Respect for LEOs

[IndyDave1776]

I thought that was implicit in his statement.

Disagreeing with the condition of having too many laws and too many non-legislative sources of de facto laws seems to be a separate issue from malfeasance on the parts of the enforcers.

 

[oldpink]

Disagreeing with the condition of having too many laws and too many non-legislative sources of de facto laws seems to be a separate issue from malfeasance on the parts of the enforcers.

Not for me it isn't.

 

[WestSider]

I recently switched from a career in logistics management to law enforcement at 35 years of age. I have been on the job for 4 months now. Early in my training my supervisor handed me a pocket sized copy of the US Constitution for me to keep in my car. I really liked that... Reminds me of the oath I took to uphold it when I'm dealing with people who are difficult to deal with. IMO the police work for the people not the government, that's how I feel anyway.

I'm still new to this career so I'm not going to talk like I know what it's like to spend YEARS doing it, but I have a feeling that the bad officers we are talking about somehow lose sight at some point of why the job was important to them. For me, it's being able to help people every day and put criminals behind bars where they belong (I just wished they stayed there).

 

[WestSider]

Most people break the law every day and don't realize it.
Did you ever hear the expression "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime"?
LEOs specialize, because the law is so complex. Gambling and alcohol require their own enforcers. Accounting, different officers.
Then throw in things like OSHA, EPA, Code Enforcement Officers, etc.
Yet you are supposed to know all of them.
Heck, gun law confuses people with "can I carry there" or "can I carry there"

[video=youtube;GXC3X4dbmpY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXC3X4dbmpY[/video]

Yeah I can't disagree here... most of my thoughts are more in regard to state law than federal regs, because the original discussion was about the lady yelling at the officer for writing her a speeding citation.

When we open up the discussion to all the federal agencies, it's a whole different ball game.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Not for me it isn't.

Wait a minute. It is entirely possible to have the most upright officer required to enforce overreaching law, and it is also possible to have enforcement of perfectly good laws placed in the hands of dangerous criminals with badges.

I recently switched from a career in logistics management to law enforcement at 35 years of age. I have been on the job for 4 months now. Early in my training my supervisor handed me a pocket sized copy of the US Constitution for me to keep in my car. I really liked that... Reminds me of the oath I took to uphold it when I'm dealing with people who are difficult to deal with. IMO the police work for the people not the government, that's how I feel anyway.

I'm still new to this career so I'm not going to talk like I know what it's like to spend YEARS doing it, but I have a feeling that the bad officers we are talking about somehow lose sight at some point of why the job was important to them. For me, it's being able to help people every day and put criminals behind bars where they belong (I just wished they stayed there).

You will have to share contact information for your boss. He needs to go on the Christmas list! I would agree that there are those who go in with good intentions, or perhaps not having thought it all through and went for a 'cool' job, and lost their way. I can also think of a boy I went to school with who sold drugs when we were in school, joined the PD and is still selling as of the last I heard.

Yeah I can't disagree here... most of my thoughts are more in regard to state law than federal regs, because the original discussion was about the lady yelling at the officer for writing her a speeding citation.

When we open up the discussion to all the federal agencies, it's a whole different ball game.

The only problem I see here is that when you throw in federal mandates and other mirror-image laws where the state law becomes a doppelganger of the federal law (like traffic laws the states enact in response to federal extortion), or situations like asset forfeiture where the feds will include locals to do the legwork for them in exchange for a cut of the money which can be more freely distributed as the federal agency sees fit than would be the case in a purely state operation, you start to lose this distinction. Another example is that the state police enforce federal regulations in the context of motor carrier enforcement. They may do it elsewhere as well, but this is where I have encountered it. I am not sure how the migration of CFR into the state police works legally, but they do it every day.

Oh, and I neglected to answer an earlier question. No, I did not know Officer Renn. Given the way his reputation preceded him and the fact that he is a well known example on INGO, and that he stood out as a good example in a picture is worth a thousand words way of being a good officer, I used him as an example. He is also an example of another principle I have observed. I absolutely hate to hear about police being killed, which may sound a bit out of alignment with some of my other thoughts. The fact I have observed is that those who are more deserving of it have an incredible skill for keeping themselves out of harm's way. I attribute this to the fact that in the words of a previous post in this thread, they DO NOT run toward danger in defense of others but rather seek to preserve themselves. By contrast, when one gets killed it is almost invariably the guy who ran toward the danger. For some strange reason this seems to also hold up in situations like the deputy recently killed while pumping gas whose reputation and public response are very telling. By contrast, that guy I went to school with would NOT receive the kind of public tribute this deputy received.

 

[BE Mike]

I agree. The problem is that few groups are truly monolithic. Not everyone who had a badge will run toward danger, and not everyone who runs toward danger has a badge.



These masses of lawmen you have encountered...

