What do you mean I can't take pictures?

Jaybird180 said:
No, he's not joking. This is the reality of the post 9/11 world we live in. Albeit, a case of extremism but it has happened before (WWII Japanese internment & the legal quagmire that is Pres GW Bush v Jose Padilla).
Click to expand...
No it is not. You cannot be arrested without probable cause, without an arraignment, and certainly not based on 'someone saying you look suspicious'.

Jose Padilla is a whole different case, where he attempted to conduct a terrorist attack on the United States using a dirty bomb. In the end, his case was transferred to civilian courts, and he was convicted and sentenced.

He was an Al-Queda affiliate who had conducted training and operations with Al-Queda, and was part of an active terror cell. That is a far different cry than taking pictures at an airport

wsuffa said:
Think "Patriot Act". Yes, they can do this andd find a way to justify it.
Click to expand...
Point to the section of the Patriot Act that allows this.
The Patriot Act has become the boogeyman, and is often cited with no understanding of what it actually entails, and by people who have not actually read it.
Based on who's talking, the Patriot Act supposedly either allows or forbids anything you can think of.
 
PilotAlan said:
No it is not. You cannot be arrested without probable cause, without an arraignment, and certainly not based on 'someone saying you look suspicious'.

Jose Padilla is a whole different case, where he attempted to conduct a terrorist attack on the United States using a dirty bomb. In the end, his case was transferred to civilian courts, and he was convicted and sentenced.

He was an Al-Queda affiliate who had conducted training and operations with Al-Queda, and was part of an active terror cell. That is a far different cry than taking pictures at an airport
Click to expand...

You're right on all counts.

The question I'd ask, though, is "what merits different treatment?" If we're going to have a system where we can say "Person A gets 'Due Process Version 2.0,' and Person B gets 'Due Process Version 1.0' because we've decided Person B is particularly bad before we've decided that Person B is particularly bad," I'd say the whole system is...lip service.

Point to the section of the Patriot Act that allows this.
The Patriot Act has become the boogeyman, and is often cited with no understanding of what it actually entails, and by people who have not actually read it.
Based on who's talking, the Patriot Act supposedly either allows or forbids anything you can think of.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Not to suggest that I "like" the PA, just that nobody really knows what it says. At least in part because it's a gigantic PITA to know what it says (as in, I eat this type of stuff for breakfast, and I think it's difficult).

For those who are interested, here is the original public law: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ056.107

Looking up all the statutes is...incredibly burdensome.
 
PilotAlan said:
No it is not. You cannot be arrested without probable cause, without an arraignment, and certainly not based on 'someone saying you look suspicious'.
Click to expand...

Well actually Alan you unfortunatly can. Of course that does not make the arrest legal or appropriate but " probable cause" can be and has been "manufactured" I think any decent LEO is going to look at this with that
" OH PLEASE, Give me a break" Look but I do agree that I don't see an arrest comming based upon the statement of some cafe waitress.
 
Police incompetence is rampant - and this comes from a former County Coroner and Police Surgeon and someone who is a supporter of the police (at least the competent ones)...
Friday night about 8PM I saw lights being flashed across my house windows - We live in the woods a quarter mile off the road... We don't get lights flashing across our windows at night....
Going to the back door and flipping on the 500 watt Halogen spotlight I have mounted above the door (to blind people when I am uncertain who is out there at night) I see 3 officers huddled together doing the "deer in the headlights" routine about 15 feet from my doorway... I quickly slip the pump gun back behind the settee and open the door...
Had I been a nut job they would have been the lead story on Headline News at CNN an hour later... (I hate officers who are stupid, incompetent, nincompoops, grrrrrr!)
Instead I merely said, "Hello, can I help you?"
The lead one said, "are you 'so and so'...
I said, "Yes."
He says - with that insulting super politeness they like to use to indicate their contempt - "Sir, I am taking you to jail for three unpaid traffic violations."
"Really?" - was the only thing that came to mind at that instant... I instantly understood the name of the game... You arrest someone after court hours on Friday and they spend 3 nights in the slammer before getting a hearing... This is a favorite maneuver by officers to harass someone they don't like...

And for a split second I was tempted to say, "I want a lawyer." and let them do it... I would call Jeffery Fieger and he would show up for the Monday morning hearing at the courthouse and present the prosecutor with a ten million dollar lawsuit for false imprisonment which he had filed with the County Clerk two floors down just minutes before... But, old habits die hard and I do identify with the law enforcement community - good officers put their lives on the line for peanuts in pay...

