No one is going to want to be a cop soon.

It's true that police can't very often protect you in the critical moment against criminals -- it's you against them in a split second, but police can establish a crime scene, collect evidence, and bring cases to the DA who can then prosecute and obtain punishment and justice.

 

And why would they need an APC, tear gas, and body armor to do that?

 

Hostage situations and riots.

 

Or...they just don't have anything to do with "the situation."

 

I gave an argument for my claim. Thus far - your counter argument has been to run around in a circle crying "NO NO NO"

 

I noticed you avoided my question...

I can't speak for others (who is 'you people'?) but I don't quite agree with the notion you're suggested here.

I believe the police do have a 'responsibility' to protect us. What they don't have is a legal obligation to protect us when they're able (according to the courts) or the ability to guarantee our protection (which is why we need to take measures to protect ourselves) by the simple reality that they can't be everywhere all the time.

Which leads me back to my original question, just in case you meant to answer it, but forgot to

 

Of course bad cops should be weeded out. But, at the same time, we need to not go so far as to create a perception that the police will be persecuted any time they use force. If we do create that perception, then we're going to end up with cops who show up for work and do just as absolutely little as they possibly can, and then go home.

Whatever reforms are enacted must strike a realistic balance.

Let me expand upon my story a little. I was young and in my first years on the job. A drunk and disorderly guy came at me aggressively, and I grabbed his shoulders and spun him around and pushed him against a wall. My intent was to stop his advance, protect myself, and just pin him there. From there I intended to get a wrist into a joint lock and handcuff him. But once I had him spun around, I pushed just a little too hard, and instead of his chest hitting the wall, his chest and his head hit the wall which was made of concrete. It opened up his skin in the eyebrow area that required 3 or 4 stitches to close. As you might imagine, it bled like crazy.

This happened back in 1979, long before everything is caught on video and uploaded to YouTube like it is today.

And you know what? That was my fault. Not for stopping him or pinning him, but for pushing too hard. I didn't mean to push him too hard. I didn't mean to cause injury. But I did. He didn't push his head into that wall; I did.

My supervisor had a meeting with me the next day. We talked about it, and ultimately his attitude was that it was a learning experience. He wrote a short internal memo about the incident and our meeting, and I never heard a word about it again.

For the rest of my career until I retired in 2008, I never again had an incident where I used too much force. I had many, many incidents where force was used to make an arrest, including some highly dangerous situations, but I never had another incident where I used too much force.

Now just imagine that we were to take my situation and fast forward it to today. Let's imagine that it was all captured on video. And since I'm white, let's imagine that the guy was black. Do you know what people would be saying? They would be saying that the brutal racist cop deliberately split this guy's forehead open because he was black and the brutal racist cop wanted to hurt him. They would be saying that if the guy had been white, I wouldn't have done it. They would be totally demonizing me. The media and civic leaders and the public would be calling for my head. Very likely, my Chief would fire me, and the District Attorney would be working to file charges.

Am I wrong?

Is this where we are now?

 

You expect hostage situations and riots while police establish a crime scene, collect evidence, and bring cases to the DA?

I think your idea of plice work is...skewed.

 

I answered your question. You just didn't like the response.

If you believe the police have an obligation to protect us then you disagree with the official NRA position.

This makes you pro gun-control.

Tell all your friends at the meetings so they can call you RINO and toss you out.

 

nothing destroys so much that good cops aspire to, nothing kills the trust, the respect, the sense of doing right, as dirty cops who get away with it. Good cops LOATHE bad cops who get away with it. They hate that minorities feel they cannot be alone with them, that hispanics refuse to talk to them, that young men of color feel profiled and targeted simply by having a badge nearby. Good cops do not want to scare the very people they expected to serve.

If you want to bring the best and the brightest to the profession, do what needs to be done to get the community they patrol to respect, and trust them.

 

Yes, you gave an argument that I summarily dismissed.

Frankly, I feel that I've been fairly indulgent with your loco attempt at thread derailment. You should thank me!

 

The only thing you have indulged in is a big glass full of kool-aid induced denial. You are the one who should be thanking me for trying to extract the poison lizard from your mind.. even albeit the attempt was unsuccessful.

 

You should try the fact based community sometime, the water's fine!

 

Explanation required...

 

They don't care. They don't think far enough ahead to realize the consequences

 

I gave you the facts - and you had no refutation - so you wallow in denial - and all you have left is projecting your issues onto others.

 

Or so you think.
A while back I thought so to.
unfortunately, believe it or not, trump is not likely to win in November.

Just remember this and get back to me after the election.

 

No explaination required.
The words are self explanatory.

 

The words dont make any sense. How does my opinion that cops should protect people equate to me supporting gun control?

 

Try reading...with the intent to understand...rather than the intent to argue.

 

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive. Your statement is simply wrong.

 

Welcome to Mexico.

 

Your problem is that the "facts" that you gave me are irrelevant to this topic. You have a pet issue that you are trying to shoehorn into a totally unrelated topic, It makes your statement, "...and all you have left is projecting your issues onto others" doubly ironic.

 

then your statement that you do not understand is false.

 

I was inviting you to further explain your position in case I was misunderstanding it... sometimes people with different perspectives have difficulty communicating and clarification is required.