Police State - Official Thread

[Dos Equis]

Correlation does not imply causation.

In this context, there is no question that law enforcement is the primary reason why people don't loot on any given day of the week.  It's only when there is a natural disaster, power outage, or some other civil unrest when law enforcement is overwhelmed that people break the law en mass.

Any notion that law enforcement is not a substantial deterrent to mass crime is silly.   

[avxo]

In this context, there is no question that law enforcement is the primary reason why people don't loot on any given day of the week.

No. False.

It's only when there is a natural disaster, power outage, or some other civil unrest when law enforcement is overwhelmed that people break the law en mass.

Really? Have you ruled out unrelateds cause and you're sure that law-breaking happens because law enforcement is overwhelmed?

Any notion that law enforcement is not a substantial deterrent to mass crime is silly.

Being a detterent - even a substantial one - is one thing. But that doesn't support the statements you're making in your post.

[Dos Equis]

No. False.


Really? Have you ruled out unrelateds cause and you're sure that law-breaking happens because law enforcement is overwhelmed?


Being a detterent - even a substantial one - is one thing. But that doesn't support the statements you're making in your post.

Yes.  True. 

What unrelated causes are you talking about?

Of course it does.  We often see altruism in society, but you let law enforcement let up like they have been doing in Maryland and there is no question crime would spike. 

[Skip8282]

Maybe it was just a coincidence that all the crooked cops were in the same place when it happened.

LMAO...yep that's it.  It's just the tiny, tiny minority of bad cops who all once again managed to come together at the same time and same place, etc.

It's not systemic.
It couldn't be lax oversight.
It couldn't be the knowledge that they will be investigated by their buddies.
It couldn't be that DAs and Judges are lenient and sympathetic to letting cops off.

Nope, it's the perfect storm...once again. 


I was reading that the Chief had said sometimes officers carry snacks with them and eat them on the raids.

Already trying to give his officers an out.

I know whenever I eat my snacks at work, I always flash my buddies thumbs up like the cops did.

It's completely believable. 

[Skip8282]

Yes.  True. 

What unrelated causes are you talking about?

Of course it does.  We often see altruism in society, but you let law enforcement let up like they have been doing in Maryland and there is no question crime would spike. 

I think you're trying to take that as though it's the only variable that would change.  I imagine those who advocate getting rid of cops are also considering that there would be other methods available...CVS' would have security guards, or much greater protections against theft in place, etc.

I don't support it myself, I think massive reform is the optimal way to go.  There's a lot of good the cops do that we can keep.

[Dos Equis]

I think you're trying to take that as though it's the only variable that would change.  I imagine those who advocate getting rid of cops are also considering that there would be other methods available...CVS' would have security guards, or much greater protections against theft in place, etc.

I don't support it myself, I think massive reform is the optimal way to go.  There's a lot of good the cops do that we can keep.

I guess that is one alternative, although I doubt it would be successful.  If you have a problem with the use of force by highly trained and regulated police officers, what do you think will happen with mall cops who suddenly start packing? 

I have no problem with reforms.  My broader point was about how important law enforcement is to maintaining order. 

[avxo]

Yes.  True.

In other words, you believe that without cops, we'd all be lootin' and shootin'. I'm curious... cops are, like you and I, humans. Why are they immune to this tendency to loot and shoot? Does their badge give them super-powers or imbue them with a supernatural sense of justice or something?

What unrelated causes are you talking about?

I don't know - you made the statement that during a "natural disaster, power outage, or some other civil unrest" the people go crazy and start breaking the law. You assert, bluntly, that the reason they do so is because law enforcement is overwhelmed. If you have established that, then surely you must have looked at other reasons that could be behind the people breaking the law, and eliminated them as possibilities. What where those other reasons that you considered and eliminated?

Of course it does.  We often see altruism in society, but you let law enforcement let up like they have been doing in Maryland and there is no question crime would spike.

You are picking one instance, claiming that it fits the theory you propose, and then declaring your theory proven. Please book a trip to Norway and Sweden. I have it on good authority that you will be the sole recipient of all the Nobel Prizes for 2015.

[Dos Equis]

In other words, you believe that without cops, we'd all be lootin' and shootin'. I'm curious... cops are, like you and I, humans. Why are they immune to this tendency to loot and shoot? Does their badge give them super-powers or imbue them with a supernatural sense of justice or something?


