Cop Calls Out Another Cop

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: boohoo

Enjoy your mental gymnastics.

Read the oath that local law enforcement takes upon swearing in. The one that most of them adhere to on a daily basis.

But I know that's not nearly as fun as misinterpreting and misconstruing legal decisions to support your narrative.

Ta-ta

Great, everyone make note, Shamrock-Shake has had pleasant experiences with law enforcement and/or is in law enforcement. However, my experience with LEO's is different and has been legally defended successfully, in court, against their infringements. The "culture of LEO's" taught me not to trust them and anyone who does is REALLY asking for BIG trouble. Civilians should view the police no differently than police typically view the general public, with suspicion.

I am educating people to "think first" about the motivations of LEO's, BEFORE interacting with them or contacting them. Which is a prudent course of action for ANYONE whom is not on LEO payrolls. YOU on the other hand, are telling civilians, "not to worry about it" because LEO's swore an "oath" and that the media's portrayal of police is simply and exaggeration. People are free to choose which narrative they believe and it seems to me the majority of those under 40, that are not in or affiliated with law enforcement, are in my camp, not yours. Deal with the reality, police made their bed and now must lay in it.

Here is an example of a sleepy county in Oregon, that is 92% white, with 56% of the population over 45 years of age, yet still VOTED TO DEFUND ITS POLICE DEPARTMENT because they got sick of receiving unjust traffic tickets:

Defunding government is a sensible voter solution to reining in local government By Dave Duffy

Think about that for a minute, if LEO's can't hold the trust of small communities with these kinds of demographics, what chance do they stand anywhere else? Not much. This should be a VERY CLEAR message that LEO's, in general, have lost the trust of the public.

Also, based on your comment that "dissenting narratives" against police are mere "mental gymnastics", thank you for again, for demonstrating that Contemporary LEO's are in place to do the following, ESPECIALLY #6,

1. Protect themselves.
2. Maximize their total compensation.
3. Act as a source of revenue generation for the department currently employing them, the union they belong to and the local governments authorizing their activities.
4. Protecting the commercial interests of national corporations (with PAC's lobbying on the behalf of the big corporations)
5. Protecting the private property and political interests of large, influential, land owners, residing within their jurisdiction, that contribute and participate in local politics.
6. Controlling dissenting narratives that would interfere with 1-5.

As for your comment about the "Oath" that LEO's typically take, lets use the LAPD oath for example, which seems to be MOSTLY concerned with swearing to not overthrow the government:

"And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of any party or organization, political or other- wise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not been a member of any party or organization, political or other-wise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means. I will not advocate nor become (name of office) a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means."

Here is another sample Oath, that focuses on "Peace with the Communities" within the "Sovereign Country and State":

I SWEAR,, THAT - I WILL WELL AND TRULY SERVE - OUR SOVEREIGN COUNTRY AND STATE - AS A POLICE OFFICER WITHOUT FAVOR OR AFFECTION - MALICE OR ILL-WILL - UNTIL I AM LEGALLY DISCHARGED, THAT I WILL SEE AND CAUSE ­ OUR COMMUNITY’S PEACE TO BE KEPT AND PRESERVED - AND THAT - I WILL PREVENT TO THE BEST OF MY POWER - ALL OFFENSES AGAINST THAT PEACE - AND THAT - WHILE I CONTINUE TO BE A POLICE OFFICER

So exactly how, do these above noted sample Oaths, keep officers from "picking and choosing" when they attempt to "save someone from death or injury" due to having no LEGAL obligation to act? Other than of course, having the LEGAL obligation to keep "Peace with the Communities" within the "Sovereign Country and State" and also swearing to not overthrow the government.

Also, as Shamrock-Shake mentioned, Bowers v. DeVito established that failure to provide adequate police protection will not result in governmental liability, BUT in another case, South v. Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local law-enforcement had no duty to protect individuals, but only a general duty to enforce the laws (as shown in the two above example Oath's). These ruling essentially give LEO's the freedom to "pick and choose" who lives and who dies. Read the Warren v. D.C case, WHICH IS CLEARLY an instance of police "picking and choosing", despite being told EXACTLY where the burglary is occurring.

originally posted by: boohoo
They do "Protect & Serve", but its the STATE that they "Protect & Serve", not its citizens.

Well said. The horrible truth.

All the same, I love reading articles about officers upholding their oaths the way they were intended to be interpreted.

a reply to: SilentE

Tip o' the Hat to this guy actually following the Constitution..

a reply to: SilentE
Who is this pig?
Where can I find this pig?



I want his autograph.

a reply to: SilentE

Saw this on Facebook, was really happy it went viral.

Keeping others accountable is important in all aspects of life!

a reply to: SilentE

That right there is a shining example of hope. We need more officers like him in this world. Good job officer!