Pretty Much All Cops Are "Rogue"

[JFN1]

I read an interesting diary over at Daily Kos, wherein the author states:

Let's stop bullshitting. This is nothing new. Back in May, I was standing on the street talking to a police officer near Eastern Market in DC. I had a question about something happening in my neighborhood. He did not seem very interested in helping me out: like I was annoying him. When I pointed out to him that I didn't appreciate his attitude, he threatened to arrest me for "disorderly conduct."

That's what rogue police officers do. When you piss them off, when you offend them, when they feel that their authority is not being fully respected, they threaten to arrest you for disorderly conduct. (emphasis added)

As the author notes, police are banding together in outrage, demanding an apology from Mr. Obama for calling the actions of one of their own "stupid."

That is the key point - "one of their own."

Other cops are rallying around this Crowley jerk, ignoring the law (from the same diary):

Officer Crowley's arrest of Professor Gates on charges of "disorderly conduct" squarely contravened the First Amendment, which protects our freedom of speech. We don't even need to turn to federal case law on point. The Massachusetts Supreme Court has already told us as much: In 1976, that court held that the First Amendment prevents application of any disorderly conduct law to language that is expressive conduct, even if that language is offensive or abusive. The only exception to this is language that falls outside of First Amendment protection: i.e., fighting words. Nowhere in the police report does it indicate that Professor Gates' words of such a character that they would - by their very utterance - "tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."

These "upholders of the law," these men supposedly above reproach - on or off the job - are supporting an officer who clearly misapplied the law for purely personal reasons.

I can only conclude, based upon this circumstance and others like it, including from my own experience, that most cops are not "good."

Most cops, if not all, will support Crowley, even as they exercise the rights they so often work to deny us. What these cops are doing right now in Boston is more "disorderly conduct" and "tumultuous behavior" than anything Mr. Gates is reported to have done...and in this, I suspect that all police officers are "rogue" cops...

[Buzz Clik]

1. Gotta love these personal tales. My dad had a great saying about this kind of stuff:

The first liar doesn't stand a chance.

[HardWorkingDem]

2. You are practicing the same behavior that...

tends to cause other people labeled with all sorts of "isms", none of them good.

[BlooInBloo]

3. Yep. Cops are only on one side: their own. They are anti-public - fuck them.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BlooInBloo]

9. Good to know who to avoid.

[5thGenDemocrat]

11. The feeling is more than mutual

Like I PMed you, I'll be happy to vote for the next union-busting bill that comes up in Michigan -- just for you.
John
Have a nice day.

[bigmonkey]

14. Where is your brother when it comes to condemning this kind of arrogant behavior?

Good cops like your brother should be going after Crowley for giving cops a bad name, not covering for him. Really.

[BlooInBloo]

18. Any cop covering for a bad cop is likewise a bad cop.

[WeDidIt]

29. +1

[5thGenDemocrat]

22. Glad you brought that up

My brother hates corrupt, violent cops because they rightly cause resentment toward other cops and make his job that much more difficult and dangerous.
In fact, he was medically retired from the profession for more than ten years (he was run over by a drunk driver in Bradenton, Florida while directing traffic around an accident -- breaking his pelvis, several ribs, a leg and putting him into a coma for three days). That's when he went back to school and earned his paramedical license.
After more than a decade, he was hired into a small police department in northern Michigan after the chief there was fired for cause. So I'm not going to argue that some cops are bad -- hell, Chuck wouldn't have been hired back in if they weren't.
As far as I know (and I know pretty well), Chuck has NEVER had a single complaint filed against him by anyone. That's because he plays it fair and square and DOESN'T carry an attitude with him. He's a great, fine guy and I'm proud to stand up for him.
John
Though at least one person here would have probably cheered the drunk driver for nearly killing him.

[bigmonkey]

30. Toleration of bad cops by police culture dishonors the police.

Good cops, like your brother, need to assert themselves as models. There are many good cops, plenty of adequate cops, but the behavior of the bad cops needs to stop. One way to get that to stop is the law, another is the culture of the police, but it's got to stop.

[TexasObserver]

40. You have no idea whether your brother makes trumped up arrests.

He may be a great guy, or he may be a guy who is great to those he likes and sorry with those he doesn't know.

[Orsino]

42. Thus we can retire the broad brush. n/t

[JFN1]

62. Not too broad, though...

If I had said, "All cops love donuts," that would be a broad brush.