So, I dropped into my "I am in charge here and you had better listen" persona from my days as the Coroner... I immediately went after the officer in front (he I mentally named Larry, the other two were Moe and Curly)
"Look sonny, I have not had a traffic citation since long before you were pooping in your diapers." That made him blink...
"My full legal name is xxx xxx xxx, and my date of birth is yy yy yyyy. So if the arrest warrant, that you had better have in your pocket, does not match up you just committed false arrest!"
At this point they actually back up a step (I gotcha now.) He digs the paper out and sure enough it does not match... Now the tails go down and you never saw a more sorry looking bunch of dogs, errrr officers, stumbling over themselves to apologize...

Lessee, we got, criminal trespass in the nighttime while armed, false arrest, extreme mental abuse, and loss of consortium for my wife... Got to be worth millions :)
One even goes so far as to say, "Gee you have a really nice house here" - as though I give a rats azz what he thinks about my house...

Anyway, I remain in my professor lecturing the students voice and tell them to be careful and not drive off into the pond while going around the turn in the woods as I did not want to have to explain how three deputies disappeared without a trace... This is also a message that indicates I am the alpha dog in this here pack... They depart still mumbling apologies...

Monday, I am going to the Sheriff's office to have a little chat with him (he ain't a gonna enjoy it, Maud) as to how he came within a heartbeat of having 3 dead officers because they are too stoopid to live...
Then we will discuss basic police work in that the fella with the same name they thought they were arresting is at least 20 years younger than me and left Michigan years ago... Had the county officers thought to have a 10 second conversation with the township police (who know all this) there would not have been an embarrassing incident...

denny-o
 
Some people are simply authority wannabees, they can't help themselves. They love to throw their superior than thou authoritative weight around, even though they lack the authority to do so.

A few months ago I was walking my dog along the cliffs. He stopped to take care of some business, while I stood there waiting on him. A woman interrupted our routine with; " I hope you are planning on picking up after your dog, this is all of ours cliffs, and we like it to be kept clean."

Murf was still straining away while I am enduring her lecture, thinking, honey, I've lived along these cliffs since 1957, I know what we like here. Anyway, I pulled the plastic bag out of my pocket without responding to her at all. She walked away in a huff, like I had just insulted her. Go figure?

John
 
PilotAlan said:
The Patriot Act has become the boogeyman, and is often cited with no understanding of what it actually entails, and by people who have not actually read it.
Based on who's talking, the Patriot Act supposedly either allows or forbids anything you can think of.
Click to expand...

I think the ACLU probably has a good idea of what's in the Patriot Act:

http://www.reformthepatriotact.org/
 
Palmpilot said:
I think the ACLU probably has a good idea of what's in the Patriot Act:
http://www.reformthepatriotact.org/
Click to expand...

I know exactly what is in the Patriot Act, as does the ACLU.

My point was that people claim the Patriot Act permits all kinds of things that it does not.
People on this board have said if you stand up to TSA, the Patriot Act will let them send you to Guantanamo.

The ACLU's own website does not mention the things earlier posts in this thread have been claimed to be part of the Patriot Act.
 
AdamZ said:
Well actually Alan you unfortunatly can. Of course that does not make the arrest legal or appropriate but " probable cause" can be and has been "manufactured" I think any decent LEO is going to look at this with that
Click to expand...

Well sure. If a cop is willing to commit perjury and manufacture evidence, and spending several years in prison, then yeah, you can get arrested and charged.
I spend my entire adult life in law enforcement (including narcotics teams and street crimes units), and never saw anything remotely like this.
Not saying it has never happened, but it's vanishingly rare.
 
PilotAlan said:
Well sure. If a cop is willing to commit perjury and manufacture evidence, and spending several years in prison, then yeah, you can get arrested and charged.
I spend my entire adult life in law enforcement (including narcotics teams and street crimes units), and never saw anything remotely like this.
Not saying it has never happened, but it's vanishingly rare.
Click to expand...
I have seen cops commit perjury, and against me!. & nobody is ever going to prosecute a cop for it. Once I complained & I was told by the prosecutor that his lie was bad memory from so many similar cases. BS/ If you have never seen it you are either part of the the 'Silent blue code' problem or just blind. Yet I remain firmly a strong supporter of law and order. Despite the deterioration of quality Dave
 
PilotAlan said:
I know exactly what is in the Patriot Act, as does the ACLU.

