I’m sure it happens but I’ve never seen one or been involved. But I don’t believe it’s a wide spread problem.
“Americans should reasonably expect to be shot dead by police for possessing guns in their homes.”
- Thread starter SPM
- Start date
- Replies 114
- Views 5,542
I’m sure it happens but I’ve never seen one or been involved. But I don’t believe it’s a wide spread problem.
Nope..... just the power they wield coupled with the refusal to accept culpability when that power is abused. That's the "all bad" part.
Plenty of data out there that shows otherwise good people will abuse others if an authority directs them to do so (https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html), even when it was clear the order violates their conscience.
I cannot help that in an era when everything is getting recorded the rose-colored version of reality you want to exist simply does not.
Conversely, I maybe know 2 in the military and none in civilian life fired or disciplined for even accusations. Which unless every woman is lying (which is unlikely), that's still significantly higher than the rest of the population.
Further, while I fully agree that vindictive women scheme and ruin men ruthlessly,and the law often backs them up, that doesn't explain a 30% difference in cases involving LEOs.
Last edited:
OverMountainMan
Cryogenically Hardened Member
If I understand it correctly, I think we're in agreement again. It will always come back to how that pointy end of the stick is presented. Theoretically, from my perspective, privatization should iron out the selective enforcement irregularities. Consequently, and pleasantly so, it would also necessitate having fewer laws. The private contractor leadership, if held accountable along with the private police, should definitely be an improvement over those politicians.
That may be wishful thinking, but I'm convinced it couldn't be worse than what we have now. Unless my hypothetical private contractor becomes a warlord...
OverMountainMan
Cryogenically Hardened Member
As if the "public interest" was something you could define? If so, what part of this nebulous "public interest" are they serving when they murder unarmed citizens?
How do they "serve public interest" by having a union to represent themselves...against their employer, *supposedly* the public?
Because they serve the interests of the State, not the public.
By their own admission, it's the State that writes the laws that they enforce. It's a job they do for the State, not the Public at large. And if the public has a problem with it, their solution is not to adjust their actions to serve the Public, but to tell the public to change the State.
I realize LE hates being called the King's Men, but it's hard not to acknowledge their meeting the definition through their own words and deeds.
OverMountainMan
Cryogenically Hardened Member
Worst part of it is the presumption that their puppet-master politicians even faintly have someone else's interests at heart. These are the folks snakes LEO answers to, NOT the "public".
You know the worst part about all of this is you keep talking about the bad police work, but never mention the good work they do. Mostly because the good that they do is not reported in the news or on some pissed off bloggers web page. I've seen people arrested with guns on their way to kill coworkers and people that kidnap people that are talked into giving up their hostages and its never mentioned. You see not every single item gets a press release or turns out bad.
OverMountainMan
Cryogenically Hardened Member
In fairness, start a thread about the valiant efforts made by the good police folk. I'll support you in that endeavor.
But, it's misleading to imagine that OUR experiences are so vicarious. There are so many laws and regulations, that your masters have made you our enemies, plain and simple. Frankly and humbly, I'd prefer that to NOT be true. We need not see it on the Fake News Network or the blogs or social media. You're set up to answer to the politicians, and we see and feel that every time we walk out the door.
Your rejection of the "media's and blogs" reportage is an ad hominem, that you frequently lean on every time someone posts a link to LEO misbehavior. And it's beyond tiresome. Good reporters are capable of telling an honest story, regardless of their medium. Post a hero story, if you like...an anecdotal one (e.g. "I've seen people arrested with guns on their way to kill coworkers") is fine. The gold standard in the "good cop" evidence should be the officer that disobeys his political handlers to actually do the right thing. Rare as hen's teeth, that story.
I think you can do better than the "well, you read it on a blog" rebuttal.
Last edited:
One could say that your reliance upon fringe blogs could lead people to think the world is burning. Look we agree on many many points. I'm just not ready to burn it to the ground.
Have you played Fallout: New Vegas? In the game there is a dialogue that says something like, "Don't get me wrong, the NCR has done a lot of good, it's just that they have a way of making you a part of them whether you want to be or not."
That's kind of where I am. I don't like what this country has become and the same sort of thing can be drilled down to a municipal level. Unfortunately the crown is hell bent on making you a subject whether you want to be or not. Being left alone doesn't seem to be an option. If it's s choice between submit, and burn it down, please pass me the gasoline and matches.
From the National Institute of Justice website.....
There is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of use of force. The International Association of Chiefs of Police has described use of force as the "amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject."
No doubt some will scoff and cry "Semantics!" but words have meaning - some more than others.
OverMountainMan
Cryogenically Hardened Member
Which is your stock response. If something, anything, someone has written (or even photographed or videotaped!) fails to align with your ivory tower, it gets this same ad hominem dismissal. Not worthy of your attention. A wave of the hand, and back to whatever inflates that LEO self-image.
But like I said above, it's not just what we read on our little fringe blogs. It's what we witness with our own eyes and ears, day in and day out. Genuine and honest people are trying to tell you about the stain on your uniform. And you're sticking your fingers in your ears.
So you witness this yourself day in and day out. Yet your not willing to do anything about it besides gripe on an Internet forum. Sounds like solid work on making the world a better place.