But to state a FACT about the culture of corruption that permeates and ultimately defines our country's police forces, is NOT using an overly broad brush - it is stating a fact.

I am sure most cops are not monsters, and I am sure most cops think of themselves as responsible, good people.

But the culture of cops, this arrogant self-importance that permeates their public attitudes, is only growing more prevalent.

Truth be told, I no longer respect cops. Oh, once upon a time I did, but too often these days cops are drunk on their own sense of power, and possess an overwhelming sense of entitlement.

If cops want to be respected, then they should follow the law AT ALL TIMES.

But they do not.

If you've never seen a cop run a red light, or speed, or make an illegal turn, just so he could pull up next to one of his buddies for a chat - well, I must conclude that you're not paying attention. When cops break the law for their own personal gain - even in small ways, such as traffic infractions they would ticket one of us for - then they have no real moral authority to enforce the law.

I offer no apologies for my post, for what I have plainly stated is TRUE: Cop culture is essentially corrupt.

If I am wrong about this, please - prove it.

[Orsino]

77. Your post is conflicted.

But I see why, and I think I understand at least part of it.

[Supply Side Jesus]

50. Stay Classy San Diego!

[stewartcolbert08]

70. That is a pretty broad generalization dont you think?

[johnaries]

4. I've known lots of cops. They are PEOPLE.

Some are good, some are assholes. Just like every other profession. I think Crowley f-d up, but I don't know if he's basically a good person or an asshole.

[etherealtruth]

23. That's it

The police are human beings ... with all the faults and foibles of humans .... and all the virtues that humans posses.

It is particularly disturbing when a cop betrays the public trust .... simply because they have the public trust. I hate the broad painting of law enforcement as singularly evil .... however, police officers need to recognize a larger obligation to rid their departments of those that are truly not fit to fill the role of "protecting and serving"

[LostInAnomie]

6. Ugh... more DU cop bashing.

They are simply human beings. Most are good people, some are bad, some don't know what they are getting into, and some react incorrectly in response to stress.

When you call though, they are willing to risk their own life to save yours.

[EFerrari]

56. Not exactly. It's not bashing if it's true.

And cops don't willingly risk their lives to save anyone. They are paid to keep the peace. Oh, and they are not paid to harass the public or at least, not officially.

The OP makes a good point. The outpouring of cop loyalty over this thrown out bad arrest just makes them all look bad.

[LostInAnomie]

61. "...cops don't willingly risk their lives to save anyone"

Are you kidding!? That could be one of the more ridiculous things I have seen on DU. Cops risk their lives on a daily basis for the benefit of the public. Whether by breaking up a fight, a domestic dispute, chasing after a dangerous criminal, or entering any dangerous situation. They are always at the risk of losing their life.

The OP does not make a good point. Almost all police officers are not "rogues". It is a ridiculous generalization to claim that they are.

[JFN1]

63. Reading is fundamental

My god, let's just totally lose it. Allow me quote myself:

Most cops, if not all, will support Crowley...and in this, I suspect that all police officers are "rogue" cops.

I have not heard of a single cop DENOUNCING Crowley, despite the FACT that the LAW was broken and/or misapplied by CROWLEY HIMSELF. If you have, please, enlighten me.

So, to recap - I did NOT say ALL COPS ARE ROGUE IN ALL THINGS. I said that I SUSPECT (this means I have a suspicion - look it up, if you require further clarification) that all cops are rogue when it comes to SUPPORTING OTHER COPS.

In other words, I suspect and fear there is a culture of corruption that, so far, every cop in America has embraced BY NOT DENOUNCING CROWLEY.

Jeesh...

[LostInAnomie]

64. What a load of shit. You think throwing a couple of qualifiers in there...

... gets you off the hook for calling all cops rouges.

At the beginning of the OP, you put an incident giving a perceived version of poor conduct by a police officer. Then, you draw a comparison to Crowley's behavior, and claim that by not denouncing him all cops are somehow complicit and "rogues" themselves. You also managed to throw in this little gem," I can only conclude, based upon this circumstance and others like it, including from my own experience, that most cops are not "good."".

If that doesn't count as a full fledged generalization about the character of the grand majority police officers, I sure as hell don't know what does. It's like saying, "If you don't distance yourself to my satisfaction, it means you are a dirty cop".

