This can't be right

[xiggi]

Anytime someone tries to define a group by the action of a few the argument is defeated out of the box.

Sent from my Fisher Price ABC123 via EO Forums

 

[AMonger]

A headline that repeats the allegations of a lawsuit as fact is the most irresponsible and sensationalistic type of 'journalism', and the people who accept it at face value are equally irresponsible.

If you read my post again, you'll see that I said, "This can't be right" and "If this is true..."

Most outlets simply repeat the original story, but one later version adds a few details: that the cop said the Taser went off accidentally [I can believe that - one deputy recently shot himself accidentally] and he was disciplined with 3 days off unpaid for the incident.
Whether the punishment fit the crime is another story, but it looks like another lawsuit seeking a lifetime of payment for one person's misjudgement [pulling the Taser in the first place.]

A blatant, bald-faced lie that anyone but a badge-licker can see through immediately. One of the stories mentioned that the taser was tested. They shook it from side to side, ran tests to see if it could have malfunctioned, and eliminated that possibility. That he drew it in the first place should cost him his job, at the very least. That he didn't call for medical help after the boy lost consciousness after the assault suggests a coverup at least.

 

[AMonger]

Anytime someone tries to define a group by the action of a few the argument is defeated out of the box.

I don't. It's long past a few. Rogue cops are now, quite simply, the standard. It used to be said that the bad cops were the inescapable exception to the rule, that human nature dictates that you're always going to have a few bad actors, and though you try the best you can to weed them out, you'll never get them all. And I'd say that was true--back before civilian law enforcement was militarized, before they started obviously recruiting and training to achieve a militant, aggressive, malevolent force and discharging any cop who displayed morals or reluctance to tase people who shouldn't be tased, like the cop in Austin who was fired for not tasing an elderly man who wasn't resisting, or Regina Tosca in Bogota, New Jersey.
The norm changed long ago, and you've missed it.

 

[bobwg]

I don't. It's long past a few. Rogue cops are now, quite simply, the standard. It used to be said that the bad cops were the inescapable exception to the rule, that human nature dictates that you're always going to have a few bad actors, and though you try the best you can to weed them out, you'll never get them all. And I'd say that was true--back before civilian law enforcement was militarized, before they started obviously recruiting and training to achieve a militant, aggressive, malevolent force and discharging any cop who displayed morals or reluctance to tase people who shouldn't be tased, like the cop in Austin who was fired for not tasing an elderly man who wasn't resisting, or Regina Tosca in Bogota, New Jersey.
The norm changed long ago, and you've missed it.

Again I would say where are your numbers , documentation of your claim that most if not all cops are bad

 

[AMonger]

The point was not that peeing on a tire and tasering someone are equivalent. The point was that you don't condemn an entire category of people based on the bad action of a few percent of the population. Anyone who seriously and genuinely does so needs to get counseling to overcome whatever has caused such irrationality.

Anybody who can READ THE NEWS and not see that the norm has shifted and that abusive, out-of-control cops are the norm needs to take their head out, so-to-speak, and either wipe away the detritus covering their eyes or at least open them and recognize that it's not 1950 anymore and that this isn't Mayberry.
Or maybe reserving one's worship for God instead of anything with a badge and a uniform would be a good start.

 

[AMonger]

Just wondering if you have proof? numbers? documemtation???

Read, Bob. It's self-evident.

 

[bobwg]

whats the total number of cops in America? how many are bad with documentation?? otherwise the claim is bs

 

[xiggi]

I don't. It's long past a few. Rogue cops are now, quite simply, the standard. It used to be said that the bad cops were the inescapable exception to the rule, that human nature dictates that you're always going to have a few bad actors, and though you try the best you can to weed them out, you'll never get them all. And I'd say that was true--back before civilian law enforcement was militarized, before they started obviously recruiting and training to achieve a militant, aggressive, malevolent force and discharging any cop who displayed morals or reluctance to tase people who shouldn't be tased, like the cop in Austin who was fired for not tasing an elderly man who wasn't resisting, or Regina Tosca in Bogota, New Jersey.
The norm changed long ago, and you've missed it.

