So, I take it that the police apologists don't want to talk about the real issue...

[Mythsaje]

The "good" police refuse to deal with the "bad" ones in their midst, often turning a blind eye toward behavior that, in any other occupation, would usually result in termination if not criminal charges. When we criticize them as a group for not only ignoring, but tolerating and covering up for bad behavior, we're called "Cop Haters." When we talk about rampant racism, the militarization of police, the inequities of the drug war and it's connection to the prison/industrial complex.

This is SUCH an important topic (not that we don't have several right now) because it's about time we decided what we and will not tolerate from our law enforcement community. Since taking the wrong tack might open us up to the accusation of being "soft on crime" (and you have NO idea how sick I am of the humanity-impaired members of the community always being given the ability to frame the argument) maybe we should, as a group, discuss what we believe to be inside and outside the realm of tolerance.

All steps must be taken to end the systemic racism, the power-tripping, and other behaviors by our armed civil servants that reduce the communication between them and the rest of us. As long as the police see themselves as somehow separate from the public as a whole, and as long as the public feels the same way, the kind of animosity we've seen here is just going to continue.

I'd go so far as to insist that all officers be recorded during any interaction with a citizen in the course of his or her duties. It would protect everyone concerned.

I'd like to know why the pro-police contingent here refuses to discuss these things. I know they're here, given some of the commentary on the police racism threads. You don't like us talking trash about the police? How about you join us in insisting that THEY start separating themselves from the bad seeds among them.

[Robb]

1. For the sake of argument

...Frame the "good cops" as a minority, as many here do. Then frame them as afraid, for their jobs, their safety, their families, an oppressed minority.

Then it's called "putting the onus on the oppressed minority to take action," which is hardly a progressive ideal.

No, it's up to us, I'm afraid. :)

[Kid Dynamite]

10. For the sake of argument, Robb,

are you honestly telling me that blacks and other minorities are not walking targets for Law Enforcement. You seem to fancy yourself "even-handed" on the matter, so riddle me this: do you think cops act even-handedly as a matter of course? And I don't mean "good" cops, or "bad" cops but ALL cops. The problem is systemic so you can't create some fairy tale about rogue cops to cover up the very workings of Law Enforcement.

Any more than a fairy tale about a black President makes the burning issue of race in America disappear.

[H2O Man]

12. Why

pretend that there is anything in his post that comes close to saying what you claim he is "telling you"?

[Kid Dynamite]

14. Fine lets review

start by telling me what the premise of the OP is. Robb comes along and says "oh that mild, apologist premise you've got there is much too harsh and unforgiving"

You can joing Robb in "framing" things however you like, which should go hand-in-glove with the pretending you seem to be fond of

[H2O Man]

16. Once again,

you make shit up, and attempt to apply something -- in quotes -- to someone. At very, very best, that suggests an inability to debate on even a weak level.

[Kid Dynamite]

19. What is the premise of the OP?

[H2O Man]

20. And again,

you resort to trying to create a distraction. Our little conversation has to do with Robb's response to the OP, and your being untruthful about what Robb said. Neither of your dishonest attempts to put words in Robb's mouth has the slightest to do with the OP. It is only about what Robb wrote, and your responses.

[Kid Dynamite]

23. WE are not having a conversation

if you want to spring to the defense of Law Enforcement, do so on some other subthread or start your own OP

[H2O Man]

25. Sure, we are.

I was hoping that you wouldn't disappear. Yet, anyhow.

But conversing, we are. You need only to look at the sequence of posts, and you will easily be able to see that we are having a conversation. Admittedly, you are not intent on following it through. That's okay. Don't blame you a bit.

And thanks for the suggestions on what and where I can post here on DU. I really appreciate it! Thanks for the giggle!

[Kid Dynamite]

26. You want to pretend Robb didn't say what he said

Further, you are insert yourself into the discussion to try and mount a backdoor defense of Law Enforcement and the entrenched racism that it stands for and represents.

I'm not interested in "conversing" on either point and, just as importantly, neither are you

[H2O Man]

28. Sure, we are.

By definition, we are conversing. Ha!

And I was -- and am -- simply pointing out that you have not been either honest or accurate in your description of what Brother Robb actually said. You just keep making things up, and then squirming when you are being called on it.

Further, anyone here can see that your foolishness about "backdoor defense of Law Enforcement" is little more than nonsense. I hadn't mentioned law enforcement, at all. I simply pointed out where you were being less than honest. It is interesting to note your choice of words to capitalize, however. Funny, that. But you are funny, too.

[Kid Dynamite]

29. Enlighten me as to how I have mistaken his remarks

"Brother" Robb eh?

[H2O Man]

30. Sure.

First, though, you haven't "mistaken" his remarks. You are making shit up, and attempting to apply it to him. That's not a "mistake" -- you are doing it on purpose. Read his post, then read your own that follow. For example, when you make something up, and put it in quotes, pretending he said it, that would be where you have been dishonest.

[Kid Dynamite]

35. His words are there for all to read

why would I have to quote what he said?