My point was that people claim the Patriot Act permits all kinds of things that it does not.
People on this board have said if you stand up to TSA, the Patriot Act will let them send you to Guantanamo.

The ACLU's own website does not mention the things earlier posts in this thread have been claimed to be part of the Patriot Act.
Click to expand...

I wasn't posting the link to be argumentative. (I know, I know, it's hard to believe! :D) You wrote "Based on who's talking, the Patriot Act supposedly either allows or forbids anything you can think of." I thought the link might help solve that problem.
 
Palmpilot said:
I wasn't posting the link to be argumentative. (I know, I know, it's hard to believe! :D) You wrote "Based on who's talking, the Patriot Act supposedly either allows or forbids anything you can think of." I thought the link might help solve that problem.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. Sorry. :cornut:
I think we are agreeing here.
 
Ddayle said:
I have seen cops commit perjury, and against me!. & nobody is ever going to prosecute a cop for it. Once I complained & I was told by the prosecutor that his lie was bad memory from so many similar cases. BS/ If you have never seen it you are either part of the the 'Silent blue code' problem or just blind. Yet I remain firmly a strong supporter of law and order. Despite the deterioration of quality Dave
Click to expand...


not long ago, I was almost arrested for underage drinking (I was 23 years old at the time). I was in a bar, minding my own business while I purchased and paid for a drink. As I put the wallet back in my pocket, someone taps me on the shoulder. A short female with a hoodie (undercover cop) and spiky hair says "hey, give me that wallet, i'm a cop". Being in an unfamiliar area, I was suspicious and thought this person was trying to steal my wallet. I put my hand on my wallet, said "yeah right" and the cop walked away.

Cop returns 5 min later with several more undercover cops. They grabbed me by the shoulders, told me to put my hands on the bar, flashed ID and said they wanted to see my ID. Realizing my mistake, I said of course, and gave them my ID. They either thought it was fake or did not believe it was me. The guy says "this isn't you" and they haul me out of the bar, and onto the street where they form in a circle around me and start asking questions.

Here's where it got ugly. The cop asks me to recite my full name, DOB, address, etc. They asked me what my astrological sign was. Honestly didn't know. They kept going, asking why I was here in xxx town, why I ignored the "officer". They asked me to empty my pockets. I said "no, why?" Then one of them says he heard me talking about drugs with someone in the bar and that (this is ABSURD) if I would just 'fess up they would "help me out" but otherwise, i was going to jail. At this point I was extremely mad, but I kept a cool head and just decided to remain silent from this point on. They went on about how I was acting suspicious and how they were going to take me to jail because I was obstructing justice. I just kept quiet and was released.

The point is that Cops lie frequently. Its BS but they are allowed to lie to someone in order to question them. While I have not personally seen evidence manufactured, I have frequently seen them lie in order to get folks angry, or to scare them into surrendering their rights (to be searched, for one).
 
Nothing that says they can't lie. Also nothing that says you need to talk. As much as it sucks sometimes you just need to let them take you in and work it out in the courtroom.

It's a balance between figuring out their intent. If they have good intent and aren't too suspicious of you some cooperation can get you on your way. But if their intent is to arrest you then pretty much anything you do will just dig a deeper hole.
 
But god forbid you have a well trained dog anywhere nearby that might sniff them. Then the dog dies and the cop is hailed a hero for defending himself.
 
dell30rb said:
not long ago, I was almost arrested for underage drinking (I was 23 years old at the time). I was in a bar, minding my own business while I purchased and paid for a drink. As I put the wallet back in my pocket, someone taps me on the shoulder. A short female with a hoodie (undercover cop) and spiky hair says "hey, give me that wallet, i'm a cop". Being in an unfamiliar area, I was suspicious and thought this person was trying to steal my wallet. I put my hand on my wallet, said "yeah right" and the cop walked away.

Cop returns 5 min later with several more undercover cops. They grabbed me by the shoulders, told me to put my hands on the bar, flashed ID and said they wanted to see my ID. Realizing my mistake, I said of course, and gave them my ID. They either thought it was fake or did not believe it was me. The guy says "this isn't you" and they haul me out of the bar, and onto the street where they form in a circle around me and start asking questions.

