Reply #153: Because if they release them in the state this woman was in... [View All]

[TheMadMonk]

...she could injure someone, or more easily injure herself.

There are reasons for and against constant physical monitoring. And reasons for and against remote surveillance. I believe, the standard compromise is a panic/call button for the detainee to use if they need assistance, and periodic visual/physical checks.

There is no evidence one way or another whether this was carried and yet I have seen assumptions that she was left alone "to die", but not, of course, by doing what she is reported to have done. I have also seen multiple implications that someone "did for her" either accidentally or by design. Both blind and valueless assumptions of mis/malfeasance on the arresting authority's part.

Yes there is a pattern of such behaviour within policing circles. And it is a symptom of something very dark and very very wrong.

BUT IT IS NOT something which is automatically inherent in all policing activities. Most cops do their job and retire (one way or another) when the time comes. A few are kinked, guilty only of taking shortcuts to the truth, A few are bent, owned in one way or another by something inimical to that which is good. And a very few are twisted beyond redemption and/or compassion.

WHAT IT IS A SYMPTOM OF is the "DARK" which is in very nearly every single one of us. The "Dark" which lets, seduces, demands us to give reign to our negative side. To take the easy path and assign guilt by association. To assume the worst of people we don't identify with. To hate, hate, hate.

There is good reason to hate and despise the act and NOT the person. Despise the person and you risk projecting that despite onto others whether or not they merit it. Despise the act and you are far more likely to rightfully condemn ONLY the person who commits it.


And that concludes responding to anything resembling sense in your post. The remainder, except for its polysyllaby, would not be at all out of place on Free Republic.