Skip to comments.LAPD's Gangster Cops Are Gone(If we could just get rid of MS13 & the other 100K gangsters in L.A.)
Posted on 07/23/2006 8:45:03 AM PDT by kellynla
IT IS LONG PAST TIME to retire outdated stereotypes of the Los Angeles Police Department. Unfortunately, a recent blue-ribbon panel has given them new life.
Police Chief William J. Bratton commissioned the Rampart Review Panel in 2003 to evaluate whether his department was still at risk for a corruption scandal like the Rampart gang-unit fiasco of 1999. Ignoring the radical changes in the department over the last four years, the panel, chaired by civil rights attorney Constance Rice, incorrectly concluded that it was. Worse, it recycled old chestnuts about a racially insensitive, overly aggressive LAPD that will only make the panel's stated goal of improved police-community relations more elusive.
The key conceit of the report is a Manichaean distinction between what it portrays as the good policing in the revamped Rampart Division and what it sees as the bad policing that allegedly remains the norm in South Los Angeles. Rampart policing uses what the report calls community problem-solving to reduce crime. South L.A. policing supposedly relies on what the report dubs the "LAPD warrior model" and "proactivesuppression" tactics. Those needlessly harsh tactics are largely to blame for the police-community tensions that plague South L.A., the panel claims.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
A $500 bounty on every known gang member will solve the problem in a month. The ones that are harvested will flee. Oh, wait a minute. They've disarmed everyone in LA. Never mind.
Any police officer risking their life in South L.A or Watts is deserving of respect for their dedication and bravery.
I'm not referring to incarceration.
Just pile free heroin and crack on the street corners! The thugletts will off themselves in short time!
We could free up even more by releasing non-violent drug offenders. LOL! Like that will ever happen!
And what exactly is a "non-violent drug offender"?
South LA is a criminal culture; the police are the enemy no matter how "nice" they act.
The scum sucking maggots who got caught cooking up and / or selling Meth Or...
Anyobody operating a meth lab is placing their neighbors in danger of toxic fumes and/or explosions. They deserve to be locked up.
A Crack Dealer who got busted selling his life destroying crap in a 'buy sting'.
Consensual act. Many liquor store owners are just as guilty of "destroying lives" with this argument.
Or.... A PUSHER who got caught selling Heroin to Jr High School kids?
Hyperbole. Heroin use by Jr. High School kids is very rare --as is all drug use in that age group. At any rate, if someone is busted selling drugs to children, I wouldn't cry if they were locked up.
Or.... The 'mule' that got busted with 10 Kilos of Heroin who just couldn't wait to get his shit fast enough to the 'boss' and then the PUSHER and the Jr High Kids?
Again, hyperbole. These folks make up but a fraction of drug offenders in prison. The majority behind bars are sent away for mere possesion. Often an "intent to sell" is tacked on because they possessed a certain amount above what is considered "personal use" regardless if they ever sold anything to anyone at all.
For sure, there are some drug offenders who deserve to be locked up. But there are many who pose no threat to society.
Empires consist of peoples of different religions, languages, cultures, races, and nationalities. One of these groups, a minority itself dominates the others by naked military power. Nations, on the other hand, are dominated by one group that makes up a majority of the population. Finally and most important, nations are inherently stable while empires are always inherently unstable. Nations are naturally stable because a majority of the people mutually recognize each other as co-nationals. Multiethnic empires never achieve true internal stability. They survive only by unrelenting military and police suppression of their inhabitants, and break up the minute the dominant group loses the military power, or the will, to shackle the empire's peoples together.
Multiethnic empires are always tiered, undemocratic societies because it is impossible for empires to be other than tiered, undemocratic societies. Empires are always undemocratic because the diverse peoples making up the empire have nothing in common to serve as the foundation for the empire's laws -no common mythology, no common language, no common culture, no common history, and- most important no common vision of the empire's future. Therefore, the laws of an empire are always unpopular with most of the empire's subjects, who would certainly either take over the empires's government, or set up their own new nation on a portion of the empire if they could do so democratically. Therefore, the people must be denied democracy in order to hold the empire together and force must be used to keep the resulting undemocratic and unpopular imperial government in power.
Empires are necessarily tiered because a certain group or groups must be given special privileges to enlist their support in the subjugation of the other groups. The more groups an empire has, the more tiers it will have.
Why anyone would want to be a police officer there is beyond me.Had a fellow freeper who took the test to be a NYC police officer.He commented that quite a few of the people taking the test looked like they should be in the jail!
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.