[JFN1]

65. Like I said

Prove me wrong. Don't just throw your stones at me - put some substance behind it with a few facts. Here, I'll restate one - just to get the ball rolling.

FACT: We are seeing cops right now actively supporting a cop who misapplied and/or outright broke the law.

Even here on DU, you and I, and others like us, are arguing the point as to what this all means.

But where are the cops, holding their similar argument?

Where is the throng of cops out there denouncing Crowley's actions? Where is there even a single cop, publicly stating that Mr. Obama spoke correctly and that the cops who want an apology are wrong?

And what DO we see - exclusively? COPS SUPPORTING CROWLEY AND DEMANDING APOLOGIES FROM THE PRESIDENT.

So spare me your outrage. IN THIS, so far - the cops seem to ALL be on the same page.

Now just what do you suppose that means?

[LostInAnomie]

67. Any other negatives you would like me to prove?

Since you are essentially saying, "Prove that most cops aren't rogues".

"Now just what do you suppose that means?"

I suppose that it means that police officers are in a union. And, as most unions do, they are supporting a dues paying member in an instance that is open to interpretation. If they weren't doing this, they wouldn't be doing their job as a union. It also means that since they are a source of conflict with the President, they are going to get all the coverage.

That's where your reasoning falls flat. You assume that their union support means complicity and similarity. When in reality it means a union doing it's job attempting to protect it's member.

[JFN1]

75. You have got to be kidding

So being a member of a union means that union members march in lockstep to support their brothers who break the law for personal advantage?

Really?

I'd say your own reasoning fell flat, but I don't think you're reasoning at all...especially since you believe this incident is "open to interpretation."

The law is very clear in Massachusetts concerning the application of the law as it relates to the Gates arrest.

Let me guess - you're a cop - right?

[LostInAnomie]

78. What law did Crowley provably break?

He may have acted like an asshole. His actions may have been based in racial profiling, but you can't prove that (especially since the black and Hispanic officers that were present don't support that claim). He didn't enter the residence without reason (there was a reported break-in). In fact, he has legal reasoning for pretty much everything he did (although tricking Gates into walking outside so he could arrest him is underhanded). What some claim was racial profiling, others can also legitimately claim was a police officer acting on being disrespected for just doing his job. That means it is open to interpretation.

Your claim that all police officers are rogues is not open to interpretation. It's a clownish generalization based on guilt by association and the idea that cops are guilty until proven innocent. It sets up a paradigm where every police officer would have to condemn Crowley to your satisfaction, or they are automatically "rogues" themselves. That's hackish McCarthy style logic.

[JFN1]

80. Oh, nothing important...

Officer Crowley's arrest of Professor Gates on charges of "disorderly conduct" squarely contravened the First Amendment, which protects our freedom of speech. We don't even need to turn to federal case law on point. The Massachusetts Supreme Court has already told us as much: In 1976, that court held that the First Amendment prevents application of any disorderly conduct law to language that is expressive conduct, even if that language is offensive or abusive. The only exception to this is language that falls outside of First Amendment protection: i.e., fighting words. Nowhere in the police report does it indicate that Professor Gates' words of such a character that they would - by their very utterance - "tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."

Seems to me the First Amendment is the Law of the Land...and yes, the First Amendment is a Right, but it is also the Law - one that is codified in our Constitution.

And by the way- I will NEVER back down from my statements - unless, of course, you've found some cops who aren't marching in lockstep with their union brothers over the STUPIDLY ENACTED abuse of a citizen's rights (i.e. - not rogue).

[LostInAnomie]

84. Actually, here's the current Mass. law on disorderly conduct.

MGL CHAPTER 272. Mass General Laws, excerpt.

Section 53. Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, common railers and brawlers, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, idle and disorderly persons, disturbers of the peace, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure may be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than six months, or by a fine of not more than two hundred dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

And a disorderly person is defined as one who:
-with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or
-recklessly creates a risk thereof
-engages in fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or
-creates a hazard or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose.

http://www.masscriminaldefense.com/disorderly.htm

I don't know what 1976 case you're talking about, but it doesn't seem to conform with the current law.

I wouldn't expect you to back down. Most people that make ignorant statement about whole groups of people never do.

[JFN1]

85. "Most people that make ignorant statement about whole groups of people never do."

Pot - meet kettle...

[EFerrari]

72. Do you seriously not know cops get a pay check?

And as the OP already said to you, reading is fundamental.