I will take you at your word that I have not mistaken his remarks..the rest, I leave with you

[H2O Man]

41. Your pants

are on fire.

[mkultra]

55. i read his and yours and i agree that you leaped away from his point

You almost seemed to pull a sarah palin on him. Im suprised you didn't mention your maverickiness.

[H2O Man]

57. One of the

many funny things is that I am probably in about as good a position as anyone on DU to discuss a number of the more important individual and systematic cases of police (and court) corruption. Add to that, that I've been putting together some research for an associate on those very topics, in recent weeks.

As always, I am confident that those who are familiar with me on this forum fully understand and appreciate that. And I'm not concerned about the others, including our maverick friend here.

[Jazzgirl]

66. From where I sit, disappearance won't be long in coming.

n/t

[SharonAnn]

15. Also, on group that wants to "police themselves" should be suspected of wrong-doing.

I haven't yet seen any group that "policed themselves" take strong enough action to get the bad guys out of their professions.

Doctors, Teachers, Law Enforcement Officers, Psychologists, Clergy, etc.

Edited: Forgot clergy.

[Mythsaje]

82. For the sake of argument, you're saying you believe that criminals

run our country's police agencies and the actual law enforcement officers, the ones actually entitled to refer to themselves as such, are living in fear of reprisal should they actually do their job with regard to their own co-workers?

Ouch. I wouldn't have gone there at all. That paints a terrifying picture, I'd say.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

2. What bad cop have people been apologizing for?

[Fumesucker]

5. All you really have to do is show us the cops who are whistle blowers..

We all know that there are bad cops out there, cops are as human as anyone else and there will be both good and bad ones.

But cops blowing the whistle on other cops for acting beyond their authority is apparently a very rare occurrence, it's so rare as to be quite remarkable when it happens.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

7. I think you responded to the wrong post.

[Mz Pip]

3. This is not limited to police

Maybe there is some desire to protect one's own but I've seen this in other professions as well. Teachers protecting bad teachers, doctors protecting bad doctors, lawyers protecting bad lawyers, politicians protecting bad politicians. Business people protecting bad business practices.

Some of it is probably based on fear of being ostracized by your peers, of being labeled a 'snitch.'

Is it right? No. But I don't really see it changing.

[Fumesucker]

6. But police are unique in having vast powers over ordinary citizens..

The power of life and death actually.

And they are also sworn to uphold the law, laws which many cops break on a routine basis.

[Mz Pip]

9. Some of it is probably fear of retaliation

The Riders case in Oakland a few years back is a prime example.

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/settlements/09696/riders-scandal.html

[Obamanaut]

18. No, police are not unique. Look to Washington DC. Even here

on DU there was a list of congresspeople who, posters said, should be expelled. They have all been reelected at least once, mostly more than that. They will be reelected again.

They enact legislation that robs us blind. They provide funding that enables our relatives to be killed, along with thousands of probably innocent civilians we've never met. They tell us we need health care reform because so many don't have health services of any sort - while they themselves have some of the finest in the land. They vote themselves payraises every year, despite dire economic times. In spite of this, they know we will reelect them, so they don't care.

If I had to choose between a politician from DC or a policeman anywhere to do anything at all with, it would NOT be the politician.

[Fumesucker]

37. A politician in general cannot pull out a gun and shoot you dead with impunity..

Cops do that routinely.

[Obamanaut]

45. That is ridiculous! Cops do not routinely shoot people.

Posters here do routinely attribute 22,000 U.S. deaths annually on a lack of adequate health care, the blame for which they also put at the feet of congress.

Cops did not allow thousands of American servicemen and servicewomen to go to Iraq and/or several countries ending in -stan, but congress did, and they continue to provide funding for this.

Congress has ensured future generations will be paying off massive debts for these -stan wars and bailouts.

In the midst of financial crisis where people are losing jobs and homes, Congress allowed passage of a fine pay raise for themselves, and attached a similar raise for federal judges to the auto bailout bill.

Because of the -stan and Iraq wars, thousands of American service people, and even more of the local residents have died or become maimed and disfigured. Cops had nothing to do with that - it was all Congress.

But we’ll vote in 2010 and keep most of them where they are, all the while beating our breasts and gnashing our teeth because a black educator was arrested by a white cop - and we‘ll use this as fodder to keep alive the mistaken belief that ‘all cops are bad.’

We are so screwn.

[Fumesucker]

49. Eh, I'm a white male Southerner, older than Gates..

And I've learned the hard way that you cannot trust the cops. I've had cops go above and beyond the call of duty for me and mine but I've also had them horrendously abuse their authority.

As well as all the other things you mention "the Land of the Free" has the highest incarceration rate in the world, bar absolutely none. If that is not an indication of an out of control police force I can't think of what might be such an indication.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

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

[Fumesucker]

63. You really think the police have no input into what laws are passed?

I find it hard to believe you are that naive..

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[Jazzgirl]

67. Can you say lobbyists?

n/t

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

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

[Obamanaut]

56. I too am a white male southerner, also older than Gates. May I

respectfully point out that a high incarceration rate is not quite the same as shooting people routinely with impunity.

