Police Officer Blames Everyone Else But Police Officers For The Public's General Distrust Of Law Enforcement
from the also:-Ferguson,-because-#trending dept
Deputy Matt -- the pseudonym employed by the law enforcement officer behind this op-ed -- is here to blame everyone else but he and his fellow officers for today's law enforcement-hostile climate. It all leads back to Ferguson…
When we finally located the son, who is of mixed ethnicity (dad is white, mom is Hispanic), he instantly began cussing and yelling at us. He took a fighting stance and said he was not going to do anything we told him.From the strength of a single anecdote, a nationwide attitude is extrapolated. It's not just criminals -- who Deputy Matt fully expects to be less-than-submissive -- it's everybody.
Luckily, we were able to calm him and get him into handcuffs without any blows being thrown.
We asked why he was so hostile towards us. His response? Ferguson. The cops could not be trusted because of what happened in Ferguson, Missouri. He told us that he wanted to kill all white cops because of what “they” had done to Michael Brown.
Sadly, this feeling has not only infected the normal criminal element that I expect that behavior from, but even seems to be effecting [sic] middle class families as well.As goes the middle class, so goes the country. Deputy Matt could learn something from reactions to Ferguson. He could. But he finds it easier to blame everyone else for the unpleasantness of his job. Cops are still the wonderful, self-sacrificing people they've always been, he says. It's the American public that's gone downhill.
The same people who we used to count on for support, the good, law abiding general public, are now reluctant to trust us.The public is wrong. And why is the public wrong? Because it's too stupid to avoid being led by the nose.
We, the local cops they have seen and contacted in the past, have not changed. We have done nothing different.
What has changed is the public’s perception of us, created by the reckless reporting by nearly every news outlet very early after the shooting of Michael Brown. The rush to be first with the story over the desire to be correct is having dire consequences nationwide, and quite honestly, has made my job more difficult and more dangerous.While I have my own issues with mainstream media and its shallow coverage of certain issues, Deputy Matt's problem seems to be that this one time, the slant briefly went the other direction. For the most part, the mainstream doesn't cover incidents like these. And when it does, it follows safe narratives (rioters!) and grants way too much deference to statements made by law enforcement/government officials. Compared to the way those outside the mainstream cover incidents like officer-involved shootings, Deputy Matt would be better off not biting the hand that (more often than not) feeds him.
Going beyond the thinly-veiled insults (people are stupid and they get their information from sensationalistic sources) to the heart of Deputy Matt's argument ('It's everyone else!'), I'm inclined to agree with the general push of his article: cops haven't changed.
To Deputy Matt, this signifies the blame should lie with the public. To anyone who's been paying attention over the past several years, the problem is that cops haven't changed. Many still believe they can operate without scrutiny, oversight or accountability. The omnipresence of recording devices (operated by both the public and officers themselves) doesn't prevent misconduct, brutality or unjustified killings. It just makes it more difficult to cover up. It also (very occasionally) forces law enforcement officials to hold officers accountable, but these are sadly still the exception rather than the rule.
Putting more eyes on officer behavior and tactics -- whether it's by bloggers and journalists dedicated to this field or by the thousands of hours of amateur footage hosted at YouTube -- has resulted in a shift in the public's perception. But Deputy Matt is wrong to blame it on the public… or mass media… or Ferguson. The problem is Deputy Matt and the officers he's decided to speak for. They haven't changed.
The cop who always laid a few extra licks on an "uncooperative" arrestee still does so… only there's a good chance the punches/baton swings/taser bursts have been captured on "tape." The cop who always performed a little extracurricular searching during routine traffic stops continues to do so… only now he's being served with civil rights lawsuits and the dashcam recording of his illegal efforts is splashed all over the news thanks to the plaintiff's lawyer.
If the public no longer implicitly trusts the police to be the "good guys," the problem isn't the public. It's the cops who take money from citizens just because local laws say they can. It's the multiple agencies who feel the only way to handle the drug problem is as violently as possible. It's cops who shoot people's pets, rather than allow the animals' owners to restrain them. It's officers who constantly "fear for their lives" endangering the lives of citizens around them with careless use of deadly force. This is what's changed the public's perception of law enforcement. Sure, some of it may be based on bad info and careless hyperbole, but a majority of the damage done to the reputation of law enforcement has been inflicted by the officers themselves.
