April 22nd, 2011 11:36 PM
Law enforcement, a fresh look.
First off I am totally pro law enforcement. No question about it. I had an interesting talk with a co-worker and he pointed out some interesting things I want to share. First law enforcement is built around catching the BG AFTER the crime. Sadly the very nature of the business makes it so they can not usually get there even during the crime. They do great work after the fact and work hard to find the criminal. But the crime has still happened and hopefully you lived through it. I dare say that the majority of their training is for after the fact response. Let me stop right here and add that society will not allow ( and rightly so) officers to arrest folks if they know this is a really bad guy.
Thought police are still just in the movies. So back to my point, a fresh crime must be committed before cops are allowed to react. So now you (a fresh victim) has requested police but you are still the victim. Even if the BG tried or even succedded in killing you cops are still obligated to not use deadly force unless THEY are in danger. Lets say the cops arrive and the BG has you in the front yard with a gun to your head. Swat team is set up and they are trying to "talk" this guy out of it. Rember there is a gun to your head. Talk will go on for as long as the BG is willing to string law enforcement along. BUT once the BG turns his gun towards the cops Snipers and/or others shoot the BG to kill him. Remember I still like cops and we loose way to many of them. So as along as it's you in harms way negotiations and every effort will be made to solve this with out deadly force. Cops endangered, whole new story.
Here is my point. This story proves to me that cops are not obligated to protect you specifically just society as a whole. I am ok with that but if cops are not gonna take my personal safety as serious as their own, who is? Answer of course is me and only me. So anti gun persons, I like living and want to be safer than law enforcement can provide. The logical solution is that every person who wants to reduce the proability that they will become a victim to violence MUST provide their own security. I really don't understand why people ( non carry types) can't understand that. We all have fire insurance, we all insure our cars, but few do anything to insure their very lives.
In a gun fight, you can not miss fast enough, to catch up.
April 22nd, 2011 11:41 PM
sounds good to me, remember too, cops are paid to put people behind bars. This is why it is smart to not talk to one during an investigation without a lawyer, unless obviously its a traffic stop for speeding or other offense
"The value you put on the lost will be determined by the sacrifice you are willing to make to seek them until they are found."
April 23rd, 2011 12:07 AM
Cops come with the chalk to outline the body(ies)...make sure ahead of time that it's not YOUR body.OMOYMV
The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member[/B]
April 23rd, 2011 12:42 AM
No, they most certainly are not. Where do you get these ideas? Stop hanging around those people, they are doing you no favors.
Originally Posted by INccwchris
April 23rd, 2011 12:47 AM
The cops also don't want to take him out while he has a gun to your head because they don't want him to pull the trigger as a reflex.
Exodus 22:2 "If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed"
April 23rd, 2011 01:23 PM
Originally Posted by dsee11789
You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku
April 23rd, 2011 03:36 PM
The two biggest problems with LEOs are:
1. They don't get paid enough to always attract the right candidates, nor do they get empowered by those above them to 'do the right thing'.
2. They fail to recognize the difference between a 'predator/perpetrator' and an ordinary citizen. Both are treated harshly and suspiciously. Brutality and no-knock raids should be ended.
April 23rd, 2011 04:38 PM
^ My fellow officers are the finest men and women i've ever had the pleasure of knowing. There are exceptions, but those exceptions are found in any workplace, so lets not blame the career choice.
Originally Posted by BadgerJ
Please elaborate on "fail to recognize the difference between predator / perpetrator and ordinary citizen. Brutality should be ended? Please explain. How many times have you fought for your life, out of curiosity? How many times have you been assaulted? How many of those times that you were assaulted was there a gun out in the open within easy reach of a BG? Every time an officer is assaulted, there is a gun in play. I for one, will strike fast, strike hard, and live. If you want to assault a uniformed police officer, get ready for brutality. End of story. The mentality of someone who assaults an officer knows darn well there is a gun in play, and cannot be given an inch.
No knock raids should be ended? Please explain. Do you know how difficult it is to perform a no knock raid? An officer doesnt just say blast in a door on a whim. The last search warrant I obtained took me 5 hours before I even presented it to a magistrate. No knock raids much more often than not yield amazing results, and keep the public safer from BG's.
April 23rd, 2011 09:02 PM
Wow, this is the crappiest post I've read in a month or two.
Originally Posted by BadgerJ
#1. Not everything in life is about pay. Most folks with half a brain already know that. If it was only about pay we wouldn't have anyone willing to serve in the military....EVER!
#2. The police recognize predators and criminals all the time, most times it would be illegal for them to do anything about it. It's too bad our legal system is slanted so far in favor of the lawless.
It is surely true that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Nor can you make them grateful for your efforts.
April 23rd, 2011 09:12 PM
Not to disrespect you but the best and brightest do not go into law enforcement that's a valid point. This quote "I for one, will strike fast, strike hard, and live. If you want to assault a uniformed police officer, get ready for brutality. End of story." also makes me question your maturity you could explain some of the reasons behind these statements and be an ambassador for law enforcement instead of thumping your chest.
Originally Posted by kb2wji
April 23rd, 2011 10:06 PM
I saw this and was gonna not say anything but since Sixto did....
Originally Posted by INccwchris
Cops are paid to make sure order is kept, and justice is done, that does not necessarily mean putting people behind bars. I have worked with a LOT of officers from local to county to state and federal over the last 11 years. Very few LEO think this way.
BTW....do yourself a favor and change this very belief or at leats lie about it if you are ever interviewed for an LEO position which I think is your ultimate goal from what I have read about your posts.
Friends don't let friends be MALL NINJAS.
I am just as nice as anyone lets me be and can be just as mean as anyone makes me. - Quoted from Terryger, New member to our forum.
April 23rd, 2011 10:07 PM
I respect law enforcement for the most part, but all to often I see too much "us vs. Them" attitudes. Too often the police violate peoples rights, iv personally witnessed the police walk up on a guy, slam him to the grounded breaking his nose in the process because they THOUGHT he was wanted by another agency only to find out ot was a mistaken identity and this guy had done nothing other than try to enjoy an outing with his family, of course they justified it as "officer safety" since they thought he was a violent guy, but the one needing protection was the guy injured. Let's not forget about the Ohio trooper who was on his own motorcycle going 149mph on the interstate (Google Jason highsmith) for fun and nearly got away with it had it not somehow made it to the media, then they gave him a ticket, he is still a trooper at the Delaware county post,
surely we need protection from him, had it been any of us we would have been looking at reckless op, his charge was speeding.
Again don't get me wrong I mostly support law enforcement, but there needs to be some accounting when they are wrong instead of the FOP arguing how wrong the rules are. There needs to be citizens review boards that are totally independent of the agencies that have some control over investigating officers in order to get rid of that thin blue line. Even at least around my town internal affairs is a joke and even when its obvious the officer is in the wrong they are cleared.
It is a sad state when a badge gives someone the power to do what they want and not have to be held accountable and if we as citizens are in the 100% right, we must submit to whatever the police wish to inflict on us and then spend thousands of dollars to try to get our justice, we are stripped of our right to defend ourselves against them.
Understand my comments are geared towards the wrongs on innocent people not arresting criminals. Anyone here that will tell me that the police have not commited attacks on innocent prople, I will just ask what world your living in.
Like I said, I'm not against all cops, there are more good than bad, but the bad gives you all a bad name.
I could go on but won't.
Sent from my EVO via Tapatalk pro.
Gen 4 Glock 32 .357sig and SW M&P 15/22
Ohio CHL since 1/29/2009
PA Non-Res 10/12/2010
Those who trade liberty for security have neither. ~John Adams
April 24th, 2011 12:49 AM
Do you really misintrepret my statement that badly?
Originally Posted by pica
So, the best and brightest do not go into law enforcement. Ok, we're not NASA scientists as a whole, but i'll be damned if I dont work with some seriously dedicated, intelligent and honorable people.
I smell a troll.
OP: I enjoyed your take, and agree with most of it. Although proactive work is what I (and most) LEO's enjoy most, its usually a small part of the job unfortunately.
April 24th, 2011 06:12 AM
Originally Posted by INccwchris
cops are paid to put people behind bars.
The District attorneys are paid to put people behind bars.
Originally Posted by SIXTO
Always remember that others may hate you but those who hate you don't win unless you hate them. And then you destroy yourself.
Richard M Nixon
Owning a handgun doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.”
April 24th, 2011 07:43 AM
There are a lot of problems with the OP's remarks, and I'll get around to them, but this quote here is correct. This was upheld by Warren vs District of Columbia. You can't sue the cops because they didn't protect you. But then again, the police should not be considered your or my personal bodyguard service, either.
This story proves to me that cops are not obligated to protect you specifically just society as a whole.
No, that is seriously incorrect. It is a soundbite. It's clever-sounding. Somebody tells you that in a bar and now you go home with some "street wisdom," perhaps. But it's wrong. The entire concept of "community policing" is predicated on the idea that an active, engaged police force reduces crime by preventing it.
law enforcement is built around catching the BG AFTER the crime
But you can't quantify that, except statistically. It's hard to tell how much crime police "prevent" because the perps who decide to not rob a store because the police are nearby don't show up on the blotter. What we do know is that police driving around in cars are least proactive and most re-active. They will tend to be driven more by requests from dispatch.
Your best cop bang-for-the-buck are foot and bike patrols. That's expensive and when law enforcement budgets are cut (as is common today), deploying available manpower in vehicles gives you a more re-active force, and thus crime rises. Still, that said, police on patrol do very much pull over suspicious cars, getting DUIs off the street before they cause death or injury. They do stop and investigate suspicious activity.
And not all crimes are fast and short. Some are long, drawn-out affairs like domestic violence calls, public nuisance calls, etc., where they have plenty of time to arrive and respond to crimes in progress.
This whole notion of "they only show up to outline the bodies" is the stupidest thing I'll read on the Internet today. However, it does convey the general notion that, with regard to crime against your person or property, the "first-responder" is you. It's wise and prudent to equip yourself with layered means of defense. Which is why we're here and also why I cannot understand the OP's rant against "anti-gun" types - who is he talking to? They ain't here.
"It may seem difficult at first, but everything is difficult at first."
Search tags for this page
9/11 changed the way local law enforce ment reacts to terrosm
every 52 hours a cop dies
how law enforcement has changed since 9/11 and also discuss what else can be done to protect us from terrorism
how law enforcement has changed since 9/11 and what else can be done to protect from terrorism
laws broken by split second decisions
lawyers in nc that sue law enforcement for putting family in harms way
ohio trooper you dont want to arrest you
police not obligated to protect
talk to law enforcement pros
the limits of law enforcement and police officers gone too far
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors