5
5
0
Before anyone goes off on this, I AM a supporter of the police. Biased as I am towards them being a former MP, I have to ask has the Thin Blue Line become more of a broad stroke with impunity? Has policing in America become more like the policing of the wild, wild west? Or has the internet and social media allowed the masses to see in real time what has been going on for decades?
United States
Police
Justice
Law Enforcement
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 17
1
1
0
I think the biggest problem is they forgot they are there to serve the public, not (for lack of better terms) boss you around and use their badge for a power trip. I'm with you, I am a great supporter of the overwhelming majority of police officers. That may be a little of course with your topic. The simple answer to your question in my opinion, yes.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
MSgt, the SCOTUS had a case where it was determined that the police do not have to "protect and serve", but are to uphold laws. I have it posted somewhere else in this thread. But even with that decision, the VAST majority are going above and beyond what their jobs entail to make things right for those in their areas, and doing a damn good unappreciated job at it.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Erik Copp
Did you take it that I'm against police? Because that is not what I said or implied. It is impossible to argue that some let the "power" go to their head. I have a great respect for police that don't abuse their positions. So, don't assume that I am talking bad about or putting down, as I said, the overwhelming majority are good people and good at their job.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
You might not like my answer but here goes. The biggest problem that I see is that they are put in a active role of enforcement. Police ware originally meant to respond when a crime has happened. To act when a crime has happened. Not to go out and look for problems. For instance the war on drugs.
this was taken from a wiki page so look in to it if you want.
August Vollmer was a leading figure in the development of the field of criminal justice in the United States in the early 20th century and he was against police involvement with the problem of drug addiction. Vollmer wrote that enforcement of moralistic vice laws leads to police corruption and "engenders disrespect both for law and for the agents of law enforcement."Vollmer supported the establishment of federal distribution, at cost, of habit forming drugs. It should be noted, however, that most drugs were not yet made illegal at this time.
Making the consumption of drugs illegal also brought laws that allowed the police forces to take a cut of the drug money the ceased. So then they had to go out looking for "funding" in the form of drug money. Now if we just enforced laws that caused harm like impaired driving (Alcohol or Drugs) or theft you would move the people that can not control their indulgences and harm society. You would have far less reason to have drug enforcers walking the streets protecting the criminals money/drugs. this would move many of the criminal elements in to the public eye. Take a look at the states that legalized weed. If you are not focusing on swat tactics to get criminals then you are teaching Officers how to respond instead of just react. There will always be a need to know how to respond to someone violent but we have trained our cops to respond like troops. If you shoot the knife wielding person in the leg it makes it harder for them to try and attack someone.
this was taken from a wiki page so look in to it if you want.
August Vollmer was a leading figure in the development of the field of criminal justice in the United States in the early 20th century and he was against police involvement with the problem of drug addiction. Vollmer wrote that enforcement of moralistic vice laws leads to police corruption and "engenders disrespect both for law and for the agents of law enforcement."Vollmer supported the establishment of federal distribution, at cost, of habit forming drugs. It should be noted, however, that most drugs were not yet made illegal at this time.
Making the consumption of drugs illegal also brought laws that allowed the police forces to take a cut of the drug money the ceased. So then they had to go out looking for "funding" in the form of drug money. Now if we just enforced laws that caused harm like impaired driving (Alcohol or Drugs) or theft you would move the people that can not control their indulgences and harm society. You would have far less reason to have drug enforcers walking the streets protecting the criminals money/drugs. this would move many of the criminal elements in to the public eye. Take a look at the states that legalized weed. If you are not focusing on swat tactics to get criminals then you are teaching Officers how to respond instead of just react. There will always be a need to know how to respond to someone violent but we have trained our cops to respond like troops. If you shoot the knife wielding person in the leg it makes it harder for them to try and attack someone.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
SSgt, you have an opinion and you're protecting that freedom. I see nothing wrong with what you're saying, and I forgot about Vollmer....remember him from CJ classes in England.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
There is no such thing as a Good or Bad organization, just organization with strong or weak oversight.
The vast majority of Police (as People) are good, because the vast majority of People are good. This is a simple fact. However, as People, we are social creatures, and we develop communities. We have a tendency to develop "protective structures" within our social networks. Police Communities are no different.
The question of whether the Police is too powerful is actually very simple. If you and a cop go before a Judge, absent any other evidence, who is he going to believe? Think about that question.
Next, think about this. Are the citizenry being used to generate revenue for the state, and are the Police being used as the arm to accomplish that goal? Isn't there something inherently wrong with that philosophy? Isn't there a rabbit-hole of "ethical dilemmas" that can just exist if we chase that rabbit?
There is no such thing as a Good or Bad organization, just organization with strong or weak oversight.
The vast majority of Police (as People) are good, because the vast majority of People are good. This is a simple fact. However, as People, we are social creatures, and we develop communities. We have a tendency to develop "protective structures" within our social networks. Police Communities are no different.
The question of whether the Police is too powerful is actually very simple. If you and a cop go before a Judge, absent any other evidence, who is he going to believe? Think about that question.
Next, think about this. Are the citizenry being used to generate revenue for the state, and are the Police being used as the arm to accomplish that goal? Isn't there something inherently wrong with that philosophy? Isn't there a rabbit-hole of "ethical dilemmas" that can just exist if we chase that rabbit?
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SSG Warren Swan I agree they don't have to protect, but enforcing laws doesn't mean "revenue generation" or "civil fines" or "property confiscation" and we're seeing quite a lot of that.