Here's where it got ugly. The cop asks me to recite my full name, DOB, address, etc. They asked me what my astrological sign was. Honestly didn't know. They kept going, asking why I was here in xxx town, why I ignored the "officer". They asked me to empty my pockets. I said "no, why?" Then one of them says he heard me talking about drugs with someone in the bar and that (this is ABSURD) if I would just 'fess up they would "help me out" but otherwise, i was going to jail. At this point I was extremely mad, but I kept a cool head and just decided to remain silent from this point on. They went on about how I was acting suspicious and how they were going to take me to jail because I was obstructing justice. I just kept quiet and was released.

The point is that Cops lie frequently. Its BS but they are allowed to lie to someone in order to question them. While I have not personally seen evidence manufactured, I have frequently seen them lie in order to get folks angry, or to scare them into surrendering their rights (to be searched, for one).
Click to expand...

BTDT...A very good friend of mine disappeared a few years ago, and after giving two written statements (the second supplemented the first) I was asked to come and speak with the cops on the case. As this is a dear friend of mine, I happily obliged without much issue the first time (aside from typical "attitude" the fella's had) but the second time, they were flat out accusing me of having something to do with it. I walked out of the building with bruised thighs from squeezing so hard instead of slamming the guys face on the table I was so ****ed. And they wonder why people don't like to deal with them...:rolleyes2:
 
jesse said:
Nothing that says they can't lie.
Click to expand...

Be careful of context. They can't lie when filing a report and that is an important point.

The Denver police are in the middle of a process in which they are being reminded of the price of telling lies on a report. The cops hate it but justice is finally being served.
 
Clark1961 said:
Be careful of context. They can't lie when filing a report and that is an important point.

The Denver police are in the middle of a process in which they are being reminded of the price of telling lies on a report. The cops hate it but justice is finally being served.
Click to expand...

They aren't supposed to, but they do. And good luck proving them to be the liar unless you have video evidence proving so.
 
EdFred said:
They aren't supposed to, but they do. And good luck proving them to be the liar unless you have video evidence proving so.
Click to expand...

The most accurate police report is 75% fabriction.
 
Clark1961 said:
Be careful of context. They can't lie when filing a report and that is an important point.

The Denver police are in the middle of a process in which they are being reminded of the price of telling lies on a report. The cops hate it but justice is finally being served.
Click to expand...


True, but they are trained to lie to you during questioning. It's all about gauging your reaction.

Though I still giggle remembering the look on the deputy's face when I refused to let him search my car:rofl:
 
jesse said:
Nothing that says they can't lie. Also nothing that says you need to talk. As much as it sucks sometimes you just need to let them take you in and work it out in the courtroom.
Click to expand...

Be very careful of that. Simply being arrested can carry unforseen and very negative consequences. The whole emphasis on "zero tolerance" means that we're down to "one foul and you're out".

Consider:

1) Most employers run background checks and specifically ask on the job appilcation if you have any arrests. In today's job market, an affirmative response means no job. Since you're not yet hired there is no protection... and no requirement that employers consider only convictions. And if you're working in a job involving children (teacher, for example) watch out: school administrators don't want publicity about someone in the classroom who's once been arrested. Not to take this into Spin Zone but this story is absolutely chilling.

2) While your pilot license itself may not be at risk, other related privileges may be at risk. Depending on the offense, for example, it may affect your FAA medical (Question 18) or SIDA access.

3) Foreign travel: Some countries will bar travelers that have arrests and/or convictions. Canada is one - a DWI makes one inadmissable to Canada. And yes, the US shares records. Likewise, if you have Global Entry as a way to avoid the lines at US Customs and Immigration, an arrest could disqualify you from the program.

4) If you happen to be in a job that requires a US government security clearance, arrests are reportable as "adverse circumstances" & could jeapordize the clearance.

5) It may well cost you more to defend yourself than the penalty of the crime. Even if the charges are unwarranted and are dismissed.

There are more risks....

There's an old adage that still applies: "You might be able to beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride". Nowadays, the "ride" can have pretty stiff consequences.
 
wsuffa said:
Be very careful of that. Simply being arrested can carry unforseen and very negative consequences. The whole emphasis on "zero tolerance" means that we're down to "one foul and you're out".

Consider:

1) Most employers run background checks and specifically ask on the job appilcation if you have any arrests. In today's job market, an affirmative response means no job. Since you're not yet hired there is no protection... and no requirement that employers consider only convictions. And if you're working in a job involving children (teacher, for example) watch out: school administrators don't want publicity about someone in the classroom who's once been arrested. Not to take this into Spin Zone but this story is absolutely chilling.

