Posted on 12/11/2018 6:43:17 AM PST by marktwain
YOU are just as much a civilian as those you purportedly serve. You are just another CITIZEN, albeit one entrusted BY YOUR FELLOW CITIZENS in the enforcement of laws enacted by our representatives.
Unless you are wearing a MILITARY uniform, you have no distinction from others vis-a-vis "civilian-citizen". A police/peace officer is just another citizen. The term civilian is reserved to separate MILITARY from non-military.
Sorry if I offended you by a term that is normally used in law enforcement. Most LE agencies structures follow a para-military model with their command structure. There was nothing in my comment that indicated any disdain towards another citizen.
However, I’ve seen nothing but wholesale bashing of law enforcement on this thread by posters who “demand” respect but seem to think respect doesn’t go the other way. And by the way... I WAS in the military and served in the Reserves while I was in law enforcement. Forgive me the semantics.
I was not offended, just disappointed. It’s the whole “us v them” mindset I was calling out. Referring to a fellow citizen as a civilian implies a separate status.
Para-military model or not, thinking one’s organization is something it is not is poisonous in the long run.
Police forces are a citizen’s group, not a military one, no matter the organizational structure.
A large part of the alienization between law enforcement and the public is exactly this (your own words) para-military setup.
I have no real beef with the police as a group, indeed I have many friends and acquaintances that are current and former badge wearers. I just really get annoyed by the implications and separations caused by inaccurate terminology, especially when the writer knows better.
Thank you for being one of the sheepdogs, I’ll watch for you in the fold <;-)
With all due respect, have you read some of the comments on this thread? The us vs. them mentality goes both ways. Your disappointment is equally shared by those of us who are constantly painted with a broad brush. It’s the equivalent of castigating every auto worker for a bad vehicle. I will be the first to admit that there are some officers who do not deserve to wear the badge. But the vast majority are honest, hard working men and women who are not just worried about their paycheck or pension and try to serve their fellow citizens daily.
Didn’t read the article yet but the popo went home safe in all those cases. Job well done.
Been out, so I'm late to the party. There is a big difference between a traffic stop, where you can be calm and do everything they talked about in your CCW class and the aftermath of a deadly fight. If you read the article the author covers all the issues of hearing loss, tunnel vision, etc. Kind of hard to "follow the rules" after you just shot someone in a fight for your life.
Patting yourself on the back for not shooting innocent citizens in situation were you were in no danger but brag that you would have been "justified" in doing so.
Do you think any citizen not wearing the magic blue uniform would have been "justified" in murdering those innocent people?
Or are there two standards for what is a justified shoot?
Of course there is and I was not trying to equate the two scenarios. Only trying to make a point.
Also a lot of people are unaware that many “innocent” people are shot by police every year during a traffic stops and often because of improper gun owner behavior.
I think there are very, very few of those. They tend to make national news.
Perhaps a couple of them in a year.
I follow this assiduously, usually a couple of hours a day, almost every day.
Shootings of innocent gun owning citizens because of poor gun handling at traffic stops is a very rare event.
If you are talking about poor behavior generally, sure, that is more common. But you mentioned gun owners.
No one was “patting themselves on the back” about a no-shoot/shoot situation. I was relaying facts where there were instances of citizens with firearms that could have ended badly for both sides.
I wonder how many times you’ve come face-to-face with someone with a firearm pointed at you and what your reaction would be?
And yes...in the situations I listed, I probably would have been justified in using deadly force when all 3 people failed to heed commands to drop their weapon.
I appreciate your ability to access that I was in “NO DANGER” in each of these incidents, considering I don’t remember you being there. But it’s a lot easier to sit at a keyboard and second-guess.
The uniform is blue, it’s cloth not magic, and as for being justified, YOU have much more latitude in discretion than I did then and in retirement do now.
It’s difficult to find statistics on this but bottom line is, one is too many if it’s you.
True, true.
Difference between gun owners and legal gun owners. But even simply possessing an illegal gun does not necessarily warrant a shoot down. However, if the cop has a perceived threat whether real or not he’s going to react.
In your estimation, what percentage of LEO’s are basically informed, honest, hard working, public servants trying to do their level best to protect the public and avoid using violence if at all possible?
My guesstimate would be somewhere between 85-90% but I’d like to get a bit more experienced opinion.
flr
I can only extrapolate using my old department as a base, but I would say 90-95% which is probably a conservative estimate.
There have been many incidents where purported inappropriate police behavior occurs and understand it causes everyone that works the job difficulties. Again, in my experience, those who serve don’t want the “bad cop” around as it negatively reflects on them.
Usually interaction with the police will have a negative outcome for someone. Either someone goes to jail or receives a citation. We are not the “good guys” in most situations.
But we knew that when we signed on.
Contrary to what some of the posters here may believe, cops DO have to justify their actions. In our department, discipline could range from a verbal reprimand all the way up to dismissal. That’s not counting anything that may be addressed in a criminal court proceeding.
I have seen some of the “anecdotal” stories posted on FR and in some of them, they are either second-hand or news reports of an incident. I find it ironic that FReepers vilify the media when stories are posted about DJT, but accept as gospel stories from the same outlets that castigate LEO’s.
You just can’t have it both ways.
Are there cops that shouldn’t be on the job? Sure. They are always the ones who get media attention. It’s tough trying to have a reasonable conversation about LEO’s when a couple of threads away is the story about the Detroit cops from two different precincts who got into a brawl. Another black eye for law enforcement.
For the most part...I still believe the average uniform officer is trying to do the best he/she can under the circumstances. There may be outliers, but you never hear about the vast majority of LEO’s that do the job professionally day in and day out.
I hope, should the need arise, you deal with THAT officer.
Kind of thought so and figured my estimate was probably leaning toward overly negative.
My experience with LEO’s over the years would tend to back up your estimate and only confirms what I already knew. I would say of the police issues I’m aware of, the majority (perhaps the vast majority) are with new/young officers who have no so called ulterior motives but are rather just inexperienced and lack the adept judgment that is possessed by a veteran on the force.
I had a disagreement with two on this thread concerning LEO’s and really couldn’t fathom people, let alone long time Freepers, possessing such a twisted and warped opinion of law enforcement professionals. It’s pretty disconcerting knowing that if right minded conservatives can believe that crap what might be spinning around in the minds of the average brainwashed uniformed liberal/progressive screwball.
“-———but accept as gospel stories from the same outlets that castigate LEO’s.”
—
That’s the only type of LEO post that ever appears on FR.
Sad.
.
You may be right, however, LEO’s should be held accountable.
Unfortunately, we’ve gotten away from the original intent of the thread which was the interaction between armed citizens and police. If you havem’t read the cited article, you should. It is an extremely well done piece and should be required reading for all who carry, civilians AND cops.
I can especially relate to the “tunnel vision” aspect of the story. I’ve heard many officers say the same thing.
Maybe it is dead pets, wrong doors, “revenue streams” (RICO), and those pickup trucks the LAPD shot up when hunting a rogue cop without even verifying who was in them (and without even a slap on the wrist!)?
That sort of press is a bit different from the press whining “Wah! Wah! Wah! We hate Donald Trump!” It is dead pets, dead bodies, damaged property, and terrified people.
Cops are entrusted with a lot of power and don’t seem to answer for its misuse very much.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.