Do you support our current president?
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 17:33
VIEWED: 12746
PAGE 14 of 15
Quote:I think we have to define some things here...a cop who writes a bogus ticket to fill a quota or show who's in control is an irritant, but hardly dangerous...would you call him 'corrupt'?
Originally posted by SignyM:
This is exactly opposite of what surveys and studies show
Is a cop that pockets some drug money-evidence corrupt?
Certainly ones that plant evidence on innocent peeps, or ones that physically abuse peeps (meaning blood and/or broken bones) are...right?
There's always gonna be minor abuses, but how prevalent is the serious mob-type stuff?
Enquiring Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Corruption is corruption. I think writing bogus tickets is probably pretty bad, because one imagines that it’s probably being done to exploit money. I might be very suspicious of that kind of activity. Pocketing drug money? Pocketing drug money is also pretty bad. Planting evidence on innocent people or causing serious physical abuse disproportionate with the response is also pretty bad. You want me to pick a corruption and say it’s okay, but I can’t do that.
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:I think we have to define some things here...a cop who writes a bogus ticket to fill a quota or show who's in control is an irritant, but hardly dangerous...would you call him 'corrupt'?
Originally posted by SignyM:
This is exactly opposite of what surveys and studies show
Is a cop that pockets some drug money-evidence corrupt?
Certainly ones that plant evidence on innocent peeps, or ones that physically abuse peeps (meaning blood and/or broken bones) are...right?
On the other hand, it’s the details that get you. Let’s say, Officer Finn and Officer Isall goes to arrest a perp known as shithead who sells drugs to minors and enjoys playing out his twisted fantasies on little girls. Officer Finn walks into the room and starts beating the shit out of Mr. Shithead, then to cover his tracks officer Finn plants a knife on Mr. Shithead so that it looks like he was attacked. Officer Isall witnesses the abuse, but because Officer Finn is crafty, he doesn’t witness the knife being planted. However, Officer Isall isn’t stupid and knows there was no knife when he walked in the room. Officer Isall is surprised by Officer Finn’s actions because just yesterday he was over at Officer Finn’s house watching him dote on his little girls like they were the only thing on earth that mattered to him. Now Officer Isall has a choice to make. Does he report an event that he can’t know was actual abuse to defend a worthless fuck up like Mr. Shithead and potentially ruin the job of an Officer whom Officer Isall knows to be a good guy. Officer Isall knows what the rules are, but he also knows that Mr. Shithead deserved every lump he got. Now what? The grey area bites.
Quote:Probably only a fraction of the previous mentioned 5% would really be considered “mob-type stuff.”
Originally posted by chrisisall:
There's always gonna be minor abuses, but how prevalent is the serious mob-type stuff?
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In that instance Officer Isall takes Officer Finn aside and tells him what he suspects (knows) went down, and explains that Mr. Shithead isn't worth losing a job over, but that he'd like that to be the last time he has to deal with excessive force being used around him (except with actual child abusers, of course
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Now Officer Isall has a choice to make. Does he report an event that he can’t know was actual abuse to defend a worthless fuck up like Mr. Shithead and potentially ruin the job of an Officer whom Officer Isall knows to be a good guy. Officer Isall knows what the rules are, but he also knows that Mr. Shithead deserved every lump he got. Now what? The grey area bites.
).No gray here Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For clarification: The survey that I found (and danged but I can't find it again... such is the internet!) is that 53% of police officers witnessed what they thought could be considered "excessive use of force".
I think the problem is not so much that police misconduct is subtle... that 5-10% beat people up so there's nothing subtle about THEM... it's just that moral clarity disappears with fear of consequences. A cop who "rats" on other cops is pretty much blacklisted: nobody talks to him/her, and they're always left wondering what'll happen if they need backup. But if the vast majority of cops are "honest", why does such a culture of coverup and retribution persist?
