Re: 2 officers chrgd in beating homeless man to death
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: desertrat1979</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well Event, I can tell you I have had issues where an officer has overstepped. None lied on the stand or anything, at least not where I was involved. But for the ones that have overstepped, I have had to do my duty to report the offenses. I get the feeling you think its as easy as calling a paper, or blowing a whistle, but when an officer or official is accused of lying under oath, thats a whole other investigation. As to why other officers who know lies are being told, <span style="color: #CC0000">I dont think you understand how some cops can be bullied, threatened, or even have their own safety put in jeopardy buy other officers. I know of one officer who worked at another agency who filed a sexual harassment suit against a supervisor. I heard that when this officer would go to put out any radio traffic, someone would key up their radio, blocking the officers transmission. Do you have any clue what that could lead to if there was an emergency incident?
</span>
</div></div>
Isn't this more of a reason to weed out these types of cops. I understand the danger involved in other officers being this corrupt, but I don't understand why that's a reason to allow it to continue.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: desertrat1979</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Its a catch 22 where an officer is sworn to absolute honesty, but a time may come when that officer must use that oath to enforce justice on one of their own. The same people that may be your back up, the same person that may need to save your life. In a lot of cases, I have heard other officers refer to others as snitches, backstabbers..ect. That alone can put up trust barriers even if you never worked with the guy. So, please, let this info soak in and put yourself in a situation like that. Do you know, full well what the results could be? On paper the answer is always clear and simple. When you need to face the person, who's life you may very well ruin, well....you will test your morals and ethics. I pray I am never put in that situation, but, if I am, I know I will do the right thing. But I probably will not be proud. Its a shitty situation, with a shitty outcome, no matter what decision you make. </div></div>
There is a difference between 'messing up' and being criminal. I can fully appreciate that we're all human and when a guy messes up it would be very difficult to to decide to ruin his life as you put it. BUT, what is the difference in doing this to a fellow cop or a citizen who 'messes up'? Both people get their lives ruined with loss of career, jail etc.
In regards to being called a snitch. Well, isn't there a campaign that says being a snitch is actually a public service - something to get the community to aid the police in solving crimes. If other officers are this hostile to self-regulation then what hope is there?!? How can I, a civvies, trust that officers will do the right thing if there is so much pressure against the bad ones being called out by their peers. I am hoping the situation you are describing is the rarity and not the norm. Seriously.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: desertrat1979</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You need to get away from making decisions based on a lack of evidence. All you get in the end is an assumption, and no fact to back it up. As it has already been stated, by Dagsta and his link to the LEAA, your assumption, which is far from any kind of verdict, has been blown out of the water by factual information that was easily found in a google search. </div></div>
Well, I would say the same for you.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: desertrat1979</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The assumption I refer to is; the silence from high ranking senior officials regarding laws made to restrict 2nd ammendment rights must mean they approve of them. </div></div>
and here is why... if you read Dagsta's posts you'll see he said the opposite. The leadership and rank/file are NOT aligned. The leadership being mostly political and not in step with the rest of the force (thankfully).
In regards to google: Here's something I found on google that exactly supports my view that leadership is not aligned with 2nd A....
http://www.theiacp.org/Portals/0/pdfs/GunViolenceReductionGuide2011.pdf
This is a publication from the International Association of Chiefs of Police. It's about gun violence. Look who has 'co-sponsored' this report - The Joyce Foundation. A Chicago based 'charity' - formerly headed up I think by Obama - that amongst other things funds millions of dollars towards other 'charities' that are openly anti-2nd A. They've funded each IACP's gun violence research from 2007 until today.
I don't jump on bandwagons and I do my research. I may not always be right I'll admit, but I'm not against homework as you seem to suggest.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: desertrat1979</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> To repond to your conclusion that I am suggesting that politicians and senior officials are "bribed", no. You clearly looked way too far into that statement. It may seem like bribing, or illegal, as far as what the other side does, but its not. To beat them at their own game, you do the same shit they do, you just do it better. That is how you win. Votes are one thing. But putting someone in a position with better financial backing, more campaign money...ect. That is what I am talking about. Not gonna get this onto a political debate, but observe the upcoming elections and look past the smear campaigns, and you will see just how, who, and where the support comes in to play. We can do our own part, but its not gonna happen here. I dont need to convince people here who looks out for our interests, most already know. </div></div>
OK, and I agree.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: desertrat1979</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also, please put more thought into the statements you post. It seems your intent was way off from what you said. Its hard to express intent in type, and can easily be misunderstood. You worded what could be simple and direct questions with snide comments like "so-called" and dismissing an obvious and common fact that "cops dont make the laws". It paints the picture that you have a predetermined opinion, yet you presented no facts, only questions. See how things get carried away?
</div></div>
OK, I'll be more specific but when you try to square this last paragraph with your description of what seems like an institutional/systemic problem that good officers have when trying to call out the bad ones then it's difficult for me, .
I'm not trying to argue with you, not trying to make this personal, just trying to juggle the sometimes counter-intuitive, contradicting realities that are being described here.