4 ms·

Are you saying cops don’t serve and protect? Do you know any who rushed into active mass shooting scenes, which is clearly a dangerous place to be? If you did,

Are you saying cops don’t serve and protect? Do you know any who rushed into active mass shooting scenes, which is clearly a dangerous place to be? If you did, then you might think differently. Have cops used undue force? Yes. Are there some that are on a power trip and need to be fired? Yes. That doesn’t change what the police officers I know are like, nor the risks they are taking with every patrol. I think the main legitimate beef I’ve seen is how seemingly good cops still stand up for cops that are obviously bad.

mint2 5y ago
Look at the LA times report on the the Torrence police department. A substantial number of officers were texting klan like message and bragging about racially profiling and lying about it. Note the articles refer back to earlier texting scandals in places like SF where recently cops were caught on camera just sitting around watching people rob a dispensary. It’s obvious some cops do not serve and protect, and there are too few good cops holding their own accountable. We need cops but the current state of the force is untenable and unprofessional
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > It’s obvious some cops do not serve and protect All cops “serve and protect”. The problem with isn’t that those verbs don’t apply, it is the objects of the verbs. Who do they serve and what do they protect.
- mostertoaster 5y ago
  > It’s obvious some cops do not serve and protect, Completely agree > and there are too few good cops holding their own accountable Maybe true in SF and other progressive cities, but I’m doubtful this is the norm across all police departments. The problem is people are treating all cops the same. In Oakland there might be a good precinct, and a bad one, if you treat the good like the bad, all you will be left with is the bad. Still if it is bad enough might make sense to just turn it all over.
  - uoaei 5y ago
    > Maybe true in SF and other progressive cities, but I’m doubtful this is the norm across all police departments. Hypothesizing too few good cops in progressive cities, and implying (happily assuming) there are plenty of good cops in conservative areas to keep checks and balances? Color me unconvinced. > The problem is people are treating all cops the same. The phrase "a bad apple spoils the barrel" absolutely applies in fraternistic, spartan settings of indoctrination such as "the brotherhood". Yes cops literally call it that; the dominant culture has most people in the course of their duties acting tough by cosplaying military with looser rules of engagement, and other impressionable folks fall into a similar pattern to be accepted by a community that they hold in respect (their brothers, not the citizenry). If you are relatively free-thinking, you are filtered out at the application level. If you somehow slip through, you have no power to make real change. We know this from countless examples of those who left the force after seeing obscene behavior. Chris Dorner's case is the most prominent recent example I can think of right now.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  > Look at the LA times report on the the Torrence police department. A substantial number of officers were texting klan like message and bragging about racially profiling and lying about it. LA also has a serious problem with cop gangs[1] that have murdered people. [1] https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/los-angeles-sheriffs-department-gangs-rand-report-1225982/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/los-ange...
monocasa 5y ago
Police have fought for and received the legal right to not serve and protect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Nor are they required to rush into an active shooter situation any more than any other citizen https://abcnews.go.com/US/cop-fired-parkland-shooting-job-back-back-pay/story?id=70678466 https://abcnews.go.com/US/cop-fired-parkland-shooting-job-ba...
verall 5y ago
dude the cops on power trips don't need to be fired, they need to be prosecuted. It is insane we give people both deadly weapons and wide judgement for when to use them and then the worst that occurs in most cases of misuse is firing.
uoaei 5y ago
Aside from the other responses you have received, I want to say: Exceptions do not disprove the rule. We can look to one or a handful of officers who put on their big kid pants and fulfilled the nominal job description that they consensually agreed to (despite not being required to do so, by law). Statistically speaking, they are completely insignificant when you want to draw conclusions such as those you imply are proven by the counterexample you've provided. "Police officers you know" are probably nice to you, and recount stories from their perspective. Sure some may actually be decent, but again, that's not exactly a safe bet considering the evidence we have. Even with the 5th amendment, we can include the evidence that cops regularly hide evidence which would otherwise make them look bad as a factor in comprehending the reality of the situation. Even the nice ones among the officers you know are regularly silent about numerous abuses, large and small. The fact that no one speaks up against the ne'er-do-wells means they are complicit. Complicity is generally not any more morally good than performing the action yourself, especially when you are in a position to prevent it from happening.
syysilma 5y ago
for every story of heroics there are 10^n times as many of bad experiences ranging from petty issues to brutality. police do not only not serve and protect, they frequently actively harm the communities they patrol anecdotal counter-evidence will not be taken as a valid argument, either - just because you know cops that haven't either harmed you or claim to not have harmed anyone unjustly doesn't make policing as a whole less morally reprehensible

