You first claimed you "don't think the police 'wish to mess' with ANYBODY."
You then went on to demonstrate that's exactly what you think.
papertyger: "Why did you reply to my post?"
Because you are reporting, or fantasizing, police malfeasance that I have no experience of and would never presume absent strong evidence.
Sure, nobody imagines police are 100% perfect 100% of the time, but like President Trump, I think police have gotten a very bad rap in recent years, resulting in more crime, even against police themselves.
I think they need and deserve better public support, especially from our elected leaders.
I take it you disagree?
Look up "the excluded middle," dude. Not wanting your boat rocked is not the same as what you'll do when it is. It's not that hard a distinction to make.
Because you are reporting, or fantasizing, police malfeasance that I have no experience of and would never presume absent strong evidence.
No one is asking you to "presume," anything. An objective assessment of common standards and practices is all that's expected. But pray tell what "evidence" have you even considered? I just gave you an example of the cognitive dissonance, without which, a cop will not be allowed to advance higher than ticket writer.
It's awfully hard for me to give unqualified support to an entire profession when by all indications that profession requires, either by inclination or by training, one to be a high functioning sociopath.
Furthermore, it's awfully hard for me to give credence to your opinion regarding an entire profession when by all indications you've neither examined, nor had cause to question their occupational standards and practices.
But you don't have to take my word for it. Just watch a few YouTube videos of lawyers speaking on how (and why) to behave when stopped by the police.