Some judges are appointed, others are elected. Might I also point out that not a single, solitary police officer has put a single, solitary person in prison. I think you'll find there is a judge between the arrest phase and the incarceration phase. Sometimes there might even be some lawyers and a jury. If you insist on giving the pie of injustice to the police, share a slice or two with the others involved.

On ballots for judges, when it asks if I want to keep him/her, I always select no.

On the general ballot, if the incumbent is on the ballot, I make every effort to vote for another other person, especially in the primaries. (Except for Nader)

My experience with the police has been different than yours. Every single instance I've been met with professionalism and courtesy. I'm 66 BTW.

[Fumesucker]

64. I hope you are not naive enough to think that the police have no input into what laws are passed..

Police routinely lobby for harsher laws in order to increase their power, but I think you knew that.

And experiences differ, I tried not to be one sided by stating that I have had officers go above and beyond their call of duty on my behalf.

I have even had a family member that was a high ranking police officer although he is now deceased.

[Obamanaut]

73. Congress people come home for the holidays, and have town hall

meetings, and people tell them what they want to see in their district. That is lobbying.

Constituents go to DC and meet with their senator and/or representative and ask for things. That is lobbying.

Sometimes they get what they want, other times not. Police organizations lobby, and sometimes get what they want, other times not.

MADD moms lobby, teachers lobby, everyone who wants something is a lobbyist. UAW lobbies, and people say UAW does wonderful things, but they are lobbyists, and other people say lobbyists are bad.

The weasels in this mixture are the ones who are receiving the favors from the lobbyists with the most money or gratuities in whatever form. If the weasels are accepting anything from any of them - and some do - they should be rooted out and replaced.

I see we've changed from routinely shooting people with impunity to routinely lobbying. Is the routine shooting claim too hard to justify?

[nolabels]

99. I believe you to be correct

People never establish things or make objects with no intent on using them. Judges will find people guilty just for the simple reason that it perpetuates their line of work. Cops having the mindset 'it's us against them' comes naturally when they have to carry a guns to perform their job. The problem of tradition and of it being scary to try things unknown will almost always stand in our way, and this especially true as we get older.

The only thing that keeps us away from the complete slide into a police state is that a large enough percentage of lawyers still have logic on their side (be scared if that ever disappears :scared:)

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

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

[Th1onein]

76. They do it OFTEN enough for it to become commonplace in the news.

Is that enough for ya?

I am from the Houston area. I remember about ten or fifteen years ago they shot a handcuffed fifteen year old kid, high on marijuana, in the back five times. FIVE times! And he was handcuffed, face down on the floor! These PUBLIC SERVANTS have the ability to do great harm and great injustice to the very people they are supposed to be serving. It is no wonder people have had enough of it. Before, it was hushed/covered up, but now we have the internet and the shit goes viral.

[bobbolink]

31. My goodness..... seems to me that DOCTORS have MUCH POWEr over our lives....

and our deaths.

[Fumesucker]

36. True enough, but it is a little different..

Doctors are not charged with telling everyone what to do and how to act.

In general, if you don't want to see a doctor you will not be forced to do so.

[bobbolink]

38. ALL the examples are a little different.

"In general, if you don't want to see a doctor you will not be forced to do so."

Where have we heard this sort of sentiment before?

[Fumesucker]

50. What sentiment are we speaking of here?

I don't have insurance myself and am old enough (older than Gates) where I really could use health care. I also live in a section of the country where my getting to see a doctor without insurance or cash I don't have is exceedingly unlikely.

[bobbolink]

54. You've gone in a circle back to what I originally said... that others, including DOCTORS

have control over our lives.

That seems quite obvious to me, but you chose to argue with it.

If you're in need of health care now, as you get older you will probably argue less with what I said.

There are a lot of very important issues here to discuss, ad I don't understand why it seemed important to you to pick apart what I said.

So, ta-ta now, and I hope you are able to get to a doctor before it's really crucial.

[Fumesucker]

58. They don't have the direct, hands on, level of control that cops have..

And if I get truly ill I expect to die, it's as simple as that.

You were the one that started picking apart my statement first, I'm only replying in kind.

[bobbolink]

60. "They don't have direct, hands on level of control"...WOW, consider an operating room, one time.

:crazy:

THE POINT: there are many people with control over our lives, who constantly defend their unethical colleagues.

[Fumesucker]

61. But they don't *force* you into the operating room at gunpoint..

Which was my point..

[bobbolink]

65. Oh, you're right..... don't need no stinkin' health care.

:crazy:

For the last damned time.... there are MANY PROFESSIONS that protect the unethical and even illegal among them.

Say goodnight, Fumesucker.....

[Mythsaje]

83. As far as I know, doctors have never kicked our doors in for the chance

to commit healthcare on us.

[Mythsaje]

87. Hi jack!

We're not talking about doctors, we're talking about cops... You know, the ones that roam our cities armed and enforce our laws through main threat of deadly force? I can't think of the last time I was stopped by a doctor for failure to get a physical.

