Posted on 08/15/2014 5:05:16 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
If you’ve been watching cable news, reading Hollywood celebrities’ tweets, and listening to race-hustling opportunists, you might think that every police officer in America has a finger on the trigger, hunting for any excuse to gun down defenseless youths.
This hysterical nonsense must be stopped.
The Cirque du Cop-Bashing, with Al Sharpton as ringmaster, is working overtime to exploit the deadly incident in Ferguson, Mo. That means stoking anti–law enforcement fires at all costs.
Are there bad cops? Yes. Does the police state go overboard sometimes? Yes. Do the demagogues decrying systemic racism and braying about “assassinations” know what happened when teenager Mike Brown was tragically shot and killed last week? No.
Here’s a reality check. While narcissistic liberal journalists and college kids are all posting “hands up” selfies in hipster solidarity with Ferguson protesters, it’s law-enforcement officers who risk their lives in “war zones” every day across the country.
The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund (NLEOMF) reports that a total of 1,501 law-enforcement officers died in the line of duty during the past ten years, an average of one death every 58 hours, or 150 per year. These include local and state police officers, federal officers, correctional officers, and military law-enforcement officers.
Fact: Last year, 100 law-enforcement officers were killed. On average, over the past decade, there have been 58,261 assaults against law enforcement each year, resulting in 15,658 injuries.
Fact: New York City has lost more officers in the line of duty than any other department, with 697 deaths. Texas has lost 1,675 officers, more than any other state.
Just this week, NLEOMF released preliminary fatality statistics from August 2013 to August 2014. Total fatalities are up 14 percent, from 63 last year to 72 this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
If that's the one I am thinking of, the police did better after they obtained some rifles--of the same sort there was a waiting period to obtain if you were an ordinary citizen (AR-15s).
I am a pretty large fellow myself, but if I used that size and power as a weapon, someone smaller might just shoot me, and depending on the circumstances, that might be justifiable--not that I go around attacking smaller people.
Even without fighting over possession of the firearm, people are killed by being beaten to death with fists or feet, and classified that way in the crime stats. With malicious intent and trying to take the officer's firearm? You are going to get shot.
Agreed!
Sadly, though, the media have a tendency to spin the prosecution of the bad elements against the good ones. I saw an article a while back that ranked the most corrupt states by the number of prosecutions of public servants caught pulling some crap.
No, not likely. The most corrupt ones are the ones where they all have each others' backs and no one gets prosecuted.
Look at how the rhetoric changed in that era, though. It went from fighting crime to the "war on this" and the "war on that", as if that justified the extraConstitutional tweaks in tactics and shift in equipment.
When everything is a "War", you're going to get a Fort Apache attitude.
Movies were as responsible for the shift as the daily media rhetoric, but protect and serve went out the window in a lot of places on account of the 'war' and the 'us vs them' attitude (easy enough to get when you deal with dregs daily), and it became CYA and get home, put in 20 or 25 and collect your check.
I'm not saying all LEOs are that way, not by a long shot, but there are enclaves where the attitude seems to prevail.
Actually, the perps were wearing more than full combat gear. When they were finally brought down, it was a shot to the ankle that found a gap in the armor. Those guys had vests wrapped around their legs, padded, etc.
The police had handguns against that, and need something with more penetration and precision.
Simply put, though, those were city police, and a more rural Sheriff's deputy would likely have had the firepower to end that more quickly. One good shooter with a scoped rifle and a little standoff capability would have been able to make short work of that situation.
What exactly is a “police state?” A state under the rule of law? I thought that’s what conservatives valued.
Rule of law without law ENFORCEMENT is a farce.
As you pointed out, the way to stop bad guys with full-auto weapons is a good rifle.
Domestic law enforcement should NEVER UNDER ANY IRCUMSTANCES have full-auto weapons.
The U.S. Postal Service Sniper Team is a good place to start looking if you are trying to find the police state.
A police state is where the individual is presumed guilty at all times.
Limited government orders the State to declare that individuals are innocent until proven guilty.
Both under “rules of law” but the context is different.
Rule of law without law ENFORCEMENT is a farce.
I would submit that your assumptions are wrong. First, your definition of a police state is wrong. And no, it's not at all what conservatives value. One major point that some are missing is that former "law and order" type conservatives now no longer assume that cops are lawful or orderly. Many, like myself, no longer give cops the benefit of the doubt - even though for most of my life I certainly did. -- And your final fatal flaw is the assumption that enforcement is really enforcing LAW. Sometimes enforcement is just raw brute power.
That was also an outlier fluke freak one time event. To make law, to equip, and to form tactics on such a basis is exactly how liberals grow government power…..use a single event to trample everyone’s rights.
And another thing: cops in classic blues - the cruiser - the hat, the pistol, maybe a club, and the badge - evokes a certain kind of image, thought process and emotion.
A cop who looks just like our special forces from Iraq or Afghanistan, right down to the pseudo nazi style helmets and Humvee - evokes an entirely different image, thought process, and emotion. Both for LEO and citizen.
True, and I would also add that to be completely accurate, it is important to add that this attitude is growing rapidly and that many LEO's now only "protect and serve" themselves and their unions. They get that macho "we're better than everybody else" from the absurd Horatio character on CSI Miami, for example….
I'm no cop hater, and never used the word pig in that context:
HOWEVER: Perhaps it has escaped your notice that cops of today are NOT THE COPS of our childhood. Perhaps it has escaped your notice that many cops today ARE THE ENEMY OF A FREE REPUBLIC. Seems you have anger towards us conservatives who have that figured out. I would suggest you learn from us, and not insult us.
Protect and serve is a quaint, pollyannish and outdated notion…..SADLY!
I bet cops “laugh” at that now. I know for a fact many totally reject the notion that “they work for us.” Totally reject it…..and that’s a dangerous situation.
Hey don’t fog up the thread with facts dang it ....:o)
Hope yer well...Stay safe !
I try to keep a respectful mind frame towards cops, they are on the job 24/7 and put do risk life and limb to keep us safe. However there is no limit on their authority if they want to go too far. I am supposed to submit to whatever they want and if I don't I'm risking my life. I can only submit and then hope I can redress my grievances later. That gives an enormous potential for abuses of power.
I was watching an old episode of Hawaii 5-0; forget the name of the episode but it was season 1. Danny shoots a punk who was breaking into a car after a long chase. The whole episode was about having to find the punks gun or Danny was going to be in big trouble. Ha! Who cares, now a days, the revenuers have every right to fill you full of holes. Ask Randy Weaver. We shouldn't feel lucky that a boy scout troop escaped with their lives after an encounter with border patrol. As citizens of a constitutional republic we ought to have the right to tell the authorities to stop if they are violating our rights. I'm also not above thinking that some swat teams might carry a baggie of evidence to “discover” should they get the wrong house.
I shouldn't have to worry that the police will kick in my door in the dead of night with more authorization to kill than Marines hunting terrorists. As decent law abiding citizens we are figured to be guilty until proven innocent. What good are rights if all you can do is beg for justice after the fact?
I'm sure the cops know this. There's a lot of info out there about how "neighborhood cops" walking a beat in their blues is a comfort emotionally and intellectually - so they have to know that when every podunk little berg has some unit that makes the original LA SWAT team look like little league baseball squad is simply a way of enforcing brute government power unchecked.
I am stunned how many Freepers are stuck in the 1980s or heck, the 1960s about how conservatives should view cops. This is an entirely new world of LEOs and it ain't good….
That “put yourself out there” argument is just a straw liberal infantile talking point….you know, if you aren’t gay, you can’t comment on gay - if you aren’t a woman, you can’t comment on abortion, if you aren’t a veteran, you can’t be pro military and a hawk - blah blah blah……it’s just infantile bullsh-t.
As citizens, we can, and have the responsibility, to comment on cops. Not doing enough of it has helped pervert the whole notion of what it means to be a cop. This is relatively new.
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.