+1 impd officer

[jve153]

Crossed paths at the chinese restaurant this afternoon with one of impd's officers. we were both rounding the corner, i said excuse me as we almost ran into each other. he told me to go ahead, glanced down at my pistol and told me to have a good day. firearms were never brought up, not a word about ID or license. overall great encounter, if you can call it that. that is the way it should be.

 

[the1kidd03]

"+1" and "IMPD" in the same sentence....is this a first here?

 

[TaunTaun]

"+1" and "IMPD" in the same sentence....is this a first here?

No, it happened before, but I think it was a typo. They just fat-fingered the keyboard and forgot to proofread before submitting.

 

[Dead Duck]

Huh - Didn't know Chinese served donuts.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Huh - Didn't know Chinese served donuts.

You obviously don't spend too much time at chinese restaurants.

 

[the1kidd03]

Huh - Didn't know Chinese served donuts.

You obviously don't spend too much time at chinese restaurants.

 

[drillsgt]

+1 to the Officer, nice to hear!

 

[PriestEG]

"+1" and "IMPD" in the same sentence....is this a first here?

not the case. i have had several good encounters with IMPD while OCing. the officers i have encountered seem to either be more used to dealing with this and dont want to spend their time discussing Indiana's gun laws with someone. to IMPD

 

[the1kidd03]

not the case. i have had several good encounters with IMPD while OCing. the officers i have encountered seem to either be more used to dealing with this and dont want to spend their time discussing Indiana's gun laws with someone. to IMPD

Not in my personal experience, but it's a big department with a wide variety of employed officer.... and my experiences with them regarding OC were several years ago. Things and people change....and I don't often just "encounter" officers. I try to make sure I share those experiences here when I do.

 

[PriestEG]

Not in my personal experience, but it's a big department with a wide variety of employed officer.... and my experiences with them regarding OC were several years ago. Things and people change....and I don't often just "encounter" officers. I try to make sure I share those experiences here when I do.

down on the southside where i frequent, i have only had good expierences. mainly just the how ya doing? do you have a LTCH? have a good day convo. its once i get into johnson county that I keep having the negative encounters, being told its illegal to OC (as you can remember from my previous threads Kidd03). it seems that my "encounters" are almost always at gas stations or mcdonalds too... coincidence? i dont know that it is, but those establishments are where most on the job LEOs have to stop in. gotta have food and go juice!

 

[the1kidd03]

down on the southside where i frequent, i have only had good expierences. mainly just the how ya doing? do you have a LTCH? have a good day convo. its once i get into johnson county that I keep having the negative encounters, being told its illegal to OC (as you can remember from my previous threads Kidd03). it seems that my "encounters" are almost always at gas stations or mcdonalds too... coincidence? i dont know that it is, but those establishments are where most on the job LEOs have to stop in. gotta have food and go juice!

Yeah, I've "seen" officers at local gast stations and such places while there, but I can't say any of them have been an "encounter." They didn't even seem to notice I was there, much less carrying.

My one real "encounter" with IMPD was negative and several years ago, but no where near the south side and it wasn't in an "every day public" setting such as McDonalds. I was merely walking to my friends home. I don't judge all officers based strictly on such interactions, but I certainly don't deny that there are serious issues which need addressed when officers do such things, nor agree with the passive "few bad apples" response that's typical.

 

[PriestEG]

I don't judge all officers based strictly on such interactions, but I certainly don't deny that there are serious issues which need addressed when officers do such things, nor agree with the passive "few bad apples" response that's typical.

the bold section is to prevent hurt feelings. nicely done

 

[the1kidd03]

the bold section is to prevent hurt feelings. nicely done

No, not really. I could care less if I hurt someone's feelings. I'm not a politician.

I just know/have met officers who have conducted themselves properly and professionally and I have also met some who do not. I've seen both sides of it and can attest that merely wearing a badge does not make one trusworthy or honorable. Regardless, I hold EVERYONE of them to the same standard (as do most citizens) and will hold them accountable for their actions (whether good or bad) EVERY time I encounter them. Sadly, I have not actually "encountered" them outside of my two negative experiences (at least in the area surrounding Indy.) I have met officer all over the country who conducted themselves in what seemed to be a professional manner (although I had not been carrying at those times and was not "suspected" of breaking any laws) so my perspective there is limited

I've even seen a very close friend of mine enter the field whom I knew before taking on the career. Now, I've seen him change and has lost much of his integrity/honor in the name of "protecting the thin blue line" many in the community perpetuate. I no longer communicate with him.

 

[AndersonIN]

Yeah, I've "seen" officers at local gast stations and such places while there, but I can't say any of them have been an "encounter." They didn't even seem to notice I was there, much less carrying.

My one real "encounter" with IMPD was negative and several years ago, but no where near the south side and it wasn't in an "every day public" setting such as McDonalds. I was merely walking to my friends home. I don't judge all officers based strictly on such interactions, but I certainly don't deny that there are serious issues which need addressed when officers do such things, nor agree with the passive "few bad apples" response that's typical.

I don't judge all officers based strictly on such interactions......

But when I do they're ALL %$#^^%$ A%$#holes!!!

Good to hear. We have some good ones up here in Madison Cty too......both Sheriff and City!!! +1

 

[jsx1043]

Chinese joints have those awesome sweet biscuits, which are almost like donuts - they're approved under GO 305.50 - Police Pastry Consumption.

 

[the1kidd03]

I don't judge all officers based strictly on such interactions......

But when I do they're ALL %$#^^%$ A%$#holes!!!

I think you miss the point. I don't judge out of ordinary human natured stereotyping. I judge based on expectations of those in uniform.