[SharonAnn]

13. Absolutely! And bad doctors can kill people, or disable them for life.

[Mythsaje]

84. Which is why we require them to be heavily insured...n/t

[Flaneur]

4. Yes. Let's pretend we don't have an institutional problem with policing.

Everything's hunky-dory, just a few bad apples, never mind that heavily armed, masked, armor-wearing goon in the corner.

[Kid Dynamite]

8. I am very disappointed in the OPs lack of

clarity on this point.

Racial profiling, as just ONE example, is hardly dependent on any good cop/bad cop disparity. It is simply an understood part of the job. Those who disagree? Fine, explain to me the US prison population in any other way.

[Mythsaje]

85. I consider racist cops to be "bad" cops...

Same with bullies. Technically it's usually meant to indicate corrupt cops, but I think racism and bullying are "bad" behaviors in a "peace officer."

And I believe standing in support (or at least not opposing) a systemic racist problem in any police organization is also "bad" behavior in and of itself.

[imdjh]

21. You mean the one who is going to answer your call for help when you dial 911?

[Mythsaje]

86. I'd better need a fucking LOT of help if I call 911 for the police...

Because unless I have a reason to believe my life or someone else's life is in immediate danger, I'm not about to do it at all. And I'll seriously consider if there are any gray areas involved, because I don't want to call the cops to protect my neighbor from someone else and have him shot because HE'S the black guy.

[imdjh]

11. It sounds like you are asking for universal agreement on several issues.

The "good" police refuse to deal with the "bad" ones in their midst, often turning a blind eye toward behavior that, in any other occupation, would usually result in termination if not criminal charges. When we criticize them as a group for not only ignoring, but tolerating and covering up for bad behavior, we're called "Cop Haters." When we talk about rampant racism, the militarization of police, the inequities of the drug war and it's connection to the prison/industrial complex.

The police forces of many (perhaps most) cities are at or above national racial percentages, equal to regional percentages, and equal to or less than municipal percentages. Washington DC city police force is 66% black. That's six times national representation, double regional representation, and exceeds municipal representation. So for your universal declaration to be true, then you would be saying that a black majority, black supervised police force is racist. Am I wrong here? Los Angeles Sheriff's Department is below national representation and equal to regional and municipal representation.

All steps must be taken to end the systemic racism, the power-tripping, and other behaviors by our armed civil servants that reduce the communication between them and the rest of us.

These are all legitimate goals which are realized through individual choices on the part of officers. We can reasonably demand and expect these things.


As long as the police see themselves as somehow separate from the public as a whole, and as long as the public feels the same way, the kind of animosity we've seen here is just going to continue.

They are. Take away the drug war and see how much of that public animosity goes away. The animosity is largely generated by the feeling that the police will enforce a law which we consider to be unfair. That's not for the police to decide. If a policeman is given an illegal order, it's his duty to disobey. The drug laws aren't illegal, they're just outdated.

I'd go so far as to insist that all officers be recorded during any interaction with a citizen in the course of his or her duties. It would protect everyone concerned.

The dash cam is a terrific idea and could probably be expanded to include a side cam and rear cam. Eventually, the officers will probably have cameras in that thing on their shoulder.

I'd like to know why the pro-police contingent here refuses to discuss these things. I know they're here, given some of the commentary on the police racism threads. You don't like us talking trash about the police? How about you join us in insisting that THEY start separating themselves from the bad seeds among them.

Are you accusing the black officer at Gates' house of standing by and doing nothing while something racist was happening? If you are, then is he off the hook or is he one of the cops you are demanding separate the wheat from the chaff?

I am not particularly pro-police. I do like a good argument, especially when there are facets. But I think I take a fairly objective approach to things. I read all of the articles which came along, read Gates' version and Crowley's version and only made my points with points of agreement. Meanwhile, a few folks here were just fucking flying off the wall with stuff that they were imagining, reading between the lines, or perhaps they simply hadn't read the articles.

[hfojvt]

22. Well done. Good points.

You should have a journal.

[Mythsaje]

89. They DO have the choice in what laws to enforce

by their choice of profession in the first place. If enforcing (as you say) "outdated" laws in a way that puts you at odds with a sizeable minority of the citizens of the country sounds like it would suit you, become a cop. If you like to be armed and know your very presence tends to intimidate, by all means, don that badge and gun.

I was told by one of the police lovers here that I was "too much of a coward" to be a cop. Hell of a thing to say about someone you've never met, via an anonymous internet screen name. Calling a man a coward to his face has nearly always been a direct challenge to prove otherwise. Hard to do in these circumstances, isn't it?

As a matter of fact, even though I probably WOULD have made a good cop, I have too much personal integrity to choose to take a job enforcing laws I don't believe in and never will.

And let's not pretend that the police as a group have no say in the drug war, since nearly all of them will support it all the way to the end even though it's clearly accomplishing none of its claimed goals and, in fact, never has. Many will say this is the case because the cops get something tangible out of the drug war in terms of budget, personal honor and promotion, and the ability to throw their weight around any time it's convenient.

And as far as African-American run and operated jurisdictions--what's the arrest rate percentages look like? Do they arrest as many more people of color, percentage wise, as any nearby white-run jurisdictions? If so, maybe that says something else about the whole situation we should talk about. If a black cop assumes the black guy on the corner is dealing drugs, is that different than the white cop assuming the same thing?

[imdjh]

97. You could say that about almost any job, but it wouldn't be the reality.

Police are charged as an institution to enforce laws fairly. You and I might disagree with the drug laws, but the police don't really have the choice to not enforce them when they are specifically directed to enforce them. They might have some discretion in a given situation, but they don't have the discretion to not enforce the laws at all. And they have to be careful with the discretion that it doesn't take the form of enforcing the law against one group of people and not others.

And as far as African-American run and operated jurisdictions--what's the arrest rate percentages look like?

I would imagine pretty much like anywhere else.

Do they arrest as many more people of color, percentage wise, as any nearby white-run jurisdictions? If so, maybe that says something else about the whole situation we should talk about. If a black cop assumes the black guy on the corner is dealing drugs, is that different than the white cop assuming the same thing?

Arrest demographics aren't going to conform to population demographics where there are dynamic differences in play. Where there are no dynamic differences, then you would expect the arrest rates to be more in line with population demographics.

Let's use DC and prostitution. For our argument, let's say that DC is 50% black and 50% white. Even if the prostitutes of DC are exactly conforming to population demographics, then you would expect more black prostitutes to be arrested than white ones based on one easily observed dynamic difference: black prostitutes are more likely to be working the street whereas white prostitutes are more likely to be working the internet, call services, and hotel bars. The street prostitution generates cars circling the block and looping through residential areas, peripheral crime of pimps, predators on the prostitutes, sex in cars and public places and other things which generate a public demand that the police take action. The out-of-sight prostitution is more out of sight and isn't as likely to generate public demand that the police take action. So in this scenario, would a disproportionate arrest rate be a cause to accuse the majority black police force of Washington DC of conforming to an allegedly racist police culture? Or is the difference in dynamics sufficient explanation for what in simple percentages appears to be something else?

[RaleighNCDUer]

17. Not 'any other profession'.

I think they learned it from the medical community.

OTOH, it could be that doctors learned it from cops.

[cleveramerican]

24. The cops are not the enemy

If one rings you doorbell,or shows up on your doorstep,don't get angry, talk to him.
The assumption that cops bring trouble is pervasive and highly destructive.

[Kid Dynamite]

27. The assumption that cops bring trouble is pervasive and highly..

true

[ColbertWatcher]

34. Bad cops are the enemy.

And so are the good ones who look the other way as the bad ones keep pulling their shit.

[seabeyond]

40. a poster made a point saying he assumes all cops are bad. (to protect self). cops

assume all civilians are criminals (to protect themself).

so we have an environment where one assumes the cop is bad and cop assumes we are criminal.

how well do you think this will work

[Fumesucker]

51. It doesn't work worth a damn..

But we have to deal with the system we have, not the system we would wish to have.

"The Land of the Free" has the highest incarceration rate in the world, if that isn't a valid reason to be wary of cops I'm damned if I know what might be such a reason.

[seabeyond]

53. of course it doesnt work. told one cop after terrifying my kids and saying she was protecting

tec agent from me... in front of kids, treat us all like animals and that is what we all may become.

but for the cop defenders and cops to act like there is not a reason we are where we are makes absolutely no sense to me either

i asked a poster, are they really suggesting as a parent i not teach my two boys to be weary of cops???? i think not. i think that would be an irresponsible adn bad parent

[ColbertWatcher]

32. I think the big issue is ...

... how easily some people would give up other's rights for the illusion of security.

[Spazito]

39. Well said! n/t

[seabeyond]

43. yes. sucha huge... yes. n/t

[Karenina]

33. BINGO!

[Ohio Joe]

42. Well...

"The "good" police refuse to deal with the "bad" ones in their midst, often turning a blind eye toward behavior that, in any other occupation, would usually result in termination if not criminal charges. When we criticize them as a group for not only ignoring, but tolerating and covering up for bad behavior, we're called "Cop Haters." When we talk about rampant racism, the militarization of police, the inequities of the drug war and it's connection to the prison/industrial complex."

If you blame the police for:

1 - Rampant racism - Yes, you are a police hater. The police do not make the laws, they enforce them. Yes, there are racists that are police, racism is a huge issue that is not simply a police issue. The real issue with race in regards to crime is the conviction and incarceration rate and that is not a police issue, it is a judicial and prison issue.

2 - The militarization of the police - Again, you blame the police for something that is not their fault. The reasons police have become more heavily armed has to do with the drug war, not something the police decided to do, something politicians decided to do, blame them.

3 - The inequities of the drug war - Again, you blame the wrong people, blame the politicians that make the laws.

4 - Prison/industrial complex - Still you blame the wrong people. The police are not responsible for this, politicians are, blame the right people.

Blaming the police for things that are not their issue makes you a cop hater. Try pointing your anger in the right direction.