How many departments did they come from? I have noticed that good departments tend to weed out problem people if they wiggle through the hiring process, and bad departments will similarly weed out honest and good people.

How well did you really know them, and know them in more than one context? Anyone can behave well in your presence with limited contact, just like plenty of people not worth the 95¢ it would cost me to kill them can behave well enough long enough to have the little old ladies at church convinced they are the most wonder people this side of the Apostles.

How did those you recognize as problems come to be recognized as such? Are you relying on the ones who made the newspaper and/or got fired or do you really know what these people are like whether they officially got caught or not?

I am not trying to attack your personal judgment so much as address some possible layers of distance which may affect the quality of evaluation involved. By contrast, when I personally observed wrong-doing, it is not subject to perspective, it is not subject to interpretation, it did in fact happen, and in most cases I enumerated, I saw it happen myself. Your only alternative here is to conclude that I am a liar and did not in fact see the things I saw.

I didn't say that everyone who runs towards danger has a badge. I also never said that everyone who has a badge runs towards danger. Having said that, there are plenty of badges among the rubble of the twin towers. There are plenty of badges still pinned on shirts six feet under. You have a strong dislike for law enforcement and keep repeating the same incidents to prove how they don't deserve respect. You've said you don't need to kiss up to anyone you encounter. IMHO, you really need to let go of this hate, especially your perceptions as a child. It only hurts you. Peace be with you.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I didn't say that everyone who runs towards danger has a badge. I also never said that everyone who has a badge runs towards danger. Having said that, there are plenty of badges among the rubble of the twin towers. There are plenty of badges still pinned on shirts six feet under. You have a strong dislike for law enforcement and keep repeating the same incidents to prove how they don't deserve respect. You've said you don't need to kiss up to anyone you encounter. IMHO, you really need to let go of this hate, especially your perceptions as a child. It only hurts you. Peace be with you.

Are you also going to call out the equally repetitive arguments about attitude. Sure, it has a big impact in a situation that could go either way, but in no way does it impact flagrant malfeasance. I find it strange that the malfeasance seems to be more accepted than is a person having the temerity to call it out in their 'betters'.

A little over a century ago, the Royal Navy was preparing for the construction of a battleship which would revolutionize naval warfare. Some of the critics included their (unjustified) worries that the new ship would be too large to be accommodated in existing harbor facilities. Admiral Fisher's response to this was to ask whether the ships exist for the harbors or the harbors exist for the benefit of the ships. It seems that in many regards, this same principle can be applied to our discussion, and we will find an upside-down relationship.

I will also accept the notion that, as with all groups, there is a silent majority which can be very difficult to define or predict. I am guessing that much of the disagreement rests on one's default expectations for that group.

 

[oldpink]

Just allow me to say that I have yet to have an encounter with a LEO that was anything less than professional and courteous, and oftentimes incredibly helpful, including a particular state trooper based out of the Pendleton post who helped me greatly at the very lowest point of my life, a mere three days after I had lost my wife to cancer.
Sometimes, I wasn't all that happy to see a LEO, as in when getting stopped for having a heavy foot, but even then, I've never felt as if I would be the target of some kind of wrongdoing.
How is it that I've met dozens of cops, and yet not had something terrible happen?
To hear one poster here and BLM tell it, cops are just running around, stalking the citizens for fun and profit.

 

[jgreiner]

I can see that I am offending your personal religion and will stop doing so as it serves no useful purpose.

You have no IDEA what my "personal religion" is. And the more I read of your posts, the more certain I am that your opinions of mistrust are formed from being on the wrong side of law enforcement in your life.

 

[jgreiner]

Just allow me to say that I have yet to have an encounter with a LEO that was anything less than professional and courteous, and oftentimes incredibly helpful, including a particular state trooper based out of the Pendleton post who helped me greatly at the very lowest point of my life, a mere three days after I had lost my wife to cancer.
Sometimes, I wasn't all that happy to see a LEO, as in when getting stopped for having a heavy foot, but even then, I've never felt as if I would be the target of some kind of wrongdoing.
How is it that I've met dozens of cops, and yet not had something terrible happen?
To hear one poster here and BLM tell it, cops are just running around, stalking the citizens for fun and profit.

Amen. It's amazing what treating people with respect will do for you, as opposed to treating them with suspicion. I do believe some have been on the wrong side of the law too many times, and tend to blame the LEO's for their issues.

+1

 

[BehindBlueI's]

To hear one poster here and BLM tell it, cops are just running around, stalking the citizens for fun and profit.

 

[BE Mike]

Are you also going to call out the equally repetitive arguments about attitude. Sure, it has a big impact in a situation that could go either way, but in no way does it impact flagrant malfeasance. I find it strange that the malfeasance seems to be more accepted than is a person having the temerity to call it out in their 'betters'.

