Generalized Police Bashing Needs to Stop

[MrBig]

This is my first original post on DU. I've lurked here for quite awhile making the occasional post here and there, but I haven't been so disgusted by anything as much as I have by the complete generalized bashing of all law enforcement officers here.

It's important for all of you cop bashers/haters to keep in mind:

• I don't doubt that you've had some terrible interactions with the police, and it might even be based on the racist/prejudicial beliefs of said officer(s). This does NOT, however, mean that ALL police officers are racist/prejudice. All of your interactions with police officers combined does not come close to equaling "most" or "all" police officers.
  
  
• The generalizations that you are making about police officers are the same ones that led you to distrust police in the first place. Saying "all police are bad" is not true. Saying "most" police are bad isn't true unless you can show that there are at least 400,000 police officers that are bad. This is no different than saying "most poor people are lazy" or "most Muslims are terrorists". These are generalizations.
  
  
• It is NOT progressive to generalize a group of people.
  
  
• I don't know what happened with Mr. Gates and Officer Crowley. I'll even say I believe Officer Crowley overreacted. I don't believe there were any racial motivations on the part of Officer Crowley, but even if there were you cannot take that attribute and put it on most or all police officers. It's simply wrong.
  

I just needed to get that off my chest. Hopefully we can have better discourse on the subject than has been seen recently.

[BlooInBloo]

1. Fuck cops.

[izquierdista]

25. Yes, fuck'em

I'm glad you are so quick with an appropriate comment.

If cops don't want to be painted with a broad brush, they can tear down their fuckin "blue wall" and get rid of the assholes in their midst. In some departments it might only be 10%, and in others it may be 80 or 90%, but citizens should demand 0%. Cops who have drinking problems, cops who have domestic violence histories, cops who have lied in reports or in court, they all need to go. Being an organization that is given the authority to enforce laws, they have taken that for granted and forgotten that in modern democratic society, authority is never granted by status alone, but has to be earned.

[Fire1]

164. Sounds more than reasonable to me. n/t

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

28. Like that "outstanding" racist officer that gets to visit the White House and have a beer with Obama

[Raineyb]

102. Apparently if you're a pig and you whine on national television you get to

have a beer with the president. Nice way to reward fucktardery.

[HughMoran]

50. There is this cute one that does traffic in the mornings

;)

[liquid diamond]

96. This.

[emilyg]

120. Except when you need one.

[GoneOffShore]

134. Fish and bicycles?

Cops are never around when you need them.

Too busy tasing folks in the butt and arresting some homeless guys.

[emilyg]

189. That has not been my experience.

[DRoseDARs]

186. Well, people-in-uniform ARE pretty damn hot, so yes. Fuck cops.

Nightly, if possible. :)

[enzymatic]

256. I notice that you didn't elaborate after that brilliant headline.

But you are a progressive, right? You harbor no prejudice towards a group and only deal with individuals, right?:crazy:

[Fire1]

284. +1

[kestrel91316]

2. We have 1st Amendment rights on DU, in case you hadn't noticed in

your VERY short time here. And we use them.

If you can't handle people's opinions, you have chosen a very strange place to hang out.

[MrBig]

11. Right back at you

I never tried to prevent you from expressing your opinion. I never said you shouldn't be allowed to say it. I'm posting MY opinion on subject because, you see, I have First Amendment rights as well.

Besides, trying learning about the Constitution. If I had the power to suppress your right to post, I could. I'm not the government. Thus, the reason the moderators here can delete whatever they want for whatever reason they choose.

I'm trying to improve discourse by making people re-think their positions. That's the purpose of discussion.

[TorchTheWitch]

37. oh bullshit

This bigoted general police bashing has NEVER been allowed here just as no other broad-brush bigoted posts are...

"Content: Do not post messages that are inflammatory, extreme, divisive, incoherent, or otherwise inappropriate. Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, bigoted statements. The moderators and administrators work very hard to enforce some minimal standards regarding what content is appropriate. But please remember that this is a large and diverse community that includes a broad range of opinion. People who are easily offended, or who are not accustomed to having their opinions (including deeply personal convictions) challenged may not feel entirely comfortable here. A thick skin is necessary to participate on this or any other discussion forum."

In case you don't know what a bigot is...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot
big·ot
noun

a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as in a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance



Nevertheless, for some reason general bigoted statements against the police in general have been rampant here for years, and YES, it DOES need to stop.

[bridgit]

106. agreed

[mix]

132. This is not bigotry.

How are generalized statements against cops bigotry? This seems a stretch, when you consider that cops work for us, the citizens. Against government entities, citizens have every right to air their grievances.

This is not bigotry, but the sounds of people deprived of rights on a regular basis who demand better from authority.

[PurityOfEssence]

155. "generalized statements against..." is BY DEFINITION BIGOTRY

Dismissing groups of people with a homogeneous depiction is the heart and soul of prejudice. It's narrow-minded, close-minded, combative, conservative and inaccurate.

There's a big difference between claiming some kind of personal experiences that mitigate one's sense of fairplay or benefit of the doubt, but even THAT bespeaks bigotry; it just has a causal explanation with it.

[mix]

161. Your use of bigotry is meant to inflame. And it is not accurate.

It is within our rights as citizens to make generalized statements against government employees, particularly when we feel we are not being "served" or "protected."

[MrBig]

171. It is within our rights, you are correct

I don't believe it is the best course of action, however. It is good to question, but assuming isn't productive.

[mix]

173. Someone elsewhere told you to look for the humanity

behind these extreme statements against cops...that seems to me wise advice.

[Hutzpa]

185. You don't believe its the best course of action

you mind explaining that statement.....:shrug:

[MrBig]

204. Making generalized statements

It doesn't accomplish anything. It serves to drive a wedge. I think both those defending and against police here agree that the best situation would be for police and public to work together. That's not possible as long as that wedge is there.

The first step to bring the two sides closer is to stop with the generalizations.

[Hutzpa]

277. Your argument makes sense

and you do have a point to some extent, I say that for the simple fact that most folks here
are not generalizing, people are actually speaking from personal experience or knowing
someone who have gone through harassment with the police force.

The reason why you see it as generalization is because all these folks are all speaking
at the same time of their experiences with the police force. When certain issues are endemic
of an organization it means it's about time to change their policy and restructure, the
same goes for any major corporation.

In retrospect the police force has not done a good job in policing itself, its about time
the federal Government looks into that.

[PurityOfEssence]

194. But this is, by definition, BIGOTRY.

Making generalized statements about groups of people is bigotry. It's the DEFINITION of bigotry. Whether it's somewhat justified or true or has been the the cause of personal pain is another matter, it's still prejudice. Justify it as you will, preconceived, sweeping statements about groups is bigotry. The downtrodden are not exempt from behaving poorly; people should be given some latitude for their experiences, but that doesn't mean that their actions aren't what they are.

It is within your right as a citizen to say all sorts of bigoted things, but that doesn't mean they're not bigoted. THAT is a demand for privilege: to be granted a waiver for bad behavior for some personal reason.

[BlooInBloo]

201. (shrug) I hate rapists. I guess I'm a bigot. So be it.

[PurityOfEssence]

232. Everyone I've ever met has some prejudices, no matter how mild

People who don't admit it are nauseating.

This person was making a sweeping generalization that making sweeping generalizations about people isn't bigotry. Big disconnect.

Some groups suck and they deserve to be scorned, but that doesn't mean the person doing it isn't engaging in bigotry. The "butter wouldn't melt in my mouth" moral superiority of some people is no help in the dialogue. Neither are people who fan the flames by saying "fuck cops".

[Lyric]

260. Like hell. If that were true, we'd ALL be bigots.

We generalize Republicans and right-wingers every single day. Do you oppose that, too?

The common understanding of "bigot" involves being biased against someone for reasons that have to do with an inherent characteristic of who they are. Being black, gay, and/or female--those are all inherent characteristics. Being a cop, a Republican, or a mercenary--those are choices that are NOT inherently part of someone's overall existence.

Do NOT compare the plight of minorities to the poor, poor cops. You accomplish nothing save to diminish the horrific effects of the bigotry that TRULY oppressed people suffer on a regular basis.

[tammywammy]

121. No we don't, there's plenty that censored on here

You can't use certain language, no mentioning of certain websites, etc. 1st Amendment doesn't apply to DU anyways.

[enzymatic]

257. The irony is delicious: in one breath you managed to bleat about free speech

and yet threatened a newbie and said his/her time was numbered. Very progressive and non-fascist!:fistbump:

[tj2001]

3. Generalized police worship needs to stop

Cops are humans, not gods. Many of them are liars and assholes, since the "profession" offers a natural affinity for such types.

[bliss_eternal]

7. there are studies supporting this...

...(i don't have access to them at the moment).

but i recall from sociology that human beings placed in "authority positions" can become abusive of such authority. it's quite an unnatural position to be in, when you think about it. not everyone is cut out (or mentally equipped) for the "power trip" that can come with the job.

[MrBig]

16. This is a logical post

Unlike the other "cops suck" and "cops are evil" posts, at least yours attempts to point to logical reasoning behind an assumption that, not just cops, but people in authority positions can become abusive.

I'd be interested in the studies you have whenever you get a chance to access them. I never took a sociology class in college but I find it fascinating.

[bliss_eternal]

75. a few links...

...that i knew of off-hand, as i don't have the time to go digging for specific studies at the moment.

definition of sociology:
http://www.answers.com/topic/sociology

basically the study of how specific groups of people interact w/one another and create a specific culture. for example, there is a culture specific to the internet. there is also a culture specific to police departments and various authority roles.


there's a famous quote, "absolute power corrupts absolutely."

sadly, this seems to be the case for a lot of people placed in positions of authority, where that authority frequently goes "unchecked." it's incredibly unnatural for human beings to be in positions where there are no checks and balances--where they are primarily responsible for deciding what is or is not appropriate for everyone else.

police depts. have "internal affairs" divisions--but these are still "police officers" who've elevated to positions of investigating cases of police misconduct.

this is the wikipedia page on a now famous case of police corruption in los angeles. lapd officers, people whose job it was to uphold the law, framed gang members for crimes and committed murder (not in self-defense, either):


Los Angeles Police Dept. Rampart Scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampart_Scandal

if nothing else, this shows that people aren't slurring officers for the sake of doing so.
there are many cases and situations all over the country of people in positions of authority "abusing" that authority when dealing with people of color. and unfortunately, placing ethnic people on police forces has not helped. because ethnic people on forces, frequently take on the "police culture" and see people of their culture the exact same way other officers do.

if i have time, i'll try to include actual studies, but no guarantees. it's a bear to try to mine the internet for specific items and time consuming.

hope this presents another view for you. :hi:

[MrBig]

81. Thanks!

[bliss_eternal]

101. don't just thank me...

...read them. it could influence your perspective.

no one here is merely "generalizing."
those that offer the view they have, do so for a reason. if you can't be bothered to educate yourself on "why", it's fruitless to start discussions like this. as you are bashing those that offer their perspective based on knowledge of the system, and it's flaws.

evil does exist, and sometimes it wears a badge.
for example, a police officer used his knowledge of the law and forensics to murder his wives:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30630652/

[MrBig]

131. Point well taken

But I would disagree...there are some that are merely generalizing. Posts that say fuck all cops, etc. are merely generalizing.

They might be based on true stories and experiences, but they are generalizing.

I know evil does exist and it can wear a badge. Police officers can do evil. They can also do good.

