Blue Lies Matter: How cops are incentivized to lie — and why they get away with it.

[Andylusion]

The best cops are more interested in getting the bad guys than following rules that the criminal mind takes advantage of.

The slave op who is still clearly enslaved is just trying once again to tell us all how bad blacks have it in the country.

The same argument is never going to die. Of course the cops bend the rules to get the bad guy.

Sean connery tells it the best.

I talked about this with some friends many of whom were black. Let me tell you the scenario, and you tell me if you think this is fair.

You are a young man, and you work hard at your job, you have a skill. One is a Mechanic, a Master Mechanic no less. Another that I'm going to focus on is a back yard mechanic, truck driver, equipment operator.

This one fellow worked his life at his career. In his fifties, he started to indulge his hobby of restoring cars. He got his hands on an old Mercedes, one of the early AMG models. It was in bad shape, and he worked on it for months. Finally he got it shining like a new penny. Buffed out in beautiful silver glory. The engine purred like a contented kitten. The interior was pristine.

My friend was proud of his work. I was impressed. He did a lot of hard labor on that car. It got so he couldn't drive it. Every week he was pulled over to see if he had drugs in the car. In Georgia and South Carolina. My friend knew it was merely a matter of time before the cops planted something. Your awesome cops were just absolutely sure that he must be dealing drugs to drive a shiny car.

Why was he being pulled over? He wasn't driving fast, or recklessly, he was a black man in a shiny Mercedes. Driving while black is a crime in this nation. In New York, and in California. In Georgia and in Texas.

You pretend it's great that the cops lie and break the rules. I think it's a disgusting and despicable thing. I think it's a tragedy that my friend parked his car and never drives it because he is really sick of the harassment he has to endure to drive a car he worked for hundreds of hours on.

That is one story, one of dozens that my friends tell me and I've seen. I saw my friend pulled over more than once on the way to work. I always told the Managers that the cops had him pulled over again because they were just checking on random black men driving Mercedes again.

There are many more if you would listen. The heroes you celebrate for breaking the very rules you think should be enforced, are in reality just criminals with authority to many of us.

And look who is judging?

My friend knew it was merely a matter of time before the cops planted something. Your awesome cops were just absolutely sure that he must be dealing drugs to drive a shiny car.
​

You are judging the cops, before anything happened. You are no better than the police you hate, by your own, and your friends own admission.

And where did anyone anywhere say we support cops planting evidence? I can't think of a single post anywhere, by anyone, which said that, yet you have no problem saying "Your awesome cops".

This is why you can't get anyone to debate you openly, and take your position honestly. Why would we when you shove words and position on us, we didn't say or support?

When people like you, say stuff like that, my care-o-meter about your justice with police goes down. Maybe you deserve to have evidence planted on you, when you are such a self-centered arrogant judgmental prick?

You want to win anyone, forget me, but anyone else to your side, don't make up things they didn't say, and attribute position to them they don't support. Quite frankly, based on your previous posts, I think it would be good for all of us, if you ended up on the news. One less jerk in the world. People like you don't help anything. You only make everything worse.

Andy. You said you support cops lying. You wrote it Blue Lies Matter: How cops are incentivized to lie — and why they get away with it.

You posted a long reply about why they had to because the system is so unfair to protect the guilty from the just and good. Did someone borrow your account and post that in your name?

I asked you at least three times where you would draw the line if you supported cops committing felony perjury. What thing was too egregious or too corrupt. All you said was that I was putting words in your mouth. You wrote you were not going to reply to me anymore since I was accurately quoting you and you said I was this putting words in your mouth.

I don't give a damn if you take anything serious. You are such a lousy liar that you may be a cop yourself.

Now you say you would not support planting evidence. That's the first time you ever wrote that. Sort of odd isn't it? I know this is probably taking time away from your special "me" time with a bottle of lotion and the box set of America's toughest cops.

Now were you unaware that a liar in court is committing felony perjury even if they had a badge? Do you have some multiple personality disorder? Or were you so put upon that you figured the reply I made to Theowl32 was really directed at you?

No. Saying what reality is.... is not the same as saying I support it. I could equally have posted a 3 page essay on Trump is president and why. That doesn't mean I must support it. I never voted for him.

Explaining why things are, the way that they are, is not the same as saying "I think cop lying is great".

You made that up, because you are a worthless pile trash. You are worse as a person, the the police you whine about. I hope they find you someday and nail you to the wall. Less trash in the country is better for everyone.

 

[SavannahMann]

The best cops are more interested in getting the bad guys than following rules that the criminal mind takes advantage of.

The slave op who is still clearly enslaved is just trying once again to tell us all how bad blacks have it in the country.

The same argument is never going to die. Of course the cops bend the rules to get the bad guy.

Sean connery tells it the best.

I talked about this with some friends many of whom were black. Let me tell you the scenario, and you tell me if you think this is fair.

You are a young man, and you work hard at your job, you have a skill. One is a Mechanic, a Master Mechanic no less. Another that I'm going to focus on is a back yard mechanic, truck driver, equipment operator.

This one fellow worked his life at his career. In his fifties, he started to indulge his hobby of restoring cars. He got his hands on an old Mercedes, one of the early AMG models. It was in bad shape, and he worked on it for months. Finally he got it shining like a new penny. Buffed out in beautiful silver glory. The engine purred like a contented kitten. The interior was pristine.

My friend was proud of his work. I was impressed. He did a lot of hard labor on that car. It got so he couldn't drive it. Every week he was pulled over to see if he had drugs in the car. In Georgia and South Carolina. My friend knew it was merely a matter of time before the cops planted something. Your awesome cops were just absolutely sure that he must be dealing drugs to drive a shiny car.

Why was he being pulled over? He wasn't driving fast, or recklessly, he was a black man in a shiny Mercedes. Driving while black is a crime in this nation. In New York, and in California. In Georgia and in Texas.

You pretend it's great that the cops lie and break the rules. I think it's a disgusting and despicable thing. I think it's a tragedy that my friend parked his car and never drives it because he is really sick of the harassment he has to endure to drive a car he worked for hundreds of hours on.

That is one story, one of dozens that my friends tell me and I've seen. I saw my friend pulled over more than once on the way to work. I always told the Managers that the cops had him pulled over again because they were just checking on random black men driving Mercedes again.

There are many more if you would listen. The heroes you celebrate for breaking the very rules you think should be enforced, are in reality just criminals with authority to many of us.

And look who is judging?

My friend knew it was merely a matter of time before the cops planted something. Your awesome cops were just absolutely sure that he must be dealing drugs to drive a shiny car.
​

You are judging the cops, before anything happened. You are no better than the police you hate, by your own, and your friends own admission.

And where did anyone anywhere say we support cops planting evidence? I can't think of a single post anywhere, by anyone, which said that, yet you have no problem saying "Your awesome cops".

This is why you can't get anyone to debate you openly, and take your position honestly. Why would we when you shove words and position on us, we didn't say or support?