mint2 5y ago

Look at the LA times report on the the Torrence police department. A substantial number of officers were texting klan like message and bragging about racially profiling and lying about it. Note the articles refer back to earlier texting scandals in places like SF where recently cops were caught on camera just sitting around watching people rob a dispensary. It’s obvious some cops do not serve and protect, and there are too few good cops holding their own accountable. We need cops but the current state of the force is untenable and unprofessional

dragonwriter 5y ago
> It’s obvious some cops do not serve and protect All cops “serve and protect”. The problem with isn’t that those verbs don’t apply, it is the objects of the verbs. Who do they serve and what do they protect.
mostertoaster 5y ago
> It’s obvious some cops do not serve and protect, Completely agree > and there are too few good cops holding their own accountable Maybe true in SF and other progressive cities, but I’m doubtful this is the norm across all police departments. The problem is people are treating all cops the same. In Oakland there might be a good precinct, and a bad one, if you treat the good like the bad, all you will be left with is the bad. Still if it is bad enough might make sense to just turn it all over.
- uoaei 5y ago
  > Maybe true in SF and other progressive cities, but I’m doubtful this is the norm across all police departments. Hypothesizing too few good cops in progressive cities, and implying (happily assuming) there are plenty of good cops in conservative areas to keep checks and balances? Color me unconvinced. > The problem is people are treating all cops the same. The phrase "a bad apple spoils the barrel" absolutely applies in fraternistic, spartan settings of indoctrination such as "the brotherhood". Yes cops literally call it that; the dominant culture has most people in the course of their duties acting tough by cosplaying military with looser rules of engagement, and other impressionable folks fall into a similar pattern to be accepted by a community that they hold in respect (their brothers, not the citizenry). If you are relatively free-thinking, you are filtered out at the application level. If you somehow slip through, you have no power to make real change. We know this from countless examples of those who left the force after seeing obscene behavior. Chris Dorner's case is the most prominent recent example I can think of right now.
heavyset_go 5y ago
> Look at the LA times report on the the Torrence police department. A substantial number of officers were texting klan like message and bragging about racially profiling and lying about it. LA also has a serious problem with cop gangs[1] that have murdered people. [1] https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/los-angeles-sheriffs-department-gangs-rand-report-1225982/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/los-ange...

monocasa 5y ago

Police have fought for and received the legal right to not serve and protect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Nor are they required to rush into an active shooter situation any more than any other citizen https://abcnews.go.com/US/cop-fired-parkland-shooting-job-back-back-pay/story?id=70678466 https://abcnews.go.com/US/cop-fired-parkland-shooting-job-ba...

verall 5y ago

dude the cops on power trips don't need to be fired, they need to be prosecuted. It is insane we give people both deadly weapons and wide judgement for when to use them and then the worst that occurs in most cases of misuse is firing.

uoaei 5y ago

Aside from the other responses you have received, I want to say: Exceptions do not disprove the rule. We can look to one or a handful of officers who put on their big kid pants and fulfilled the nominal job description that they consensually agreed to (despite not being required to do so, by law). Statistically speaking, they are completely insignificant when you want to draw conclusions such as those you imply are proven by the counterexample you've provided. "Police officers you know" are probably nice to you, and recount stories from their perspective. Sure some may actually be decent, but again, that's not exactly a safe bet considering the evidence we have. Even with the 5th amendment, we can include the evidence that cops regularly hide evidence which would otherwise make them look bad as a factor in comprehending the reality of the situation. Even the nice ones among the officers you know are regularly silent about numerous abuses, large and small. The fact that no one speaks up against the ne'er-do-wells means they are complicit. Complicity is generally not any more morally good than performing the action yourself, especially when you are in a position to prevent it from happening.

syysilma 5y ago

for every story of heroics there are 10^n times as many of bad experiences ranging from petty issues to brutality. police do not only not serve and protect, they frequently actively harm the communities they patrol anecdotal counter-evidence will not be taken as a valid argument, either - just because you know cops that haven't either harmed you or claim to not have harmed anyone unjustly doesn't make policing as a whole less morally reprehensible