[bliss_eternal]

144. perhaps "fuck cops"

is their way of expressing their anger at the situation. i don't see that as inappropriate, but also human. it is human for someone to be angry and frustrated to see cases of police officers abusing their authority.

but it's interesting that you seem to take exception to such a response, and can't see "the humanity" in that. you only see people "generalizing." you seem to be arguing that police officers should be given more room to be human that people on this board.

as such, maybe others see this and expressing anger at you, and your op. :shrug:

[MrBig]

152. Maybe I expect more from people on this board?

I don't doubt that people on this board have had horrific experiences with cops.

But this is a progressive message board and I do believe that progressives are the key to making this world a better place. I do expect discourse among progressives to be of a higher standard than others.

I understand the posts as a means of expressing anger. I do agree that it is human. But I am hoping to at least put the thought in their minds that not all police officers are bad. That it isn't good to go into an interaction with a police officer with pre-conceived notions. At the very least, it is important to have an open mind that the person you are about to interact with is a fellow human being.

[Name removed]

159. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bliss_eternal]

160. what's not progressive...

...about questioning authority? that is what i learned in sociology 101--question authority. think. don't just do what people in authority tell you to do, 'because they say so.' question why 'they say so' and take the time to consider if you are just blindly following what others dictate, as opposed to considering if someone in a position of power is abusing it.

maybe you need to consider that some people's idea of progressive is different from yours...

or maybe you need to consider the possibility that you expect too much from people on this board, and not enough of the police.

just possibilities...:shrug:

[MrBig]

165. Questioning authority...

is different from assuming all authority is bad.

Authority should and must be questioned when it deserves questioning. That, to me, is progressive.

You are correct to say I need to realize that peoples' definitions of progressive vary. And you are correct to say that I expect too much from people on this board.

I would disagree that I don't expect enough from police. Approaches to this conversation vary depending on who the audience is.

[bliss_eternal]

170. no one said that.

i've seen people saying that there is a problem of police abusing their authority, that it is a widespread problem (from coast to coast) and they want to see it addressed. i've seen people saying that to you in this thread. very few people in this thead are "generalizing."

if you can't see this or admit that racial profiling is a widespread problem that needs to be addressed(and not merely people "generalizing") then the problem is you and your perception--not people on this board.

you either can admit there is a problem or you can't.
the choice is yours.

[MrBig]

172. Racial profiling IS a problem

I have seen it many times and know it is a problem. It happening just once is a problem.

I'm not questioning the validity or importance of a racial profiling problem and at no point in this thread have I done so.

I am saying that generalized statements don't help the situation. They aren't true. They don't lead to changes. They don't help change opinions. They lead to further divisions and problems.

[bliss_eternal]

175. what generalized statements...?

people are saying racial profiling is a problem. you admit that. so what is being "generalized," in your opinion?

saying cops are jerks, seems to be rooted in feeling they are jerks--for falling to corruption, engaging in racial profiling and harassment (as well as the other incidents being discussed). those aren't generalized statements, merely people commenting and sharing their frustration w/the fact that police engage in such behavior.

[MrBig]

177. There was one thread

in particular. The thread's entire premise was "All cops are bad people" and had comment after comment saying as much.

These mindsets, while rationally justified, aren't the best means of bringing about change in society.

Of course it is MUCH better for these opinions/frustrations/beliefs to come out on a message board than in a real life situation.

[bliss_eternal]

179. then why not address it in the specific thread....?

...as opposed to calling out (and generalizing) the entire board/community, the way you do in your op?

[MrBig]

206. The thread was an example

Obviously if it was all resigned to within one thread, I would have responded within that thread. It is a pervasive problem throughout the board/community.

To have generalized the entire board/community like you are attempting to state I did would have meant I write something such as, "Everyone on DU hates cops" or something to that extent.

[dddem]

244. I respectfully disagree.

Many people here generalize about the police, republicans, gun owners, etc. etc. These kind of statements would not be tolerated here if the discussion were about gay, women, muslim, athiest or christian people. We would accuse the poster of being a freeper for making such blanket statements about a group,but for some reason, it's okay for certain groups. As in any other profession, or group, there are good decent people just trying to do their job, and there are assholes who are on a power trip. But mostly, there are human beings who occasionally fall short of perfection.
Peace.

[bliss_eternal]

282. you don't see the difference...

...between generalizing glbt's, various ethnic groups, religions or sex, versus generalizations based on one's professon. nothing more to say.

[MrBig]

17. EXACTLY

Cops ARE humans. They are just regular people like you and me.

To say many of them are liars and assholes you have to say many humans are liars and assholes. If you want to argue that, that's a different scenario.

[Odin2005]

56. The problem is that the "good" cops ENABLE the assholes.

[bliss_eternal]

91. sometimes they are afraid....

...of those cops, of being set up, of being bullied, written up, etc. police culture is like any other culture of human beings.

sometimes the group of rotten people gain influence of the rest, and the others are to afraid for their livelihoods, their professional reputation, etc. to risk speaking up and losing everything they've worked for.

[bobbolink]

103. Amen.

[LostInAnomie]

4. Cops are one of DU favorite groups to attack.

They're one of the few groups that people think it's alright to make ridiculous generalizations about and insult every time there is a police story in the news. Most of the bashers have no idea what it is like to be a cop, and have no appreciation of the risks that cops take to protect the community. They simply like to lump them all together and talk out of their asses.

[EFerrari]

15. You haven't been following this discussion, have you?

[LostInAnomie]

22. It's the same conversation that always takes place when a cop makes the news.

One police officer does something wrong. DU reacts be making hateful generalizations about all police officers. Some people call bullshit on the generalizations. These people are then called "pro-authoritarian", "apologists", etc.

Did I miss something?

[EFerrari]

79. Yes, you missed the part where we discussed the issues

over the claims of emotionalism and cop bashing and the rest of the right wing fruit basket.

[LostInAnomie]

109. LOL!

How long have you been on DU?

[me b zola]

214. She's been here a year longer than you

Most of the people here would like to see a better relationship between the police and the policed. You may not like the tone of some of the conversations, but that is the goal of the majority of us here. Now what?

[LostInAnomie]

216. Might want to check your math again.

For the most part, constructive arguments are not what take place when the issue of police misconduct comes up. A discussion of how to improve policing, or the appropriate response of citizens rarely takes place. Just take a look at this thread. The OP is generally benign, and even concedes the point that the police behaved poorly during the latest outrage. Yet, the general DU response down thread has been one announcing hate for police, maligning police in general as thugs, and attacking the OP with various epithets.

Reasonable discussion about police officers, for the most part, cannot be had here. Any attempt to give an opposing or even an even-handed view of the situation becomes a flame-war.

[me b zola]

222. You're using some of that special math: "You're either with us or you're against us"

Stop labeling all people whom want to see the police behave more respectfully & honestly as cop haters. Jesus. I at times would like the authority to imprison any one who pisses me off, or doesn't speak respectfully to me...but that would just be wrong. Cops should feel equally as icky for even thinking such a thing--but all too often often they don't. That doesn't make me a "cop hater". That makes me someone who doesn't want to be bullied.

[LostInAnomie]

225. Wanting police to behave more respectively is one thing...

... but that is not the verbalized response of a growing number of DUers. Lets just take a look as some of the responses to a very mild OP:

Post #1 Fuck Cops.
#102 Apparently if you're a pig and you whine on national television you get to have a beer with the president. Nice way to reward fucktardery.
#5 Police worship needs to stop
#42 Officer Crowley hasn't even accepted Obama's invitation to the WH, which indicates to me he's another typical asshole cop.
#9 GOP Worship needs to cease....We tried it under Bush/Cheney/Rummy
#39 The authoritarian pig-lovers need to STFU!!!
#169 I have no real respect for any cop.

And, that is just from a quick glance, without getting into sub-threads. I could go on other threads on DU and find much worse. This is and always has been the general break-down of DU threads regarding police officers. It is not the police supporters that are guilty of hit and run posts filled with vitriol. It's the opposing side.

[Raineyb]

262. You have a problem with what I said?

Did Crowley not whine? Was he not rewarded for his whining? If he wants respect he'd do better to act professionally something he didn't do with Prof. Gates. So yeah, inviting him to the WH for a beer is rewarding fucktardery. It's too bad you seem to be inclined to just allow the police to abuse their authority with impunity.

YOU are part of the problem.

[merh]

219. There is something different about this one.

The Blue Wall that went up, the unions that defended him, the wagons that were circled across the nation.

The cop screwed up and has yet to admit to his mistakes or offer an apology and the pro-police faction refuse to admit that he made mistakes and unlawfully arrested this man.

I'm pro-police, having family on the force makes me that way as I know what they deal with. I once wore the polyester with the ugly stripes down the legs and the tin on my chest and the collar brass and the gun. I've stood in formation with the black band on my badge as the tears streamed down my face.

Not all the criticism of the police in the threads over the last several days constitute police bashing. It is criticism of the cop for handling a situation so poorly because he let his emotions get the better of him. It is criticism of the brothers/sisters in blue that stand by him and defend his actions. While in LEO I complained about those who stood silent when they saw the abuses and I stood between the abusers and their victims. The behavior is allowed to continue because of the silence and the unwavering support of the cop just because he is a cop.

Standing up for the rights of a citizen is not police bashing. Police are supposed to be protecting the rights of the citizens, not violating them. Since cops take an oath, when they become a part of the Blue Wall and defend the cops that violate the rights of citizens, they violate their oaths. It reflects badly on the profession as can be seen in the posts that are characterized as "police bashing".

Try to keep things in their proper perspective, it may help keep the frustration level down.

[LostInAnomie]

226. Good, someone with a law enforcement background.

Have you read the police report? I just read it today, and from what I can tell, it doesn't appear any racial profiling took place.

Here's a copy of it: http://www.samefacts.com/archives/Police%20report%20on%20Gates%20arrest.PDF

Crowley had a legitimate reason to be in the house. He had a legitimate reason to question Gates. And, by the letter of the law, he had a reason to arrest Gates. It might have been an underhanded and dickish way to do it, but he was within his rights. The First Amendment doesn't cover disorderly conduct.

Here's the discussion that hasn't taken place on DU though. What about Gates reaction? Instead of cooperating with a police officer responding to a break in, and reacting in a generally calm matter, he immediately assumed a defensive posture and assumed a racist motive for Crowley being there. He berated the officer, and attempted to big foot him by calling the chief of police. A real discussion needs to take place about how we as citizens react to our public servants. Perhaps there may be reason for people to have an abrasive attitude towards police officers, this may be cultural or based on personal experiences. But, this does not mean that we as a culture should be approving when someone berates a police officer for doing their job.

It is unfortunate that the blue wall protects so many bad cops, but at the same time that is what a union is supposed to do. If police officers didn't have a union to rely on they would be in constant fear of simply doing their own job.

[merh]

228. This discussion has taken place on DU.

Gates did cooperate, at first he hesitated, but then he gave the man his identification that proved he belonged at that address.

You want to discuss this from the LEO standards that cops I know would have applied?

Crowley was a Harvard University cop before he went to work for Cambridge PD. He knew the area and he knew that houses on Ware were Harvard houses. When dispatch sent him on that call he should have asked the dispatcher to call the Harvard PD and ask if that address was one of their houses and, if it was, who was the occupant. He should have told the dispatcher that if it was a HU house the dispatcher should have the HU cops meet him no the scene. He should have asked the dispatcher to get the name and a description of the lawful occupant so, when he arrived on scene he would better prepared. Let's say if he found out a white 50 year old white woman lived there, then the 2 black men on the porch were probably out of place.

When Gates gave Crowley his identification that proved he lived there, Crowley should have apologized for any inconvenience and then handed Gates one of his business cards with his name, badge number. On that card Gates should have written the incident number and then he should have explained to Gates that if he wants a copy of the report how and when he could obtain a copy.

Then Crowley should have left the scene. He should have sent the other cops on their way. He didn't need to call Harvard University cops at that time, the situation was under control. No crime had been committed.