A little over a century ago, the Royal Navy was preparing for the construction of a battleship which would revolutionize naval warfare. Some of the critics included their (unjustified) worries that the new ship would be too large to be accommodated in existing harbor facilities. Admiral Fisher's response to this was to ask whether the ships exist for the harbors or the harbors exist for the benefit of the ships. It seems that in many regards, this same principle can be applied to our discussion, and we will find an upside-down relationship.

I will also accept the notion that, as with all groups, there is a silent majority which can be very difficult to define or predict. I am guessing that much of the disagreement rests on one's default expectations for that group.

If I ever had bad dealings with the police, I would file a complaint and let the chips fall where they may. Just like everything else in life, I do what I can and just have to let go of the rest. Hope you learn to let go. Peace.

 

[IndyDave1776]

You have no IDEA what my "personal religion" is. And the more I read of your posts, the more certain I am that your opinions of mistrust are formed from being on the wrong side of law enforcement in your life.

Stop. Head out from up ass. The most significant problems I have encountered happened without any conduct outside the law on my part, and in the worst case involving traffic infractions. When you can be 'on the wrong side of law enforcement' without breaking the goddamned law, there is a problem.

 

[IndyDave1776]

If I ever had bad dealings with the police, I would file a complaint and let the chips fall where they may. Just like everything else in life, I do what I can and just have to let go of the rest. Hope you learn to let go. Peace.

I generally don't wish ill on people who have not directly harmed me. In your case, I sincerely hope you see the day that you understand.

 

[searpinski]

I generally don't wish ill on people who have not directly harmed me. In your case, I sincerely hope you see the day that you understand.

I find that people who have never had horrible experiences with the police that they did nothing to bring on will not understand your point of view. I also experienced what you have and it has definitely resulted in a deep-seeded mistrust of law enforcement. It's a terrible thing to feel so helpless in a situation with the police. If they are dishonest, you are screwed completely. That being said, I have also met a few genuine police officers who appear to really want to protect and serve.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I find that people who have never had horrible experiences with the police that they did nothing to bring on will not understand your point of view. I also experienced what you have and it has definitely resulted in a deep-seeded mistrust of law enforcement. It's a terrible thing to feel so helpless in a situation with the police. If they are dishonest, you are screwed completely. That being said, I have also met a few genuine police officers who appear to really want to protect and serve.

How many experiences does it take to universally have deep seeded mistrust of law enforcement?

 

[Denny347]

How many experiences does it take to universally have deep seeded mistrust of law enforcement?

0

 

[IndyDave1776]

How many experiences does it take to universally have deep seeded mistrust of law enforcement?

As it stands, the majority of the good officers I have encountered have been on INGO, not the street. It also depends on whether you consider as an 'experience' just an immediate encounter or dealing with months-long problem situations which required vigilance every day of the week.

 

[IndyDave1776]

0

I would say that it depends. If one's position is base on irrational issues, then it is entirely possible for zero to be a correct answer. When it is based on actual experience reviewed in a reasonable fashion, you may end up with a situation like taking Evan Marshall's statistics for holy writ if you aren't careful, but even if his methods don't really stand up to scientific scrutiny, that doesn't change the fact that they are a good general guideline that will be good enough for who it's for, and work out to be correct enough for the purpose at hand most of the time since, after all, it is based on events which actually happened.

For my own purposes, I will concede that even with a collection of bad experiences, I theoretically could go the rest of my life meeting police who are conscientious, honorable, and everything the brochure says they should be and also people I would want for neighbors.

The other thing that tends to get glossed over in these kinds of conversation are the standards people use in forming their conclusions. Right of the top, you are going to have the 'all police are god' versus 'all police are scum' argument. Then, when you peel that away, you get into more personal issues, with the distinction often lost between instances of someone being sore because the got smacked even if he did deserve it and on the other hand people being sore not because of being smacked but because of inappropriate conduct in conjunction with it, or worse yet because of objectively criminal activity on the part of the supposed enforcer of the law.

I will also add that it does much to sway one's perspective when realizing that a business encounter amounts to a situation in which you are having a very unequal encounter with someone who is supported by an extensive network of public resources who, in your experience, has about a 10% chance of being what the brochure says, about a 70% chance of being a revenue collector, and about a 20% chance of being a felony-level criminal. It just doesn't give a person that warm fuzzy feeling.

Denny, more to the point, if you were to stop me, I wouldn't be worried assuming that I realized that it was you. I would be comfortable in the notion that regardless of what I may or may not have done to get stopped, I would get fair professional treatment. Now, on the other hand, if I were stopped by the guy who sold drugs through high school, joined the PD first chance he got, still sells drugs as of the last I heard, beats his wife severely, and is a police officer for basically the entire list of wrong reasons, I would be very concerned (and no, this is not a hypothetical--it is a person I actually know).

 

[BE Mike]

How many experiences does it take to universally have deep seeded mistrust of law enforcement?

I always thought that there's never a cop around when you need one!