"This is SUCH an important topic (not that we don't have several right now) because it's about time we decided what we and will not tolerate from our law enforcement community. Since taking the wrong tack might open us up to the accusation of being "soft on crime" (and you have NO idea how sick I am of the humanity-impaired members of the community always being given the ability to frame the argument) maybe we should, as a group, discuss what we believe to be inside and outside the realm of tolerance."

I completely agree but it is the laws that need to change so again, point your anger at the right people.

"All steps must be taken to end the systemic racism, the power-tripping, and other behaviors by our armed civil servants that reduce the communication between them and the rest of us. As long as the police see themselves as somehow separate from the public as a whole, and as long as the public feels the same way, the kind of animosity we've seen here is just going to continue."

It is a difficult issue. Police have the job where every situation they get involved in is adversarial. Every. Last. One. Why? Because they never know if the guy they pulled over for speeding is going to pull a gun on them and kill them. Because if they are called to a domestic dispute they do not know if a gun is going to be pulled and they are going to be killed. Every single encounter is an opportunity for the cop to be killed. Not in a theoretical kind of way, in a very real way. The very way you frame this is adversarial, "them and the rest of us". Gee, I wonder where the animosity will end... probably when all of us decide to treat each other with some respect. It is not a one way street, yes, police need to be able to be more relaxed, yes, people need to not have a fixed idea in their head that the police are the enemy.

"I'd go so far as to insist that all officers be recorded during any interaction with a citizen in the course of his or her duties. It would protect everyone concerned."

I agree completely with this.

"I'd like to know why the pro-police contingent here refuses to discuss these things. I know they're here, given some of the commentary on the police racism threads. You don't like us talking trash about the police? How about you join us in insisting that THEY start separating themselves from the bad seeds among them."

The issue is not really the police, the issue is the laws they have to work under. There are thousands of interactions with the police every day in this country and relatively few incidents considering what they are up against. We have way to many guns and way to many people willing to pull them out and use them. We have a drug war that is stupid and senseless. We have a prison complex for profit. All of this combines to create a scenario in which the police are out manned and out gunned and forced to take their lives in their hands on every call. Add to that a public that is fed up with all of it and blaming them instead of the laws and the politicians that created them and you have a group of people that.. yes, are willing to protect their own because they are constantly under fire... both fugitively and literally.

You are pissed off at the symptom, I don't blame you, I am as well. You are also, blaming the symptom and not the cause.

Edit to add - I did rec this thread.

[stranger81]

46. If you really believe police unions don't heavily support draconian drug laws,

increased militarization of police departments and incarceration of even minor offenders in the prison-industrial complex, then you haven't been paying attention. These phenomena are part of our society now largely because of the part police played in bringing them about.

[Ohio Joe]

47. Wrong

This is not something the police started, it all goes back to the war on drugs. This is not something the police came up with, it is something that politicians came up with. It started an escalation that has not yet ended. That the police want more fire power is a symptom, not a cause. End the cause and the symptom will go away.

[Mythsaje]

78. They openly SUPPORT the war on drugs...

Which cancels THAT argument. They bear some responsibility for the drug war because people look upon them as "experts" in the field and thus assume that their input is more valid than say, Joe Blogger.

[Ohio Joe]

90. And that means jack shit

First, I would like a link to support that claim. Next, the fact remains that they did create the laws that started the drug war, politicians did and you are still blaming the police for the existence of the laws they have to uphold. Get the laws changed and if they support it or not becomes meaningless. Your dead fucking wrong and putting blame where it does not belong, fix the cause of the problem and the symptoms go away, try and fix only the symptoms and nothing will get solved.

[Mythsaje]

91. LOL... "dead fucking wrong?"

I don't think so.

And find your own fucking link.

Try DARE for starters.

It's not my fault cops don't have ethics enough to refrain from taking a job enforcing clearly racist drug laws. They have a choice. Be something OTHER than a cop. Unless they believe in the shit, and then they're just delusional. This is only one facet of a much larger problem.

The PROBLEM is that too many cops are fuckheads and the rest of them would prefer to ignore this fact than actually stand up to them. They're either collusive, or chickenshit. Take your pick.

[Ohio Joe]

92. Yes, your dead fucking wrong

Usually it is the burden of those making claims to provide a link. DARE does not support your claim, DARE is a program to challenge kids to not do drugs, it is not something to support that all cops support the drug war. Try again... or at least try at all.

"It's not my fault cops don't have ethics enough to refrain from taking a job enforcing clearly racist drug laws. They have a choice. Be something OTHER than a cop. Unless they believe in the shit, and then they're just delusional. This is only one facet of a much larger problem."

Now you are claiming that the drug laws themselves are racist? Not only that but if someone wants to be a cop they automatically support the war on drugs? Simply stupid. Not only that but STILL not an issue caused by the cops but by the people that pass laws.

"The PROBLEM is that too many cops are fuckheads and the rest of them would prefer to ignore this fact than actually stand up to them. They're either collusive, or chickenshit. Take your pick."

Again, provide anything to back up this claim. As I said previously (yet you ignored along with my debunking of the rest of your claims) there are thousands of interactions with the police every day and very few incidents. Incidents that do happen are news and everyone hears about it, nothing is said of the bulk of the interactions that are perfectly fine.