As the man who trains LEO cadets on how to avoid racial profiling and how to deal with issues concerning same, he should have just continued to do his job and not escalate the situation by telling Gates, who was on the phone with the chief's office, "I gave you my name two times, if you want more information you can come out on the porch." There was no need for Gates to step out on the porch. The situation had been handled, the residency and identity established.

See, Gates has the right to be an ass in his own home. He has the constitutional right to be uncivil and rude and insulting to the police. Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the constitution and SCOTUS has said criticism of the police is not a crime. Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 461-63, 107 S.Ct. 2502, 2509-10, 96 L.Ed.2d 398 (1987).

Although the preservation of liberty depends in part upon the maintenance of social order, the First Amendment requires that officers and municipalities respond with restraint in the face of verbal challenges to police action, since a certain amount of expressive disorder is inevitable in a society committed to individual freedom and must be protected if that freedom would survive. Pp. 471—472.


The Massachusetts Supreme Court has said:

Given that an inherent part of police work involves being in the presence of distraught individuals, and given that police officers are trained to maintain order, the Court concluded that police should be the least likely to be provoked.

Crowley wanted Gates on the porch so he could arrest him for disturbing the peace, the problem was, there were no "others" present that could have been provoked into some act of violence. Seven passers-by that looked in the direction of Gates does not constitute the public needed to form an element of the crime as charged. The Massachusetts Supreme Court has said that "the rationale behind criminalizing disorderly conduct rests on the belief that a disorderly person can provoke violence in others."

Commonwealth v. Mulvey
57 Mass. App. Ct. 579 (March 14, 2003)

Police presence in and of itself does not by itself turn an otherwise purely private outburst into disorderly conduct.

The defendant was charged with disorderly conduct for yelling and pacing on private property that was set back from the road in a secluded area. There was no one around at the time except police officers. While the statute requires that the disturbance be such that it had or was likely to have an impact upon people in an area accessible to the public, the presence of police officers alone will not suffice to prove the public element.

In reaching its decision, the Court noted that the rationale behind criminalizing disorderly conduct rests on the belief that a disorderly person can provoke violence in others.. Given that an inherent part of police work involves being in the presence of distraught individuals, and given that police officers are trained to maintain order, the Court concluded that police should be the least likely to be provoked. Therefore, police presence alone does not satisfy the public element.

http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=dmdaterminal&L=5&L0=Home&L1=Court+Decisions&L2=Court+Decisions+by+Topic&L3=Crimes&L4=Disorderly+Conduct&sid=Dmdaa&b=terminalcontent&f=courts_mulvey&csid=Dmdaa

So yes, I've read the report and I believe Crowley was unprofessional and he not only failed to do his job properly, he failed to do what he trains others to do and that is diffuse a situation that involves the charge of racial profiling.

Citizen Gates was well within his rights to be uncivil in his home.

Officer Crowley had a higher duty to citizen Gates, his job was to "protect and serve" Gates and to maintain the peace. He failed and his failures resulted in the violation of Gates constitutional rights.

[Spazito]

254. Excellent post! It was, in fact, Sgt. Crowley who broke the law...

when he DID NOT provide his identity card when Dr. Gates first asked him. The Massachusetts State law is very specific:

POLICE OFFICERS


Chapter 41: Section 98D. Identification cards


Section 98D. Each city or town shall issue to every full time police officer employed by it an identification card bearing his photograph and the municipal seal. Such card shall be carried on the officer’s person, and shall be exhibited upon lawful request for purposes of identification.

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/41-98d.htm

Not only did Sgt. Crowley NOT provide his identity card as required by LAW the first time, he received multiple requests by Dr. Gates and ignored them.

One can only opine but it seems to me the incident escalated when Sgt. Crowley did not provide the identification after the first request because, even within Sgt. Crowley's own report, it is the repeated requests by Dr. Gates and the non-response that led Dr. Gates to follow him out to the porch. Had Sgt. Crowley followed the law and provided the card as he was LEGALLY BOUND to do, I suspect the incident would NOT have escalated near to the extent it did.

[merh]

259. Thank you for the information.

I'd assumed it was part of the police procedures and policies at Cambridge, didn't think to see if MA had a specific law.

Wow, just wow - Gates could easily sue Crowley and his strongest witness would be Crowley, via Crowley's own report.

There is no doubt that Crowley was in the wrong.

Thank you for your kinds words regarding my post and for this information.

[Spazito]

261. It was another poster, Gothmog, who originally pointed this out in his OP..

and I continue to be astounded that, even when this is pointed out, it is studiously ignored by those who defend Sgt. Crowley and his actions.

Not one of Sgt. Crowley's defenders has touched any of my posts citing the Massachusetts law, it is quite interesting.

Edited to add:

It is, indeed, Sgt. Crowley's own police report that proves he breached his own State's law when he reports the following:

"He then demanded to know who I was. I told him I was "Sgt. Crowley from the Cambridge police" and that I was "investigating a report of a break in progress" at the residence."

This is where Sgt. Crowley was, by law, required to provide his identification card and he did not.

Again, from Sgt. Crowley's report:

"I asked Gates to provide me with photo identification so that I could verify that he resided at (blacked out address number in report) Ware St. and so I could radio my findings to ECC. Gates initially refused, demanding I show him identification but then did supply me with a Harvard University identification card."

Second request for identification ignored by Sgt. Crowley.

Yet again, from Sgt. Crowley's police report:

"As I began walking through the foyer toward the front door, I could hear Dr. Gates again demanding my name. I again told him I would speak with him outside."

Third request from Dr. Gates, third time Sgt. Crowley refused to follow the State law.


The more I look at this, the worse it gets for Sgt. Crowley, imo.

Link to Crowley report:

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/Police%20report%20on%20Gates%20arrest.PDF

[merh]

264. Oh, believe me, I understand.

Look how the person I responded to did not acknowledge the factual analysis post I wrote. He just replied to my other post by saying basically that unions stick by their members, as if that is something new.

[Spazito]

265. Yes, it has been fascinating to watch that when actual facts are..

presented, as is the case regarding the law and Sgt. Crowley's breach of said law, there is only deafening silence. I very rarely post OPs but I just started one based on the law and how Crowley broke it and how quickly he did so. I suspect I will see few, if any, defenders responding to it, lol.

[merh]

267. I hope you included what SCOTUS and the Mass Courts have had to

say, give 'em all the facts and then watch the tumbleweeds go by as you listen to the crickets.

;)

[Spazito]

268. I am already blowing the dust off it, rofl!

I focused strictly on the identification law Sgt. Crowley broke in this specific incident but I would love it if someone added that 'piece of the puzzle' for discussion as well.

[merh]

269. I'm still laughing at the first reply posted in your new thread.

incredible.

[Spazito]

271. LOL, me too!

I would bet money Sgt. Crowley would be the first to point out to any citizen that no one gets to choose which law to follow and which one they can shrug off. In a way, that is the most ironic aspect of this. Sgt. Crowley is, by all accounts from his fellow officers, an outstanding officer yet he chose, in this instance, not to follow the law. I can't help but wonder why he made the decision not to follow the law, not just once but multiple times?

[merh]

272. Did you read Gates' attorney's initial statement?

Do you remember what it said about what Crowley said to Gates as he handcuffed him on the porch?

As Professor Gates stepped onto his front porch, the officer who had been inside and who had examined his identification, said to him, “Thank you for accommodating my earlier request,” and then placed Professor Gates under arrest. He was handcuffed on his own front porch.

http://www.theroot.com/views/lawyers-statement-arrest-henry-louis-gates-jr

He was mad that Gates wouldn't obey him. It was a retaliation arrest.

.

[Spazito]

275. I keep asking myself, why did Sgt. Crowley deliberately ignore...

Dr. Gates' repeated requests for identification? Even after he has ascertained Dr. Gates was the legal occupant of the home, he continued to ignore the lawful request. His actions, or rather lack of action in this case, leaves one to wonder, indeed, what was in Sgt. Crowley's mind at that time.

[EFerrari]

283. I was hoping you'd post something like this for us civilians.

:applause:

[merh]

288. lol - you are too kind

for whatever good it did, I've been mocked for pretending to be a lawyer on the internet. I would have posted back to them that doing that is much better than pretending to be a human, but I grow tired of pissing matches.

thanks for the reply

[merh]

229. Your defense of the professionals that defend Gates makes little

sense to me. Cops know that they have to put up with criticism and unruly folks and angry folks and emotional folks. They are supposed to be trained on how to handle situations just like what Crowley faced.

We citizens aren't trained how to handle these type of situation. The cops are. They are under a higher duty than you and I and they know that going in.

If the unions want respect for the profession, they need to give respect to the citizens and they need to insist the profession do its job as they are trained.

[LostInAnomie]

230. I can think of numerous reasons for the unions to back Crowley.

1. The President had just commented on a case without all of the facts bringing public ire and hints of racial profiling towards a case where there appears to be no basis for the accusation.

2. Unions are bound to represent officers in matters between the public vs the police. Especially, matters open to interpretation.

3. They were probably forced into a giving a response by the media. They could either side with Crowley or side against him in a matter that had essentially already been resolved and he had not been found to be acting inappropriately by his superiors.

There are other reasons, but they mostly come down to the union weighing it's choices and giving other union members the impression that they will be supported when they need support. They are a union, but they are also a business. The public doesn't pay them dues.

[merh]

242. You and I are commenting on the case without all the facts.

Obama's comments were based on bias, he knows Gates - see, knowing the person allows one to say "he wouldn't act like that". That bias is not racial in nature. However, I would guess the the President has been harassed by the police just because of his skin color, it is something that happens all of the time, whether you and/or the Union want to admit it.

There is no "open to interpretation" - there is proper procedure, there is case law and there is the way Crowley handled things. I can assure you, he did not follow proper procedure and/or legal precedent as I outlined in my post.

The union was no more "forced" to give a statement than was Obama and I would Obama knew more of the facts than did the Union reps.

Oh goody, the union will support other union members when they need support. What shall we call that, oh - I know, the thin blue line, the blue wall of support.

It's curious, you responded to this post, but not the other one.

[dysfunctional press]

249. "I would guess the the President has been harassed by the police just because of his skin color..."

plus- since he attended harvard, he may have some familiarity with the cambridge police dept. as well. and that's not to say that he was necessarily 'hassled' by them while a student- only that he may have had a chance to see them 'in action', or knew people who HAD been hassled.
or not.

[Mythsaje]

35. Cops defend their own, even when they're obviously in the wrong...

and that needs to stop.

[TexasObserver]

5. police worship needs to stop

[rollingrock]

42. I second that.

Officer Crowley hasn't even accepted Obama's invitation to the WH,
which indicates to me he's another typical asshole cop.

[polmaven]

80. From WHERE are you

getting the information that he hasn't accepted the President's invitation? He SAID he has, the PRESIDENT said he has. Maybe you are getting that from the same place that some DUers seem to thing that there was no call to the police station to report a possible B&E, so therefore Sgt Crowley just randomly looke in window to find a house with a black man to arrest?

[rollingrock]

93. The president has said Gates has accepted

but there's nothing in the reporting on this story about Crowley accepting the invitation.

[polmaven]

236. Listen to what the president said, please...

It was actually Officer Crowley's suggestion that they sit down for a beer. Pretty much says to me that he accepted. But then, I'm not working from a pre-conceived notion that Crowley is a racist pig who has not intention of trying to help calm things down.

[Posteritatis]

119. The use of the fallacy of the excluded middle needs to stop. (nt)

[TexasObserver]

141. Yeah, I remember when I read my first philosophy book, too!

Thanks, but no thanks.

You've made a conclusion that is illogical and not supported by the post to which you replied.