Ferguson may have (slightly) altered the mainstream media's approach to officer-involved shootings. The more apparent side effect has been a heightened awareness of the immense divide between the general public and those charged with policing them. In between, there's a certain amount of hashtag activism and coat tail riders -- some of which culminates in a teen arrestee miles from ground zero name-dropping Ferguson as an excuse for his anti-cop aggression.
But Deputy Matt's complaint ignores even the slightest, most minimal bit of culpability on behalf of his fellow officers. This massive blind spot prevents him from seeing the truth directly in front of him: if the public -- generally-speaking -- no longer trusts police officers, it's because -- generally-speaking -- police officers aren't worthy of the public's trust.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: mistrust, police, police brutality, public
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Respect and trust are earned, If you want it back, start earning it back.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Missed a few
Or pedophiles.
Or pedophile terrorists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Missed a few
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Missed a few
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Respect and trust are earned, If you want it back, start earning it back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Trust is earned, I couldn't agree more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Trust is earned, Respect is learned.
You learn to respect the police the same way you learn to respect rattlesnakes, avalanches and 4-way stops.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Given its readerbase, I am surprised that Deputy Matt does not condemn his fellow officers for a lack of 'personal responsibility.'. Oh wait, to people like him it's everyone else that lacks responsibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Oct 20th, 2014 @ 8:22am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Though I get the feeling he is another guy that believes the laws do not apply to cops because they say they do not apply.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Did the officer talk him down because they didn't have tasers?
Or did they talk him down despite having tasers?
In a way, the officer's confusion actually speaks well of him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The big change in the cops is the use of cars for patrols, which isolate them from the people, and reliance on radio to summons other cops to their assistance, rather than a whistle to summon the local populace to their assistance. They have become a reactive force, rather than a proactive force, and have isolated themselves from the people that they are meant to serve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hm... Slight problem with Deputy Matt's rant - the Idea that Trust is a Given.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a sick joke...
1. kops are being killed on the job at the lowest numbers since the 18-fucking-hundreds; retail clerks are killed on the job at a higher rate, firefighters are killed TWICE as much, cabbies are killed on the job 5-6 times as much, FUCK HIM...
2. when you work as violent goons for the 1% and you 'protect and serve' their PROPERTY to the exclusion of 99% of human beans LIVES, WHY are you so fucking stupid you can't figure out that is one of a million reasons 'we all' hate you? FUCK HIM...
3. when you MURDER dogs and people WITHOUT PROVOCATION, seize/destroy homes, steal money, rape women on traffic stops, tase, spray and KILL people over NOTHING but they 'disrespected your a-thor-i-tie!', AND YOU WALK AWAY WITH NO TRIAL BUT FULL PAY 99% OF THE TIME, FUCK HIM...
4. when the biggest threat to a donut-eater is eating their OWN FUCKING GUN, WHY do you think that is ? ? ? i prefer to think those are the few who had *some* shame in the shit job they were doing to everyone else...
5. when you gang of sociopaths COVER UP the crimes and illegal behavior of your own, YOU ARE ALL GUILTY... isn't THAT EXACTLY what you accuse citizens of doing ?
sauce for the goose, sauce for the pig... (sic)
the WHOLE SYSTEM is corrupt from beginning to end...
Empire must fall,
the sooner the fall,
the gentler for all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: a sick joke... of our own making
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: a sick joke... of our own making
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: a sick joke... of our own making
Arizona's notorious sheriff Joe Arpaio is still in office, but thankfully Los Angeles county sheriff Lee "I am not a crook" Baca resigned this year in mid-term. Lee Baca was one of the most thoroughly corrupt sheriffs in recent memory, yet still managed to get reelected repeatedly. Hopefully the federal investigations targeting Baca and his administration will continue, even with him now out of office.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: a sick joke... of our own making
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's not to say they shouldn't have respect, they should. Until it's proven that specific cop has abused his power, they should be treated like normal. Innocent until proven guilty applies to them as well. They should just be watched closer while on duty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think much of the problem is that the public focuses on the wrong issues. The mainstream media is partly to blame for this. Most cops are good and the Ferguson incident isn't really an example of something worthy of the attention it received. It's example of the public directing their anger at cops for something that happened that doesn't deserve that much anger.