You are willfully ignoring the real cause of the problem in your hatred of cops, I don't know why but it is not helpful. You are a popular poster here and I am no one but... Take a step back and look at the problem, not the symptom. I share your anger, I am simply focusing it where it belongs and not at some easy target that when hit will not kill the problem, just create new ones. It is the laws and the politicians we elect that need to be changed... The police will have no choice but to change in response. Trying to change the police without changing the laws is futile.

[Mythsaje]

93. Oh, please.

The drug laws ARE racist. They're racist in inception and implementation, and always have been. The fact that there's a DUer who doesn't know that blows my mind.

The politicans aren't out there on the street pushing people around. They're not busting heads or tasering 6 year olds. And I don't give a FUCK what link you want me to dig out for you. DARE is a pile of shit program in which COPS lie to children regarding the effects of drugs and make it more likely that they'll go out and do them when they actually realize that they WERE lied to. I've seen THIS effect first hand. Where the fuck have you been that you don't know this shit already?

I've already said I don't hate all cops. I hate the bad ones, and I hold their ineffective and apparently cowardly (or complicit) compatriots in disdain for their inability or disinterest in getting them off the street where they can't harass or bully decent citizens. If you think that translates to I hate all cops, I can't do anything for your reading comprehension.

[Ohio Joe]

95. "I've already said I don't hate all cops. I hate the bad ones"

"The PROBLEM is that too many cops are fuckheads and the rest of them would prefer to ignore this fact than actually stand up to them. They're either collusive, or chickenshit."

Want to tell me what part I am not understanding? "too many"... "the rest". With that one sentence you made it very clear how you feel about all cops. You are talking out both sides of your mouth, the problem is not my ability to comprehend rather your ability to communicate.

You know... The very title of your OP is a farce, you have demonstrated that it is you that has no desire to talk about the REAL issues. You just want to make wild ass assertions, offer nothing to back them up (even worse, you want me to find the proof of your claim for you) and declare you are correct so you can feel justified in your hatred. Well bullshit. You go ahead and keep trying to treat a problem by addressing a symptom and not the cause, good luck with that. If you ever decide you would like to talk about the real issues, let me know.

[Mythsaje]

98. You keep saying it's a "symptom"

but the primary issue is police misconduct, NOT the drug war, which simply makes the problem worse. You keep trying to sidetrack the argument and get angry when I refuse to engage.

[Ohio Joe]

101. Well... at least you are finally saying something honest

You are avoiding the real issues. But... you go on and keep trying to fix the symptom instead of addressing the laws that are causing the problem. oh right... those just make the cops worse, they all suck anyway. You again show how dishonest your OP was, you had no intention of discussing the real issues, you simply wanted an excuse to bash all cops.

[Mythsaje]

103. Here we go again...

The problem is that a lack of serious consequences for bad behavior makes the occupation more likely to attract sociopaths and other anti-social types. The drug war, as it stands, makes that bad behavior even MORE systemic because it allows otherwise reasonable people to justify things that cannot, in the end, be justified.

It is YOU who's not discussing the real issues, especially considering you haven't ONCE done anything in this thread except bitch that it's not fair we're blaming the police for the drug war. The drug war is PART (a large part, admittedly) of the problem. It is not the source of the problem, but a big component of what's making the problem worse... the attitude that WE, the citizens, are the enemy.

[Ohio Joe]

106. Complete nonsense

"The problem is that a lack of serious consequences for bad behavior makes the occupation more likely to attract sociopaths and other anti-social types."

I would ask for something to back up this bullshit but I already know you are in the habit of not doing so.

"The drug war, as it stands, makes that bad behavior even MORE systemic because it allows otherwise reasonable people to justify things that cannot, in the end, be justified."

Yes, the drug war is a problem, I've said that since my first post. End the drug war and the problem gets fixed. Blame the police for the drug war and nothing gets fixed.

"It is YOU who's not discussing the real issues, especially considering you haven't ONCE done anything in this thread except bitch that it's not fair we're blaming the police for the drug war. The drug war is PART (a large part, admittedly) of the problem. It is not the source of the problem, but a big component of what's making the problem worse... the attitude that WE, the citizens, are the enemy."

First. Go back and read my first post in this thread... Done? I gave you a measured point by point response to your OP, it is you that decided to focus on the drug war, it is you that have ignored the rest of my response. I have never said it is not "fair" to blame the police for it, I have said it is incorrect.. and it is. They did not create the drug war and if the laws were repealed they would have no choice but stop arresting people for drugs.

And... after five posts in one thread YOU are going to say I'M bitching? oh, thats rich coming from the same one that did how may OP's bitching and crying about unrec? Big fucking honking balls you got. Especially since I'm not actually bitching but trying to get you to see past your hatred to the real problem. oh you are too funny

I'm done with your nonsense, you just really can't be taken seriously. You have a bone up your ass about cops and it goes so far it is blinding you to finding solutions to the problem. Enjoy and good luck! You'll need it.

[Mythsaje]

108. You've been arguing in circles this whole time...

It's obvious you have only one purpose here--to defend the indefensible.

