Police

Post Reply New Topic

As a model of policing I'm in favour of Peelian Principles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles

I think it is very easy for policing to loose track of its duty to the public.

Yes but initially you made it sound like a lot more was going on than many journalists having a more liberal view point...I mean right wing opinions are not disallowed by any evil 'liberal' control freak group in the media. Though it seems some things you'd consider 'leftist' really aren't specifically...for instance you think its solely the left who takes issue with police brutality and abuse of power.

If you don't even watch fox news what were you worried about it being 'taken away' for? And once again how is the opinion cops should be held responsible for their behavior hysterical? Is anything other than complete and full trust and love of the police hysterical? because that is what you are making it sound like.

If you think wanting them held responsible and not always getting off easy for crimes is hysterical...then do you think police should be able to do whatever they want consequence free?

So caring about any social or environmental issues is hysterical? I suppose complete apathy is the way to go right? lol and I am not going to comment on the off topic stuff you brought up and derail the thread. Go ahead and think police corruption, abuse of power and brutality is a trivial/made up issue....just don't expect to convince me of it.

I've already experienced and seen enough to know it is a serious issue...and by seen enough I don't mean viewing only heavily leftist biased media...I find videos that are caught of cops misbehaving and not being held responsible to paint a much more clearer picture than any wording in media articles.

No, many on the Right do too, but it's mostly a Leftist-Libertarian cause. Libertarians can be hysterical about the issue, but their numbers are not only relatively small, but tend to be more rational and honest in their critique. In other words, most Libertarians who are critical of police tend not to be police-haters.

And that's right, the media censors the best of conservative thought while allowing meaningful Leftist voices to give their take on important issues.



Because it's bad for the country if only one side's opinions are reflected.

There is nothing hysterical about the opinion that cops should be held responsible for their behavior. The entire Left's preoccupation and fixation on the issue, and their out-sized vilification of ONLY cops(at least for the reasons they cite), however, is hysterical. And all the reasons you give for your unjustified preoccupation with a relatively small issue, is what we call rationalization, since going by your own barometers of concern, you don't apply those critiques to any other group in society who use excessive force, abuse the public trust, or kills innocent civilians.



No. The opposite of not being hysterical IS NOT letting the police do whatever they want, consequence free. The opposite of not being hysterical is to cut the size of the state and state worker salaries, and to lower the funding of police departments. And to end unionization of public employees so that Cops can be held responsible by taxpayers for what they do/did. That's what Government can do to limit police corruption. Then corrupt cops have nothing to hide behind, and are kept on a short leash by the public that pays for them.

What we can do as citizenry to end police corruption is to end the corrupt environments that allows corruption to thrive. Which is a cultural battle, a much harder battle, but one that can be won.



I was only pointing out hysteria's we should be careful of. Those hysteria's that have an acorn of truth at their core, lose credibility when you hate/fear monger about the opponent you're fighting, and paint them as this vile cruel villain, smearing their name with manufactured libels, all in order to beat them politically. And that's not right. You'd have more people fighting on your side if you didn't vilify the objection of your obsession to such outsized proportions, and didn't vilify anyone who disagreed with you as an inherently bad person who wants bad consequences.



I'm not sure if that matters, your obsession and outsized projection of cops being a humongous problem isn't reflected by the reality on the ground. We're a country of 320 million people. There are 1 million cops. They commit only 1,000 or less killings/murders a year

Stop & Frisk is probably unconstitutional and statistically appears in most areas where it has been used to be applied with racial bias.

Arizona SB 1070 as one example is at best poor police work and at worst is certainly applied with racial bias. If the objective is something other than harassment, it's pretty pointless because immigration is the exclusive domain of the federal government, and as i understand it most of the people handed to INS/ICE by non-federal agencies are just turned loose.

I will put some faith in good cops when i see some bad cops getting perp walked in cuffs.

This is based on events in the US but probably applies elsewhere.

So what is the role of police in modern society? The short answer is, law enforcement. It is their job to bring those who perform illegal acts to justice as a way to discourage others from doing the same. As well as to ensure that lawbreakers are punished as called for by the criminal code. As an added benefit, their efforts improve security in the communities they serve with all the benefits that implies.