When people like you, say stuff like that, my care-o-meter about your justice with police goes down. Maybe you deserve to have evidence planted on you, when you are such a self-centered arrogant judgmental prick?

You want to win anyone, forget me, but anyone else to your side, don't make up things they didn't say, and attribute position to them they don't support. Quite frankly, based on your previous posts, I think it would be good for all of us, if you ended up on the news. One less jerk in the world. People like you don't help anything. You only make everything worse.

Andy. You said you support cops lying. You wrote it Blue Lies Matter: How cops are incentivized to lie — and why they get away with it.

You posted a long reply about why they had to because the system is so unfair to protect the guilty from the just and good. Did someone borrow your account and post that in your name?

I asked you at least three times where you would draw the line if you supported cops committing felony perjury. What thing was too egregious or too corrupt. All you said was that I was putting words in your mouth. You wrote you were not going to reply to me anymore since I was accurately quoting you and you said I was this putting words in your mouth.

I don't give a damn if you take anything serious. You are such a lousy liar that you may be a cop yourself.

Now you say you would not support planting evidence. That's the first time you ever wrote that. Sort of odd isn't it? I know this is probably taking time away from your special "me" time with a bottle of lotion and the box set of America's toughest cops.

Now were you unaware that a liar in court is committing felony perjury even if they had a badge? Do you have some multiple personality disorder? Or were you so put upon that you figured the reply I made to Theowl32 was really directed at you?

No. Saying what reality is.... is not the same as saying I support it. I could equally have posted a 3 page essay on Trump is president and why. That doesn't mean I must support it. I never voted for him.

Explaining why things are, the way that they are, is not the same as saying "I think cop lying is great".

You made that up, because you are a worthless pile trash. You are worse as a person, the the police you whine about. I hope they find you someday and nail you to the wall. Less trash in the country is better for everyone.

Lol. So now you want the police to nail me to the wall. Not for any crime, but for revenge because you don't like that I don't worship them.

Next you will be threatening to SWAT me right?

Seriously Andy. You might want to get some help.

 

[Andylusion]

The best cops are more interested in getting the bad guys than following rules that the criminal mind takes advantage of.

The slave op who is still clearly enslaved is just trying once again to tell us all how bad blacks have it in the country.

The same argument is never going to die. Of course the cops bend the rules to get the bad guy.

Sean connery tells it the best.

I talked about this with some friends many of whom were black. Let me tell you the scenario, and you tell me if you think this is fair.

You are a young man, and you work hard at your job, you have a skill. One is a Mechanic, a Master Mechanic no less. Another that I'm going to focus on is a back yard mechanic, truck driver, equipment operator.

This one fellow worked his life at his career. In his fifties, he started to indulge his hobby of restoring cars. He got his hands on an old Mercedes, one of the early AMG models. It was in bad shape, and he worked on it for months. Finally he got it shining like a new penny. Buffed out in beautiful silver glory. The engine purred like a contented kitten. The interior was pristine.

My friend was proud of his work. I was impressed. He did a lot of hard labor on that car. It got so he couldn't drive it. Every week he was pulled over to see if he had drugs in the car. In Georgia and South Carolina. My friend knew it was merely a matter of time before the cops planted something. Your awesome cops were just absolutely sure that he must be dealing drugs to drive a shiny car.

Why was he being pulled over? He wasn't driving fast, or recklessly, he was a black man in a shiny Mercedes. Driving while black is a crime in this nation. In New York, and in California. In Georgia and in Texas.

You pretend it's great that the cops lie and break the rules. I think it's a disgusting and despicable thing. I think it's a tragedy that my friend parked his car and never drives it because he is really sick of the harassment he has to endure to drive a car he worked for hundreds of hours on.

That is one story, one of dozens that my friends tell me and I've seen. I saw my friend pulled over more than once on the way to work. I always told the Managers that the cops had him pulled over again because they were just checking on random black men driving Mercedes again.

There are many more if you would listen. The heroes you celebrate for breaking the very rules you think should be enforced, are in reality just criminals with authority to many of us.

And look who is judging?

My friend knew it was merely a matter of time before the cops planted something. Your awesome cops were just absolutely sure that he must be dealing drugs to drive a shiny car.
​

You are judging the cops, before anything happened. You are no better than the police you hate, by your own, and your friends own admission.

And where did anyone anywhere say we support cops planting evidence? I can't think of a single post anywhere, by anyone, which said that, yet you have no problem saying "Your awesome cops".

This is why you can't get anyone to debate you openly, and take your position honestly. Why would we when you shove words and position on us, we didn't say or support?

When people like you, say stuff like that, my care-o-meter about your justice with police goes down. Maybe you deserve to have evidence planted on you, when you are such a self-centered arrogant judgmental prick?

You want to win anyone, forget me, but anyone else to your side, don't make up things they didn't say, and attribute position to them they don't support. Quite frankly, based on your previous posts, I think it would be good for all of us, if you ended up on the news. One less jerk in the world. People like you don't help anything. You only make everything worse.

Andy. You said you support cops lying. You wrote it Blue Lies Matter: How cops are incentivized to lie — and why they get away with it.

You posted a long reply about why they had to because the system is so unfair to protect the guilty from the just and good. Did someone borrow your account and post that in your name?

I asked you at least three times where you would draw the line if you supported cops committing felony perjury. What thing was too egregious or too corrupt. All you said was that I was putting words in your mouth. You wrote you were not going to reply to me anymore since I was accurately quoting you and you said I was this putting words in your mouth.

I don't give a damn if you take anything serious. You are such a lousy liar that you may be a cop yourself.

Now you say you would not support planting evidence. That's the first time you ever wrote that. Sort of odd isn't it? I know this is probably taking time away from your special "me" time with a bottle of lotion and the box set of America's toughest cops.

Now were you unaware that a liar in court is committing felony perjury even if they had a badge? Do you have some multiple personality disorder? Or were you so put upon that you figured the reply I made to Theowl32 was really directed at you?

No. Saying what reality is.... is not the same as saying I support it. I could equally have posted a 3 page essay on Trump is president and why. That doesn't mean I must support it. I never voted for him.

Explaining why things are, the way that they are, is not the same as saying "I think cop lying is great".

You made that up, because you are a worthless pile trash. You are worse as a person, the the police you whine about. I hope they find you someday and nail you to the wall. Less trash in the country is better for everyone.

Lol. So now you want the police to nail me to the wall. Not for any crime, but for revenge because you don't like that I don't worship them.

Next you will be threatening to SWAT me right?

Seriously Andy. You might want to get some help.

Fewer jerks in the country is good for everyone. I don't need any help. I'm not the one making up crap people didn't say, and attacking them for it.

 

[keepitreal]

Excellent article in the link below on exactly how cops get away with and are encouraged to lie.

All of this is entirely true.

I remember reading about why police lie, years ago. Nothing has changed. The problem is, you have to put yourself in the place of a police officer, to understand. From the outside, a brainless person would conclude all police are evil. That's not true.