[Flaneur]

100. The police are deeply complicit in the drug war.

And yes, law enforcement was involved from very early on. In fact, it was head narc Harry Anslinger who pushed for the criminalization of marijuana with lying propaganda campaigns. Need a link? Try Google.

If cops don't support the drug war, why is that they are always opposing any reforms? Why is it whenever there's a medical marijuana bill or initiative, we see a bunch of cops explaining why it's a bad idea? Ditto for decriminalization. Look at Massachusetts. Who opposed decrim there? Cops and prosecutors. They lost, but they're still fighting a rearguard action.

Police benefit from maintaining drug prohibition. They benefit directly from asset forfeiture, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year. They benefit budgetarily: "Drug use is up; we need more help" or "Drug use is down; we need more help."

The California prison guards union and narc association are some of the biggest obstacles to prison reform there.

Police have a vested interest in prohibition. It is disingenous to argue otherwise.

[Mythsaje]

104. I know... this argument is ridiculous.

"Link, please," indeed. Anyone who pays any attention at all to the situation should already have this information... and anyone who doesn't can find such with very little effort whatsoever. Google, indeed.

[HOLOS]

44. yes!

[Karenina]

48. Rack 'em up!

[Rex]

59. I think there will always be cops that abuse their power no matter what race.

I doubt anything will ever change. Humans don't have the ability.

[EFerrari]

62. I think you're right. And that's all the more reason why instead of glorifying cops

and the dysfunctional cop culture that exists in this country, we talk about the issues.

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

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

[EFerrari]

72. You know, Crowley arrested the most pre-eminent black scholar in America

on the flabby charge of disorderly conduct when the man was not armed, not violent and not inciting violence. A guy that has zero history of being out of control or even making scenes?

If this guy is a good cop, and he may well be, then what does it tell us that this is even fucking possible in America?

We have a huge problem here if a top cop winds up arresting a top authority on race relations, don't we?

I don't have a solution. But I've long thought that glorifying cops is just another way to neglect them. In other words, if you think someone is a super hero, you don't worry about them getting what they need, do you? How much down time, how much training, how much anything. That's a big problem in my book.

If this were up to me, that's what I would go for. Instead of vilifying cops, if I were president of the world, I'd do an assessment of what cops in this country are not getting. Because being a cop means you have a target on your back whenever you're on the street. And no human being can cope with that without a lot of support. Cop culture tries to put that support there. But, if it doesn't involve the whole community, the result is an insular, bunker mentality and that's not very helpful finally.

On the race side, people just need to keep piping up. Because racism depends on acceptance. No acceptance, racism can't thrive.

I don't even pretend to be objective because I love Skip Gate's work. I love the projects he creates, everything about him. So, there's no way I can be objective about this.

But if HE can be arrested in this way by someone who may be a good cop, we'd be idiots not to understand we have a problem and bigger idiots not to do anything about it.

[Mythsaje]

79. Or try, anyway... n/t

[stray cat]

74. Real issues like the "fuck police" posts on DU? - yea those are productive.

like "fuck teachers" posts because you had a jerk for a teacher once or "fuck ..insert any group"

[Mythsaje]

80. Well, that has nothing to do with any of the points of my commentary

but thanks for playing.

[BlooInBloo]

75. How can you even talk about this??? There's a little old black man in his home being tumultuous

somewhere! Arrest HIM!!!!

[Mythsaje]

81. He might even be being "uppity..." I mean, really... n/t

[opihimoimoi]

77. 1 in 30 is a serial BULLY.....could it be this is a factor? jus askin....

There are BULLY COPS everywhere...often giving their profession a bad name...Super Cops we used to call them...they had the most tickets given out...etc...that shit...

they often get promoted to high levels...I had them in my working years...I should know...

classic sign

NO EMPATHY

[nadinbrzezinski]

88. It depends on the department

some departments, yep, and it starts at the top... LAPD comes to mind.

Others have a very strong internal affairs division, and a very low tolerance for bullshit from officers.

So I'd say, really depends on the department, and one solution would be standards, at least regional ones, oh wait, Cali has them, but LAPD is self insured and will not play.

[Mythsaje]

94. Oh, man... I can't believe how badly I wish I could see the deleted messages

on this one. Usually I don't care, but I'm seriously curious what someone could have said to get themselves wiped THAT clean.

[TexasObserver]

96. "insist that all officers be recorded during any interaction with a citizen"

I agree with that proposal.

It protects the police officer from untrue claims as well as citizens. The officer could have a recorder he must engage as soon as he gets out of his car or approaches a person in the course of his or her duties.

It protects the public by requiring the police officer to record and therefore manage his own speech. Far too often, the lack of any consequences encourages police to be bullies during encounters with citizens.

[redqueen]

102. Wiley Willis just turned the camera off...

beat the hell out of a woman, and walked away scot-free.

edit: He did lose his job, but he was not prosecuted.

[Mythsaje]

105. That should be a "obstruction" charge, automatically.

It might not be a big deal, but it's not "scot-free."

[seabeyond]

107. lie lie lie lie lie...... n/t