I state only that police worship needs to end. I say nothing about those who hate police, or those who neither worship nor hate police. You created that out of your imagination, playing connect a dot with dots that you pulled from your own mind, to construct a weak straw man.

[Posteritatis]

147. Then why'd you bring up police worship?

This patronizing backpedal of yours is entertaining, to say nothing of entirely typical of people who respond in a similar way to anything challenging one or another of DU's Opinions Which Must Not Be Contradicted, but I react to what evidence I see from other posters. Deal.

(Nice job deciding that a grasp of basic logic is something to sneer at, by the way. Also, you don't get to talk about reacting to facts not in evidence in the same post as your telling me where I learn how to recognize a bullshit argument.)

[TexasObserver]

148. DUH! Did you read the title of the thread?

Stop constructing straw men, and try to write something original.

People who flit from thread to thread, finding innocuous comments with which to take issue are the bane of the message board experience. Get a life.

[MrBig]

156. There is a difference

between the random innocuous comment and entire threads and sub-threads devoted to a topic

[Robb]

258. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Sebastian Doyle]

6. Yeah, OK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83PARETVfY4

[baldguy]

8. It's not about hate, it's about our survival as a democracy instead of a police state.

As long as police depts & unions continue to close ranks & support bad cops when they do bad things, robust public criticism of police behavior & tactics is not only warranted - IT IS REQUIRED!

[opihimoimoi]

GOP Worship needs to cease....We tried it under Bush/Cheney/Rummy

[sea four]

Every cop I've run into has been a major dick.

I'm not generalizing, just saying that's what I have seen. Maybe there are nice police, but I've never met one. :shrug:

[MrBig]

20. This is different

Your extremely unfortunate experiences with police officers are your own perceptions. You don't say "every cope I've run into has been a major dick therefore I conclude ALL police are dicks."

Drawing that conclusion would be generalizing whereas merely stating what you said is your own experience and not generalizing.

[Th1onein]

HEY! You know what?

Sometimes it's TIME to generalize. When we see our fellow Americans, on a daily basis, all over this country, being tased to death, being choked to death, being shot to death, without provocation, and GENERALLY treated less humanely than stray dogs, when they're ALLOWED to live, we get FUCKING SICK OF IT. Our rights are being violated left and right by these fuckers, and I'm only talking about the ones that make the news. Can you IMAGINE how much of this shit goes on, against the helpless, and the powerless, those who don't know how, or who can't speak out. We're FUCKING SICK OF IT. You understand?

And, now, after having joined our forum way back in 2009, having posted only a little over 100 posts, you think that you can come on here and say some shit like "Generalized Police Bashing Needs to Stop"? Who do you think you are?

These Nazis support the status quo and the status quo is killing our fellow Americans. What's more, they support it at the point of a taser, or a gun. WE'RE FUCKING SICK OF IT.

Fuck you.

[MrBig]

69. Hahaha, wow

First, I like that you assume that I've only been coming to this site since 2009 and, even if I had been new, that that somehow makes my opinion less valid. Who do I think I am? A regular person. No one special, just a human who supports other humans and doesn't make assumptions about humans based on actions of other humans.

Obviously you've had traumatic experiences with police officers and for that I am sorry. But these comments can easily be attached to any group of people (Muslims, Jews, poor, etc.) and you would denounce them as "right wing fanaticism"

If you find one generalization acceptable, you lead yourself to accepting all generalizations.

[Th1onein]

97. I'm glad you like my assumptions.

Assumptions and generalizations are made for a reason--because there is evidence to support them.

And, no, I haven't had "traumatic experiences" with cops. The reason I haven't is because I've known enough about my rights, and the law, to cut their bullshit off at the pass. But, yeah, I've seen how they work. I've seen these "nice guys" refuse to take police reports of property damage, simply because they can't have a driver's license to run, so that they might be able to find traffic warrants, and take the victim in. As a matter of fact, that little space for the driver's license on the police reports, at least in Galveston County, TX, is there because this kind of behavior is systematic, and institutionalized. How's that for a generalization? But, hon, if you've got that shit on your FORM, what else can you call it?

I've seen them refuse to do their job, when they're in a poor area, and someone gets shot at. Just simply refuse to take a report. I've seen them refuse to take reports when it's poor people being victimized. (I guess they cut some of that shit out when they realized they could make a lot of money asking for their drivers' licenses and dragging the victims in over unpaid traffic offenses, though.) They victimize the victims of our society, and they protect the status quo.

I've seen them fuck with the same guy, week after week. Just a working man, trying to support his family. He gets stopped and ticketed for no insurance, but before he can pay that fine off and get the money to GET insurance, the next week he gets another ticket, from the same cop for the same thing. It's bullshit.

I had an experience with one cop, in my whole fifty plus years, where the guy was professional. I wrote a letter to his chief, commending the officer.

The fact is, MOST cops are assholes. That's why they become cops. The power goes to their heads and they become assholes as soon as they put on that uniform.

[MrBig]

105. Can you provide the evidence you claim exists???

"Assumptions and generalizations are made for a reason--because there is evidence to support them."

Do you have this evidence? Can you link to it? Stats? More than just individual stories which, while terrible, don't make it a case of "most" or "all".

[Th1onein]

118. Hey, YOU are the one telling us what we "NEED" to do.

I don't need to prove anything to you. My own perceptions, after YEARS of dealing with these assholes, is quite enough for me to make the very good generalization that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Cops are just a good example of it.

Why don't you go see for yourself, out on the streets? Dress like a bum, and call the cops to come and help you, and see what happens. Or, hey, how about just mind your own business and let me call in an anonymous tip, and let them bash your front door in and shoot your ass full of lead, like they did that little old lady in Georgia? Hmmm?

Pull up some searches on police brutality on Youtube and watch them beat the shit out of an elderly bum on the street while their friends on horseback shields the cops that are doing the beating from the camera, with his horse? How about the fifteen year old kid who fell from a bridge and broke his back, after which they tasered him fourteen times? How about the pregnant woman they tasered? And the man in the wheelchair? Hey, how about the man in the wheelchair that they DUMPED on the ground, because they thought he was faking it? How about the homeless people's tents that they fucking cut up with their knives? These are some real nice people, I tell you.

How much does it take to convince you that power corrupts, and that these people are corrupted? Hmmmm? Go do some fucking research, and apprise yourself of what these Nazis are doing to your fellow Americans, and then come back here and tell us how we're all just generalizing and making false assumptions.

In the meantime, don't come on here and tell us what we NEED to do.

[MrBig]

126. No doubt your stories are true

and no doubt stories like that will continue.

I happen to have worked with many police officers (I'm not a cop, I work for a non-profit that attempts to support and assist people victimized by discriminatory and hate related acts) who are quick to come to the assistance of those in need.

I believe in the concept that power can corrupt, but I don't automatically assume that EVERY person with power will be corrupted.

You are getting emotional and worked up over these stories with good reason. It's better to use that energy and emotion for the betterment of society rather than attempting to split it apart.

[Th1onein]

138. I'm not the one splitting society apart, buddy.

It's those poor widdle cop buddies doing it to themselves. They are the ones with the power, and they are the ones abusing it. If you think I'm going to give one of them a pass just because you know a few decent ones, think again. There comes a time when too much is too much.

Don't tell me how to use my energy. I think it's more useful fighting injustice than sucking up to power hungry monsters.

[MrBig]

154. It's not about giving them a pass

Is it better to fight or make peace? Is it better to make war or break bread? Some people simply won't see the other side and, yes, fighting against them is necessary.

But if you can change minds and change perspectives, isn't that the better way to go?

[Th1onein]

274. Depends on whether you have a level playing field or not.

And we don't. The cops got the guns and the tasers and they are killing people. They are killing our fellow Americans, and the ones that they don't kill, they torture, or maim for life. They are seldom punished for it, either.

This shit has been going on, despite our best efforts to "make nice" for decades. Enough is fucking enough. We need to stand up to every one of them, every time, and sue the fuck out of them every single time they cross the line.

These Nazis need to be taught the hard way, how NOT to infringe upon our constitutional rights. Sue their departments; sue them, personally. Hit them in the fucking pocketbook; that's all they understand.

The next cop that stops me, I'm going to let him know exactly what I think of cops, in general, and if he DARES to cross the line, he might have me in jail for a night, but I'll have his job, and I WILL cost him more than just his fucking income.

EVERYBODY should do the same. It's called exercising your rights. And if you don't exercise them, like anything else, you WILL lose them.

[TexasObserver]

36. Change "dick" to "jerk" and you'll be fine.

Use of terms like "dick" are frowned on by some here, and my lead to someone asking that your post be removed.

[omega minimo]

199. Well there's private dicks and public dicks.

[polmaven]

95. I happen to have several friends

who are cops. They are good people, and, mostly, good Democrats...members of the local Democratic Committee.

[EFerrari]

9. DU Authoritarians untie!

[omega minimo]

26. We MUST, We must, We must increase our Bust!!!

:bounce: :bounce:

[proteus_lives]

196. Disagree or not...

You get points for the Lords of Acid reference, ;-)

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

30. Untie what?

[MrBig]

61. Your shoe? The knot looks a little loose...needs to be redone

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

73. I use double knots they are fine.

[MrBig]

84. New Studies show double knots not as reliable as once thought

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

Mine have always held very well. I'll keep an eye on them though.

[seabeyond]

122. bah hahaha. i loved this subthread in oh so serious. thanks guys. nt oh

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

129. You are welcome. Silly to always be so serious.

[annabanana]

89. lol. . .

I don't know what's worse... sh*tstirrers or the fools caught in the eddys. .

[GoneOffShore]

10. I would love to be able to not bash cops because there are many good ones

Unfortunately the numbers of really bad ones out there outweigh the ones who do not look at every citizen as a potential "perp".

The interactions many of us see on a daily basis between police and citizens turn us against the police - who, when you really think deeply about it, started off as a defense against the poor. Recruited from the poor to protect the rich and their property.

Sure it's not "progressive" to paint with a broad brush, but we all do it - even you I suspect. Human nature and there seems to be fuck all that can be done about it.

And if you want to know why many people don't like cops - just google cops, tasers, overreaction, racism. I think you'll get a really good understanding of why many of us here have very little time for "Peace Officers" (How Newspeak is that term?)

Results 1 - 10 of about 6,790 for cops, tasers, overreaction, racism. (0.61 seconds)
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=cops,+tasers,+overreaction,+racism&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[godai]

12. Nice try. Be aware that a lot of people who agree may not reply.

Whereas the worst of our oh-so-enlightened DU cop-haters definitely will.

[EFerrari]

18. LOL! You poor, poor things.

:rofl:

[MrBig]

21. No Doubt

I know what to expect from the responses. Normally I wouldn't feel the need to make a post like this, but I work for a non-profit organization that works with a lot of police officers in my region to protect and enforce the rights of minorities and those discriminated against.

The police officers we have worked with have been THE only protective shield for the poor and minorities here.

The thing I've taken away the most is that police officers are people. Some are racist. Some aren't. Some are hateful. Some aren't. Just like everyone else.

[emilyg]

125. I'll reply. I never

had bad dealings with cops.

[sandnsea]

13. If I'm treated well I respond well

If they think they're going to give me a lecture or puff their chest at me, then that's not going to go so well. Unfortunatley, most (oh no, the dreaded most) have been given terrible training in how to interact with people. It starts with them, the PROFESSIONALS, bashing all citizens and lumping all of us together as Charles Manson criminals.

And if you don't "know what happened" with Gates and Crowledy, then never serve on a jury. The police reports and interviews are all out there for anyone to read.

[MrBig]

27. Yup, the dreaded most

I just don't understand why you are okay with some generalizations about groups of people, but not others? If you are going to support generalizations, why not support them all?