OverMountainMan
Cryogenically Hardened Member
What do you know about "what I'm willing to do"? Like you enjoy pretending about Badged Thug Gang, there's all kinds of good you never get to see. If you were paying attention in this forum, you'd see that "griping" is only a small percentage of my contributions. And that griping is mainly reserved for the agents of the tyrant. Your tyrant.
Ok again who is the Tyrant? Is that as in one or meant to be plural as in the tyranny. Hey I don’t agree with burning it down, I do agree with people that have come from message boards and decide to do something. Ted Bund comes to mind.
To try to bring this back to a "calming" moment...
I found it odd that this NFL crap is supposedly started on the premise of Police Heavy Handedness, specifically the plight of the black man against the uniformed. What I find interesting is that on one hand many of us will criticize their protest actually parallels the "anti-tyranny of the police" voices I hear at times. Even from myself.
I am not saying that I agree with their protest, not in the least. I perhaps agree with some of their motivations, but not in their methods. In the same way I can understand why someone could get frustrated with a child and want to beat it, but I would never agree that child abuse is even close to a viable solution.
I found it odd that this NFL crap is supposedly started on the premise of Police Heavy Handedness, specifically the plight of the black man against the uniformed. What I find interesting is that on one hand many of us will criticize their protest actually parallels the "anti-tyranny of the police" voices I hear at times. Even from myself.
I am not saying that I agree with their protest, not in the least. I perhaps agree with some of their motivations, but not in their methods. In the same way I can understand why someone could get frustrated with a child and want to beat it, but I would never agree that child abuse is even close to a viable solution.
OverMountainMan
Cryogenically Hardened Member
Either you have a hard time writing what you mean, or you mean some sick sh*t. You're saying you agree with Ted Bund(y)?
This point is extremely powerful, owing to the stellar reputation that Federal, State, and Municipal Law Enforcement have earned for serving the public interest.
I don't know what kind of places you guys hang out in to see all this bad policing day in and day out. I'm an outside sales rep and have been for 30 years. The only personal interaction I've had with cops during that time is a handful of traffic stops. Only one of which resulted in a citation. And several of them were for more than 20mph over the limit.Not once have I been asked to let them search the car. I've never been bounced off the bumper or even been spoken to in an ugly tone. I guess since I'm polite and respectful to them, I get the same in return.
I can't give you the details on here, but it is an awful story. (It involves family.) It would make an excellent movie about corruption, yet sadly, the story isn't over yet.
Maybe one day if we meet, I can share it with you.
Some of us don't base our opinions due to the media. We have seen and/or had bad situations occur. I assure you that you are no more polite or respectful than I am to Law Enforcement Officers. And I have had many good experiences with them. And if I met one tonight, I would still be polite and respectful.
Unfortunately, I have also had a couple of bad ones. More unfortunately, I have witnessed a couple of horrible experiences that happened to others. Even worse, I have seen how the system defends its abusers and just shrugs to the victims. Feel free to dismiss my experiences as anomalies, but eventually all these anomalies add up to more.
BTW, I have never seen anyone hit by lightning. I have done many outdoor activities during storms, including golf, for a very long time. Yet, I have never seen anyone even grazed. Oh sure, sometimes on TV I hear a story, but it always seems unbelievable. Now that I think about it, based on my extensive and sometimes reckless experience, I no longer believe lightning is dangerous to humans. It is just something "they" say to keep us inside.
Who will investigate private police?
The government police.......Oh wait.
Their bosses, who will be able to be sued in civil court or fired if they do a poor job .
Alternately, there's other independent civil structures/boards that could be formed to do this job.
Last edited:
I find it facinating to see people arguing that a potential problem with private police forces - and a reason they should be avoided - while brushing off the fact that it's an actual problem with government police forces now.
If the chance of it happening is a good enough reason to avoid such notions - why then should we give the benefit of the doubt to the institution that actually engages in the practice now?
If the chance of it happening is a good enough reason to avoid such notions - why then should we give the benefit of the doubt to the institution that actually engages in the practice now?
Last edited:
Long_Hunter
Sufficient Speed, Acceptable Drag
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Private Police Forces with newly created "civil structures/boards" to oversee them and hold them accountable...yep, zero chance of corruption there.
We have our hands full today dealing with the corruption and misguided authoritarian practices of CLE agencies supposedly accountable to "We The People...", let alone a private company only in the game to make money (profit from) and accountable to some bureaucrats.
Constellis is waiting in the shadows to pounce on these contracts...
We have our hands full today dealing with the corruption and misguided authoritarian practices of CLE agencies supposedly accountable to "We The People...", let alone a private company only in the game to make money (profit from) and accountable to some bureaucrats.
Constellis is waiting in the shadows to pounce on these contracts...
I find it fascinating that so many claim that private / corporate is good and profit motive leads to the best outcome and government is bad but when it comes to the idea of restoring things to the same, the way the country's founders had it and set it up, when it comes to entrusting your various rights and freedoms, they become a bunch of nervous nellies that want it to fall to the government, the same government that has demonstrated that it can't be trusted and will assume power it doesn't have.
SMH.
SMH.