(0)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS - Very True. Now are you grouping the line officers with camera enforcement? I'd fully recognize that speed/red light cameras are only used for revenue generation, but I'd debate that a regular beat cop is fully used in that manner.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SSG Warren Swan depends on the cop. A cop placed on traffic enforcement, like California Highway Patrol (CHiPs!) is definitely at least in part. As an example, since we are both in VA. State Police are Revenue Generators. County and City Police are generally Law Enforcement. The State Police hang out on the highway giving tickets, and not much else. The county/city cops couldn't tell you where their ticket book is.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
They are not. They are being weakened due to the misconception they are too powerful. The president alone has undermined law enforcement by his words and actions.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
Thanks for your input, but how does the president roll into this? He's not the one telling anyone to do this or that. And he's not calling for prosecutions or acquittals. I'm curious as to how he would fit into this. I'd wager some of the police unions would have more sway in how things are done.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
SSG Warren Swan - Unfortunately we have seen our POTUS make negative comments in relation to the law enforcement community without having the facts. This has undermined and caused additionally issues, and is also why he has learned to wait and make comments until the facts are out. The Beer Summit is an example.
(2)
(0)
SSgt Alex Robinson
Warren as evidenced by the president's rush to judgement in the Cambridge and Ferguson cases. There was no evidence yet he blamed the police when after a full examination of the facts the president was proved wrong.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Im not one to paint with a broad brush. As someone who has family in both Philly PD and Prescott Sheriff's Department, I completely believe that the majority of police are good people.
However with anything healthy you have to expect, and deal with viruses. There are police out there who believe that because they enforce the law, that means they are above it. There are also law enforcement out there who do not understand that every order they give may not be a lawful one (the biggest violation of this I have seen is police telling people to put cameras away).
We also need to have a discussion about how our Police Deparments are armed. There is no reason for regular police officers to be rolling around in MRAPs and walking around looking like theyre DEVGRU. That's what SWAT is for.
However with anything healthy you have to expect, and deal with viruses. There are police out there who believe that because they enforce the law, that means they are above it. There are also law enforcement out there who do not understand that every order they give may not be a lawful one (the biggest violation of this I have seen is police telling people to put cameras away).
We also need to have a discussion about how our Police Deparments are armed. There is no reason for regular police officers to be rolling around in MRAPs and walking around looking like theyre DEVGRU. That's what SWAT is for.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
I also think that MOST cops are great and truly want to make a difference in the communities. But you bring up a great point; are we changing the police mindset when giving them military equipment? Are we making them a paramilitary force?
(0)
(0)
2ndLt (Join to see)
SSG Warren Swan I think so. When we deck police out in full battle rattle, and give them M4s as their primary you can only be in a certain mindset.
I also think it comes down to, as SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" has stated, training. Correct me if Im wrong, but it appears that a lot of police academies try and emulate military boot camp. That leads a lot of people to take a more hostile approach to situations when they've been trained and indoctrinated like theyre going to go fight a war.
I also think it comes down to, as SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" has stated, training. Correct me if Im wrong, but it appears that a lot of police academies try and emulate military boot camp. That leads a lot of people to take a more hostile approach to situations when they've been trained and indoctrinated like theyre going to go fight a war.
(1)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
2ndLt (Join to see) First and foremost police academies have resembled boot camp for decades so that is nothing new. Second you are blaming the effect for the cause. Police are reactionary, as the criminal elements become better armed the police have to become better equipped. Police didn't move from revolvers to semi-autos until they started getting gunned down by criminals with semi-autos. They didn't start carrying rifles until criminals started wearing body armour. Having a fire department does not encourage fires.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Federal appeals court: Drug dog that’s barely more accurate than a coin flip is good enough
A "search warrant on a leash."
(0)
(0)
Sgt (Join to see)
No, the "media" are "brainwashing" Americans into believing non-sense about the Police!
(1)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
The largest issue with this article is that it is an opinion piece and filled almost completely with opinion labeled as fact. Key example, the story teller (he should be writing for the ONION or DUFFELBLOG) explains to us that a 93% alert rate means the dog alerts 93% of the time. Actually no that's not what it means. What it does mean is that the dog is 93% accurate, which includes false sits and missed items. This high degree of accuracy(required to meet the same % as explosive dogs) is why the dog may sit and no drugs be found. How is that you might ask? Well the dog can pick up on trace amounts as well as remnants. But he says that dogs can be trained to detect only large amounts. No, however you could purchase dogs that are not as effective and therefore only able to pick up on larger amounts of a substance. Its articles like this written by people with no clue, no research, and a specific agenda that are the reason why people have so many crazy misconceptions about police.
(0)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
It says to me that certain members of a certain federal appeals court have the combined common sense of a rock, to make such an idiotic statement.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I think in some cases this is extremely true, SSG Warren Swan. The power goes to their heads (for some) and that's the beginning of a recipe for potential disaster. Check out this video I happened to see today on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ailk3dxuhA4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ailk3dxuhA4
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
Something about this seems staged to me. How often do you just start filming for absolutely no reason and then wait to see if something happens? I wouldn't be surprised to find out this cop was baited, fake 911 call as an example. Car is illegally parked, they are filming before the cop even shows up, and the guy filming purposefully escalates the situation by refusing to do something as simple as take his hand out of his pocket (a request that is not illegal, unfair, immoral, or even unreasonable). Now if this is was not a set up and the cop just showed up and lost his mind, that is a huge issue.
(2)
(0)
CMSgt James Nolan
MSgt (Join to see) There are areas that are anti police. They don't care a bit about the violence and crime, only about catching cops doing something wrong. Anytime there is activity in those neighborhoods, flocks of people with cameras come out and interfere.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google