Seriously, F the Police

Off Topic
421

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

People get beat on and don’t report it…BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE REPORTING IT TO THE PEOPLE WHO BEAT ON THEM.
[/quote]

Hold up, people do experience excessive force and don’t report it. I didn’t need a stat to know that. Victims don’t always report crime. Then there’s unreasonable people, with whom force is lawfully used against, who’d say they were roughed up, but don’t report.
I’m not arguing that stat because there’s nothing to argue. There was no complaint. It’s percentage of people making an allegation, with nothing for me to see. [/quote]

?

What is the point of discussing “1.8%” then? That number is clearly shit…because they also noted that different precincts have different methods of record keeping…and that MOST PEOPLE will never report their incident of excessive force.

That means anyone using “1.8%” to act as if police brutality is a small problem is just flat out WRONG.

If there was some other point you were making, please, let’s hear it.

422

"Estimates from the 2002 Police-Public Contact Survey indicated that although 75% of citizens experiencing force thought the level of force used was excessive, about 10% filed a complaint with the agency employing the officer(s). "

Bolding mine. I mean, it’s kind of a lump, as far as stats go. There’s nothing to argue about. We have no complaints to examine. We don’t know if their ‘thought’ was reality, to a reasonable observer. Undoubtedly some are. But how many? That’s exactly why I said we could argue about magnitude, but that’s all we’d be doing. Arguing. Arguing without reasonably CONFIRMED numbers. Even the 1.8% includes alleged, not only confirmed.

423

[quote]Professor X wrote:

and that MOST PEOPLE will never report their incident of excessive force.

[/quote]

Alleged.

424

[quote]Sloth wrote:
So, when I see f’ the police, and then see 1.8%…knowing that 0.0% is simply impossible…the trade off is pretty darn good for the services. [/quote]

[NOTE-SUMMARY AT BOTTOM]

I don’t think so. All the “victims” of harassment, racially or socially motivated detainment/interviewing, assault, battery, etc, on the part of LEOs, of which I am one, don’t think so.

There can be NO give and take. Because a single incident sets precedent - a LEGAL term. I REFUSE to cede to the police ANY MORE AUTHORITY than they already posses - and the options to: determine guilt/innocence, determine punishment, and to enact that punishment - are NOT IN THEIR AUTHORITY.

That does not stop those who ABUSE the position, the “good cops” who ALLOW it to happen, and the INSTITUTION whose system creates the possibilities, from actually affecting in a negative manner the society whom they are sworn to serve and protect.

I have a form letter, similar to one posted by Bodyguard in another thread, on a business card, in my car in case of traffic stop. If an interview goes beyond my behavior in the vehicle, I will with respect hand the card to the officer. I have a similar card in my wallet for all other possible interviews outside of the car.

I also have a lawyer that eats babies heads like they were apples as my primary contact in case of another police ass-whooping.

TO SUMMARIZE: A trade-off of freedoms between civilians and LEO CAN NOT EXIST in a society based on rule of law.

425

[quote]Vash wrote:

I don’t think so.
[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you think. You can’t institute a police force and believe there’ll be 0.0% complaints. Complaints, justified and unjustified.

426

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Vash wrote:

I don’t think so.
[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you think. You can’t institute a police force and believe there’ll be 0.0% complaints. Complaints, justified and unjustified.[/quote]

?

Out of 75 FUCKING PERCENT of the people who feel they were treated badly, only 10% will ever complain for fear of retaliation. This has been explained to you in detail…so why keep harping on some “0.0% complaint” stat when that isn’t what anyone is arguing?

If most people won’t report it, your stats about complaints are FUCKING USELESS.

Do you even understand this?

427

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
I can’t speak on behalf of Chushin, but I can tell you from firsthand experience that the cops where he is from will fuck you up in a heartbeat.
[/quote]

Ha! I was really tempted to ask you, “Which Applebees?” but didn’t know if you’d want to get that specific.
[/quote]

The one over on Greentree rd. in Scott/Mt. Lebanon. They’ve been doing a nice late night menu with half off appetizers and desserts.

428

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Out of 75 FUCKING PERCENT of the people who feel they were treated badly, only 10% will ever complain for fear of retaliation. [/quote]

You’re misrepresenting someone else’s data. I’ve underlined the problem in your statement.

429

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Out of 75 FUCKING PERCENT of the people who feel they were treated badly, only 10% will ever complain for fear of retaliation. [/quote]

You’re misrepresenting your someone else’s data. I’ve underlined the problem in your statement.
[/quote]

They used the term “civilian characteristics” if that makes you feel better…and that still doesn’t change the fact that since most people don’t report it, stats about complaints are shit as far as coming to some conclusion about the actual brutality taking place.

Get it?

So quit bringing up “1.8%” or anything like that as if it means something.

430

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Vash wrote:

I don’t think so.
[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you think. You can’t institute a police force and believe there’ll be 0.0% complaints. Complaints, justified and unjustified.[/quote]

Point of fact #1 - it damn sure matters what I think. A sheriff needs electing? Vote that shit. A mayor has a track record of approaching law enforcement officer complaints in a manner conducive to or to the detriment of the public good? Vote that shit. Legislation regarding funding for various aspects of law enforcement come up? Watch what my lawmakers do, then VOTE THAT SHIT.

I see an officer who goes beyond his duties to the improvement of the public good? Write to his precinct. I see an officer / have an officer show me THE LAW? Write his precinct, local news.

Point of fact #2 - Some people are shitty human beings, and will complain about a cop saving a puppy from a burning building. While building an orphanage. They can get fucked, but NOT BY THE COPS. Again, their duty is to UPHOLD THE LAW, NOT INTERPRET IT, DETERMINE GUILT, AND DOLE OUT PUNISHMENT.

And the system as it exists allows them to do just that.

The system needs an overhaul which brings in more educated and more emotionally balanced police (like the 98.2% your math says should exist), makes stepping A MICROMETER outside their legal jurisdiction a career-killing AND LIFE-RUINING (AFTER due process, of course) mistake.

The system, as it stands, allows for the 1.8% which you assert cause the complaints to dominate media.

It also allows for a great many people, more than it would seem could be affected by 1.8% of active LEOs, to have their rights, and often times their bodies and lives, injured by corrupt cops.

431

[quote]Professor X wrote:

They used the term “civilian characteristics”[/quote]

I suppose “agency characteristics” (same sentence) means 'fear of retaliation, too.

With all the f the police going on, I wouldn’t have known we couldn’t come to some conclusion.

It does, because it something to work with. Who knows how many complaints weren’t filed of those 75% because while they ‘thought’ the force was excessive, they weren’t confident that a reasonable person would agree. I don’t know. But, fear of retaliation was YOUR conclusion. Not the authors’. At least alleged complaints, folded into this 1.8, carry more weight. After all, where force is used the one acted upon is much more likely to ‘think’ the force was excessive. Obviously, the actor, the LEO, is much more likely to believe otherwise. There is never going to be a real conclusion without even a complaint to start from.

But thanks, from your site I did learn that the US and England and Wales might be comparable in complaints. You learn something new every day.

432

[quote]Vash wrote:

Point of fact #1 - it damn sure matters what I think. .[/quote]

For what you quoted, no it doesn’t.

[quote]Sloth:

So, when I see f’ the police, and then see 1.8%…knowing that 0.0% is simply impossible…the trade off is pretty darn good for the services.

You:
I don’t think so.
[/quote]

Unless you’re an anarchist society, with no police force at all, you’ll never have 0.0% complaints…Which is all that you quoted is saying.

433

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Vash wrote:

Point of fact #1 - it damn sure matters what I think. .[/quote]

For what you quoted, no it doesn’t.

[quote]Sloth:

So, when I see f’ the police, and then see 1.8%…knowing that 0.0% is simply impossible…the trade off is pretty darn good for the services.

You:
I don’t think so.
[/quote]

Unless you’re an anarchist society, with no police force at all, you’ll never have 0.0% complaints…Which is all that you quoted is saying.
[/quote]

Where in this thread, on this forum, ON THIS PLANET, has anyone asked for, or even SUGGESTED, a 0.0% complaint to service ratio? You’re the only one bringing it up, then shooting down it’s possibility.

What I, and most of the posters positing the “fuck the police” info, is a system which punishes those officers who step out of line (that line, by the way, is the BEGINNING OF OUR RIGHTS) in a manner beyond “suspended with pay.”

To reiterate: ACCOUNTABILITY, VISIBILITY, HARDLINE CONSEQUENCES. Raise their pay, raise their requirements.

434

[quote]Vash wrote:
Stuff
[/quote]

If you’re going to reply to a quote, a statement, and then not expect a response as if you’d meant to deal with that statement…I don’t what I can do for you.

