Posted on 02/19/2014 3:37:02 PM PST by servo1969
Bookmark
“...I am in the don’t put your finger on the trigger unless you intend to shoot camp.”
Me too. And you’re welcome.
My husband, who’s in the business, has seen that the more “intellectuals” they hire, the more clueless the department becomes.
_________________________________________________________
Interesting comment.
Many years ago many departments hired those who could demonstrated basic common sense and had some “street smarts” . Those who seemed somewhat “seasoned or experienced”, before being hired.
Nowadays?
Most law enforcement agencies seem much more concerned with how many “college credits or degrees” one might have, while at the same time lowering the physical standards to accommodate the females...
Answered here:
Stop, Drop, and Cower
[Direct Link]
I'll go so far as to assert that the police simply do not care about Justice at all, if they did then they as-a-group would not hesitate to "out" one of their own that did commit crime — instead we see them covering up the crimes of their fellows. Instead of embracing the long-held classical English/American philosophy It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer
(William Blackstone), thy embrace a philosophy of there are only perps and perps we haven't caught.
Indeed, much of the problem can be laid at the feet of the acceptance of the legitimacy of the War on Drugs; I'd go so far as to say anyone advocating the War on Drugs cannot be a Constitutionalist — because the War on Drugs has damaged 90% of the Bill of Rights:
Amendment 10 — Destroyed by combining “necessary and proper” with the intrastate/interstate regulation of Wickard.
Amendment 9 — Everything. Seriously, EVERYTHING about the War on Drugs is about the federal government exercising powers not expressly delegated by the Constitution.
From Justice Thomas’s Dissent in Raich:“If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption (not because it is interstate commerce, but because it is inextricably bound up with interstate commerce), then Congress’ Article I powers – as expanded by the Necessary and Proper Clause – have no meaningful limits.”Amendment 8 — Mandatory minimums and zero tolerance combine to make the punishments outweigh many of the “crimes”, even is you accept the crime as valid.
Amendment 7 — In [civil] asset forfeiture, the victims are routinely denied jury-trials even though the amount in controversy exceeds $20.
Amendment 6 — The clogging of the courts with drug-related cases erodes the notion of a “speedy trial” to a joke. Often drug charges are added on to the list of crimes, which can “taint” the jury w/ prejudices. Often police act on informants whose identities are “protected”, which impairs the ability to confront the accuser.
Amendment 5 — How does “Comprehensive Forfeiture Act of 1984” comply with “No person shall [...] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”?
Amendment 4 — Kentucky v King”The Fourth Amendment expressly imposes two requirements: All searches and seizures must be reasonable; and a warrant may not be issued unless probable cause is properly established and the scope of the authorized search is set out with particularity. [...] The proper test follows from the principle that permits warrantless searches: warrantless searches are allowed when the circumstances make it reasonable, within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment , to dispense with the warrant requirement.”In other words:Yes, the fourth amendment requires warrants for searches, but… fuck that!
Amendment 3 — [Nope, nothing here... yet.]
Amendment 2 — Arguably, the “prohibited persons” from the `68 GCA.
Amendment 1 — Religious freedom is denied via the war on drugs ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith ), there are stories of “legalization”-advocacy publishers being raided/harassed. So, that’s 90% of the amendments in the Bill of Rights.
If that's not cause for concern, and impetus for stopping the War on Drugs then is there anything that cannot be done in its name?
servo1969:
A very powerful interview I watched was of the McLennan county sheriff in Waco Texas in the aftermath of the Branch Davidians slaughter. The Sheriff knew the Davidians and offered to walk in to the compound and talk to David Koresh. The ATF and FBI refused and we all know the result. A good cop, the Sheriff, was over ruled by agents playing army and the whole lot of them were massacred.
The police are not your friends; you should never talk to the cops. (Even other cops agree.)
She needs to go to jail!
Great post, thanks.
Amendment 3 — [Nope, nothing here... yet.]
Update the list
Powerful stuff, thanks...........
domestic violenceas its impetus — I'd have to do some proving to link the general degradation of the rule of law / due process engendered by the WoD to this… and even then the connection would be tenuous.
Those range targets are very scary.
Makes you wonder what Homeland Security has in mind for us.
… But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. …
Of course there wasn’t one, that would entail a journalist actually doing their job and researching something.
Agree. I was hoping this was satire. Women don’t belong in combat roles, especially in a police state, Exhibit Z.
Rest in peace young man.
Recreational drugs hurt a lot of people and result in a significant amount of evil. With that said, the war on drugs is a failure. With all the lives ruined, militarized police, and aggressive enforcement you can still buy any drug you want in any town or city in this country.
Perhaps teaching our children morals is a better option.
Where is the photo of this female cop? I’ll bet she is a wide load and lesbian looking.
******* To be fair. The daughter of an old friend is gay and serving in the PD of a NE city. She is smart and competent. Kind of cute last time I saw her. She has two children from a real marriage so she did her female duty. Today she lives with a woman.
” The officer broke down it tears upon
realizing her mistake, according to The
New York Daily News.
She had been making a probation-related
visit to the home. She thought Roupe was
holding a gun, according to a statement
from the police department.”
I guess we are all supposed to be sorry for the cowardly pig’s feelings. Cops walk around in such insane fear, that this crap happens.
I guess that if some screwball knocks on my door, I had best just shoot them through it. Because it is either a dangerous screwball intent on my harm, or a paranoid cop. Why should I value the cop’s life more than mine?
I wonder what would happen to me if I shot some kid for no reason whatsoever?
I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell to anyone who thinks the Euharlee police are telling the truth.
That looks like something i would write. Yeah i know. I wouldn’t write it as well as you did.
Thanks for the link.
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.