I don't know - you made the statement that during a "natural disaster, power outage, or some other civil unrest" the people go crazy and start breaking the law. You assert, bluntly, that the reason they do so is because law enforcement is overwhelmed. If you have established that, then surely you must have looked at other reasons that could be behind the people breaking the law, and eliminated them as possibilities. What where those other reasons that you considered and eliminated?

You are picking one instance, claiming that it fits the theory you propose, and then declaring your theory proven. Please book a trip to Norway and Sweden. I have it on good authority that you will be the sole recipient of all the Nobel Prizes for 2015.

No, I don't believe that "we'd all" be looting and breaking the law without cops.  I believe, as history has shown, that a substantial number of people would do so.   

Don't try that Jedi mind trick crap on me.  lol  You are the one mentioned "unrelated causes."  I can see now that you didn't have any in mind. 

I'm not just picking one instance.  I'm looking at a plethora of situations where there have been extended blackouts, civil unrest, and natural disasters.  Happens all the time.  It is actually a little scary how quickly lawlessness can envelope a community.  We saw it in Katrina, Ferguson, L.A., Maryland, etc., etc.     

[avxo]

No, I don't believe that "we'd all" be looting and breaking the law without cops.  I believe, as history has shown, that a substantial number of people would do so.

Then you failed to word your argument properly. You wrote: "In this context, there is no question that law enforcement is the primary reason why people don't loot on any given day of the week." You should be more careful in how you express yourself.

Don't try that Jedi mind trick crap on me.  lol  You are the one mentioned "unrelated causes."  I can see now that you didn't have any in mind.

You claimed it's "primary reason why people don't loot on any given day of the week." If they're the primary reason, there must be secondary reasons. List them.

I'm not just picking one instance.  I'm looking at a plethora of situations where there have been extended blackouts, civil unrest, and natural disasters.  Happens all the time.  It is actually a little scary how quickly lawlessness can envelope a community.  We saw it in Katrina, Ferguson, L.A., Maryland, etc., etc.

It surprises you that in emergency situations people act differently? If I see a burning car with a child trapped inside, and you happen to own a crow-bar store, is it really a surprise if I break your storefront to take a crow-bar and rescue the child? Do some people take advantage of such emergencies? Sure. And?

You assert that these people are deterred (primarly) by law enforcement. Yet, similar incidents happen even when police are not overwhelmed. How does that work?

[Dos Equis]

Then you failed to word your argument properly. You wrote: "In this context, there is no question that law enforcement is the primary reason why people don't loot on any given day of the week." You should be more careful in how you express yourself.


You claimed it's "primary reason why people don't loot on any given day of the week." If they're the primary reason, there must be secondary reasons. List them.


It surprises you that in emergency situations people act differently? If I see a burning car with a child trapped inside, and you happen to own a crow-bar store, is it really a surprise if I break your storefront to take a crow-bar and rescue the child? Do some people take advantage of such emergencies? Sure. And?

You assert that these people are deterred (primarly) by law enforcement. Yet, similar incidents happen even when police are not overwhelmed. How does that work?

This is a friggin message board.  I really don't care how "careful" I am when I express myself.  You are taking this way too seriously.

I tell you what:  You list the "unrelated causes" you were contemplating and I will list "secondary reasons" why people don't break the law en mass on any given day.

That is one really bad comparison.  We're not talking about people acting differently.  We're talking about our society being one step removed from anarchy; about how people break the law in droves when the opportunity presents itself. 

No, we do not see masses of people running through neighborhoods and looting stores when law enforcement is not overwhelmed.  Absurd.     

[Skip8282]

Chicago, Glenview police officers charged with lying in drug case


Three Chicago police officers and a Glenview police officer have been charged with lying under oath in court during a drug case last year..

The officers -- Chicago police Sgt. James Padar, Officer William Pruente, Officer Vince Morgan and Glenview Officer James Horn -- have been charged with felony perjury, according to a statement issued early Monday by the Cook County state's attorney's office.

Lawsuit filed over traffic stop caught on police video

The charges come after a video contradicted the officers' sworn testimony during a March 2014 court hearing on whether evidence in the drug case had been properly obtained. The surfacing of the video was first reported by the Chicago Tribune.