[LostInAnomie]

79. Right, a base salary of around $32K is worth risking never seeing your family again.

I wonder what all the reserve officers and deputies that do it for free get out of it? :eyes:

[reflection]

7. Big-time unrec.

The anti-LEO sentiment around here is getting ridiculous. And I've had as many bad run-ins with cops as the next guy.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

8. I don't think all cops are bad or rogue

but I find it very distressing that so many are rallying behind Crowley. Some might even be supporting him even though they disagree with the way he acted. The thing that troubles me the most about the police is the blue wall behind which they tend to retreat to protect their own and not blow the whistle on the bad actors among them.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

10. God, these generalizations are frightening -

The idea that the actions of some define the whole for certain people reminds of the worst of the racists and bigots.

Scratch a DUer, find a freeper.

That's terrible...........................

[BlooInBloo]

12. Any cop breaking the law is a criminal. Any cop not turning in a cop breaking the law...

is likewise a criminal. That covers close to all cops.

The generalization is deserved. They're terrorists, state-sponsored domestic terrorists.


EDIT: Corrected subject typo.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

13. No, that's hardly deserved -

it's just prejudice and ugliness, and it saddens me to see this sort of thing on DU...................

[BlooInBloo]

15. It's the OPPOSITE of prejudice. It's POSTjudice....

And trying to make it out as akin to racism or homophobia is pathetic. Cops CONSCIOUSLY CHOOSE to be cops, and they consciously choose not to turn each other in, hence acting directly against the public's interest.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

24. No, I don't agree

with a broad brush stroking of the entire police community. It's an ugly bigotry.

But, stroking seems to make you feel better, so don't let me interrupt........................

[Odin2005]

31. Most of those so-called "good" cops are guilty of being enablers of the "bad" cops.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

17. Jobs are not innate qualities.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

26. Oh, so one can only be biased

against people because of the color of their skin?

Because the rest of it - or do birth defects count, too? - is chosen.

That's just silly................

[Starbucks Anarchist]

32. No, bias exists in all forms, but anti-police bias is not comparable to racism.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

33. Broad generalizations about a group

are bigotry. Since they're not racial, you're right - they're not called "racism."

They're called "bigotry" or "prejudice" or simply "hate."

[Starbucks Anarchist]

34. But that "bigotry" is not directed at the powerless.

When private citizens hold cops in contempt, it's no skin off the cops' backs -- it's a hurtful insult at best.

When certain bigoted cops use their authority as a vehicle for their bigotry, the consequences are far, far more dangerous.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

35. Now you're talking about "direction" -

I'm talking about bigotry. Plain and simple broad generalizations that cover an entire class.

Bigotry.............

[Starbucks Anarchist]

36. No, you're trying to equate all forms of bigotry as if they were the same.

Direction is one of the factors to take into account when attempting to put forms of bigotry in perspective.

[mamaleah]

16. So....are all generalizations allowed now?

or just the ones we feel all good about?

I guess I should be on my way to my International Zionist Conspiracy Media Takeover Eat Your Children meeting.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

27. Apparently,

generalizations are allowed - and applauded - if you make them against a group that is not INHERENTLY different - I think that's what's being touted here.

That is, you CANNOT CHOOSE the color of your skin (and forgive the caps, but I'm making fun of a response I got here about the very same issue you raise), so you are ALWAYS BEING PICKED ON.

But, if you CHOOSE to be a police officer, or a Jew, or whatever it is you choose that the PC patrol finds offensive, THEN GENERALIZATIONS ARE ALLOWED.

Encouraged, even.

Enjoy your meeting. Do they serve snacks? A beverage?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

41. So now we're Anti-Semites?

:rofl:

Do Jews as a group have the power over people like a police officer does? Really, they don't? :eyes:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

43. That post was in response to someone else -

you're a bit rabid on this one, it seems.

Not a good sign......................

[Starbucks Anarchist]

44. That post also referred, if not to me specifically, to a similar sentiment I expressed.

That of jobs being chosen and skin color not. And now you're (incorrectly) throwing anti-Semitism into the mix, as if that was anything like anti-cop bigotry.

you're a bit rabid on this one, it seems.

Not a good sign......................

Hey, you're the one with multiple posts in multiple threads defending cops, not me.

[mamaleah]

48. Tangerine was answering my post.

And I stick by my belief that generalizations are crap. You can't run around crying about them half the time and cheering them the other half.