435

[quote]trevor16 wrote:

Sorry but it looks like you just missed the cut:) [/quote]

At least I played varsity :slight_smile: That’s pretty much the only “cut” I ever cared about (and never had to worry about). It was that big time cut that was the bitch :frowning:

436

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Isn’t it great we live in a country where an anonymous poster on an internet forum can denigrate the municipal and county police departments of an entire nation with impunity.[/quote]

it’s fucking terrific. it’s called a free country and freedom of speech. with impunity? what price shall you suggest be paid for free speech?

437

[quote]barbarianlifter wrote:
Every LEO I know will admit that there are asshole cops, then again every attorney I know will admit they know asshole attorneys. Point is we all know there are assholes in the world, why are LEOs an exception?

[/quote]

Because if you “know there are asshole cops” and you are sworn to uphold the law (the highest duty and trust) you should be compelled to give up those “asshole cops” and weed them out of the force.

It’s really pretty simple. It’s called a Code of Honor. Like I said before, they’re able to impose it upon shit stained teenagers in military academies but somehow the “blue wall” is a reality. Care to discuss that?

438

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Prof X you must be a huge fan of Chubby Checker because you are the master of the twist. I clearly articulated in my post that the assertion many people made that because possibly up to 1.8% of LEO’s abuse the power they have then all LEO’s therefore are guilty of the same is ridiculous. I will say it once again since you don’t seem to understand…I don’t condone and find it reprehensible any abuse of power by any LEO, but 1.8% of bad apples does not spoil the bunch. If you have studies that show the incidence of abuse is higher then by all means present it.[/quote]

Sorry, but YOU don’t understand. You either failed to comprehend the numerous and repeated clarifications or, you simply didn’t read the thread. It’s the INSTITUTION we condemn, not any individual police officer.

It’s really pretty simple. They don’t have a Code of Honor, they have a CODE OF SILENCE. It’s inexcusable. The machinations of the union to save the jobs of bad cops is inexcusable. And while we’re at it, it’s fucking outrageous that most of our LEO now look like para-military patrol. What happened to a uniform and those shiny shoes? Now we got guys in fatigues and combat boots - ON REGULAR FUCKING PATROL.

And by the way, play games with your stats if you want, but the fact remains that some of us are NOT from Mayberry RFD. Police misconduct I assure you is the NORM in many of our big cities. It’s certainly the norm in Philadelphia. It’s definitely the NORM in Camden NJ where the State Police will not even inform the local police of various planned raids (leaks).

Give me a fucking break. Most cops, in most towns, write a ticket and that’s an action packed day - where the fuck is the misconduct going to occur in that environment.

Let’s look at the statistics of big city police departments. Go ahead, gather them, provide a reference. I’ll wait.

439

[quote]curtisj76 wrote:
I live in IA where blacks make up 2.9% of the population. I myself have been robbed at gunpoint by 2 black males, my girlfriend was attacked with a knife by a black guy(in MO), and when I watch the news it’s honestly dang near 75% blacks committing the serious crimes. Last time I took my kids shopping we arrived at a Wal-Mart where 3 black women were getting arrested. Why is this honestly? Oh yeah, I have friends that are black so please don’t call me a racist.

PS I hate white trash, I hate black trash, I hate “x” color trash but it honestly seems like blacks have more trash. Sure seems like a small % of people committing a large % of crimes.

Please explain this, please.[/quote]

I knew it was the black cops fucking it up for the whole force. FINALLY we have identified the problem!

/sarcasm

440

[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Yeah! Go fuck yourself because a few people who have the same job as you did something terrible! Fuck yourselves!

/sarcasm[/quote]

It happens too often. Do you live in or near a big city?

In addition, it’s a systematic problem when you have LEO audacious and arrogant enough to commit these crimes ON FUCKING VIDEO TAPE. Furthermore, it’s “institutionalized” when you have fellow LEO witness said crimes, and say or do nothing to intervene. Finally, the retort from the Department is ALWAYS the same; “they were performing as trained”.

Fuck em.[/quote]

One could argue that the news doesn’t report every time a service officer does his job correctly, or attempts to do the right thing and gets screwed or killed as a result. Not to say that I justify this at all, just countering.

Sensationalist reporting is just that, and is meant to generate responses just like yours.
[/quote]

Well, with all due respect, I don’t think that’s much of a counter. Do you want a gold star every time YOU DO YOUR FUCKING JOB? I went to work every day for 20 years and didn’t get an “attaboy” every time I completed a task. We do give “attaboys” to exceptional performance and we do hear about those.

We do hear about EVERY time a LEO gets KIA. Every time.

Sorry, my ass don’t bleed b/c they don’t get an “attaboy” every day. It’s the job, they signed up for it. Do it. 100 attaboys doesn’t excuse a single incidence of criminal conduct.