5 ms·

> Not only that, but people forget that most of the people police come into professional contact with are, in fact, criminals. Really? You think that most of t

> Not only that, but people forget that most of the people police come into professional contact with are, in fact, criminals. Really? You think that most of the people police come into contact with are criminals? How many arrests does a police officer make on an average night (X) and how many people does the officer contact (Y)? I'm guessing Y >> X.

ben0x539 13y ago
Gonna argue that it's trivially true because everybody is effectively "a criminal", that is, guilty of some crime or other.
Loughla 13y ago
You're arguing semantics and contributing nothing to the actual discussion. Most of the people the officers come into contact with on a regular basis that have meaningful impacts on the way the officers view those around them are criminals. Will the cop remember the young man who helped an old lady across the road, or the young man who stabbed and raped the same old lady? I come into contact with literally thousands of people every week, but the same 20-30 have an impact on my life, and are the ones that I would say I actually come into contact with. Don't argue semantics, it genuinely adds nothing to the conversation.
jamesbritt 13y ago
This is a very good point, given the number of casual interactions a typical cop might have on a given day. Still, based on what I know from having worked with cops and having cop family members, the job can change you. Cops are prone to seeing a side of life most of use are lucky to only read about. I think we all like to believe that were it us we would not become cynical and jaded about humanity but that seems to be tougher than one might expect. It's sadly common for too many cops to start thinking that everyone they meet is guilty of something and they just haven't been caught (yet).
ewoodrich 13y ago
Not to put words in tptacek's mouth, but I believe that assertion was related to his subsequent point about the recent trend of officers moving from "the beat" to patrol cars where they primarily respond to crimes. In the past, it was far more common for the bulk of the police force to spend time patrolling on foot and interacting with law abiding citizens and criminals alike. Whereas now, except for certain exceptions such as in more "progressive" police forces or in downtown urban areas, most cops are somewhat detached from the public, except when responding to a crime.
- krakensden 13y ago
  > the recent trend of officers moving from "the beat" to patrol cars ... Isn't this a 30 year old complaint, at least?
  - ewoodrich 13y ago
    True enough. Recent defined as <35 years. Which in US historical terms, is still not so long.
  - vellum 13y ago
    The LAPD started doing this in the 50s-60s, under Bill Parker. Parker's experience with the larger by per capita force of his early career led him to estimate that fewer but more professional officers would mean less corruption. Additionally, the strategy of changing the beat posture to one of mobility led to change from foot patrols to one which favored police cars. Not incidentally, this also furthered Parker's belief that isolating his officers from the streets would reduce opportunities for corruption. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Parker_(police_officer) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Parker_(police_offic...
tptacek 13y ago
"Professional contact". I chose my words carefully.
- vidarh 13y ago
  Unless you effectively narrowly define "professional contact" to mean situations where they are responding to a crime, I don't for a second believe you're right.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    Almost, modulo the fact that the police are called into situations that may/may not involve crimes, but either way involve something bad enough that the police are called. The CPD in Englewood don't spend a lot of time giving directions or registering bicycles or helping get cats out of trees. Either way, my point was clear. If you disagree with it, I'm happy to hear why. But I'm not interested in this semantic argument.

ben0x539 13y ago

Gonna argue that it's trivially true because everybody is effectively "a criminal", that is, guilty of some crime or other.

Loughla 13y ago

You're arguing semantics and contributing nothing to the actual discussion. Most of the people the officers come into contact with on a regular basis that have meaningful impacts on the way the officers view those around them are criminals. Will the cop remember the young man who helped an old lady across the road, or the young man who stabbed and raped the same old lady? I come into contact with literally thousands of people every week, but the same 20-30 have an impact on my life, and are the ones that I would say I actually come into contact with. Don't argue semantics, it genuinely adds nothing to the conversation.

jamesbritt 13y ago

This is a very good point, given the number of casual interactions a typical cop might have on a given day. Still, based on what I know from having worked with cops and having cop family members, the job can change you. Cops are prone to seeing a side of life most of use are lucky to only read about. I think we all like to believe that were it us we would not become cynical and jaded about humanity but that seems to be tougher than one might expect. It's sadly common for too many cops to start thinking that everyone they meet is guilty of something and they just haven't been caught (yet).

ewoodrich 13y ago

Not to put words in tptacek's mouth, but I believe that assertion was related to his subsequent point about the recent trend of officers moving from "the beat" to patrol cars where they primarily respond to crimes. In the past, it was far more common for the bulk of the police force to spend time patrolling on foot and interacting with law abiding citizens and criminals alike. Whereas now, except for certain exceptions such as in more "progressive" police forces or in downtown urban areas, most cops are somewhat detached from the public, except when responding to a crime.

krakensden 13y ago
> the recent trend of officers moving from "the beat" to patrol cars ... Isn't this a 30 year old complaint, at least?
- ewoodrich 13y ago
  True enough. Recent defined as <35 years. Which in US historical terms, is still not so long.
- vellum 13y ago
  The LAPD started doing this in the 50s-60s, under Bill Parker. Parker's experience with the larger by per capita force of his early career led him to estimate that fewer but more professional officers would mean less corruption. Additionally, the strategy of changing the beat posture to one of mobility led to change from foot patrols to one which favored police cars. Not incidentally, this also furthered Parker's belief that isolating his officers from the streets would reduce opportunities for corruption. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Parker_(police_officer) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Parker_(police_offic...

tptacek 13y ago

"Professional contact". I chose my words carefully.

vidarh 13y ago
Unless you effectively narrowly define "professional contact" to mean situations where they are responding to a crime, I don't for a second believe you're right.
- tptacek 13y ago
  Almost, modulo the fact that the police are called into situations that may/may not involve crimes, but either way involve something bad enough that the police are called. The CPD in Englewood don't spend a lot of time giving directions or registering bicycles or helping get cats out of trees. Either way, my point was clear. If you disagree with it, I'm happy to hear why. But I'm not interested in this semantic argument.