OTOH, when it comes to other cases, there is the perception that cops often get away with more than what a normal citizen would be allowed to. When doing something wrong they have often escaped the same punishments that a citizen would receive had they done the same thing. The system is partly to blame for that perception (though in recent years the situation does appear to be improving slightly, often due to public pressure on police departments to ensure that police are reprimanded). Often times judges punish cops less, perhaps because it's a first offense. This is not always the case. There are incidents where cops with a history of misconduct are allowed to continue and they perform more acts of misconduct.
I think the biggest issue is an issue of trust. Cops have a long reputation of sticking together when it comes to telling their story even if what they're saying is a lie (and yes, this does make every cop involved guilty though it could be the case that a cop that doesn't go along will be blackballed by the other cops and the police department may later somehow find bogus reasons to release the cop from the department). The public doesn't trust their trustworthiness and, often times, for good reason. When trust breaks down everything begins to go wrong (for everyone) and everything becomes a game of hearsay. I think one potential solution is to require cops to hold more of the burden of proving their case. They should carry cameras around and record incidents themselves and the uncut footage should (non-selectively) be released to the public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and of course the numerous intimidations and arrests made on reporters just for trying to do their jobs in ferguson.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/missouri-officers-job-ferguson-threats-article-1.1921 712
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Because, of course, a young unarmed black man who lives in a community that's been victimized by its own police department for decades is going to pick a fight with an armed white cop. Yep. He's going to do that for exactly no reason whatsoever, and then -- after he's been shot and has run away -- he's going to turn and charge toward the guy who shot him.
That is the narrative from the FPD and that is the story they will stick to, because any/all forensic evidence or testimony which contradicts it is being rendered moot. Why do you think that there's STILL no incident report?
So no, this investigation hasn't been botched. It has been conducted with the utmost care and attention to detail. It just doesn't have the objective that you and I might wish it has. It has nothing to do with establishing the truth and everything to do with sustaining the narrative. And in that narrative, Brown was just another drug-using petty-thieving uneducated jobless thug and Wilson a brave selfless police officer defending himself from a horrific unprovoked attack. So must it be, because in the 4.5 hours while Brown's body lay baking in the August sun, so it was decided. Everything since has already been written, and when the grand jury does not indict, and St. Louis burns, that will be written too: "now you see that the lawless and violent mob must be put down with military force and chemical weapons, for they do not respect authority and the rule of law...annnnd also they are black and scary and probably terrorists and maybe carrying Ebola".
Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
Everybody knows that the war is over
Everybody knows that the good guys lost
Everybody knows that the fight was fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich -- that's how it goes
Everybody knows
--- "Everybody Knows", Leonard Cohen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'll put it simply in Mathematical terms. Take the Statement "All Cops can be trusted", there are multiple examples where this statement fails which in turns proves that the statement is not accurate by counter example.
While I understand that he is frustrated that the public does not want to work with him this unfortunately is the nature of his Job and it will always happen.
The only way to change public Opinion has been to show that you are willing to change and actually change. However as Tim explained there are too many cops out there who abuse the power they have and it reflects badly on those who don't abuse their power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Exactly. Now people are finally fed up with getting mauled, beaten, shot and killed for no reason aside from "cop was scared for his ass".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Power corrupts even hobbits
Everyone with power thinks themselves immune to its corrupting influence and the more power they have, the less they think they have. They need more.
In the end, even good Frodo was corrupted by the ring.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It went something like this: A few Colonial troublemakers incited a riot, and worked to bring more and more people to the scene so they could stir up more trouble. The British soldiers exercised extreme restraint for several hours, making a show of force to try to persuade the colonists to disperse, while they were being taunted and having things thrown at them and literally dared to fire on the crowd.
After one of the Colonials physically attacked him with a club, one soldier lost his cool and fired his musket. In the confusion that followed, several other soldiers fired, and a grand total of five people ended up dead. Not much of a massacre, really, but then the media got ahold of it and blew the whole thing out of proportion, and before anyone knew it there was a war on.
So yeah, it actually does sound a lot like Ferguson, except the whole part about the rabble-rousers actually being successful in inciting serious social upheaval. Thankfully, that hasn't happened yet, and I hope it never does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
But today, there's a gargantuan difference between the weapons that the American civilians are allowed to have and the weapons the military and police possess. Any citizens' armed uprising, no matter how popular, would be destined to fail, and fail miserably.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
All that would be required is the will to resist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.reddit.com/r/defaultgems/comments/2d11wn/uthats_not_all_explains_why_the_us_military_woul d/
But models of predictive behavior mean little. War can be a total crapshoot and no one ever really knows how it will progress. A civilian uprising is even more unpredictable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If we're going to discuss history, then let's note that the "Boston Massacre" occurred five years before Lexington & Concord.
There's a great deal more to the story than you're allowing, including why the Colonials were there in the first place "rabble-rousing", why the soldiers were there in the first place, and what happened between March of 1770 and April of 1775.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, before the invention of the telegraph and the railroad, let alone radio and the Internet, it took a while for news to get around. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Note he is Hispanic. He has even more reasons to distrust cops and Ferguson is just a higher profile case. NYPD has some bad reputation to add with their "randomly focused" stop-frisk program. There was a case a while back where cops beat a mentally handicapped man to death a while back and many, many others that can be pulled with ease.
Some apologists still insist that these cases are the exception but it's simply bullshit. They are ignoring the fact that one of these exceptions is one too many, very few of them were properly investigated and punished and that these "exceptions are happening everywhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What, me worry?
That single story posted the other day describing the militarization of police forces ought to be all that's necessary to disprove that statement. Cops dressed in black battle dress, wielding military weaponry, arriving in vehicles gifted to them by the military, multiplied by the number of times they're called out as the first go to option?
Yet, they're incensed by someone holding a cell phone, and pointing guns into a car with small children in the back seat.
Officer Matt, you certainly have changed. The cops I've known would be appalled by behaviour such as this, yet you're defending them!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the truth hurts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
shootings
it is the reason my car now has a dash cam
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I "fear for my life", too
I don't think so. And I don't think any police officer who feels that way is WORTHY to be a police officer. The job comes with risk, and sometimes that risk is massive. Don't like it? Get a different job. But if you keep the job, then you accept the risk. Stop whining about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It isn't just Ferguson. It's year after year of mission creep and the results of that. SWAT teams to serve a search warrant or to check business licenses? Whose kidding who here? Every year the toll of citizens shot in which the end results of investigation always releases the cop, having found him blameless, is not statistically viable. There are simply too many of them. It is also an amazing coincidence that when dash cams are present they are either off, the action happens outside it's range, or the resulting film disappears into limbo. None of this supports the citizenry continuing to trust the cops.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I was with you until the end
I'm not a cop, but I'm guessing a significant number of encounters with the public end up going off without a hitch. Perhaps it's traffic stops that end with a ticket, but no other incident. Maybe it's a domestic call that ends peacefully. I don't know the percentage, but I'd think it's in the 90's.
Most people, even those who have 'earned' an encounter with LEOs, can probably be trusted to handle the situation without violence.
Still, every officer is trained to handle every situation with great care, because those 5% (+ or -) who do react negatively can have a huge impact on the safety of the officer or the public.
That's the same lesson we all have to learn. Most officers are out there doing a good job. Generally speaking, they deserve our trust. BUT, the bad apples are bad enough that we still have to be careful in every interaction.
I understand how that can be frustrating for 'Deputy Matt.' Maybe he and his department are truly the noble good guys, and his good name is being dragged through the mud through no fault of his own. What else is he to do besides all the right things? We don't know enough about him to say that he has to rebuild the public's trust.
Again: every LEO encounter should come with some level of caution and skepticism, from BOTH parties. That's hardly enough to say for certain that this particular Deputy is worthy of scorn, and that most officers are corrupt, as this post (and the comments) strongly suggests.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stop guessing at the real data.
Maybe you should stop guessing. You know what we don't have? Hard data. You know what the FBI and Department of Justice are witholding from the public? Hard data. They don't provide the numbers of how many incidents required extensive response. They don't even keep track of the number of people they shoot.
Absent in our justice system: incidents of police abuse in which the sole incriminating evidence is held by the police force. No officer is convicted by his own dash-cam unless that footage is used in the incrimination of a non-cop as well. No officer is convicted by his or her fellow officers who witnessed his crime. If there was a fair review system of police-controled media, we'd actually see incidents of this. Maybe a few a year across the country, if the police were good guys doing good work. The few exceptions to all the good apples.
But no, we get none, and that's pretty implicative of a system covering up for itself, and a system that covers for itself, in turn, implies they have something to cover.