So you automatically take the police reports and interviews to the press as definitive proof of "what happened"? I hope you don't serve on a jury, taking everything at face value like you do.

[sandnsea]

49. Excuse me? Police Reports??

Yes, I take police reports very seriously. Don't you? Are you saying cops are liars?? Oh noes, that can't be.

Cops are supposed to act in a professional manner when dealing with the public. Most of them do know how to do this and do know how to behave without arresting someone who yells at them. There's that most again. Unfortunately, most of them also don't know how to engage people so the yelling doesn't happen in the first place. Another most. They act like assholes and then wonder why people treat them like assholes. Maybe they think they're taking control of a situation, but if that's the case, then there needs to be new training because bluster doesn't work, as we've seen so well with George Bush.

[MrBig]

86. I take police reports very seriously

And I look at them in conjunction with other facts.

I don't take them at face value without any other evidence. There can be mistakes on them. I'm not saying cops are liars. I'm saying they are human and can make mistakes.

[sandnsea]

128. Police Reports, 3 Cops statements,

several interviews with Gates.

I don't understand why you can't draw a conclusion as to what happened. Actually, I think you can, I just think you won't.

[MrBig]

133. I can draw conclusions

I have my opinions and I believe Crowley over-reacted. I still wasn't there. I still don't know exactly what happened.

[dddem]

246. In my humble opinion,

I think both men overreacted (probably based on past experience), and I think they both realize they overreacted, and in my perfect world, they will come together to create a teaching moment out of this situation, because they both seem to be intelligent, caring individuals.
Peace.

[Hutzpa]

193. Pardon my interruption

but would like to make a point which is lies can be seen as mistakes just as mistakes
can be seen as lies.....Thank you,

You may carry on......:hi:

[MrBig]

207. Very true n/t

[47of74]

14. While there are plenty of good cops out there, there are also lots of bad ones too

And while ordinarily I would agree that generalized statements are wrong, in this case with a silent majority of cops, prosecutors, judges, etc etc who do nothing while bad cops operate in their midst I cannot say that generalized criticism is not deserved.

[undeterred]

19. I think that there are a lot of cops with poor social skills

and psychological problems.

[MrBig]

29. Again, there is a difference

You saying this isn't generalizing. I completely disagree with your point, but you aren't generalizing. The problem comes when you say "most cops have psychological problems" because that's generalizing.

[JohnnyLib2]

23. I agree with the points in your OP.

:kick:

[omega minimo]

24. If you're calling personal stories of racial profiling "cop bashing" you're way out of line

You haven't stated what you're talking about. The stories I'm seeing are not saying "all" or "most" or "cop bashing."

The ones who are obviously ridiculous may be looking for a rise.

[MrBig]

34. I'm not saying that

I don't believe that personal stories of racial profiling are "cop bashing" nor do I believe them to be untrue or out of line.

I can tell you that I know some cops practice racial profiling just like some cops are racist and make decisions based on prejudicial beliefs.

What I am saying is that to argue that "most" or "all" cops believe this or act this way is generalizing and shouldn't go on here.

I've seen multiple posts buried within threads (and one prominently in an OP) saying "all" or "most", thus the reason for this post.

[omega minimo]

53. Well some of those may be nimrods. Welcome to DU. Or it may be their experience.

it's not going to stop.


"What I am saying is that to argue that "most" or "all" cops believe this or act this way is generalizing and shouldn't go on here."

The folks who understand that already agree with you.

What would be interesting to discuss re: cops is how much policing has changed over the past 20 years. How that has altered police perception of the public and the public perception of police.

[MrBig]

90. That would be interesting

I would also be interested in any studies or articles about the role of the media and how that has affected the public perception of police officers. (Not just news media stories necessarily, but cop shows, etc.)

There's got to be some scholarly articles on that subject.

[omega minimo]

100. and how it's affected police perception of police officers.

yes that's what I mean, those shows and other changes of the past 20 years.

[bliss_eternal]

117. but in studying the culture...

...of police officers it is reasonable to argue that "many" can frequently "overtake" the "few," because of the dominant pervading culture that exists in police departments.

if a great many police in a department engage in "racial profiling" is it unreasonable to suspect (or argue in discussion) that in time, the few that don't indulge in that....will? because they are eventually taken in by the culture they work in every single day?

[MrSlayer]

31. There is a small but vocal group of cop haters here.

Most people realize that there are good ones and bad ones as there are in any profession.

[TorchTheWitch]

43. I've not noticed it being a small group

Seems like cop haters overflow this place.

[Mythsaje]

63. How about "Bad Cop Haters?"

As far as we're concerned, there aren't enough of us among the "good" cops to make a difference.

There's our REAL problem.

[seabeyond]

74. how about many of us not even hating cops. how about we see a huge problem getting bigger

and unless we as a society admit, and the police admit and acknowledge, we will ALL be sorry. including the police that protect themselves so.

some of us actually want a win win win

civilian, cops and community

[Mythsaje]

32. Oh, I definitely don't hate all police...

But the assholes and bullies among them I hate with the fiercest passion possible...and the decent cops out there should hate them even more than I do because it's because of them that they're distrusted and disliked by so many ordinary citizens. If the police wish to gain the trust and good will of the citizenry, they should be promoting rather than fighting things like citizen oversight and attempts to video their actions in the discharge of their duties. Unless they are doing something for which they feel they should be ashamed, they should welcome any such thing. As long as they do not, as a group, they are earning at least a portion of the animosity we aim at their corrupt or bullying counterparts.

Cops aren't any better than the rest of us and we don't appreciate the unspoken assumption that they are. They are armed and allowed to regulate the behavior of other citizens and should be held to a much higher standard of behavior than the rest of us. Most particularly by their own. As far as we can tell, they're not.

Bring down the "blue wall" and maybe we'll have something to talk about.

[MrBig]

41. I agree

I agree with many points in your post.

It is more important for the police to attempt to embrace and create a strong relationship with the public at large than vice versa. There are certain responsibilities placed on police officers simply by the job they do and the power they carry.

The fact that they have this power, though, seems to drive some people here crazy and leads them to make assumptions and generalizations that simply aren't true.

The most important statement you made is, "Cops aren't any better than the rest of us." This is very true. The opposite is also true. Cops aren't any worse than the rest of us.

[CakeGrrl]

72. No, not any worse either, but they don't have any right to

use their gun, taser or nightstick in an abusive show of force despite the fact that they may have financial problems, a marriage on the rocks, substance abuse problems, anger management issues, personal biases against certain ethnic groups, or any other problems/issues that may manifest.

If they can't keep that in check, they should no longer be allowed to wield that power.

And if others can be proved to have provided cover for wrongdoing, they need to go as well.

[seabeyond]

82. i blame the higher ups. i see the higher ups the ones responsible for the problem

they should have had tight reign, strict boundaries and as soon it was stepped over, the cop is out of there.

doesnt happen today

[MrBig]

92. I agree (n/t)

[varelse]

137. "Cops aren't any worse than the rest of us. "

Unfortunately they have a great deal more power than the rest of us. They need to be better - at least while in uniform - than "the rest of us".

[seabeyond]

44. right on. peace brother. and THIS, is not cop bashing. this is saying where the issue is

op wants to stop the cop bashing, wants us to not see them as a whole, then lets deal with this issue instead of pretending it doesnt exist

[MrBig]

94. I agree with your assessment

My op didn't succeed in that it looked at the broader picture rather than the specific problem that does exist. I agree that the issue that the other poster made and the one you responded to needs to be addressed.

[seabeyond]

104. we dont. we pretend it isnt there. and then to shut us up or not listen label "cop hater"

i have never hated a person in my life. i am angered by abuse and will defend any area i see people are being abused

but call us cop haters and you do the same thing the right did to the liberals saying they hate america

some people jsut mouth of... hate all cops. most people see a HUGE ASS problem and we are being told to shut up

cause i wont be intimidated, because i wont be submissive, not even for a damn cop doesnt make me a criminal. i am friggin an old white woman raising two youngs boys and i see what is happening. do you think i tell kids to trust cops. i dont.

cops need our support. BUT they have to earn it... and they are not earning it with there performance now

it is a BIG ISSUE

better to address than to ignore

i remember a time when i could actually support, trust, and respect the cops. wasnt that long ago

[MrBig]

114. I don't say cop haters

I'm attempting to show people who are generalizing all police officers under one umbrella that they shouldn't think that way. It isn't progressive. It isn't productive.

[seabeyond]

116. your right and as i typed that actually flashed thru brain, you didnt say it. but

look at all that say

cop haters
and they have nothing to say, i dont listen

but yes. thank you for calling me on it. you have not said it

[MrBig]

135. You are correct

It is just as bad for discourse to call one side "cop haters" because it puts the other side on the defensive and doesn't open up productive conversation.

[sandnsea]

55. That should be its own thread

While we're on the subject of "teachable moments", wouldn't it be mind blowing if the police union and the aclu sat down for some beers?

[Mythsaje]

60. It might be...

It's been bouncing around in my head for the past few days because of what's been happening on my street.

[seabeyond]

33. seriously asking.... what does it mean, all the problems we are having with police and

there are certainly problems, that when these events do crop up the higher ups dont call them on it and fellow cops do not call them on it.

if i was a doctor and i had a doctor i saw doing something illegally or unethical, especially something that puts patients lives at risk, i would feel morally obligated to turn the person in. to support the patient that was harmed. an obligation. a duty. a responsibility. and if i did not do that, i would count myself as liable, even more so, than the doctor that actually committed the offense

why

cause i know better, and because i have the moral integrity to see the wrong

you say it is not all cops, or even most cops

what does it make the cops that sit back quietly, or the cops that will even stand up for these cops that do wrong, accuse and point the finger at the victim

what does it make these cops

[MrBig]

46. The problems

I believe they are blown WAYYYYYY out of proportion by the media coverage and press that are given them. No doubt some of those that are defending Crowley 100% are doing so to back up their profession. Others are doing so probably because they know Officer Crowley and believe his point of view (similarly to how we would support a friend's version of events over a strangers).

I'm sure there are police officers who oppose the way Crowley acted. Heck, they may even choose to speak out. If they aren't in Cambridge, they won't get the press' attention and thus you wouldn't know about it. If they are in Cambridge, why would they speak out when they could be ostracized by those that they have to work with?

[seabeyond]

62. do you THINK all this is about crowley. do you THINK the animosity is just about this event.

we are talking kids being tasered and tasered to death. old people houses being invaded and shot to death. and man sleeping on his couch, having door knocked in early morning shot sleeping on his couch. i can go on and on and on and fuckin on.

this anger isn't THIS event. this anger is years of it building and being told to stfu and respect these men and women. to become submissive and allow ourselves be intimidated.

this isn't today. this is years and years of pretending there aren't issues. it growing and festering and feeding

STILL cops and people on this board dont listen. still they want to pretend there are no problems. next year, the next year and the next will just have this problem growing more

it behooves the cops and the defenders to actually listen and address the problems

they are NOT unreasonable. all us aren't just haters

we are normal, law abiding, respectful citizens that have watched this escalate as law enforcement ignore and allow boundaries to become invisible

[MrBig]

98. I don't think this is about Crowley

I think the Crowley story brings out people's worst fears/thoughts/opinions about police officers.

I have no doubt that for countless years, individual/groups of police officers have used their power for terrible, terrible things. The number of stories indicating this are way too many (heck, one is way too many).

I agree that the problems need to be addressed and discussed and I think, as progressives and mostly peaceful people, it will be us that can properly address the issue.

If we go into it, however, with a negative attitude and with an accusatory tone, the other side won't listen and will be automatically defensive which is not the best position.

[seabeyond]

107. breath out... lol. cause no one will listen. labeled cop hater, or your post, just a few

we see those not doing something as just as guilty if not more.

i will leave you alone.

you have lots of people to address

i will say, you listening though, thru the thread, has given me more peace on this subject than i have had in last couple days

i appreciate

[MrBig]

162. It's this dialogue that I was looking for

You are correct in that my post was not the best means in bringing out the dialogue that I was hoping for, but I have appreciated and enjoyed the conversation with you.

It's when people will actually listen to each other that changes will be made.

[seabeyond]

166. the bottom line though, for me and for my boys, is i want to be able to support the police again

i use to

thanks

[MrBig]

174. No doubt

I think people who attack "cop haters" need to realize that many of those people want to trust cops and understand the importance of good police officers to a civil society.

Just like people who attack "cop lovers" need to realize that many of those people see the problems with some cops and want it to change for the better.

[TahitiNut]

38. Shit. Another forum hall monitor.

:puke:

[MrBig]

48. Nope

If I was a hall monitor, I would be reporting and alerting posts.

I'm merely stating my opinion and trying to improve the discourse of the subject. Obviously it's the same thing you are attempting to do on these boards.

[Odin2005]

39. The authoritarian pig-lovers need to STFU!!!

If the "good" cops didn't ENABLE the pigs this shit would not happen!

Concentrated authority is always bad, it always corrupts a person. It's like the One Ring in the Lord of the Ring.

[MrBig]

52. Yup...

Just like if the "good" Muslims didn't ENABLE the terrorist towel-heads, the bombings wouldn't happen. Right?

[Odin2005]

66. Wow, stupid analogy.

[MrBig]

76. How so???

Please explain how the analogy is stupid?

I took a group of people whose shared characteristics are changeable (Muslims can change religions, cops can change professions) and I've taken an assumption some make about those groups of people. All I changed from your post was who the group was and the derogatory term that was used.

Explain to me how it is stupid and not the same thing as you said?

[Odin2005]

112. Policing is both a important civil necessity and a profession. Islam is a religion.

Apples and oranges, different categories with different moral demands on being responsible for the behavior of others in that group. There is nothing inherent in Islam that makes people terrorists and there is nothing inherent in Christianity that makes people witch-burners. A policing position, on the other hand always has the risks associated with power over others and INHERENTLY so.

[MrBig]

142. While your inherent power point is well taken

I would argue that there isn't an inherent part of the policing profession that makes people bad. I don't see why police officers in Houston need to denounce the actions of police officers in Cambridge. Different group of people who do not know each other at all.

[Odin2005]

180. They need to have the idea constantly reinforced that they serve us, not the other way around.

And that is the whole profession, as a group.

[MrBig]

208. It's done more than you think

I know in my area, the police are required to attend somewhere between 25-30 hours of sensitivity training (maybe actual cops on this board can correct this).

When I work with cops, it's a program to teach them about the perils and problems of making assumptions. It teaches them to understand that, due to the history of abusive power, people have trouble trusting authority figures such as police and to understand that when approaching any scene.

Fact of the matter is, they are people. They are not perfect.

You are correct though, there is no such thing as too much education. Having that lesson reinforced to them would be very beneficial.

[godai]

83. Wow, great analogy. n/t

[Telly Savalas]

139. If you believe that concentrated authority always corrupts a person

then why do you choose as your avatar the person with the most concentrated authority in the world?

[TexasObserver]

40. Is a good cop who covers for or tolerates a bad cop really a good cop?

[BlooInBloo]

45. Of course not. That's why there are virtually no good cops.

[MrBig]

58. Where's the proof?

Show me proof that virtually all police officers have covered up or protected bad cops? Stats? Anything? I'll be waiting.

[seabeyond]

65. right here shuts the reasonable people down. the anger grows and fester. right here

you did it. this is why you face the anger today

[BlooInBloo]

67. I agree, the blue wall of silence works. As long as that's in place, they all get blamed....

If they want to be on the side of the public, instead of their own side, that would be welcome.

Until then, they can fuck off and go to hell.

[MrBig]

78. Some are on the side of the public

How many need to be on the side of the public for you to find it acceptable? How do you know how many officers are on which side?

You're basing your opinion on the stories you've read in the media. That covers a small about of police officers out of the hundreds of thousands that exist throughout the United States and the millions across the world.

[BlooInBloo]

85. I agree that there are a lot more cops who passively allow other cops to commit crimes...

Than there are cops who actually commit the crimes.

Neither is on my side.

And any who don't know about the first two groups are too stupid to be on my side.

So fuck pretty much all cops.

[seabeyond]

88. every police that read crowelys report knew he lead gates out of house to arrest him

it was their language and not even hid. everyone knew what he did

how many did you see stand up and say.... now wait a minutes guys

we know crowley led him out to arrest. lets at least be honest. stand with him for the arrest, but lets not pretend otherwise

tell me mrbig... how many cops across the fuckin nation stood up and supported crowley

[TexasObserver]

130. Again, your comments are inaccurate.

Here's what you're doing: You're taking your life experience and biases, your conclusions, and you're making them the only reasonable conclusions. You're ignoring that you are just one person, while we are many. We each have our life experiences, our knowledge, our interactions with police, our professional knowledge of them. WE are far, far more knowledgeable about cops than you are.

We are basing our opinions upon our life's experiences. Collectively, they are significant. Yours is not. For all we know, you're just an associate deputy auxiliary constable in Backwater, USA, bringing your quaint but naive view of cops.

[MrBig]

143. Partially correct

You don't know who I am. Yes, I am basing my personal opinion about police officers based on my experiences just like everyone else.

I don't think that the collective opinion of the people on this message board, however, equals a significant amount to dictate a true general statement about police officers.

[TexasObserver]

146. You don't believe it because you cannot admit that your opinion is just that.

You falsely believe you hold TRUTH about this matter, but you're just a guy with an opinion, and even if you think you're really knowledgeable about the topic, you're not. You're just a guy with a narrow set of experiences, processing information that is limited by your intelligence.

You refuse to accept that the collective experiences of those commenting here far, far exceed your own. You refuse to accept that when so many people who are decent citizens find police a threat, it's the fault of the police.

[MrBig]

157. Where have I refused to accept that???

I agree that the opinion of many exceeds the opinion of one.

I don't believe the opinion of the many on this message board exceed the opinions of all people. As powerful and popular as you may wish this website to be, it simply isn't everyone.

[TexasObserver]

77. Joseph Wambaugh, former policeman/author: "All cops lie to make cases."

And that's clearly true.

If you think cops don't fudge facts in their reports to excuse their conduct or that of fellow officers, you really need to reassess your beliefs.

[DefenseLawyer]

115. It is absolutely true.

Sometimes it is intentional, often times it is just sloth. It is easier to cut and paste from the last report rather than starting from scratch so pretty soon they all essentially become the same report. An interesting part of this reality is video cameras in patrol cars. In my state, Indiana, maybe 7 or 8 years ago there was a big push to put video cameras in cars. Money was allocated, grants received- cameras became pretty common. I love the cameras because they don't lie. They will either show a cop screwing up a traffic stop or they will show a client that he is buried, in a way his own memory of the events could never convince him. I can attest to many suppression motions won where officers, apparently forgetting they had a camera, wrote the same old bs report to justify searching someone, only to have the camera reflect what really happened. Interestingly, the police are apparently not fans. The number of cars that have working cameras today, particularly among state troopers, is down to about zero. No money for maintenance, obsolete technology, or oops it just wasn't working that day. Now I wonder why that is?

[TexasObserver]

123. Yes, it is. As you say, only video can prove they lied.

A policeman is like somebody else's pit bull. Just because he won't bite his owner or his owner's acquaintances doesn't mean he won't attack a stranger, and viciously.

Police know the elements of a crime, and therefore know what lies they need to tell to justify an arrest. If they find weed in an illegal search, they claim they smelled it, that the driver was acting funny, and that led them to the search. They work backwards, and invent facts to fit the outcome they want. That is standard operation procedure in all police departments.

Even the prosecutors use it. Instead of saying someone is a suspect, they say "a person of interest." It's a lie, and we all know it's a lie - a lie told and winked at even by media - to allow the continuing fraud that the person mentioned is not a suspect.

If you want to know the man or woman most likely to violate your constitutional rights, it's the ones who have sworn to support and defend the constitution.

[seabeyond]

47. this is what i ask too.... n/t

[Odin2005]

51. No.

[MrBig]

54. Not at all

No, a good cop who covers for or tolerates a bad cop's illegal or wrongful actions is not a good cop.

There is no proof though that a majority of police officers throughout the nation and world cover up or tolerate the actions of bad cops.

[Fumesucker]

87. Then show us the cops who are blowing the whistle on the bad ones..

That's all you really need to do to shut us up, we all know there are bad cops out there, if the majority of cops are really and truly good then they will not tolerate another cop who is abusing their authority.

Where are the whistle blowing cops?

[TexasObserver]

108. Yes, there is proof. The JURY in this matter is the public.

The proof is the way citizens speak of their experiences with police, and their observations of them.

Do you know what PROOF is, for legal purposes? It's PERSONAL TESTIMONY. It's videos. It's photos. It's analysis of the thousands of reversed cases involving police misconduct. That's PROOF.

You simply don't understand the concept of proof. It's not "proof to your satisfaction."

[MrBig]

140. You are correct - that is proof

You have done a very thorough job of defining proof.

Still, there is no proof that all or most cops are bad people. Thousands of stories doesn't equal most. There are thousands of stories of cops saving lives and helping the downtrodden.

[TexasObserver]

150. A bad cop can commit a good deed. That doesn't erase the bad conduct.

What is a bad cop?

I would say it's any cop who lies to arrest people who piss him off.

It's also any cop who knows that happens and doesn't act to stop it.

[MrBig]

167. I would disagree

If the cop consistently lies to arrest people who piss him/her off, then yes that is a bad cop.

I don't believe that Officer Crowley is a bad person. I think he might have mis-used his authority and dealt with this situation poorly.

I think, as humans, both Gates and Crowley acted rationally. They, first and foremost, are human. Their respective reactions, make logical sense as humans. Gates, from his perspective, should be pissed off that, in his own home, he was questioned the way he was. Crowley, as an officer inspecting a live burglary scene (to his knowledge) should be suspicious.

[BlooInBloo]

57. When cops stop terrorizing people, and covering for cops who terrorize - then I'll stop bashing them

Not a second before.

[DefenseLawyer]

59. Oh thanks

because no one has ever used the "any time you criticize a cop, you are disrespecting all police officers, you love crime and you hate America" line to stop anyone from EVER criticizing a cop before. What a new tactic you have chosen. What a fresh take. Here's the thing: People are free to criticize cops and whether you like it or not, if someone's experience with MOST cops has been bad, they are free to criticize MOST cops. Deal with it. Maybe if you guys spent more time trying to improve and occasionally called out one of your own when he screwed up, rather than always circling the wagons no matter how egregious the behavior of a fellow officer, there might be less to criticize in the first place.

[MrBig]

71. You seem to assume

that I am a police officer, which I am not. I'm not even friends with any officers. I've worked with many in my profession who have done incredible good for those who need the most protection in my community.

Criticizing a police officer as an individual can be appropriate. You are adding words into my post that I never said. I never said anything about any time you criticize a cop you are disrespecting all police officers. You are trying to change my words and then attack those.

[asdjrocky]

64. Cops are great guys.

Just look at how many of them kill their wives. Or their wives and their kids. I'm sure that just has to do with all the pressure these poor fellas are under all the time from all us mean liberal cop bashers. Give me one huge break.

Poor cops.

I've tried to eat liver about a dozen times and every single time it's a bad experience, so I just know I don't like the crap. It's the same thing for me and cops. And ya know what? I spent a lot of years working around a lot of cops, fucktards every single one. On the make, on the take and all of them on something.

Sure there's good and bad in every group. I hear there's a few good guys that are members of the Columbian drug cartel and there's actually a few priests who don't touch boys, so while we're at it, let's give them all a big loving shout out too.

Anyone tell you this place was full of anti-authoritarian, bleeding heart liberals? How long did you lerk, like four minutes?

[Obamanaut]

68. You'll see some of the same sort of things about military, and then

at Veteran's Day there will be threads of "we thank you for your service."

Read the posts that interest you, disregard or hide the ones that don't. Either way, it isn't worth an ulcer.

[stray cat]

70. It seems bashing police is a DU value that I hope doesn't represent most progressives

not much different than free republic neo nazis in terms of hating workers who enforce laws. I guess DU doesn't generally support workers or minorities if they work for law enforcement.

This is why some people vote republican because democrats hate law enforcement and law in general and anyone who serves their country - the anarchy self-centered, self-righteous party. I wonder why they would get that idea :banghead:

[Raineyb]

99. Constant excuse making for police needs to stop!

I'm so tired of this shit. The police work for us they don't own us we are not obligated to bow and scrape to them.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

110. You're fighting a losing battle.

Every collective group needs another group to unload on with extreme prejudice. It's human nature, despite how "progressive" and "open minded" one tries to paint themselves. You've found the one group it is considered okay to generalize one's hatred towards here.

It doesn't bother me, it just shows who I need to view as ignorant enough to ignore.

[cboy4]

111. I've learned people whose lips are glued to cops' asses tighter than a drum

definitely almost never have had a negative experience with them.

And I'm white.

Know what I mean MrBig?

[lpbk2713]

113. Admins had a good idea when they first showed the total unrec count.

Just sayin' :eyes:

[MrBig]

124. I agree (n/t)

[bridgit]

127. It can represent a disinclination toward civil mediation and the RW machine has already...

lapped it up like a kitteh from a saucer that has been laid before them; and retooled it into Dem disrespect/disregard for issues concerning law & order...next comes the task of any potential stopping of wars when you've been tagged as anti law & order before they tag you anti American and that's when all bets are off poof goes the dream and a new search begins for a new face to blame eh fuck it...

People do and say whatever the hell they want: smart, baited, ho-hum, brilliant, or as dumb as a bag of wet mice the die is cast

[Iggo]

136. Good cops cover for bad cops...

...making them all bad cops.

[goddess40]

151. You hit the nail on the head!!!

That is the biggest problem of all.

[elocs]

145. I won't even bother to read the responses. The -Recs pretty much reflects the DU attitude

and it's pretty much what I expected. I hope you are wearing your asbestos underwear. Good luck with your next OP.

[MrBig]

158. I expected as much

I don't take it personally. I'm just an anonymous person posting on an Internet message board. But I have had good dialogue with quite a few people on this thread which makes me believe that making the post was worth it.

[G_j]

149. cops can be terrifing bullies, but we must not forget who they work for

and who writes the laws, the whole screwed up justice system.

[ThoughtCriminal]

153. When I see OTHER law enforcement members condemming

the actions of "Bad Apples", I'll have some more respect.

Instead, and in officer Crowley's in particular, I see pathetic attempts to defend his actions and attack the victims.

Police abusing their authority has become an epidemic, and if they do not start taking action to clean up and discourage this behavior, there needs to be powerful oversight and harsh penalties.

[tj2001]

163. Their unions seem to be run by bullies and thugs

who do not tolerate dissent, and who do not hesitate to issue threats. It's a brotherhood, Mafia style.

[seabeyond]

168. cool. we are recognizing a problem. so better to say a truth than pretend there isnt a problem

i personally believe it is the higher ups that set the bar and allow the atmosphere for the abuses to go on, or for the department to be run with integrity.

[MrBig]

178. And what makes it worse

is that there is institutionalized racism in many of these organizations. Not that each individual is racist, but due to the hundreds of years of overt racism, it has set in place a system whereby, even if everyone individually is not racist, there is still racism in the organization.

[merh]

220. Precisely.

Well said.

[WeDidIt]

169. I have no real respect for any cop.

I fake respect for them whenever have have to deal with them, but I don't have any actual respect for them.

IF they ever actually clean up their own instead of covering up for the bad cops, I'll start actually rspecting them.

[Tim01]

176. You seem pretty reasonable. Maybe this isn't the right place for you. nt

[DRoseDARs]

181. Thank you. I had my own experience with "profiling" about 10 years ago.

I was a teen driver involved in a non-injury, two-vehicle accident. The first cop on the scene was very polite and professional, asking the obvious questions in a tone of voice showing he wasn't out to fill a quota but to actually understand the details of the accident. However, a few minutes later the second cop arrived (followed by an ambulance though its presence was thankfully unnecessary) and he was more brusk with me. As a teenager, CLEARLY I was involved with drugs and alcohol at the time of the accident. At least, that was the attitude this cop brought to the scene before my parents arrived, so they didn't get to see that. Fortunately, the first cop had a chance to run interference with his comrade before anything came of it. Had the second cop been the first one there, the night could have turned out differently.

I have never done drugs in my life. I have never drunken alcohol in my life. Except for speeding tickets every couple of years (I've been good about it for about 2 years now, yay me), I'm a good driver. My crime in the eyes of the second officer was Driving While Teenaged. My crime in the eyes of the first officer? Failure to Yield on a Left Turn. He even told me he'd seen accidents like mine at this very intersection and felt bad he had to cite me, despite my contention the other driver was slowing to stop as the light was turning red and she was on a cellphone too. I made a judgment call and I judged the situation wrong, plain and simple. It was a miscalculation, not incompetence. I got my ticket, three months of bullshit from State Farm (who probably wasn't amused that the other driver ALSO had State Farm Drivers Insurance, tee hee), and got my current '92 Explorer out of the final payout from State Farm (my '91 was totaled as was the other driver's mid-sized SUV).

I know there are dick cops from firsthand experience, but I also know there are good cops from firsthand experience. Those times I've been cited for speeding I maintained a calm, respectful demeanor with the officer and have even been able to get out of tickets, just getting warnings 2 or 3 times because the officer appreciated not having to deal with an asshole.



And before someone asks, everyone involved was white. So obviously, I don't get to talk about profiling because that only happens to African-Americans. Not teens, not gays, not women, not liberals, not Muslims. Just blacks. Yes, I've seen people post implying whites simply don't have the right to talk about profiling and it is fucking obtuse.

[BlooInBloo]

182. That was good, up to the point where you started whining about reverse racism.

[Name removed]

184. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DRoseDARs]

240. That was good, I defend myself against your ridiculous charge and a mod deletes it without cause.

Talk about abuse of power. :thumbsdown:

[proud2BlibKansan]

183. I know two decent cops

Two.

[dysfunctional press]

187. it really isn't very progressive to generalize all cop haters/bashers...

you should know better than that.

[MrBig]

209. Show me where I did

I addressed the OP to posters who are making generalizations. I didn't make generalizations within the post or say that all cop haters/bashers are bad people, etc.

[dysfunctional press]

215. look for yourself...

It's important for all of you cop bashers/haters to keep in mind:


* I don't doubt that you've had some terrible interactions with the police...

you are casting aspersions on ALL cop-haters, saying that 'you don't doubt that' we've had some terrrible interactions with the police-

a person doesn't have to have had a terrible interaction with pigs the police in order to hate them or bash them...sure, it helps...A LOT...but it isn't necessary- when you hear enough and see enough as far as what happens to other innocent victims at the hands of authoritarian assholes in blue, you can start to build your own opinions.

[Starry Messenger]

188. Why? Does it infringe on their rights in some manner?

Who said it wasn't progressive to generalize about groups of people, if that group is a profession or other affiliation of choice, not a protected minority? I generalize about nazi skinheads, Republicans, and other bigots all the time.

I often see people badmouth teachers at DU. As a teacher it makes me sad, but it's my choice to work as a teacher. No one is forcing me. If a cop doesn't want to hear flak about the performance of his duties amongst the citizenry, he can get a landscaping license and plant hydrangeas. Everyone likes hydrangeas.

[Tim01]

191. People badmouth teachers?

What the fuck is wrong with people. I guess idiots just love to blame others when they don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

How's that "no child left behind" act treating you? When is it they expect to have a 100% pass rate on the tests?

The teachers I know are getting out as fast as they can. They see it as hopeless. My friend refuses to go back unless they install metal detectors. Since they won't get the future prisoners out of his class so he can do his job. He feels unsafe in his class room.

The teacher in Md was admonished by her school board after one of her students punched her.They said the assault was her fault.


And then the whiners blame the teachers. Unbelievable. I don't even want to sub anymore.

My wife has a degree in child education.

We home school.

[lexanman]

231. future prisoners?

says it all. That is how you view children. As future prisoners? Just wow. On a progressive board too. Perhaps if you addressed the dozens of points about cops covering for bad cops. The blue wall. You probably are familar with that, though.

[Tim01]

238. No, that's how I view the students who will end up in prison.

To pretend all students are going to be lawyers and doctors is ridiculous. The students who are flying gang colors and dealing crack in school, the ones whos parents says it is the schools responsibility to fix these kids, they will be going to prison.

[lexanman]

239. who said they would be lawyers or doctors?

You are writing them off as prisoners? As if kids don't change. Yes some of them may end up in prison. Some may turn their life around, and even others may in fact become doctors and lawyers. Flying gang colors and dealing crack have been going on for a long time. Its not the schools responsibility to fix these kids, but you are effectively writing every one of them off. You are not interested other than to throw them in a jail cell to rot. And with your attitude you have just created another 100 kids who will look to get back at the system. Nice Job.

[Tim01]

270. I followed up on one of the students.

I was subbing a class and 3 of the students turned in their tests blank except for their names. For the first part of the class I spent all of my time trying to get these 3 under control, the rest of the class got nothing from me during that time. So told them could shut up or go to suspension. They considered this for a while then asked if sleeping would be acceptable. I told them if they could do it quietly, fine. One of them had to leave school early. As soon as he as in the hall way he put on the gang flag. The school assistant principal called him on it. He said he was no longer in school this day so he could do what he wanted.
I followed up on him. No dad in the picture. When the school contacted mom about him she bitched about how her son was our responsibility to educate, said the school was picking on him, and threatened to go to the school board if she was disturbed at her house again.
The son was recently in the local paper. He is now a prisoner. I actually was surprised he got so much jail time since the guy he killed was the one who started the knife fight. But the jury said since he crossed the parking to engage in the knife fight and kill the guy, when he could have walked away, he was responsible.


I was walking past a classroom recently on break.I had paperwork to do at the office.
Outside of the classroom was a male student and his female teacher. They were arguing. He was explaining that she had been disrespectful to him and that she couldn't make him do anything and he didn't care what she did as far as reprimands. I could see through the window in the door people jumping from desk to desk, there was lots of yelling, and something slammed into the door really hard from the inside. I would guess a person. The teacher was crying with tears streaming down her face as she argued with the student who was obviously not impressed.
I called security since she had no control of the class room.
When I talked to later she explained to me how hard it was for the students and they just need more love or something like that. I understand why her own students have no respect for. And why her class room is more like a zoo.
And the students who want to learn? Why should their opportunity be ripped off by other students who are going on to knife fights and prison, and teachers who are too "caring" to do the job?

No child left behind.

[Raineyb]

237. Future prisoners?

Your attitude is absolutely disgusting and so is that of your friend. If he sees his students as future prisoners then he needs to stay the fuck out of the classroom. He's only doing the children a disservice by being there. Children are not so stupid that they can't pick up on attitudes like that of your friend.

[MrBig]

211. No rights infringed...

I'm not attempting to argue that it is illegal, should be illegal, etc.

What I'm arguing is that that type of discourse isn't productive to improving the situation. We all want there to be a good relationship between police and the public. Attacking all of them generally doesn't help with that.

Generalizing about any affiliation of choice can still be a problem. Aren't religions affiliations of choice?

Generalizing skinheads, whose entire participation is built on racism and other prejudices, is different than making generalizations about a profession. Police officers are democrats, republicans, gay, straight, Christian, Jew, Muslim, white, black, Asian, Arab, etc.

[Starry Messenger]

217. law enforcement has excellent PR.

Look at all the Officer Friendly stuff that goes to schools. Evidently it's not enough to counter the negative stuff that infringes on people's rights and lives. Too fucking bad.

[Xicano]

190. Watch this short video: typical police mentality.

Advance this video to the 2:00min mark.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8612565373098971763

[obliviously]

192. One should never yell theater in a crowded fire!

[Jennicut]

195. I have had good and bad experiences with cops

Some are pricks and some are good, decent people doing a tough job. Crowley acted like a total prick.

[Wolf-Were]

197. Why not you generalize Felons

Get over it

[MrBig]

212. Where have I generalized felons?

[Wolf-Were]

280. All police generalize felons.

[proteus_lives]

198. Anyone who judges an entire group is a hypocrite and not a liberal.

And DU is filled with hypocrites.

DU cop-haters are one of our versions of FR chickenhawks.

[BlooInBloo]

200. Yup. People who generalize by hating nazis, hating rapists, etc. They're all just like freepers.

[proteus_lives]

202. As usual, you fail.

All cops aren't nazis, rapists or your favorite terrorists. I'm willing to admit that there are bad cops just like there are bad doctors, teachers and lawyers. Are you willing to provide any proof for your frequent and unproven claims that all police are bad or you just going to stick to your hatred and insults? (like a freeper.)

[BlooInBloo]

203. hahahah!

[proteus_lives]

205. business as usual with you

:eyes:

I'll say the same thing to you as I would to any other hate-filled person. May your son or daughter marry a member of the group you hate so much.

[Dreamer Tatum]

210. I think the saying goes

"don't waste your time wrestling with a pig...you'll just get dirty, and the pig will enjoy it."

[proteus_lives]

221. You're right.

That's a good saying, I will remember it. :hi:

[Life Long Dem]

213. Yes, use the law and the Constitution to prove who is right.

Or the court of law, or if it's a civil suit as well. :shrug:

[Quantess]

218. Thank you for a sensible, reasonable post, and welcome to DU.

Although I think the arrest of Mr Gates was wrong and stupid, in general, I appreciate the police when they do their jobs properly.

[lexanman]

223. I will add this

Every report that comes out of bad cops, and there are many, is not the whole story. It's the rest of the police department that stand up for the guy. Its called the blue wall, and I say that the entire department is then guilty of supporting a cop who has done bad things. They are guilty of conspiracy and condonement of police misconduct. When you add the number of incidents and add in all of the police departments who cover for their vermin time and time again, then that number most definitely comes close or surpasses 400,000. Serpico wasn't a fictional movie.

When 75% of a police department is shown to be corrupt and involved in criminal activity, it should send a real clear signal about other police departments. It is systemic.

[Greyhound]

224. No, it needs to increase and spread to the point that the status quo can no longer stand.

As has been noted in preceding threads, our police forces have become militarized enforcers of privilege for the parasite class and the instrument of intimidation to maintain the status quo.

If you are truly concerned about relations between the police and the public at large, you need to concentrate your efforts on their behavior and interactions within the communities they are supposed to serve.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

227. I always try to show respect to the police - but I don't trust them

When the Nazis invaded the rest of Europe, the police forces of collaborating governments immediately began to cooperate with the Nazis and turn over "so-called" terrorists. I won't go into the details of it, but members of my family experienced this very thing, on one occasion involving my uncle and a person who had been his childhood friend who turned him over to the Germans because he was a policeman and said he was just doing his duty. My uncle found himself on a boarded-up train heading for Germany. The thing I don't trust about the police is often they have only loyalties to the police force and their superiors, not to the interests of the people. They'll protect and serve the public until the authorities who pay their salaries give them a new duty and tell them to beat up protestors or union workers like they did during the Great Depression, or pay them to turn over their own countrymen and women to an invading power.

In the southern part of the United States, thousands of black people were lynched over the decades, right up to the 1960s. Quite often the local police did nothing and stood by while murder was being perpetrated in the public streets. In many instances, the police themselves were Klansmen and co-conspirators to murder.

In the cases of both police in the south as well as the police departments collaborating with the Nazis during World War II, morality, justice, and human rights aren't always important to them. What matters is duty, orders, and the directives of the authority above them.

We need the police. But in a democratic society, we should never put our full faith in them to always act in the interest of the people and we should never trust them completely.

[KG]

233. police abuse of authority is systemic, not an aberration. as are the attempts to cover up

until this changes, law enforcement will continue to enjoy its low opinion with the citizenry.

[Vidar]

234. My apologies to the 40% of cops that don't deserve to be bashed.

[erasmia]

235. I agree mate

[rucky]

241. This is a matter of public preception.

and Law Enforcement doesn't help themselves by openly defending questionable actions.

They could easily restore their reputations by punishing, instead of defending, blatant wrongdoing by a stray cop.

[merh]

243. I think that you are generalizing

What I have read would be people responding to Crowley's failures and the blue wall that tries to protect him.

Here, see post 228 in your thread and the discussion related to it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6150586&mesg_id=6152508

[L0oniX]

245. I can not even imagine a cop being a Dem and much less a progressive.

[bigwillq]

247. I know several of them.

Way to make broad judgments. :eyes:

Each cop, and each situation, is different. It's an injustice to many cops across the country to lump them all in with Sgt. Crowley, or any other cop that is perceived as being a racist.

[L0oniX]

250. I think you are making a broad judgement about my broad judgement.

:evilgrin:

[bigwillq]

252. That's what I got out of your post.

Unless I am missing the point.

[tj2001]

253. "Democrats = the party of the ACLU; Republicans = the party of cops"

For decades, Democrats have labored under the reputation of being the party of the counterculture. Republicans called Democrats the party of "acid, amnesty, and abortion," while claiming God, patriotism, and law-and-order for themselves. Democrats were the party of the ACLU; Republicans were the party of cops. Democrats were the "mommy party"; Republicans were the "daddy party." Democrats were the party of weakness; Republicans were the party of strength.

http://slate.msn.com/?id=2067821

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I suspect most cops - and most of their apologists - vote Republican.

[Curtland1015]

248. "Hopefully we can have better discourse on the subject than has been seen recently."

Well, that hope died rather quickly, didn't it?

:eyes:

[seabeyond]

251. yes, i did see all posters defending cop with this attitude, no talking just rolling eyes, BUT

mrbig. and yes i did see a lot of people having issues with cops actually talking about it with mrbig.

so i guess there is one side not open to discussion

unless open to discussion for you is...

agree with you

[Robb]

255. K&R. For what it's worth.

God help you here the past few years if you're overweight or a cop.

[whistler162]

263. I have a simple practice when I read a

"All cops are bad...." posting substitue one word or another for cops and you will understand where the bigots come from!

[JohnnyLib2]

273. So sadly true.

:banghead:

[grahamhgreen]

266. There are some great cops! But we live in a police state - that aint no good for either party.

Torture is legal!

The president can order you picked up, rendered to Libya, and tortured for the rest of your life without telling anyone what happened.

It's a police state.

Police don't have more rights than anyone else - but they sometimes act as if they do.

But again, there are some great cops and I know they will keep fighting for an end to the brutality that has become too common place.

Wouldn't want to live without them!

[Flaneur]

276. Generalized police bashing of citizens' heads needs to stop.

And all the other abuses of power that piss people off about cops.

[PatSeg]

278. In my dealings with police,

I have had both extremely positive and extremely negative experiences. A lot has to do with the selection of police officers and the initial and ongoing training provided by any particular police department.

This past year my family has had to involve police in a domestic situation. There were a few careless, indifferent police officers, but the well-trained, competent ones were extremely impressive and probably averted a major disaster. I cannot condone the indifference of those who obviously were unqualified, but I am very grateful for the ones who did their jobs thoroughly and professionally.

[Orsino]

279. Well, the *over-generalized* cop bashing, certainly.

The problems are widespread, but are far beyond the power of any single officers to undo. While I would like to see more whistle-blowing, I think I understand something of the strong bonds among cops good and bad. Most of them face fear and danger regularly, for long hours and for little money. Most of us on the outside are unable to identify with their necessarily tense lifestyle.

I think that some of the worst, most corrupt cops around may still be worthy of our sympathy. I'll forgive a surprising amount of the hyperbole on the subject, but I would always caution people to remember the good police officers out there, doing a tough job under constant stress for little thanks.

[Taverner]

281. Why? The cops always see non cops as the enemy

My dad was a cop

My family has a lot of cops in it

You are either in their circle or outside of it

[Strong Atheist]

285. Belated Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[johnaries]

286. Agreed. Cops are PEOPLE. This is *almost* as bad as racism.

Granted, the difference is that people can choose a career in LE whereas they can't choose the color of their skin. HOWEVER, Law Enforcement is (or at least, is supposed to be) a NOBLE profession.

People who choose to go into LE are, once again, PEOPLE who choose their career for different reasons. Some want to do good. Some just want to "kick ass". But to "broad brush" all Police is - as the OP says - contrary to all Progressive principles.

Yes, there are some "bad" police. Again, they are PEOPLE. Yes, I believe that ALL OF US could do a better job of ensuring we have more "good" police than "bad". And Police-bashing actually HINDERS that effort.

Think of it this way. We want better Police Officers, right? If we constantly paint the profession as "evil", then why would "good" people even apply for the position? And, like it or not, it's hard enough to recruit as it is.

Rather, if we promote the position for what it SHOULD be, and encourage our "best and brightest" to consider the position rather than constantly denigrate the position - hey, maybe we might actually HAVE better Police Officers!

Frankly, the same could be said for Teachers and Educators.

I am not advocating that we stop criticizing "bad" cops. I am only saying that we separate the "good" cops from the "bad" cops and we praise the good ones and demonize the bad ones - rather than demonize ALL, including the good cops.

After all, if a "good" cop has to fight the current long enough and gets no recognition, then he will "turn". The broad-brush "all cops are bad" meme could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Which would be bad, very bad.

[beevul]

287. Well...

Until and unless the police 'police' the police at least as well if not better than they police the general public, why on earth should anyone stop?



Answer that simple question.



Some have said that they serve a higher duty, and while that may be true, they should clearly and without exception be held to a higher standard as well. Thier asses should be under extreme pressure to "get it right" 100 percent of the time, with loss of police career as the consequence for not getting it right. Harsh? Yeah, you bet it is. With power comes responsibility. They wield quite a lot of power, which means they should be held responsible for misusing it. ALL OF THEM. EVERY LAST ONE.

Currently, what we have is the point that THAT is farthest from, with few exceptions.


No they aren't all bad, but I would bet large sums of money, that those who have NEVER lied in the course of duty, hassled people - particularly kids, or abused thier power in some way - AKA clean cops - would be in single digit percentages, perhaps slightly higher.

[defendandprotect]

289. You're demanding that free speech re police enforcement be curtailed?????

50% of the police officers in LA when they assassinated Bobby Kennedy were John Birchers --

50% of the police force in Dallas when they assassianted JFK were KKK --

And it looks like the pattern of hiring officers who will screw the Constitution, act with

sexist and racist overtones, and attack demonstrations are the ones they're hiring!!

Not to mention the ones who are complicit in aiding drug trafficking --

LOL