Padar, Pruente and Morgan -- Chicago narcotics officers -- had asked for help from Glenview police while making a traffic stop in the north suburb in June 2013. The officers had been watching 23-year-old Joseph Sperling, a restaurant worker, when they pulled him over and found up to a pound of marijuana in his car, according to court records.

Pruente, one of seven Chicago narcotics officers working the case that day, testified that he pulled Sperling over after the Glenview man failed to use his turn signal. Pruente said he smelled marijuana in the car while waiting for Sperling to hand over his driver's license and insurance.

He then ordered Sperling out of the car and found the marijuana inside a black backpack lying on the back seat of Sperling's gold Ford Taurus, according to his testimony.

County still investigating Glenview cops accused of false testimony


The other officers took the stand and backed up Pruente's version of the stop, to one degree or another, before Sperling's lawyer played police video of the traffic stop.

The video, a copy of which was obtained by the Tribune, showed Pruente walking up to the car, reaching through the open driver's window, unlocking the door and having Sperling step out of the car. Sperling was then frisked, handcuffed and led to a squad car while his car was searched.

Sperling's attorney, Steven Goldman, had subpoenaed the video -- taken from a Glenview sergeant's squad car at the scene that day -- and surprised prosecutors and officers with it during the hearing.

The video led Cook County Circuit Judge Catherine Haberkorn to suppress the search and arrest, leading prosecutors to quickly dismiss the felony charges. All five officers were later stripped of their police powers and put on desk duty pending internal investigations.

"Obviously, this is very outrageous conduct," a transcript of the March 31 hearing quoted Haberkorn, a former county prosecutor, as saying. "All officers lied on the stand today. ... All their testimony was a lie."


The four officers are set to appear in bond court at the Leighton Criminal Court Building on Monday afternoon.

A Chicago Police Department spokeswoman said Monday morning the investigation into the incident is ongoing and added an internal investigation was "immediately launched" and the officers were stripped of their police powers after the department learned of "the disturbing allegations."

"Chicago police officers are expected to maintain the highest level of integrity at all times," police spokeswoman Jennifer Rottner said in a statement. "The (department) will continue to fully cooperate with the (Cook County state's attorney's office.)"

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-glenview-police-officers-charged-with-lying-in-drug-case-20150608-story.html

[avxo]

This is a friggin message board.  I really don't care how "careful" I am when I express myself.  You are taking this way too seriously.

If you don't care to be careful how you express yourself, that's your problem. The simple fact is that if you can't bother to express yourself properly, then people who attempt to talk to you might as well be talking to a sponge. The whole point of a message board is to talk to and converse with other people. You don't do that by vomiting words. You do that by carefully expressing your thoughts.

Besides, if you don't care to be careful when you express yourself, I really don't care to not take it too seriously and I don't particularly care to heed the advice of someone who can't be bothered to carefully express himself.
 

I tell you what:  You list the "unrelated causes" you were contemplating and I will list "secondary reasons" why people don't break the law en mass on any given day.

You mentioned secondary causes in your argument. I'm asking you what they are. You're free not to answer, and we're free to summarily ignore your argument.

That is one really bad comparison.  We're not talking about people acting differently.  We're talking about our society being one step removed from anarchy; about how people break the law in droves when the opportunity presents itself.

Except it doesn't seem like we are one step removed from anarchy.

No, we do not see masses of people running through neighborhoods and looting stores when law enforcement is not overwhelmed.  Absurd.

Logical fallacy 101, by Professor D. Equis: "if masses of people run through neighborhoods, looting stores, then law enforcement will be overwhelmed. Therefore when law enforcement is overwhelmed, people will run through neighborhoods, looting stores."

[Skip8282]

No, we do not see masses of people running through neighborhoods and looting stores when law enforcement is not overwhelmed.  Absurd. 
   

Sure we do.  They're called flash mobs and whole groups will storm a retail store, steal, and run like mad.  You can even see some footage on you tube.  As I noted earlier, I don't think eliminating cops is the answer, but I think we're more than a step removed from anarchy.

As for private security, not sure how I would feel.  Right now, the cops are highly trained, but nowhere near accountable.  So, something has to change.

[Dos Equis]

Sure we do.  They're called flash mobs and whole groups will storm a retail store, steal, and run like mad.  You can even see some footage on you tube.  As I noted earlier, I don't think eliminating cops is the answer, but I think we're more than a step removed from anarchy.