Before Abu Graib we would have guessed that the US didn't torture. Before Snowden we would have guessed that the US didn't monitor the private communications and data of common civilians. Before the drone strike revelations, we would have guessed that we attacked only military units with them. Our guesses have, for a long time, given agents of the United States the benefit of doubt.
We need to stop doing that. We need to start assuming that anytime we don't have solid numbers, what's really going on is far worse than what we imagine is a worse-case scenario.
Incidentally, the US pinpoint bombers in WWII could drop a bomb from 40,000 feet into a pickle barrel. In real war conditions, only 30% of our bombs actually hit the target zone (factory, airfield whatever) the rest going into the housing, hospitals, orphanages or whatever else surrounded the target.
No, reality sucks, and when we make guesses, we have to take into consideration that reality sucks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Most officers are wonderful, self-sacrificing people; or at least average people who want to do their jobs well.
It's just that dealing with a random officer these days feels like playing Russian roulette. (That's a much better comparison than it might seem at first: Spin the cylinder, put the pistol to your head, and five-of-six times the chamber is empty, which is great. But if you should happen to draw the officer in that sixth chamber...)
Deputy Matt needs to take a less biased look at what's going on. People magnify bad news. When was the last time you saw a story about a cop who rescued someone, or arrested the right person, or helped someone who needed help? Right. The news about the good cops doesn't travel at all.
The most popular restaurant in town can be destroyed by one cockroach special. The customer yells, "There's a cockroach on my plate!!!", and all the customers leave. All the customers tell their friends about it. Their friends tell their friends...and before you know it, no one in town is going to the restaurant. The good news that the customer who yelled is going to prison for fraud, because he brought his own cockroach, isn't going to travel nearly fast enough to outrun the bad news.
That's human nature: Nothing travels faster than bad news. The comparative few bad apples in the police forces really give all officers a bad name, disproportionately bad, because it is only the bad news that travels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Accurate to a point, but the biggest problem, and what shrinks the number of 'good' cops into the minority, is how rarely they will go after their own. When the 'good' cops cover for the 'bad' cops, they cease to become 'good' cops.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The wonderful self sacrificing people in Law Enforcement
Not buying that at all.
Right now it's clear that the leniency-on-bad-cops sector is dominating the precincts since the bad cops are rarely getting fired or charged with assault when their actions. This is indicated further in regions such as NYC in which good cops are pressured to engage in negative behaviors (such as the stop-and-frisks) or face questionable reviews.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The wonderful self sacrificing people in Law Enforcement
This, in my opinion, has far more to do with the legal atmosphere (juries unwilling to penalize cops 'doing their duty') and police unions unwilling to give an inch (which, to be fair, is just the union doing its job) than the attitudes and actions of any regular Joe Cop.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why is irrelevant.
Cops who do bad things capitalize on a biased system, whether or not they gunned someone down in cold blood or feared for his life or made a mistake.
The public is now seeing the injustice, and just as a couple of school shootings can make it seem like the US is plagued with a school-shooting epidemic, a couple of beat-down or gunning videos and the public will start regarding it as an epidemic. The difference is we have public statistics on the number of school shootings. We don't have public statistics on the number of cops murdering people for no good reason and that data is willfully withheld.
And that implies it's as bad as we think it is, or like the rate Roman Catholic priests diddling children, much worse than we imagine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The wonderful self sacrificing people in Law Enforcement
The things you cite are additional aspects that ensure police corruption -- but I disagree that the regular cops are blameless. If regular cops actually made a big stink about the corrupt cops rather than banding together to defend them, then the police union would behave very differently, and the legal atmosphere would shift.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do what a cop tells you and you will be fine. Question his authority and you may be in trouble. I grew up being told to say yes sir no sir if talking to a cop. Today, it is different. Some wench jumps in a cops face screaming, time to get pepper sprayed or worse. Funny, today, people think that they have rights, when they should just go along, do what the cops tell them.
A cop tells kids to quite blocking traffic and get out of the street. If they do as asked, no one gets shot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That statement is pathetic on so many levels, it's disgusting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just three weeks ago, this unfortunate young Negro was shot half a dozen times by a cop for doing exactly as asked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXmVPxQGTsE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I believe that we'd rather be policed by our fellow law abiding citizens than these law violating officers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
By your logic, it should be perfectly acceptable for me to rob you at gunpoint because I have more firepower therefore you should do what I tell you and your rights don't exist/matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That is my point, when confronting a cop, you are looking down the barrel of a gun and should do what the cop tells you, even if he is telling you to do something that he has absolutely no right to do. Document it, record it, yes. Report it later, yes. Arguing with cops can be bad for your health.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now I think about it, jail qualifies.