2) While your pilot license itself may not be at risk, other related privileges may be at risk. Depending on the offense, for example, it may affect your FAA medical (Question 18) or SIDA access.

3) Foreign travel: Some countries will bar travelers that have arrests and/or convictions. Canada is one - a DWI makes one inadmissable to Canada. And yes, the US shares records. Likewise, if you have Global Entry as a way to avoid the lines at US Customs and Immigration, an arrest could disqualify you from the program.

4) If you happen to be in a job that requires a US government security clearance, arrests are reportable as "adverse circumstances" & could jeapordize the clearance.

5) It may well cost you more to defend yourself than the penalty of the crime. Even if the charges are unwarranted and are dismissed.

There are more risks....

There's an old adage that still applies: "You might be able to beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride". Nowadays, the "ride" can have pretty stiff consequences.
Click to expand...
Understand. But if you realize their intent is to arrest you they will do so and at that point it's in your best interest to STFU and plan on needing to lawyer up to deal with the mess.

If arresting you is not their intent then a little cooperation might end it.

It's a fine line that needs to be danced very carefully.
 
SkyHog said:
But god forbid you have a well trained dog anywhere nearby that might sniff them. Then the dog dies and the cop is hailed a hero for defending himself.
Click to expand...

+1

I'll leave at that before I say something someone regrets. :mad:
 
RJM62 said:
This is only peripherally related to the topic, but some "concerned citizen" reported me for taking the pic below of my goddaughter a couple of years ago with the crappy cell phone camera I was using back then.

The problem? The bridge in the background.

-Rich
Click to expand...

Sheesh. The diving platform would have been the more obvious target.
 
One of the things wrong with law enforcement today is a lack of respect for the law and the badge. I am talking a bout a lack of respect by the very people who wear the badge. When a LEO lies to me, or carelessly ignores the law( because he is a cop ) it show me that officer has NO respect for the law & the badge they wear. How can I be expected to trust an officer who openly flaunts the law? sorry if trained LEO cannot obey the laws they are paid to enforce, then those officers need to quit and find a new career field. Worse that that , because i have had the audacity to complain about law breaking police, I am now denied police services. they have refused to investigate , property crimes,and a home break-in and assualt/robbery . Yet I remain a staunch supporter of HONEST LEO. Dave
 
Ddayle said:
How can I be expected to trust an officer who openly flaunts the law?
Click to expand...

I don't mind when they flaunt the law. Where I draw the line is when they flout the law.

I especially object when they flaunt the fact that they're flouting the law.
 
Richard, I am so glad you are putting your English grammar degree to good use. I Try to use the language correctly, but it is not and has never been the major focus of my study (or my life), and does not change the facts I have presented. Thanks again for being the grammar police, we all appreciate your dedication. Dave
 
What worries me most about law enforcement isn't LEO's flouting the law.

What worries me is the way many LEOs have taken an "us versus them" attitude that goes beyond the inner cities where that attitude originated. It has gotten to the point in some aviation forums that any criticism of any LEO is considered to be an "attack" on ALL LEOs, worthy of shout-downs.

This (IMHO) signals a dangerous sea change. It used to be "all of us against the bad guys". Now, it seems to be heading toward "just us against...everyone -- cuz everyone is a potential bad guy".

As we have seen in Mexico, and (to a lesser degree, so far) along the Southern U.S. border, it's a very fine line between being a law enforcement officer, and being a corrupted agent of the bad guys. Once corruption takes over a police force, they BECOME the very thing they have sworn to protect us against.

If we lose the ability to control LEOs -- something WE, the People must retain -- the republic itself is lost. In other words, constructive criticism of LEOs is not a "problem" -- it is our right. Those who lose sight of that are, IMHO, on a slippery slope.
 
Jay Honeck said:
...

As we have seen in Mexico, and (to a lesser degree, so far) along the Southern U.S. border, it's a very fine line between being a law enforcement officer, and being a corrupted agent of the bad guys.

....
Click to expand...

How is there a fine line?
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
How is there a fine line?
Click to expand...

What I mean is it doesn't take much to push a harried, often underpaid LEO into working for the "other side".

As seen in Mexico, when given a choice between accepting this $20,000 bribe (and looking the other way) and having your entire family killed, many will choose to help the cartels.