There are two primary reasons police lie.

The first is that we have so many laws that protect the evil and criminal, from the good and just.

Imagine if you grow up wanting to serve the public by enforcing the law. You wanted to be the guy that got the bad guy, and protected the good. Then you join the police force, and every single bad guy you stop, gets off because of a technicality, and despite overwhelming evidence they were criminals doing wrong, they were released back into the public.

The police as a group, see the illegal search and seizure laws, is immoral and unjust. So do I by the way. Maybe police officers should demoted, or suspended, or even fired, for illegal search and seizure... but no matter what, a criminal should not be released over it. If you find clear proof of crime, the criminal should be punished, no matter what the police did wrong.

As a result of this, police have no problem whatsoever with lying, to make sure the criminal punished, and justice is served. So no doubt, police lie all the time on this angle.

To think about it another way, what is the point of even being a police officer, if you can't stop the criminals? Police see their job as pointless, if they don't lie to catch the criminals.

The solution to this problem, is to change the laws, so that criminals are not released simply because a police officer didn't have a reason to look in the window and see the gun.

The second reason, is what the majority of those police beating videos are all about.

Police officers are not robots. They have emotions, like any other human being. In addition, they end up in high stress, high tension situations, where they have a massive Adrenalin rush.

Some of the videos show the end of fight or chase, where the criminal puts his hands up, and goes face down on the ground. What you missed, was where he fought with the police officer to break free, and ran 15 blocks to escape arrest.

By the time the criminal gives up, the police officer is already on an Adrenalin buzz, and mad as crap at this guy. Then you think the police officer should handle him with kid gloves?

No, not happening. And it shouldn't happen honestly. You taunt the police, fight with the police, and run from the police, you deserve having your face smashed in. Don't do that. Do not provoke police, don't fight with police, and don't run from police.

Then if you are beaten, I'll accept it was wrong. But up till then, no. You are criminal running from, taunting, and fighting with police. You deserve being shot. Anyone that does that, deserves to be shot. Police are the authority, and you need to either respect that, or stop crying about what happens.

Lastly, there are bad police officers, just like there are bad people in any group.

But even if there are, in this video you posted, the guy had a gun. That to me, is the end of the story. Unless he was following the gun laws, and was legally allowed to conceal and carry.... he's a criminal. I don't care what the police did.

You follow the laws first. You do YOUR part. Then when you have done your part, then I'll complain about the cops. But as long as you are a criminal, and a supporter of criminals.... yeah this is going to keep happening, because we don't care what the cops do, when you are a criminal. Stop being a criminal. Then we'll talk.

And by the way.... if you push this? If you really push this.... then you'll end up with Chicago. Police will pull back from those areas, and the criminals you have been defending all this time, will rape murder and steal everything in your area, and you only have yourself to blame.

Chicago is what happens when you attack the police. After those protests in Chicago, the police said... ok.... screw you. You want police that never hurt anybody? No problem. Now you don't have to worry about police stops and arrests and lying. Nope, because they practically stop no one.

See how well that's working out for you? You need to decide pretty quick what you want. Because ultimately you get what you want, then you don't like it. It's not the middle-class and upper class white areas where all the murdering is going on in Chicago. But you wanted the police to not shoot anybody... and they are not. You people are, but not the police. So much better isn't it?

There are so many problems with your arguments that I honestly am having trouble deciding where to begin.

Those silly laws that you argue are designed to protect the evil and criminal from the good and just. Those laws are designed to protect the rights of everyone. I notice that the Police themselves take full advantage of those laws, and many that are not available for the average citizen, when they are accused of a crime. The first thing you have to do is understand why the Civil Rights were codified into the Bill of Rights in the first place. The former colonists were not about to let the abuses of the citizens at the hands of the British Authorities continue under new management. They wrote those protections so that the onus of convicting a criminal fell onto the State. It created the phrase of innocent until proven guilty.

Finding reasons to throw people in prison for some perceived crime against the crown was no problem for the British authorities in the Colonies. Imagine Extraordinary Rendition writ even larger.

The police in that first scenario aren't the forces of good and Justice. They are merely faces of criminals. If you have to lie to prove your case, you did it wrong. Because lying under oath is called Perjury. If you have to Perjur yourself to get the conviction, you are a felon, a criminal yourself.

We don't let a baseball player use sandpaper to scuff up the ball. We don't let a batter put cork in the bat. We throw them out of the game if they are caught cheating. Yet you lionize the police for cheating. The baseball player cheating wants to win, and so does the cop. The big difference is that a baseball team that loses because the other side cheated doesn't go to prison.

If a Police Officer lies under oath even once, he is a criminal. Just as a bank robber is a criminal for robbing one bank. If you claim you have to become a criminal, to catch a criminal, than we have to competing gangs of criminals each trying for control.

Then you have politicians who ignore laws
and harbor criminals, breaking our laws
and judges whose rulings do not favor enforcing our laws
but allow laws to be ignored and disregarded.

If we can't enforce laws that are unfavorable,
then we shouldn't enforce any laws.

We should just release everyone from prison
and get rid of the judicial and legislative branches!
Might as well get rid of Presidents too.

The president is supposed to enforce laws Congress make
And, the courts are supposed to allow the laws to be upheld

If we won't enforce and abide by all our laws....
what's the point of government and laws?

 

[SavannahMann]

Excellent article in the link below on exactly how cops get away with and are encouraged to lie.

All of this is entirely true.

I remember reading about why police lie, years ago. Nothing has changed. The problem is, you have to put yourself in the place of a police officer, to understand. From the outside, a brainless person would conclude all police are evil. That's not true.

There are two primary reasons police lie.

The first is that we have so many laws that protect the evil and criminal, from the good and just.

Imagine if you grow up wanting to serve the public by enforcing the law. You wanted to be the guy that got the bad guy, and protected the good. Then you join the police force, and every single bad guy you stop, gets off because of a technicality, and despite overwhelming evidence they were criminals doing wrong, they were released back into the public.

The police as a group, see the illegal search and seizure laws, is immoral and unjust. So do I by the way. Maybe police officers should demoted, or suspended, or even fired, for illegal search and seizure... but no matter what, a criminal should not be released over it. If you find clear proof of crime, the criminal should be punished, no matter what the police did wrong.

As a result of this, police have no problem whatsoever with lying, to make sure the criminal punished, and justice is served. So no doubt, police lie all the time on this angle.

To think about it another way, what is the point of even being a police officer, if you can't stop the criminals? Police see their job as pointless, if they don't lie to catch the criminals.

The solution to this problem, is to change the laws, so that criminals are not released simply because a police officer didn't have a reason to look in the window and see the gun.

The second reason, is what the majority of those police beating videos are all about.

Police officers are not robots. They have emotions, like any other human being. In addition, they end up in high stress, high tension situations, where they have a massive Adrenalin rush.

Some of the videos show the end of fight or chase, where the criminal puts his hands up, and goes face down on the ground. What you missed, was where he fought with the police officer to break free, and ran 15 blocks to escape arrest.

By the time the criminal gives up, the police officer is already on an Adrenalin buzz, and mad as crap at this guy. Then you think the police officer should handle him with kid gloves?

No, not happening. And it shouldn't happen honestly. You taunt the police, fight with the police, and run from the police, you deserve having your face smashed in. Don't do that. Do not provoke police, don't fight with police, and don't run from police.

Then if you are beaten, I'll accept it was wrong. But up till then, no. You are criminal running from, taunting, and fighting with police. You deserve being shot. Anyone that does that, deserves to be shot. Police are the authority, and you need to either respect that, or stop crying about what happens.

Lastly, there are bad police officers, just like there are bad people in any group.

But even if there are, in this video you posted, the guy had a gun. That to me, is the end of the story. Unless he was following the gun laws, and was legally allowed to conceal and carry.... he's a criminal. I don't care what the police did.

You follow the laws first. You do YOUR part. Then when you have done your part, then I'll complain about the cops. But as long as you are a criminal, and a supporter of criminals.... yeah this is going to keep happening, because we don't care what the cops do, when you are a criminal. Stop being a criminal. Then we'll talk.

And by the way.... if you push this? If you really push this.... then you'll end up with Chicago. Police will pull back from those areas, and the criminals you have been defending all this time, will rape murder and steal everything in your area, and you only have yourself to blame.

Chicago is what happens when you attack the police. After those protests in Chicago, the police said... ok.... screw you. You want police that never hurt anybody? No problem. Now you don't have to worry about police stops and arrests and lying. Nope, because they practically stop no one.

See how well that's working out for you? You need to decide pretty quick what you want. Because ultimately you get what you want, then you don't like it. It's not the middle-class and upper class white areas where all the murdering is going on in Chicago. But you wanted the police to not shoot anybody... and they are not. You people are, but not the police. So much better isn't it?

There are so many problems with your arguments that I honestly am having trouble deciding where to begin.

Those silly laws that you argue are designed to protect the evil and criminal from the good and just. Those laws are designed to protect the rights of everyone. I notice that the Police themselves take full advantage of those laws, and many that are not available for the average citizen, when they are accused of a crime. The first thing you have to do is understand why the Civil Rights were codified into the Bill of Rights in the first place. The former colonists were not about to let the abuses of the citizens at the hands of the British Authorities continue under new management. They wrote those protections so that the onus of convicting a criminal fell onto the State. It created the phrase of innocent until proven guilty.

Finding reasons to throw people in prison for some perceived crime against the crown was no problem for the British authorities in the Colonies. Imagine Extraordinary Rendition writ even larger.

The police in that first scenario aren't the forces of good and Justice. They are merely faces of criminals. If you have to lie to prove your case, you did it wrong. Because lying under oath is called Perjury. If you have to Perjur yourself to get the conviction, you are a felon, a criminal yourself.

We don't let a baseball player use sandpaper to scuff up the ball. We don't let a batter put cork in the bat. We throw them out of the game if they are caught cheating. Yet you lionize the police for cheating. The baseball player cheating wants to win, and so does the cop. The big difference is that a baseball team that loses because the other side cheated doesn't go to prison.

If a Police Officer lies under oath even once, he is a criminal. Just as a bank robber is a criminal for robbing one bank. If you claim you have to become a criminal, to catch a criminal, than we have to competing gangs of criminals each trying for control.

Then you have politicians who ignore laws
and harbor criminals, breaking our laws
and judges whose rulings do not favor enforcing our laws
but allow laws to be ignored and disregarded.

If we can't enforce laws that are unfavorable,
then we shouldn't enforce any laws.

We should just release everyone from prison
and get rid of the judicial and legislative branches!
Might as well get rid of Presidents too.

The president is supposed to enforce laws Congress make
And, the courts are supposed to allow the laws to be upheld

If we won't enforce and abide by all our laws....
what's the point of government and laws?

This actually touches on a couple issues for me. Politicians are in a position to change the laws they feel are unjust. The average citizen isn't. The average citizen who is guided by conscience is left with jury nullification as their only hope.

St. Augustine taught that an unjust law is no law at all. It is the basis of the jury nullification principle. Just actions are a large part of what St. Augustine is known for. When people talk about a just war, they are doing so based upon the teachings of St. Augustine.

But let's focus on the laws for a moment. Part of the reason for a jury is not just to determine if the accused committed the act that is alleged. The Jury has the additional duty to determine what Justice is. An unjust application of law should be rejected, even if the accused committed the act that is alleged.

I pray you will indulge me while I offer up an example. Every summer we read about a child who dies in a hot car. Imagine this, you are crossing the parking lot and see a child in the back seat of a car. The engine is off, the windows are up. The inside must be scorching hot. The child is in real and imminent danger of death. You shout for the owner, no one responds. You don't have time to find them, you are certain that the child will die if you take no action.

The doors are locked, you break a window on the drivers side, you unlock the car and remove the child. You take the child to a shady spot and use water to start to cool him down. You have just broken and entered a car. You have just kidnapped a child by the letter of the law. These two felonies are punishable by severe penalties. Kidnapping for one is a death penalty crime.

Speaking for myself, I would find you not guilt if I was on the jury. The letter of the law is one thing, Justice is another. Jury nullification is all about the people on the jury deciding if the law is unjust, or unjustly applied.

Another example. Before the Civil War, there were numerous laws prohibiting people from assisting runaway slaves. You could be sent to prison for helping a runaway slave. These were federal laws. I don't know if anyone was ever charged, and I can't say for certain what I would have done some hundred and sixty years ago, but I'd like to believe I would have found someone not guilty, or even helped the slaves seek freedom myself.

The problem with Sanctuary Cities is this. The elected officials are representing the wishes of their constituents. Those people in the cities believe that the immigration laws are unjust. Now, I suppose I should explain my own views on the issue.

When George W. Bush proposed what amounted to Amnesty during the tail end of his term, I believed this at that time, and since. We should have Ellis Island like facilities located as needed to process immigrants. These checks would include health, and criminality. How fast they could be processed depended on their health and the rapidity of the return on the request for information from their home nations. I am not opposed to immigration, but like the average person I want to know who is coming into my house. I want to know what they want, and what they are hoping to do. I believed these facilities would be useful since one of my other issues is diseases that run rampant in other nations that are essentially eradicated here.

I do not support illegal immigration, and I believe the limits are arbitrarily low on legal immigration.

So I understand the position of those pushing for sanctuary cities. I understand where they are coming from. I respect their motives as I always respect someone who is motivated by what they believe is right. I do not agree with them. I also don't want to see whole city governments thrown into jail wholesale. I don't believe that would make it better, it would in fact make it much worse.

There are alternatives. The Police Departments request surplus military equipment every year. Rifles, uniforms, MRAP armored vehicles, radios and gas masks. Helmets and combat vests and equipment. We saw a lot of this crap on display at Ferguson.