[EFerrari]

60. Generalizations are crap is a generalization. n/t

[MrBig]

82. Big Difference...

You are generalizing a word. You are NOT generalizing a person or group of people, as the OP is doing.

[mamaleah]

46. Oh you bet we do!

We had a delicious casserole made with the blood of gentile children this afternoon.

Then we had horn polishing class.

And of course our obligatory monthly meeting of how to continue to destabilize the ME using our ultra excellent super powers and our bank.

A blast as always.

Generalizations are pathetic, and even more pathetic when people claim to be against generalizations as a political platform find ways to rationalize them.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

51. Who was lucky enough

to be chosen to blow the shofar?

And who was the even-luckier shofar?

This kind of crap on DU always disturbs me. All you can do is mock it and veer away from it.

And these are the LIBERALS!

Anyway, gut shabbos, and thanks for the laugh.................

[EFerrari]

59. Generalizations are generally needed in the process of abstract thinking.

They are not monsters under the bed. Try going a whole day without making one. :)

[Rebubula]

19. It Sucks..

...but no other profession separates you from normal society than being a cop.

You have to deal with domestic violence, bar fights, drug shooting, drunk drivers, child rapists, murderers and EVERYONE avoids you due to your job.

I am not saying that there are not MANY bad cops, but even in the IT world I have worked with 2 guys were very violent, 1 that beat his wife and kid (serving a long sentence now) and another that was a complete racist.

If you approach a cop with this attitude, you will most likely always see them as 'rogue'. Anyway, (referring to the 1st anecdote) if I was in a shitty mood and you started talking to me and then got pissy when I did not respond properly - I would get in your face as well. Just because dude is a cop does not mean that he is always in a good mood or have time to deal with you - he may be trying to pay attention to possible criminal activity.

Meh...some folks will always want to be mad at cops and think they are all racist bullies. Whatever.

[TheCoxwain]

20. Dude .. why dont you think of cops as people who are trying to feed families ... they are like you n

me ...

some are good and some are bad ..some are boring and some are interesting...

[MindPilot]

73. Because they are not just people...they are agents of the state

and have been granted the authority to mete out lethal force. In short, they quite literally have a license to kill. Of course cops are people in that there are those who use their power with extraordinary wisdom, those who abuse it, and everything in between.

There is a vast disparity in power when dealing with a cop; it is not just a person-to-person interaction.

[TrogL]

21. I've never met a rogue cop

As I mentioned in another thread, I've worked as a volunteer police officer, I'm currently on several crime prevention committees, previous employment (teaching) put me in close contact with police officers and I've had my share of minor brushes with police (traffic stops, accidents) and only really had one bad experience that I put down to immaturity and poor training (you do NOT subject someone who just lost someone in a car accident to the Reid technique).

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Odin2005]

28. The Fargo traffic cops are a big extortion racket.

They pull you over for BS reasons in order to fulfill their quotas.

[alarimer]

37. They get a charge out of throwing their weight around.

I might add that I think it is mostly American cops who do this. From what I have read, Canadians do not have the same issues with police as we do.

Give some people a uniform and they will lord it over everyone else. Authoritarians are drawn to positions like police, military and prison guards. They can behave that way with impunity.

[TexasObserver]

38. Yes, just about any cop will arrest you if you talk back to them.

They think they don't have to put up with that, and they're taught to arrest people who question their authority, and to make up a bullshit case to cover their asses for doing so.

[TheKentuckian]

39. Not all cops are bad but enough of them are to be a systemic problem

and if you chose to duck that then you are living in your own reality and holding on to an illusion in the face of over a hundred years of evidence.

Police live under their own code, not the law the rest of us do and protect one another at nearly any cost.

[Retired AF Dem]

45. Yes all cops are Rogue

all whites are racist, all blacks are shiftless criminals, all women are cellphone talking airheads, and all people that make blanket statements are assholes.

[mamaleah]

47. You forgot hippies

and their aversion to soap.

We should have a generalizations thread.

[MrBig]

49. It's Amazing

Anytime you start a statement with "All ______ are" you should stop and think about what you are about to say because you are probably about to make a generalization.

Some generalizations are okay: All rainbows are pretty.

Others, ones about groups of people, are probably riddled with bigotry or hatred:
All Muslims are Terrorists (or support/assist those that are)
All Blacks are criminals
All Jews are greedy
All Poor people are lazy

[Tangerine LaBamba]

52. All women

are asking for it.

All Italians are mobsters.

All lawyers are shady.

All Polish people are dumb.

All Irish are - wait - what are we supposed to think about the Irish? I forgot....................

[GReedDiamond]

83. The Irish?..

...I heard they were all "potato-eating drunks."

Although, I must admit, I have an Irish-born friend who eats potatoes only occasionally, and does not drink alcohol, so I'm not too sure that they are all potato-eating drunks. But most are, right?

Isn't there a DUer out there somewheres called sumthin like "DrunkenIrishman." Maybe he would know?

Cops, on the other hand are some of the most, uhhmm,...oh, never mind.

Edited for granma.

[Supply Side Jesus]

53. Why stop now...

why let rational thought come out now!

[EFerrari]

58. There's been plenty of rational thought around this issue on this board.

[stewartcolbert08]

74. Rational:

rational adj

1 consistent with or based on or using reason; "rational behavior"; "a process of rational inference"; "rational thought"
2 of or associated with or requiring the use of the mind; "intellectual problems"; "the triumph of the rational over the animal side of man"
3 capable of being expressed as a quotient of integers; "rational numbers"
4 having its source in or being guided by the intellect (distinguished from experience or emotion); "a rational analysis"

Um...........no. "All" people on this board are anit cop, anti law, anti civil servant. "All" people should have desk jobs and say to hell with making making a difference, I'll take the easy road. "All" politicians are war waging, oil thieving, money grubbing businessmen.

Generalizations suck, right?

Just because you have a bad run in w/ a cop that is an asshole doesn't make all of them assholes. Just because your house is burglarized doesn't mean that everyone is going to steal from you. This whole conversation is ridiculous. Sure some cops abuse their power. But that doesn't mean that there aren't good cops out there who want to be a positive influence in peoples lives and make a difference.

[Chemisse]

54. All rainbows are ugly.

[EFerrari]

57. Except the OP doesn't say that and instead draws an inference

from the display of support being shown to Crowley for making a bad arrest.

The OP has a point.

[MrBig]

81. How so???

This is quoting the OP:
-------
"I can only conclude, based upon this circumstance and others like it, including from my own experience, that most cops are not "good."

Most cops, if not all, will support Crowley, even as they exercise the rights they so often work to deny us. What these cops are doing right now in Boston is more "disorderly conduct" and "tumultuous behavior" than anything Mr. Gates is reported to have done...and in this, I suspect that all police officers are "rogue" cops..."

-------

Where did "most if not all" cops get interviewed and show their support for Crowley? Answer is they didn't. The OP assumed that from the words of a couple of cops who are friends with Crowley.

How can this be rational thinking? Generalizing a group of over 600,000 people based on actions and interactions with, at most, 20 or so?

Explain to me how this is any different than, say, arguing that all poor people are lazy due to the actions and interactions with a couple of homeless people interviewed on the nighttime news?

[Chemisse]

55. We all see things through the lens of our experiences.

But we need to clear the lens to really see things without bias.

That means that cops need to stop defending every bad or questionable thing other cops do.

But it also means those of us who have had bad experiences with cops need to recognize that they are people too. Some are good, some are bad, most are a little of both - like the rest of us.

DU'ers should not just be Freepers but on the other side of the spectrum. We should be better than that; we should try to take off the lenses and see things objectively, even if they don't quite fit the rheteric we are comfortable with.

[bridgit]

66. It says right on their license plates: Exempt, and that contains a danger greater than being 'rouge'

[optimal-tomato]

68. This is why I don't really think Gates' case was primarily about race.

I think the woman that called in the "break-in" may have done so somewhat motivated by race. Even the exchange with the cop may have been racially-tinged/motivated. But fundamentally, cops pull this shit all the time, with all races, with impunity.

Edit: I'm not saying it's universal, or meaning to imply it. But there is no apparent check on cops' power to do this, as their superiors and local politicians always side with the cops unless it's obvious to everyone they really screwed up.

[and-justice-for-all]

69. My partner is not rogue...

neither are the other Cops we know..

Cops are just people and some take it to far, as do people in many other positions.

[Hannah Bell]

71. Most people will abuse whatever authority they have in the right combination of circumstances, I

believe.

Those with the most authority have the highest potential to abuse it, & often fewer barriers to prevent them doing so.

[Kievan Rus]

76. Cops are pigs