Avatar feed
Responses: 2
LTC Jason Mackay
0
0
0
The article was admittedly thin on fact and research. Soooo, then you look at sources. Browse that Marshall Project website, who the authors work for. Looks to be an organization that appears anti law enforcement/corrections and pro criminal/convict. There are also assertions in here they pass as assumed fact....the militarization of police as an example. How about the wonton disregard for law and order; two entitled generations that don't accept central authority; and the increased difficulty in maintaining law and order?

Articles like these without substantive evidence set a dangerous precedent. In the 1970s and 80s, many departments would not take veterans, even if they were MPs. Are there veterans out there with problems? Sure. Are there veterans that are also LEOs that have issues, sure. To present it as assumed fact on a hand full of dubious numbers. I reject it resoundly.

The Boston PD stats are not conclusive. Having complaints is only evident that someone was butt hurt. It did not talk about founded complaints or dismissal of officers based on founded complaints. My friend is an embattled Boston PD officer and that department has some issues.

The gentlemen's story they lead in with....it is automatically assumed his service is the only factor. It also seems to ignore that his police service predates his military service (an ANG member).
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth
0
0
0
Not really a good combination.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close