As for private security, not sure how I would feel.  Right now, the cops are highly trained, but nowhere near accountable.  So, something has to change.

I've seen flash mobs.  I'm not sure how common they are.  They do not involve the kinds of numbers we see during looting.  They are taking over entire streets, smashing windows, etc.   

I do think that some of the minority of law enforcement officers who abuse the law rather than enforce it are not held acceptable, although things have really changed in the information age.  Everyone has a camera/video.  And when we see evidence of bad cops, they are held accountable. 

[240 is Back]

LOL @ either you accept all BS that comes with cops, or you don't get cops at all.

WHy is it so hard to accept we just want cops to follow the same laws we are expected to follow.  Don't eat stolen weed brownies.  Don't shoot people who are no threat to you.  Don't lie about what happened on police reports. 

All this crap about "if you have a problem with bad cops, maybe you'd like to see life without cops..." is pure nonsense.  I'd love to see them apply this same logic to the obama they hate - either you're okay with obama's bullshit trampling of constitution, or you want to live in north korea. Obviously, the only 2 options lol.

[illuminati]

LOL @ either you accept all BS that comes with cops, or you don't get cops at all.

WHy is it so hard to accept we just want cops to follow the same laws we are expected to follow.  Don't eat stolen weed brownies.  Don't shoot people who are no threat to you.  Don't lie about what happened on police reports. 

All this crap about "if you have a problem with bad cops, maybe you'd like to see life without cops..." is pure nonsense.  I'd love to see them apply this same logic to the obama they hate - either you're okay with obama's bullshit trampling of constitution, or you want to live in north korea. Obviously, the only 2 options lol.

WHy is it so hard to accept we just want cops to follow the same laws we are expected to follow.  Don't eat stolen weed brownies.  Don't shoot people who are no threat to you.  Don't lie about what happened on police reports. 
THIS. ^^^^^
Why is it So Hard for Police & Police Chiefs to Understand.
All we Get is A Constant Set of Excuse.
Just treat them the same as they would public.
Then they would Get the Respect They Want.

[240 is Back]

WHy is it so hard to accept we just want cops to follow the same laws we are expected to follow.  Don't eat stolen weed brownies.  Don't shoot people who are no threat to you.  Don't lie about what happened on police reports. 
THIS. ^^^^^
Why is it So Hard for Police & Police Chiefs to Understand.
All we Get is A Constant Set of Excuse.
Just treat them the same as they would public.
Then they would Get the Respect They Want.

exactly.  it's okay for cops to fudge reports, lie about details, pocket money - because the 'other person' in the exchange was a bag of shit.   I dont get that thinking.  Sometimes a bad guy meets a bad cop, and at the end of the day, they BOTH belong in jail.  Getbiggers sometimes feel they have to swear allegiance to one side in a dispute, when at times, it's 2 bags of shit bumping into each other.

[Jack T. Cross]

Skip, in all fairness, maybe there's some yet-unexplained force that draws all corrupt cops together in a particular area. Perhaps that force is what causes them to act in such a way, too.

(In all seriousness, though, there is such a force. It's a long-standing culture, in fact, that causes them to behave this way. There is no other explanation, and we all know it.)

[Jack T. Cross]

It's a very small percentage of people, that require policing.

[Agnostic007]

LOL @ either you accept all BS that comes with cops, or you don't get cops at all.

WHy is it so hard to accept we just want cops to follow the same laws we are expected to follow.  Don't eat stolen weed brownies.  Don't shoot people who are no threat to you.  Don't lie about what happened on police reports. 

All this crap about "if you have a problem with bad cops, maybe you'd like to see life without cops..." is pure nonsense.  I'd love to see them apply this same logic to the obama they hate - either you're okay with obama's bullshit trampling of constitution, or you want to live in north korea. Obviously, the only 2 options lol.

sh*t.. I agree with you.. d**m!

The only thing I would question is your ability to determine if the person was a threat or not based on some of your previous posts, but other than that, the concept is solid. 

[240 is Back]

sh*t.. I agree with you.. d**m!

The only thing I would question is your ability to determine if the person was a threat or not based on some of your previous posts, but other than that, the concept is solid. 

I don't like the stand-your-ground mentality that is so pervasive these days.   Everyone just looking for that one moment when they're "allowed" to shoot.  Both police and citizens alike.  I like when people take 3 steps back to avoid a gun battle.  I like when police are confronted with an idiot with a pole, or a bat, or whatever, and they use a beanbag or taser FIRST.  Sure, legally, they're within their rights... but it tells society they're just taking the first chance to execute people.

When a guy 'maybe had one rock left in his hands' and is already shot once... the 4 cops on top of him don't need to shoot him any more.  But they chase him across the street and do (the recent traffic video shooting case).   Things like that - cops are justified in the initial shoot, but dozens of feet away, the rock is thrown, the guy is wounded, he is fleeing, and they just shoot him some more - I hate that kind of stuff.  When cops see no end to justified force, even when the rock-armed bad guy is suddenly a fleeing, wounded, empty-handed gimp just limping away. Ya know? 

Cops show a little reservation in those cases, and they win back the hearts/minds of 95% of people that don't trust them.  I look at every cop out there and I wonder how much he'd love to X a few people out, if they mis-step and "give him a reason to..."

[Agnostic007]

Just got back from a vacation spent with another couple. My buddy from my old military days and his wife met us for a week in Mexico. He is a cop near Boston. During the visit we were exchanging information on our respective departments. At one point he tells me it's common for the officers, after bar closing, to find a secure lot, pull in and catch some z's. I was pretty surprised to hear that. He said in his community nothing is going on after bar closing and they listen for their call signs and someone is always awake etc etc. I couldn't believe that it was accepted practice for even the supervisors. I've never fallen asleep on duty in 33 years nor would condone that happening at all. I came away thinking there are cultures in some departments that are alien to me and still operating in the 60's and 2) that I'm glad my department is light years ahead of that in professionalism. 

[Agnostic007]

I don't like the stand-your-ground mentality that is so pervasive these days.   Everyone just looking for that one moment when they're "allowed" to shoot.  Both police and citizens alike.  I like when people take 3 steps back to avoid a gun battle.  I like when police are confronted with an idiot with a pole, or a bat, or whatever, and they use a beanbag or taser FIRST.  Sure, legally, they're within their rights... but it tells society they're just taking the first chance to execute people.

When a guy 'maybe had one rock left in his hands' and is already shot once... the 4 cops on top of him don't need to shoot him any more.  But they chase him across the street and do (the recent traffic video shooting case).   Things like that - cops are justified in the initial shoot, but dozens of feet away, the rock is thrown, the guy is wounded, he is fleeing, and they just shoot him some more - I hate that kind of stuff.  When cops see no end to justified force, even when the rock-armed bad guy is suddenly a fleeing, wounded, empty-handed gimp just limping away. Ya know? 

Cops show a little reservation in those cases, and they win back the hearts/minds of 95% of people that don't trust them.  I look at every cop out there and I wonder how much he'd love to X a few people out, if they mis-step and "give him a reason to..."

Like I said 240,. my concern is leaving it up to citizens such as yourself to judge after the fact whether it was justified or not. Just my opinion but your judgment in such things has been disappointing. I've pointed out the examples in previous posts so I won't beat a dead horse. I will agree that deadly force incidents need to be examined to insure they were justified. I will agree, like the one where the cop shot the man running away they are not, but those are rare. I don't agree at all with your assessment of the cop mentality though.   

[Jack T. Cross]

No, 240 is right.

And each time it happens, it makes it easier for the next guy to do it. Not only that, but it becomes increasingly expected for the next guy to do it.

Yep. Big, big problems with these guys called cops.

[Jack T. Cross]

Just got back from a vacation spent with another couple. My buddy from my old military days and his wife met us for a week in Mexico. He is a cop near Boston. During the visit we were exchanging information on our respective departments. At one point he tells me it's common for the officers, after bar closing, to find a secure lot, pull in and catch some z's. I was pretty surprised to hear that. He said in his community nothing is going on after bar closing and they listen for their call signs and someone is always awake etc etc. I couldn't believe that it was accepted practice for even the supervisors. I've never fallen asleep on duty in 33 years nor would condone that happening at all. I came away thinking there are cultures in some departments that are alien to me and still operating in the 60's and 2) that I'm glad my department is light years ahead of that in professionalism. 

Honestly, it does sound like a good time to catch some zzzs. If it causes them to think more clearly and less dishonestly for the rest of their shifts, I'm all for it.