Decline the requests for Sanctuary Cities. Decline the requests for anything that is not mandated by law. Universities will have their Grant requests denied. You get the point of my idea. The problem is that people view the Federal Government as a big hammer. When you imagine that you have a big hammer, suddenly every problem looks like a nail.

By going in and hammering those cities, you empower the opponents. You play the game their way. You play the game according to their rules. One of the first lessons I learned reading Sun Tzu is never fight the battle the way the enemy wants you to. The opponents want you to come in with the big hammer. They want to be martyrs figuratively speaking. They want to be George Wallace, marched from the steps with a crowd cheering them for standing up to the big bad Federal Government. They don't think of it that way, but that is what it is.

If the cops don't get their awesome equipment from the military, the city is going to have to buy it. If their Emergency Services don't get the radios and trucks and all that from the Army, then the city/state is going to have to buy them. A request to free up federal funds for a state bridge is going to be denied. Do what the Government is mandated to, fix the bridges on Federal roads, the US and Interstate highways. But the state is on their own for the state roads and bridges.

I hope this answered your questions, and perhaps gave you some food for thought. Thanks for reading.

 

[Muhammed]

Why do cops lie? They are trained to lie and lie effectively.

Any defense attorney worth their salt should always drive that point home to the jury.

 

[MikeK]

[...]
Imagine if you grow up wanting to serve the public by enforcing the law. You wanted to be the guy that got the bad guy, and protected the good. Then you join the police force, and every single bad guy you stop, gets off because of a technicality, and despite overwhelming evidence they were criminals doing wrong, they were released back into the public.

[...]

If you begin your thesis with a flimsy premise you should expect its entire body to be viewed with skepticism. The simple fact is it's extremely rare for a clearly guilty criminal to be set free because of a technical flaw in either the arrest or the prosecution. And when it does happen the cause, almost without exception, is incompetence, laziness, or misconduct on the part of the arresting officer(s) or the DA.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

The police as a group, see the illegal search and seizure laws, is immoral and unjust. So do I by the way. Maybe police officers should demoted, or suspended, or even fired, for illegal search and seizure... but no matter what, a criminal should not be released over it. If you find clear proof of crime, the criminal should be punished, no matter what the police did wrong.

[...]

If all or most Americans felt the way you do about the Fourth Amendment our democracy would have dissolved into something resembling East Germany during the USSR era. The illegal search and seizure laws exist for one very important purpose -- to safeguard your privacy and to protect you against carelessly harmful police practices. Discharge of convictable felons because of Fourth Amendment violations is a relatively rare occurrence.

 

[Andylusion]

[...]

The police as a group, see the illegal search and seizure laws, is immoral and unjust. So do I by the way. Maybe police officers should demoted, or suspended, or even fired, for illegal search and seizure... but no matter what, a criminal should not be released over it. If you find clear proof of crime, the criminal should be punished, no matter what the police did wrong.

[...]

If all or most Americans felt the way you do about the Fourth Amendment our democracy would have dissolved into something resembling East Germany during the USSR era. The illegal search and seizure laws exist for one very important purpose -- to safeguard your privacy and to protect you against carelessly harmful police practices. Discharge of convictable felons because of Fourth Amendment violations is a relatively rare occurrence.

I would argue it's not rare. It's common, because the laws are so strict, that police see people released that harm all of us again. This is why they lie. If they don't criminals would be running the country by now.

I personally, do not believe that the fourth Amendment was ever intended to be used to defend criminals, like the way it is today.

We can argue that, and it could go either way.

But regardless, today it's nothing more than a defense of criminals, that harm and ruin society. The amount of crime in our culture is ridiculous. And honestly, the only reason it exists, is because the cost of this crime is completely hidden from the public.

If you knew how much of the cost of the goods you buy, goes to paying for criminal activity, you'd freak out. If you knew how much money you are not being paid, because the company is paying for stealing and theft, you would freak out.

If all the costs of crime were tallied up in a monthly bill that you had to pay, all of you would stop b!tching about police and the 4th amendment, and you would be forming lynch mobs, and hanging these people.

But because you don't see it, and don't realize it, and live in myth that someone else, somewhere else is paying that cost... you can sit around whining about the 4th amendment and police that lie.

Part of the reason why crime is higher in poor areas, is because crime makes people and society, poor. You want to help the poor? First thing you need to do, is kill the criminals.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

To think about it another way, what is the point of even being a police officer, if you can't stop the criminals? Police see their job as pointless, if they don't lie to catch the criminals.

[...]

The only valid point of being a police officer is to perform a specific function in strict accordance with the prescribed rules, regulations, and the training regimen. That's all. The point is not to make moral judgments but to do the job by the book. A major part of today's problem with some police officers is their utter contempt for the rules and a reflexive, systematic, well-organized tendency to lie their way around them.

 

[SavannahMann]

[...]

The police as a group, see the illegal search and seizure laws, is immoral and unjust. So do I by the way. Maybe police officers should demoted, or suspended, or even fired, for illegal search and seizure... but no matter what, a criminal should not be released over it. If you find clear proof of crime, the criminal should be punished, no matter what the police did wrong.

[...]

If all or most Americans felt the way you do about the Fourth Amendment our democracy would have dissolved into something resembling East Germany during the USSR era. The illegal search and seizure laws exist for one very important purpose -- to safeguard your privacy and to protect you against carelessly harmful police practices. Discharge of convictable felons because of Fourth Amendment violations is a relatively rare occurrence.

I would argue it's not rare. It's common, because the laws are so strict, that police see people released that harm all of us again. This is why they lie. If they don't criminals would be running the country by now.

I personally, do not believe that the fourth Amendment was ever intended to be used to defend criminals, like the way it is today.

We can argue that, and it could go either way.

But regardless, today it's nothing more than a defense of criminals, that harm and ruin society. The amount of crime in our culture is ridiculous. And honestly, the only reason it exists, is because the cost of this crime is completely hidden from the public.

If you knew how much of the cost of the goods you buy, goes to paying for criminal activity, you'd freak out. If you knew how much money you are not being paid, because the company is paying for stealing and theft, you would freak out.

If all the costs of crime were tallied up in a monthly bill that you had to pay, all of you would stop b!tching about police and the 4th amendment, and you would be forming lynch mobs, and hanging these people.

But because you don't see it, and don't realize it, and live in myth that someone else, somewhere else is paying that cost... you can sit around whining about the 4th amendment and police that lie.

Part of the reason why crime is higher in poor areas, is because crime makes people and society, poor. You want to help the poor? First thing you need to do, is kill the criminals.

Andy, I know the costs of illegality. I know the mark up to cover for the loss to shoplifters. I also know the cost to ignoring things like the 4th Amendment.

The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department was searching public housing without warrants. They and the housing police claimed that the people who lived in the public housing had for all intents and purposes forfeited their rights to the protections of the Constitution by accepting public housing. They searched without warrants, and without probable cause, and without permission of the residents.

This was wrong. It is said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and even if you feel that the motivation was pure, to find and remove weapons, to find and remove drugs, the path required people to become second class citizens. Citizens without protection by the founding documents and principles.

I read an appeals court decision not long ago. One that is being appealed to the Supreme Court. It is not the case I would liked to fight but it's what we have. Part of the appeals decision was that the people who carry concealed must accept that availing themselves of the right to carry a gun means they sacrifice the other rights like the fourth.

I disagree with that argument. My freedom of speech should not and can not limit any other rights. Your second amendment rights do not mean you lose your fourth amendment rights.

If that case is upheld, then anyone who chooses to carry concealed is a second class citizen by law. I objected to the PATRIOT ACT because it weakened the civil rights. The idea that a Federal Agent could give me a letter and instantly I am without my fourth, fifth, or sixth amendment rights was just flat assed wrong.

As I said this case is a bad one to use fighting this battle, but letting it go is even worse. That's why the NRA is involved. Because gun owners across the country stand to have their civil rights waved away. I'm on the NRA's side on this one. I hope they win. Even if winning means a bad guy goes free.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

I personally, do not believe that the fourth Amendment was ever intended to be used to defend criminals, like the way it is today.

[...]

Of course you don't. You don't believe anything that doesn't fit into your authoritarian view of the world -- which is summarized in this single sentence I've excerpted from one of your manifestos:

"Police are the authority, and you need to either respect that, or stop crying about what happens."

Police are people who accept a civil service position which affords an opportunity for those with certain personality quirks or deficiencies to sublimate by oppressing others. This does not apply to all cops but it clearly applies to a substantial number of them and it has led to such widespread and potent loathing of the police that police assassinations have recently occurred as a consequence. This is a phenomenon in which bad cops, such as those who manifest the kind of unnecessarily brutal conduct seen in the topic video, results in the random killing of cops who might be the kind who would never behave that way.

I really don't care to read any of that "adrenaline buzz" bs as being the cause of this kind of behavior because it is not an acceptable excuse. The rules of police performance hold that personal feelings must be constrained under any and all circumstances when dealing with the general public -- or with subjects under arrest. There are no exceptions. But how many examples do we see of cops swarming like a pack of hungry dogs around a subject who is face-down and being punched and kicked as well as restrained? Don't you know that everyone who witnesses such inexcusable examples of orgiastic brutality does not share your perversely authoritarian opinions of it?

Think back to the aftermath of the Rodney King beating. How many innocent people suffered as the final result of that unnecessarily brutal display of police authority?

There is a serious problem in the training regimens of most American police agencies -- and in the supervision methods of their respective patrol forces. I believe a lot of it has to do with the excessive power of police unions which make it possible for bad cops to behave like Cossacks without fear of punishment. Consequently the punitive damage awards and settlements which result from the multitude of civil actions brought about by police misconduct costs the American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars every year (look it up). We don't hear much about this because of the non-disclosure conditions included in these payouts and settlements. The NYPD, alone, is beset by thousands of these lawsuits every year. Its Department of Law has more than a dozen lawyers who do nothing but defend the actions of cops whose authority has awakened some personal monster in them.

 

[Andylusion]

[...]

To think about it another way, what is the point of even being a police officer, if you can't stop the criminals? Police see their job as pointless, if they don't lie to catch the criminals.

[...]

The only valid point of being a police officer is to perform a specific function in strict accordance with the prescribed rules, regulations, and the training regimen. That's all. The point is not to make moral judgments but to do the job by the book. A major part of today's problem with some police officers is their utter contempt for the rules and a reflexive, systematic, well-organized tendency to lie their way around them.

Right. That may well be true, and I would even agree with it.

That's nice. We moralized about how police officers should act. Now what has improved? Nothing.

Again, you are acting like Police officers are robots, that shouldn't feel, or have value judgements outside of their "prescribed rules, regulations, and the training regimen". If you want to have robots instead of police officers, ok. But that's not human existence is it?

Maybe someday, we'll have robots instead of police officers.

Until then, you need to realize you are dealing with human beings, not robots. And you can say until the day you die, that police should just follow the "prescribed rules, regulations, and the training regimen". And when you get done, you'll just grow old and die. Nothing will change.

You have two options. You can start firing police, and you will both run out of police (we already have a nation wide shortage of people enrolling into police academies), and police that simply don't police (Chicago, officers simply don't stop people, don't patrol, and only show up after someone calls 911 and the bodies are on the ground).

Again, you can complain bitterly until you die, and you'll just die. Nothing will change.

My view: We need to change the laws so police do not have to lie to do their job.

The other options is your views, which lead to Chicago, Baltimore, Dallas, Los Angels and so on.

If you have some other solution, let's hear it. What would you suggest? I'm open to some alternative, let's hear your fix.

 

[Andylusion]

[...]

I personally, do not believe that the fourth Amendment was ever intended to be used to defend criminals, like the way it is today.

[...]

Of course you don't. You don't believe anything that doesn't fit into your authoritarian view of the world -- which is summarized in this single sentence I've excerpted from one of your manifestos:

"Police are the authority, and you need to either respect that, or stop crying about what happens."

Police are people who accept a civil service position which affords an opportunity for those with certain personality quirks or deficiencies to sublimate by oppressing others. This does not apply to all cops but it clearly applies to a substantial number of them and it has led to such widespread and potent loathing of the police that police assassinations have recently occurred as a consequence. This is a phenomenon in which bad cops, such as those who manifest the kind of unnecessarily brutal conduct seen in the topic video, results in the random killing of cops who might be the kind who would never behave that way.

I really don't care to read any of that "adrenaline buzz" bs as being the cause of this kind of behavior because it is not an acceptable excuse. The rules of police performance hold that personal feelings must be constrained under any and all circumstances when dealing with the general public -- or with subjects under arrest. There are no exceptions. But how many examples do we see of cops swarming like a pack of hungry dogs around a subject who is face-down and being punched and kicked as well as restrained? Don't you know that everyone who witnesses such inexcusable examples of orgiastic brutality does not share your perversely authoritarian opinions of it?

Think back to the aftermath of the Rodney King beating. How many innocent people suffered as the final result of that unnecessarily brutal display of police authority?

There is a serious problem in the training regimens of most American police agencies -- and in the supervision methods of their respective patrol forces. I believe a lot of it has to do with the excessive power of police unions which make it possible for bad cops to behave like Cossacks without fear of punishment. Consequently the punitive damage awards and settlements which result from the multitude of civil actions brought about by police misconduct costs the American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars every year (look it up). We don't hear much about this because of the non-disclosure conditions included in these payouts and settlements. The NYPD, alone, is beset by thousands of these lawsuits every year. Its Department of Law has more than a dozen lawyers who do nothing but defend the actions of cops whose authority has awakened some personal monster in them.

I really don't care to read any of that

Of course you don't. You don't believe anything that doesn't fit into your anarchist view of the world.

(hey if you are going to just dismiss everything I say, and make broad judgements, I can do that too. Right? If that's your idea of debating, then I can debate that way as well. What goes around comes around)

 

[Andylusion]

[...]

The police as a group, see the illegal search and seizure laws, is immoral and unjust. So do I by the way. Maybe police officers should demoted, or suspended, or even fired, for illegal search and seizure... but no matter what, a criminal should not be released over it. If you find clear proof of crime, the criminal should be punished, no matter what the police did wrong.

[...]

If all or most Americans felt the way you do about the Fourth Amendment our democracy would have dissolved into something resembling East Germany during the USSR era. The illegal search and seizure laws exist for one very important purpose -- to safeguard your privacy and to protect you against carelessly harmful police practices. Discharge of convictable felons because of Fourth Amendment violations is a relatively rare occurrence.

I would argue it's not rare. It's common, because the laws are so strict, that police see people released that harm all of us again. This is why they lie. If they don't criminals would be running the country by now.

I personally, do not believe that the fourth Amendment was ever intended to be used to defend criminals, like the way it is today.

We can argue that, and it could go either way.

But regardless, today it's nothing more than a defense of criminals, that harm and ruin society. The amount of crime in our culture is ridiculous. And honestly, the only reason it exists, is because the cost of this crime is completely hidden from the public.

If you knew how much of the cost of the goods you buy, goes to paying for criminal activity, you'd freak out. If you knew how much money you are not being paid, because the company is paying for stealing and theft, you would freak out.

If all the costs of crime were tallied up in a monthly bill that you had to pay, all of you would stop b!tching about police and the 4th amendment, and you would be forming lynch mobs, and hanging these people.

But because you don't see it, and don't realize it, and live in myth that someone else, somewhere else is paying that cost... you can sit around whining about the 4th amendment and police that lie.

Part of the reason why crime is higher in poor areas, is because crime makes people and society, poor. You want to help the poor? First thing you need to do, is kill the criminals.

Andy, I know the costs of illegality. I know the mark up to cover for the loss to shoplifters. I also know the cost to ignoring things like the 4th Amendment.

The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department was searching public housing without warrants. They and the housing police claimed that the people who lived in the public housing had for all intents and purposes forfeited their rights to the protections of the Constitution by accepting public housing. They searched without warrants, and without probable cause, and without permission of the residents.

This was wrong. It is said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and even if you feel that the motivation was pure, to find and remove weapons, to find and remove drugs, the path required people to become second class citizens. Citizens without protection by the founding documents and principles.

I read an appeals court decision not long ago. One that is being appealed to the Supreme Court. It is not the case I would liked to fight but it's what we have. Part of the appeals decision was that the people who carry concealed must accept that availing themselves of the right to carry a gun means they sacrifice the other rights like the fourth.

I disagree with that argument. My freedom of speech should not and can not limit any other rights. Your second amendment rights do not mean you lose your fourth amendment rights.

If that case is upheld, then anyone who chooses to carry concealed is a second class citizen by law. I objected to the PATRIOT ACT because it weakened the civil rights. The idea that a Federal Agent could give me a letter and instantly I am without my fourth, fifth, or sixth amendment rights was just flat assed wrong.

As I said this case is a bad one to use fighting this battle, but letting it go is even worse. That's why the NRA is involved. Because gun owners across the country stand to have their civil rights waved away. I'm on the NRA's side on this one. I hope they win. Even if winning means a bad guy goes free.

Actually I would agree with that. When YOU earn the money to buy YOUR property, that's one thing. When you are living there at my expense, yeah, I have no problem with the police searching your property every single month.

I would support legislation to that effect.

Yes the path to hell is paved with good intentions... .and that's what I think of your views. Our nation is in a downward spiral, and it's because of the views your expressing right here. Every year, things are getting worse, and we've been following your plan to the letter. Every time the police do anything, there's a bunch of people like you attacking them. Are things better now? Or worse? Clearly worse, not better. Look at Chicago. That's your plan in action. Good job. You got the police officer. Well done. See how much better it is?

We're not on my plan our we? So you can't blame me for Chicago, can you?

 

[SavannahMann]

[...]

The police as a group, see the illegal search and seizure laws, is immoral and unjust. So do I by the way. Maybe police officers should demoted, or suspended, or even fired, for illegal search and seizure... but no matter what, a criminal should not be released over it. If you find clear proof of crime, the criminal should be punished, no matter what the police did wrong.

[...]

If all or most Americans felt the way you do about the Fourth Amendment our democracy would have dissolved into something resembling East Germany during the USSR era. The illegal search and seizure laws exist for one very important purpose -- to safeguard your privacy and to protect you against carelessly harmful police practices. Discharge of convictable felons because of Fourth Amendment violations is a relatively rare occurrence.

I would argue it's not rare. It's common, because the laws are so strict, that police see people released that harm all of us again. This is why they lie. If they don't criminals would be running the country by now.

I personally, do not believe that the fourth Amendment was ever intended to be used to defend criminals, like the way it is today.

We can argue that, and it could go either way.

But regardless, today it's nothing more than a defense of criminals, that harm and ruin society. The amount of crime in our culture is ridiculous. And honestly, the only reason it exists, is because the cost of this crime is completely hidden from the public.

If you knew how much of the cost of the goods you buy, goes to paying for criminal activity, you'd freak out. If you knew how much money you are not being paid, because the company is paying for stealing and theft, you would freak out.

If all the costs of crime were tallied up in a monthly bill that you had to pay, all of you would stop b!tching about police and the 4th amendment, and you would be forming lynch mobs, and hanging these people.

But because you don't see it, and don't realize it, and live in myth that someone else, somewhere else is paying that cost... you can sit around whining about the 4th amendment and police that lie.

Part of the reason why crime is higher in poor areas, is because crime makes people and society, poor. You want to help the poor? First thing you need to do, is kill the criminals.

Andy, I know the costs of illegality. I know the mark up to cover for the loss to shoplifters. I also know the cost to ignoring things like the 4th Amendment.

The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department was searching public housing without warrants. They and the housing police claimed that the people who lived in the public housing had for all intents and purposes forfeited their rights to the protections of the Constitution by accepting public housing. They searched without warrants, and without probable cause, and without permission of the residents.

This was wrong. It is said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and even if you feel that the motivation was pure, to find and remove weapons, to find and remove drugs, the path required people to become second class citizens. Citizens without protection by the founding documents and principles.

I read an appeals court decision not long ago. One that is being appealed to the Supreme Court. It is not the case I would liked to fight but it's what we have. Part of the appeals decision was that the people who carry concealed must accept that availing themselves of the right to carry a gun means they sacrifice the other rights like the fourth.

I disagree with that argument. My freedom of speech should not and can not limit any other rights. Your second amendment rights do not mean you lose your fourth amendment rights.

If that case is upheld, then anyone who chooses to carry concealed is a second class citizen by law. I objected to the PATRIOT ACT because it weakened the civil rights. The idea that a Federal Agent could give me a letter and instantly I am without my fourth, fifth, or sixth amendment rights was just flat assed wrong.

As I said this case is a bad one to use fighting this battle, but letting it go is even worse. That's why the NRA is involved. Because gun owners across the country stand to have their civil rights waved away. I'm on the NRA's side on this one. I hope they win. Even if winning means a bad guy goes free.

Actually I would agree with that. When YOU earn the money to buy YOUR property, that's one thing. When you are living there at my expense, yeah, I have no problem with the police searching your property every single month.

I would support legislation to that effect.

Yes the path to hell is paved with good intentions... .and that's what I think of your views. Our nation is in a downward spiral, and it's because of the views your expressing right here. Every year, things are getting worse, and we've been following your plan to the letter. Every time the police do anything, there's a bunch of people like you attacking them. Are things better now? Or worse? Clearly worse, not better. Look at Chicago. That's your plan in action. Good job. You got the police officer. Well done. See how much better it is?

We're not on my plan our we? So you can't blame me for Chicago, can you?

Andy. One of the big differences between us is this. I would fight for your rights while you would fight to take mine.

Let's talk about Chicago. I'll give you credit, normally police supporters who try to downplay police abuses and misconduct use Chicago a simple an example of why it's all the Democrats fault. Their argument is that Republicans would not allow the misconduct and corruption.

Instead of giving you examples of where absolute police states failed, or waxing about the noble principles behind the Civil Rights. I'm going to make an offer to you.

I propose this compromise. The police will have the absolute power that would result from getting rid of the Civil Rights. Accused will be guilty until proven innocent. No problems with search warrants, the police will be free to search anyone and anything they want. They can set up checkpoints and quiz drivers and pedestrians to their hearts content.

That's what I'll give you. Here is what you have to give me in return. If an innocent person is convicted of a crime, they get one million dollars a day for every single day they were in prison. The police, prosecutors, and judges who found the person guilty, will be executed within 24 hours of the truth becoming known. If DNA evidence exonerates a convicted person, everyone who participated in the conviction is executed within 24 hours.

The old saying as true. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. There is a way to prevent that. Accountability. The convex of authority, is responsibility. A Sergeant has authority over the soldiers assigned to him. That authority means that the Sergeant is held to a higher standard, and is responsible for his actions, and the actions of the soldiers. An officer has even more authority, and thus even more responsibility. A crime that would see the soldier drummed out of the service will see an Officer Court Martialed.

The people who scream the loudest if this compromise looked to go into effect would not be the ACLU although they would certainly be screaming. It would be the Police, the Prosecutors, and the Judges. The Police have laws that prevent them from being held responsible. It's called the LEOBR. The Law Enforcement Officers Bill of Rights. California which has some of the most egregious examples of Police Misconduct also has one of the strongest LEOBR on the books. You can't interview a cop without a lawyer present. He doesn't have to ask for one, if you do interview him without a lawyer then the case is pretty much automatically dismissed.

The police themselves would object to being held accountable for the absolute power that is proposed. They don't follow the rules now, and in the compromise I suggest they wouldn't have any except one. Only those guilty of the crime go to prison. If they care convicted of rape, or murder, and did not commit the rape, or murder, claiming that they were drug dealers later doesn't cut it. If they were sent to prison for Murder, and are exonerated later, the cops are executed the next day. No exceptions, no excuses.

This way, the guilty get punished, by whom I have no idea. Because none of the cops would take the job under those circumstances. Nobody will gamble their life on being right every time. We would devolve into chaos, because the one truth about the history of our world is this. The more power the police have, the less accountability they are subject to. No KGB officer was ever punished for sending an innocent man to the Gulag. No STASI agent was ever punished for lying about an East German citizen.

That is what is really wrong with our system. We aren't holding those with authority responsible for their actions. If they are caught breaking the rules, they escape any punishment in a vast majority of the cases. Sometimes they may resign and get a job doing the same thing at another department. Sometimes they lose a few days or hours of pay. Sometimes they get a letter that says they are a bad boy in a file sealed from discovery by the public or attorneys for the defense.

I offer absolute power, with absolute accountability. If you are willing to risk my life, you should ante your own up to keep the table stakes fair.

I find the examples of police state type tactics abhorrent. But I'm willing to go along, if the absolute power awarded, is met with absolute responsibility.

How many lies would the police tell then, assuming you could find someone dumb enough to take the job? How many times would the police plant evidence? Would the guilty escape punishment in this scenario? Would you be willing to live in such a society?

 

[MikeK]

"I really don't care to read any of that"

Of course you don't. You don't believe anything that doesn't fit into your anarchist view of the world.

(hey if you are going to just dismiss everything I say, and make broad judgements, I can do that too. Right? If that's your idea of debating, then I can debate that way as well. What goes around comes around)

My dismissal of the expressed idea that it's okay for uniformed police officers to behave like unrestrained savages and perpetrate unnecessary and manifestly brutal aggravated assault on an arrest subject because they are having an "adrenaline buzz" seems anarchistic to you?

That conclusion speaks for itself, wouldn't you say? Don't you know how readily you defeat your own purpose with some of these comments?

Suppose a driver whom you accidentally cut off and nearly cause to crash forces you over and proceeds to beat the hell out of you because he's having an adrenaline buzz. Is that excusable?

 

[MikeK]

[...]

I read an appeals court decision not long ago. One that is being appealed to the Supreme Court. It is not the case I would liked to fight but it's what we have. Part of the appeals decision was that the people who carry concealed must accept that availing themselves of the right to carry a gun means they sacrifice the other rights like the fourth.

[...]

I would very much like to know the expressed reasoning behind that seemingly senseless decision.

 

[SavannahMann]

[...]

I read an appeals court decision not long ago. One that is being appealed to the Supreme Court. It is not the case I would liked to fight but it's what we have. Part of the appeals decision was that the people who carry concealed must accept that availing themselves of the right to carry a gun means they sacrifice the other rights like the fourth.

[...]

I would very much like to know the expressed reasoning behind that seemingly senseless decision.

Does “armed” automatically equal “dangerous” in a court of law? - Hot Air

It is a terrible case to decide the issue on.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

I find the examples of police state type tactics abhorrent. But I'm willing to go along, if the absolute power awarded, is met with absolute responsibility.

How many lies would the police tell then, assuming you could find someone dumb enough to take the job? How many times would the police plant evidence? Would the guilty escape punishment in this scenario? Would you be willing to live in such a society?

I don't know about absolute power with absolute responsibility, but I believe if it were possible to properly enforce the rules of proper police performance there would be no problem filling the ranks with competent, compliant people.

If you watch the TV "ride-along" reality series, COPS, you will see all sorts of cops, from those who are clearly misconduct-prone to those who are not only capable of doing the job properly but of doing it very well. I think it's a simple matter of understanding the rules and being unable to circumvent them, which is the root of today's problem with policing. And circumventing rules is what contemporary police unions are about.