[Liberal Bob]

That's what you're asking for isn't it? The right to make the call as you see it. That's a lot of power to give to anyone and can go the wrong way quick.

[dasboot]

Your train of thought seems illogical. Every cop has to call it as he sees it. And defend that call (although the courts are covering shabby stuff relating to domestic violence)

By its nature, the job requires discrimination, objectivity, and knowledge. Are you implying that it's the duty of an officer to arrest or summon without an application of knowledge or law; without discriminating between what is, and is not, an offense?

I'm not sure what you're trying to express.

[dasboot]

So you will leave it up to every cop to determined what laws are unconstitutional? What a free hand they would have in our society, talk about corruption. Better to concentrate on the law makers not the law enforcers.

I, on dutious patrol, observe and hear you express your displeasure at a certain politician. Are you engaged in free speech, or are you a common disturber of the peace?

Ah, let the court figure it out, *click*.

[El Gato]

The right to make the call as you see it. That's a lot of power to give to anyone and can go the wrong way quick.

The alternative is the "I was just following orders" defense. I believe that one was discredited in the mid 1940s. I'd trust cops before I'd trust politicians to do the right thing. It's when the cops follow unconsitutional orders, and enforce unconstitutional laws that most of the potential for corruption, and the actual corruption, occurs.