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:But, is that like, half surveyed have seen it once, or five times, or as an ongoing thing, or what. Not clear here...
Originally posted by SignyM:
For clarification: The survey that I found is that 53% of police officers witnessed what they thought could be considered "excessive use of force".
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Police Car Camera Plan Stalls in Union Dispute
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/21/AR2008
032102982.html
"The tension between union and management became evident this month with the disclosure that scores of officers, following the union's advice, have refused to pay speed camera citations after being caught speeding on routine patrols or while off duty. The union says the citations are issued not to individual officers, but to the vehicles' owner -- in this case, the county.
Last year, when prosecutors charged 10 officers for allegedly billing part-time employers for hours that overlapped with their county shifts, some supervisors and even some union members lamented that the only tool commanders had to remove officers from the force was prosecution.
As in most police departments, the chief had the authority to increase the punishment recommended by a board that hears cases of alleged officer misconduct. But in July, as a result of the contract negotiations, the chief lost that power."
"The union says police managers should be able to review images captured on the cameras only during the course of criminal or administrative investigations, the sources said. Supervisors should not be permitted to use evidence of misconduct recorded by the cameras unless it is "egregious" or directly linked to the investigation, the union says."
I say again, this culture of corruption, deliberate sabotage of accountability, and double standards are the actions of a mafia, not a police force.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Maybe they need to define "egregious".
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Supervisors should not be permitted to use evidence of misconduct recorded by the cameras unless it is "egregious" or directly linked to the investigation, the union says."
Or, hey- maybe the camera shouldn't be catching anyone doing something wrong in the first place...?
See, I think as long as our supreme leader endorses torture & public disinformation, there's no reason to believe the little cultures of police corruption out there should see anything wrong with themselves. The example starts from the top.
Truth & Justice Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
glad Frem resurrected the thread 'cause I didn't want to have to go digging for it.
Quote:Chris, exactly how many times do you need to see someone beaten into near-unconsciousness before you decide to "do something"?
But, is that like, half surveyed have seen it once, or five times, or as an ongoing thing, or what. Not clear here...
If it doesn't "bother" a police officer the first time, then that means that MOST police (53%) are damn callous to violence. Maybe it s an effect of the job (I've said this quite often) or maybe it's because certain personality types are attracted to police-work, but if a cop doesn't report unwarranted violence on the part of his fellow-officer each and every time there is something damn screwed-up about police, police-work, and the police culture.
My personal belief is that ... aside from the small percentage (5-10%) of police who get off on violence.... which BTW is a much higher percentage than in the civilian population... most officers are prolly suffering from chronic PTSD. And like children in a dysfunctional family, they cling together really really tightly and hide "the family secrets" by mutual consent.
And unlike EMTs who often deal with the very same people but from a vastly different viewpoint, a cop's job is punitive. Other people who also have life-and-death control over people: nurses, therapists, doctors- also approach their job with a very different perspective.
I think that the way police-work is constituted- the way they view their role, the way they're organized- is all screwed up. They have never prevented any of the crimes that I've been victimized by, and in fact have never actually resolved any of them after-the-fact either. They almost always show up too late to catch the perp and obviously waaaaaaay too late to prevent the crime. Personally, I think we should be sending out squads of therapists, EMTs, criminalists and detectives. The only role that I see "police work" being good for is the enforcement of minor laws: traffic cops etc. People break minor laws after they calculate the cost versus the benefit. People break MAJOR laws because they're screwed up, and they're not into calculating cost/ benefit.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Personally, I find the Police extremely useful for dragging away near-violent drugged-up nutcases from the place I work...if not for them, I'd be icing my fists on an almost daily basis (they closed the asylum some years back here, and let 'em all loose on the streets, which makes this town a little more interesting than it needs to be).
Battling Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Sorry, forgot to answer the question- once should be enough.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Chris, exactly how many times do you need to see someone beaten into near-unconsciousness before you decide to "do something"?
SHOULD Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME