This article is behind the times. Many conservatives I know stopped knee-jerk defending the police years ago.
At the very least, it should be easier to fire police officers than it currently is and police departments need to do a much better job of screening police applicants. If things don’t change, the police will lose the confidence of the public and will deserve to.
I hope the author of this article doesn’t have a dog.
Guns don’t kill. Police Do.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Never let the government unionize against you.
Who can stop the police today? It will take a huge, long term national campaign, to get the police back under the control of the citizens.
It will be the democrats and the left against the conservatives, it won’t start completely that way at first, but in time, as the battle lines harden and the politics of the situation become more clear, we will discover that unionized city and state employees are a force of the left.
IE: take it out of their pension or departmental funding or pay (or all of the above) and you'll see shenanigans end real quick. Or auction off their MRAPs.
When a country fights a long series of low-intensity wars, soldiers are expected to act like cops, and later cops act like soldiers.
Everyone has black nomex kook gear and MRAPS; equipment is driving patrolling decisions.
EVERYONE will get an eye put out.
We need more adults —get rid of the gear.
What I’m hearing in this is every cop is guilty every time....
I think we are all smart enough to look at the facts and consider the source.
I have no time for those who leach off of society by illegal means and then think they can bitch when they get caught. Fight the cops get hurt or dead, be stupid, pay the price and that goes for both males and females.
I’m more upset about them automatically shooting dogs...
| It’s Time for Conservatives to Stop Defending Police | ||
|
07/22/2014 9:32:19 PM PDT · by chessplayer · 144 replies
|
||
“Who can defend this?”
Sean Hannity, last night.
The article is spot on. I serve on a public school board and it took hours of persuasion of other “conservative” members to convince them the school district should not start a police force. Every political subdivision in my area including city, county, port authority, marina, urban school disticts, lifeguards, game wardens, environmental enforcement, and so on ad nauseum, all have police forces. And guess what? They all have SWAT teams, body armor, automatic weapons, riot gear and armored vehicles.
The police state is upon us and it is going to take a major upheavel to reverse this trend. No politician anywhere wants to be portrayed as anti-police.
Next to massive illegal immigration, police militarization is the greatest threat to American citizen’s safety and welfare today.
TC
The “police can do no wrong” group on FR has faded away pretty much.
I have had 12 interactions with the police in my life. 6 times, I was the victim of a crime and the police did nothing. The other 6 times I was jacked up and fined while attempting to legally go about my day.
Cops are revenuers for the welfare state.
I have been vehemently AGAINST virtually ALL POLICE since they decided to become “law enforcement officers” instead of “Peace Officers”, they truly are the modern day GESTAPO, and they can all Burn in HELL as far as I am concerned. If one was on fire I wouldn’t piss on him to put it out.
ps I lived on a street with 9 cops, everyone as dishonest and morally bankrupt as anyone could possibly be.
As my psychotherapist Mother likes to say “cops are criminals with guilty consciences...”
Sounds like National Review is behind the curve. We on FR have been alarmed by police militarization for some years now.
Sue the unions and the police will fall in line. Police only get away with what the unions let them get away with. Same for all civil service.
Instead of this pro-police, anti-police argument, the problem is not the police, as such, it is in the rules under which they operate, that needs significant reform.
This begins at the state level with the passage of “police de-paramilitarization” laws. This alone will end many or even most of the problems that exist between the public and the police.
The primary purpose of the law is to sever the direct connection between local police and the federal government, a connection that has caused a multitude of problems.
1) States must create an official Table of Equipment for police departments. Any weapons and equipment not on the list is to be turned over to the state police, or Sheriff, if that is how the state wants to go. This also means that the federals can no longer directly fund police departments.
2) All communications between local police departments and the federals also must go through the state police. This includes communications equipment open to federal surveillance.
3) All SWAT operations are under the direct control of the state police. Severe restrictions should be placed on no-knock and warrantless searches. One rule already proposed in Arizona is that any evidence obtained in searches based on secret or classified information is inadmissible in state courts. Likewise, a judge must allow searches based on anonymous information.
4) The curricular of state police academies will be rewritten to reduce confrontational behavior with the public.
The bottom line to all of this is that police are not public masters, they are just a convenience, and all citizens of good character are expected to enforce the law.
The purpose of the police is three fold, to compose a round the clock ‘watch’ for communities; to gather evidence of crimes having been committed; and to doggedly pursue criminal suspects.