If it was the standard thousands of people getting speeding tickets daily would be filing complaints. You post single incidents and attempt to paint an entire profession as rouge. Honestly it simply makes you come off as an angry person with unresolved issues.

Sent from my Fisher Price ABC123 via EO Forums

 

[bobwg]

I don't. It's long past a few. Rogue cops are now, quite simply, the standard. It used to be said that the bad cops were the inescapable exception to the rule, that human nature dictates that you're always going to have a few bad actors, and though you try the best you can to weed them out, you'll never get them all. And I'd say that was true--back before civilian law enforcement was militarized, before they started obviously recruiting and training to achieve a militant, aggressive, malevolent force and discharging any cop who displayed morals or reluctance to tase people who shouldn't be tased, like the cop in Austin who was fired for not tasing an elderly man who wasn't resisting, or Regina Tosca in Bogota, New Jersey.
The norm changed long ago, and you've missed it.

Maybe there is no change in the number of bad cops that it is just with the advance in Technology that we are able to hear more about it

 

[AMonger]

"Exponentially" is an interesting choice of words. In order to you that word and have your statement retain any validity or be taken seriously, then you must know the specific numbers. What are they? How many times per day, on the average, are there verifiable instances of violation of rights? And how many times per day, on the average, do expediters pee on tires or in public?

Again, it's self-evident.
--There are few expediters;
--The number peeing on tires in a day is invariably a small subset of that small number;
--There are, comparatively, many cops;
--That systemic abuse of the citizenry's rights is well-documented (we were just discussing in recent threads how Illinois violates people's 2nd amendment rights, and how police have arrested people for video taping them in public, to list but two examples);
--That I can, with essentially no effort, run across and post numerous stories of cops abusing people; that the ones I post are but a small subset of the ones I hear and read about; and that the percentage of ones I even hear about is necessarily a small subset of a greater number that I don't ever even know about;
--and that the militarization of police is a documented, intentional policy;
leads one to the inescapable conclusion that police abuse occurs with exponentially greater frequency than an expedite whizzing on tires in public.

I don't know how many stars there are in the sky or grains of sand in all the beaches in the world, but we can know it's exponentially greater than the grains of sand in a child's sandbox. I don't need numbers to pronounce that true.

 

[AMonger]

Again I would say where are your numbers , documentation of your claim that most if not all cops are bad

As I've stated repeatedly, I don't claim that all cops are bad. The 95% in my sig line is less than all, and I've said numerous times before that that's hyperbole.
Read my rationale to Turtle starting with "There are few expediters."

 

[AMonger]

Maybe there is no change in the number of bad cops that it is just with the advance in Technology that we are able to hear more about it

Is that an improvement? Really? Would you rather it were that way?

 

[xiggi]

Again, it's self-evident.
--There are few expediters;
--The number peeing on tires in a day is invariably a small subset of that small number;
--There are, comparatively, many cops;
--That systemic abuse of the citizenry's rights is well-documented (we were just discussing in recent threads how Illinois violates people's 2nd amendment rights, and how police have arrested people for video taping them in public, to list but two examples);
--That I can, with essentially no effort, run across and post numerous stories of cops abusing people; that the ones I post are but a small subset of the ones I hear and read about; and that the percentage of ones I even hear about is necessarily a small subset of a greater number that I don't ever even know about;
--and that the militarization of police is a documented, intentional policy;
leads one to the inescapable conclusion that police abuse occurs with exponentially greater frequency than an expedite whizzing on tires in public.

I don't know how many stars there are in the sky or grains of sand in all the beaches in the world, but we can know it's exponentially greater than the grains of sand in a child's sandbox. I don't need numbers to pronounce that true.

There are thousands of interactions between cops and the public daily. Even you you could.post 100 new ones a day it.leaves the argument lacking. Is there bad cops, stupid cops and cops that shouldn't be cops you bet. Does that conclude on a whole they are corrupt not at all.

Sent from my Fisher Price ABC123 via EO Forums

 

[bobwg]

Is that an improvement? Really? Would you rather it were that way?