Word has it that this has now spread to our side of the border. Dunno how much is true, but here in Texas, many people ASSUME it to be true.
 
Jay Honeck said:
What I mean is it doesn't take much to push a harried, often underpaid LEO into working for the "other side".

As seen in Mexico, when given a choice between accepting this $20,000 bribe (and looking the other way) and having your entire family killed, many will choose to help the cartels.

Word has it that this has now spread to our side of the border. Dunno how much is true, but here in Texas, many people ASSUME it to be true.
Click to expand...

Ahh, gotcha.
 
Jay Honeck said:
What I mean is it doesn't take much to push a harried, often underpaid LEO into working for the "other side".

As seen in Mexico, when given a choice between accepting this $20,000 bribe (and looking the other way) and having your entire family killed, many will choose to help the cartels.

Word has it that this has now spread to our side of the border. Dunno how much is true, but here in Texas, many people ASSUME it to be true.
Click to expand...

Did you hear about the corruption discovered in Columbus, NM?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20041708-504083.html

cbs said:
(CBS/AP/KRQE) COLUMBUS, N.M. - In a small southern New Mexico village once raided and burned by Pancho Villa, federal agents have arrested the mayor, police chief, and a council member in a drug and weapons raid.
Click to expand...

Its here.

In a bizarre twist...what the hell does the last line of the story have to do with anything?

In 1916, Mexican revolutionary leader Pancho Villa raided and burned the town, which led President Woodrow Wilson to launch an unsuccessful pursuit of Villa by federal troops.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Miami Beach. Guy shooting video of cops shooting another man to death was ordered out of car at gunpoint and officers smashed his phone yelling, "You wanna be a f-ing paparazzi?!"

http://www.pixiq.com/article/MIami Beach Police Ordered Videographer At Gunpoint To Hand Over

Lovely folks we're hiring to "Serve and Protect" these days.

I'm all for good cops, but the balance of good/bad seems quite out of whack and the "thin blue line" needs to find some creative ways to drum out some of their problem children.
 
SkyHog said:
Did you hear about the corruption discovered in Columbus, NM?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20041708-504083.html



Its here.

In a bizarre twist...what the hell does the last line of the story have to do with anything?
Click to expand...
A minor reference to the town history to help you identify with them or help you find them on your map. It could also be used to explain their action. That is, once corrupted by violence, do to repeat same.
 
Ddayle said:
One of the things wrong with law enforcement today is a lack of respect for the law and the badge. I am talking a bout a lack of respect by the very people who wear the badge. When a LEO lies to me, or carelessly ignores the law( because he is a cop ) it show me that officer has NO respect for the law & the badge they wear. How can I be expected to trust an officer who openly flaunts the law? sorry if trained LEO cannot obey the laws they are paid to enforce, then those officers need to quit and find a new career field. Worse that that , because i have had the audacity to complain about law breaking police, I am now denied police services. they have refused to investigate , property crimes,and a home break-in and assualt/robbery . Yet I remain a staunch supporter of HONEST LEO. Dave
Click to expand...

I don't think "today" has anything to do with it, except that YOUR experience exists in the present time. Human beings are flawed and there have been and always will be outliers. Police in this country today are if anything more professional and less corruptible than any time in our history but they are still human beings, just like the priests who molest, the churchgoing CPA who steals from his client, the governor who takes some under the table, and the sizable percentage of otherwise respectable citizens who intentionally fudge their tax returns. Doesn't mean we can't do better, certainly.
 
alaskaflyer said:
I don't think "today" has anything to do with it, except that YOUR experience exists in the present time. Human beings are flawed and there have been and always will be outliers. Police in this country today are if anything more professional and less corruptible than any time in our history but they are still human beings, just like the priests who molest, the churchgoing CPA who steals from his client, the governor who takes some under the table, and the sizable percentage of otherwise respectable citizens who intentionally fudge their tax returns. Doesn't mean we can't do better, certainly.
Click to expand...

LOL!!!!!

Wait...are you serious? You're honestly saying they're more professional this way:

police-officer-pic-12.jpg


Than they were this way:
1930-2.jpg


You pretty much confirmed what DDayle was saying: You have taken an "Us vs. them" attitude. There have always been troublemakers, but all of a sudden now, we're all presumed to be bad until we show that we're not. Police officers don't need all that extra protective gear, they use it for intimidation factors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top