Most nations were ruled by that logic for most of human history. We've even seen it enshrined in feudal law via the Right of Might and the Divine Right of Kings (If you were born built like a mountain or in a king's bedchamber it meant that God favored you). All of our concepts towards leveling that playing field, from Parliament to the Social Contract to Napoleonic Law to the Bill of Rights are there because we got tired of that shit when the "divinely chosen" were also chosen to be jackasses.
If you are looking down the barrel of a gun (and you don't have one) I would recommend that you do exactly what the robber asks of you.
Yeah, The 9/11 attacks demonstrated to the United States and the world how that can be used against us. For a smaller scale example, look on rape-victim support sites about how bad an idea it is to let the power of force, even a pointed gun to coerce you to the secondary location.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Assuming you aren't beaten or shot for documenting or recording it.
And report it? Sure. And nothing happens. Great approach.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That cops have changed is indisputably, provably true. Cops have become highly militarized and have developed a much stronger attitude of "everyone is a criminal, most just haven't been caught".
Just look at one single fact: the liberal and usually inappropriate use of SWAT teams and "no knock" warrants. These alone represent a huge change in how the cops behave.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cop can't understand why people distrust cops.
Maybe these two things are related?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kid walking in street told to get out? Shot. Guy told to get out of car refuses? Tased. Woman screaming at cop for his name? Pepper Sprayed.
One can argue that these people were within their rights, but I look at it like walking the streets. Do I have the right of way when I am in the cross walk? Of course. Do I make sure the car is actually stopping? Yes, because even though I am within my rights to cross without looking, I still lose that collision.
An ACLU lawyer recently was interviewed, he said never directly question a cop, if they are violating your rights, do what the cop says and sue later.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The people whose rights are most often violated are the people who lack these resources, making it almost better to provoke the cop: if the cop starts beating the crap out of you, it's more likely that a passer-by might start recording the incident, or that you'll wind up in a hospital where medical professionals will create hard-to-destroy documentation.
Legal pragmatism only goes so far.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
unheard audio
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Specious
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another similar article
It's worth a look, but I wouldn't recommend reading it on a full stomach as it will probably make you sick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Probable Cause
While you're pointing fingers everywhere but at yourself, keep in mind that the one common element in all of your dysfunctional relationships is you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When it started
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
right wing populist
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cops cannot be trused
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Op-Ed
First, Ferguson a finely crafted false narrative from the start by community activists for the public. NOT a case of police brutality or over reach.
Second, DOJ ramped up the situation and made quite sure that police were mad the "enemy" after their "loving" donations of equipment to departments all over the country of gear and tech.
Thirdly, every officer I have spoken to tells me that the normal dress uniform with belt weighs near 40lbs, in changing to tactical gear they lose all that bulk and now the governments save not just in having happier, healthier officers who function better but they aren't having the hip, back and knee issues either.
Funny no one ever addresses this issue, where's the media?
The one thing I will say is the longer it is hyped BOTH sides will be nervous and on a hair trigger. However, police officers receive training, the general public do not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[citation needed]
As I was watching it streaming from cameras on the ground it looked a whole lot like police brutality. Overreach would be a euphemism for the disproportional response and outright abuse that was going on.
So...wait, I was wrong. Given what I saw with my own eyes as the situation unfolded, there is no possible justification of the behavior or the police forces in response to the Ferguson protests. That trainwreck will not go back on the tracks.
And given that the agencies couldn't find a few patsies to burn for the disaster they created, the entire mess serves to smear the whole precincts involved, and the County of St. Louis. If not the entire institution of Law Enforcement in the United States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Last Word
“What, me worry?
> We, the local cops they have seen and contacted in the past, have not changed. We have done nothing different.That single story posted the other day describing the militarization of police forces ought to be all that's necessary to disprove that statement. Cops dressed in black battle dress, wielding military weaponry, arriving in vehicles gifted to them by the military, multiplied by the number of times they're called out as the first go to option?
Yet, they're incensed by someone holding a cell phone, and pointing guns into a car with small children in the back seat.
Officer Matt, you certainly have changed. The cops I've known would be appalled by behaviour such as this, yet you're defending them!