Those with badges are expected to set appropriate examples when displaying themselves as officers. Part of enforcing the law and setting that example is to hold EVERYONE accountable for their actions. Hence, NOT giving special treatment in the name of "protecting each other."

In other words, passing off inappropriate officer action such as "a bad apple" only further perpetuates those citizens' feelings of unprofessional or inproper policing and disgust. They continue to not only dislike LEOs in general, but can't trust them either. Even a good officer is guilty by association because putting on that badge is the same as taking an oath to uphold all of the citizens expectations. So when ONE does NOT, then NONE of them do because in theory...the "good" LEOs should hold the "bad apple" accountable for his actions. Had they all done this, then that "bad apple" would have not been an officer still or would see some punishment for their failing to adequately perform their duties.

Simply passing such a "bad apple" off as such is merely making up an excuse for your own lack of integrity and initiative to solve the REAL problem. In the public eye of setting the example, another officer should quickly inquire as to the officer who the citizen encountered and try their best to make sure that it not only doesn't happen again, but that that other officer is corrected for their actions. But, NO...most officers are content just saying "one bad apple" and then complaining about the difficulty of their job when the community doesn't trust them.

My brain is severely strained at the moment so I hope this makes sense. It does to me at the moment.

 

[Fixer]

Chinese joints have those awesome sweet biscuits, which are almost like donuts - they're approved under GO 305.50 - Police Pastry Consumption.

Ancient Chinese Secret Recipe: Sweet "biscuit"
Can of buttermilk buiscuits
Fry biscuits in deep fat fryer until golden brown flip and repete on other side
Drain and toss in cinnamon sugar
Enjoy!

 

[PeaShooter]

Ancient Chinese Secret Recipe: Sweet "biscuit"
Can of buttermilk buiscuits
Fry biscuits in deep fat fryer until golden brown flip and repete on other side
Drain and toss in cinnamon sugar
Dip in chocolate pudding
Enjoy!

FIFY

 

[Denny347]

I think you miss the point. I don't judge out of ordinary human natured stereotyping. I judge based on expectations of those in uniform.

Those with badges are expected to set appropriate examples when displaying themselves as officers. Part of enforcing the law and setting that example is to hold EVERYONE accountable for their actions. Hence, NOT giving special treatment in the name of "protecting each other."

In other words, passing off inappropriate officer action such as "a bad apple" only further perpetuates those citizens' feelings of unprofessional or inproper policing and disgust. They continue to not only dislike LEOs in general, but can't trust them either. Even a good officer is guilty by association because putting on that badge is the same as taking an oath to uphold all of the citizens expectations. So when ONE does NOT, then NONE of them do because in theory...the "good" LEOs should hold the "bad apple" accountable for his actions. Had they all done this, then that "bad apple" would have not been an officer still or would see some punishment for their failing to adequately perform their duties.

Simply passing such a "bad apple" off as such is merely making up an excuse for your own lack of integrity and initiative to solve the REAL problem. In the public eye of setting the example, another officer should quickly inquire as to the officer who the citizen encountered and try their best to make sure that it not only doesn't happen again, but that that other officer is corrected for their actions. But, NO...most officers are content just saying "one bad apple" and then complaining about the difficulty of their job when the community doesn't trust them.

My brain is severely strained at the moment so I hope this makes sense. It does to me at the moment.

Do you believe this yourself? Police agencies are set up just like the military in terms of rank and chain of command. If I think there is a problem that I cannot handle street level, I bring it to my direct supervisor. What they do with it is out of my control and there is nothing more I can do. If I try to circumvent the chain, I get into big trouble. Now if the allegations are REALLY bad, I can go straight to AI but anything less MUST go through the chain of command. For as much as people think we are all a bunch of crooks, in my 15yrs I have NEVER seen anything that required such action. The bad ones generally keep it hidden from the rest of us BECAUSE they know they will get turned in.

 

[the1kidd03]

Do you believe this yourself? Police agencies are set up just like the military in terms of rank and chain of command. If I think there is a problem that I cannot handle street level, I bring it to my direct supervisor. What they do with it is out of my control and there is nothing more I can do. If I try to circumvent the chain, I get into big trouble. Now if the allegations are REALLY bad, I can go straight to AI but anything less MUST go through the chain of command. For as much as people think we are all a bunch of crooks, in my 15yrs I have NEVER seen anything that required such action. The bad ones generally keep it hidden from the rest of us BECAUSE they know they will get turned in.

I understand the chain of command concept. Indeed, there is a certain level of "filtering" which must take place but it doesn't have to be observed by those people complaining. I don't doubt that those who perform acts which are really bad don't share it, but when an officer hears a complaint and lets people KNOW he's an officer he shouldn't pass it off. It hurts the whole LE community further by displaying a lack of interest in even a single citizens concerns regarding their rights.

What I mean is, that a complaining citizen may already have a damaged image of officers considering what they've experienced (whether it's meritorious or not). Therefore, the response "one bad apple" is NOT helping resolve the situation or animosity for that citizen. At least making that effort in the eyes of that citizen will save a majority of their respect for the badge as a whole by countering their bad experience with a positive one. Even if it goes to the superior and then no where, the citizen need not necessarily know that for the effort to have served its purpose.

It would be more a form of "damage control" by having ONE officer AT LEAST SEEM to take responsibility for the actions of another, measures to correct them, and further show that citizen that the "badge itself can be trusted, and not all officer are turds." Whether or not anything actually gets done about it is irrelevant really. Yes, it would be nice but realistically as long as the relationship with the community is saved/salvaged that's the most important thing (at least for those officers who wish to be able to stay in their department and make their job a little easier in the long run.)