It is not, strictly speaking, the job of the police to improve the lives of people in the community in general, or to help people who are simply in trouble although not in connection with illegal activity. However, in reality, police often do just that. And often when they don't, the community expects then to anyway, or at least to do so more enthusiastically or effectively than they do.

So it turns out that crime rates have recently risen in many US jurisdictions, typically cities but I won't say just cities. As for the security aspect I mentioned above, this has already had a bad effect on these places and I am quite frankly concerned. The immediate cause seems to be recent uncertainty concerning the role of police and how they do their job.

There is a lot of potential irony in all this. Most of us probably read books or watch films and TV shows in which the police are portrayed as heroes, or else in which the protagonist is a police officer who struggles with the "moral dilemmas" presented by their job.

Are real-life police much like the police we see on TV?

In many places, corruption is more or less a given. Often a police salary is far from enough to survive on so the police officer accepts bribes even though they may violate his personal code of ethics. He may spend a lot of time in church to compensate (possibly praying alongside a person who regularly bribes him).

In many places, police are forced to act in support of tyrannical governments, committing acts that might be considered crimes but about which there is no choice.

Consider that the mayor of New York City has alienated the members of the Police trade union, for publicly saying things that were arguably true to some extent yet I would argue that he was an idiot to say them in public.

As an aside, my mother who grew up in NYC to some extent used to sometimes make remarks about "dumb cops" which would sort of startle me. I wonder what early experiences she may have had that would cause her to say that?

Also consider the image of police spending days on the highway awarding citations for exceeding the speed limit on an empty road with perfect driving conditions, to meet their monthly quota, while children are being shot in the inner city? Not to forget the amount of effort expended fighting the War on Drugs.

Whatever, the problem I stated above seems to be getting worse and I haven't seen any credible plan to improve it.

Does anybody here have some connection with the police (e.g. through family relationship) or is possibly a police officer themselves (see "The Bridge" I suppose anything is possible)? Or not? And has something to say on the topic?

No, many on the Right do too, but it's mostly a Leftist-Libertarian cause. Libertarians can be hysterical about the issue, but their numbers are not only relatively small, but tend to be more rational and honest in their critique. In other words, most Libertarians who are critical of police tend not to be police-haters.

And that's right, the media censors the best of conservative thought while allowing meaningful Leftist voices to give their take on important issues.



Because it's bad for the country if only one side's opinions are reflected.

There is nothing hysterical about the opinion that cops should be held responsible for their behavior. The entire Left's preoccupation and fixation on the issue, and their out-sized vilification of ONLY cops(at least for the reasons they cite), however, is hysterical. And all the reasons you give for your unjustified preoccupation with a relatively small issue, is what we call rationalization, since going by your own barometers of concern, you don't apply those critiques to any other group in society who use excessive force, abuse the public trust, or kills innocent civilians.



No. The opposite of not being hysterical IS NOT letting the police do whatever they want, consequence free. The opposite of not being hysterical is to cut the size of the state and state worker salaries, and to lower the funding of police departments. And to end unionization of public employees so that Cops can be held responsible by taxpayers for what they do/did. That's what Government can do to limit police corruption. Then corrupt cops have nothing to hide behind, and are kept on a short leash by the public that pays for them.

What we can do as citizenry to end police corruption is to end the corrupt environments that allows corruption to thrive. Which is a cultural battle, a much harder battle, but one that can be won.



I was only pointing out hysteria's we should be careful of. Those hysteria's that have an acorn of truth at their core, lose credibility when you hate/fear monger about the opponent you're fighting, and paint them as this vile cruel villain, smearing their name with manufactured libels, all in order to beat them politically. And that's not right. You'd have more people fighting on your side if you didn't vilify the objection of your obsession to such outsized proportions, and didn't vilify anyone who disagreed with you as an inherently bad person who wants bad consequences.



I'm not sure if that matters, your obsession and outsized projection of cops being a humongous problem isn't reflected by the reality on the ground. We're a country of 320 million people. There are 1 million cops. They commit only 1,000 or less killings/murders a year

We had that philosophy in our law enforcement (U.S.) prior to WWII. Although there were frequent abuses of the system (by the citizens themselves ), particularly in the South and the West, it is a far more humane system than the impersonal Big Brother system we have now. In earlier times it was called the King's Peace.