Your claim that there are more bad cops today than back in the 50s or that most cops are bad and all cops should be fired just because you see news reports of bad cops and that is before an investigation is done. as some one else said you seem to be an angry person with an axe to grind against most cops

 

[Turtle]

Anybody who can READ THE NEWS and not see that the norm has shifted and that abusive, out-of-control cops are the norm meds to take their head out, so-to-speak, and either wipe away the detritus covering their eyes or at least open them and recognize that it's not 1950 anymore and that this isn't Mayberry.
Or maybe reserving one's worship for God instead of anything with a badge and a uniform would be a good start.

Well, maybe anyone reading the news and gets their information spoonfed to them and believe everything they hear, yeah, sure, THEY can see it. But these are the same people believe that Ron Paul wasn't even running in the primaries, and that child abduction is so common that 50% of all children will be abducted and raped and murdered, that all truck drivers are reckless and dangerous and cause all of the traffic accidents, that you will be blown up if you drive through Dearborn, that global warming is 100% a man-made phenomenon and no other cause is possible and it's already WAY worse than you can possibly imagine, that West Nile Virus will kill off the population, and that you need a respirator because of the H1N1 flu virus. But that's OK, because none of it will matter after December 21, 2012, because according to the same media the world will end on that day. Fini

 

[Turtle]

I don't know how many stars there are in the sky or grains of sand in all the beaches in the world, but we can know it's exponentially greater than the grains of sand in a child's sandbox. I don't need numbers to pronounce that true.

However, that's only true of things that are, in fact, self-evident, such as the different between the grains of sand in a sandbox and the grains of sand on all the beaches of the world. There is no question that either of us could produce story after story of cops abusing people, but by the same token either of us, or at least I know I can, produce far more stories where no abuse happened whatsoever.

Sure, using pure numbers, by virtue of the fact that there are more cops than there are expediters, it's reasonable to assume there are more incidents of cops abusing people's rights than there are of expediters peeing in public. But viewed in comparison, using percentages, from what I have both witnessed personally and read in the news and online, I have no choice but to seriously doubt your "exponential claim". There are likely as many examples right here on EO of people peeing in public than there are of cops abusing rights at some Web site that chronicles any and all reported incidents. Every pee thread here contains dozens of examples. Using your "exponential" claim as valid, it would mean that a majority of cops abuse people's rights on a daily basis. Not merely erroneously accused of it like the motorcycle rider carrying the gun in his hip, but real, actual civil and constitutional rights violations that can be verified and proved.

 

[AMonger]

Sure, using pure numbers, by virtue of the fact that there are more cops than there are expediters, it's reasonable to assume there are more incidents of cops abusing people's rights than there are of expediters peeing in public. But viewed in comparison, using percentages, from what I have both witnessed personally and read in the news and online, I have no choice but to seriously doubt your "exponential claim". There are likely as many examples right here on EO of people peeing in public than there are of cops abusing rights at some Web site that chronicles any and all reported incidents. Every pee thread here contains dozens of examples. Using your "exponential" claim as valid, it would mean that a majority of cops abuse people's rights on a daily basis. Not merely erroneously accused of it like the motorcycle rider carrying the gun in his hip, but real, actual civil and constitutional rights violations that can be verified and proved.

How many complaints of expediters whizzing in public could you collect in a day? Maybe 3? So if 9 American cops a day use excessive force--a sure bet, and certainly much higher--the differential could be said to be exponential.

 

[bobwg]

How many complaints of expediters whizzing in public could you collect in a day? Maybe 3? So if 9 American cops a day use excessive force--a sure bet, and certainly much higher--the differential could be said to be exponential.

Just because someone files a complaint does not prove a cop used excessive force or abused his job

 

[Turtle]

How many complaints of expediters whizzing in public could you collect in a day? Maybe 3? So if 9 American cops a day use excessive force--a sure bet, and certainly much higher--the differential could be said to be exponential.

Yes, like I said if using raw numbers. But with percentages, it's hardly self-evident. I would submit that the percentage of expediters who verifiably pee daily in public, in relation to all expediters, than is the percentage of cops who daily verifiably violate citizen's rights, in relation to all cops.

 

[AMonger]

Just because someone files a complaint does not prove a cop used excessive force or abused his job

You're right that reports don't indicate the actual number of instances of police abuse. Most go unreported or not followed up on, or just don't make national news. The actual instances of police abuse are undoubtedly much higher.