To Protect and to Serve II

[Orange_Crush]

If you have reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred or is about to occur, it's your 4th amendment in action.

That's one problem I have with current police mentality. You use the Supereme Court in an effort to support what you get to do, as opposed to using your head and heart to decide what you should or shouldn't do.

Yah. You keep being "legal". But stop wondering why we (the people you are actually supposed to be serving) distrust you.

And that is coming from about as straight-laced, law-abiding citizen as you can get. Me.

 

[Orange_Crush]

I am not, and have never, proclaimed police to be without sin.

What I do proclaim, with absolute certainty, is that the notion that the actions of the few speak to the character and integrity of the whole is a farce.

I was pointing out that your "I did x... What did you do?" snipe didn't actually amount to much in the whole moral high ground argument.

 

[ob79]

I'm not speaking specifically about you; thank you for that.

However, generally speaking, one "good" act does not cancel out one "bad" act.

You can't mug an old lady, then help another across the street so that you can claim to be a good person.

Police can't destroy innocent lives or trample citizen rights then point to their good deeds and expect people to feel like the scales have been balanced. It doesn't work that way.

Oh... and ETA:

I did marital counseling and saw the Lord act radically. All indications are that a 3 year old will not grow up in a split home.

I performed Biblical counseling with a recovering opiate addict, who didn't succumb again this week.

I counseled the victim of sexual abuse.

I didn't trample anyone's rights that I know of, or treat anyone as though they are guilty until proven innocent.

Did you molest one of your patrons? There have been more than a fair share of youth pastors and priests have...

 

[Orange_Crush]

Did you molest one of your patrons? There have been more than a fair share of youth pastors and priests have...

I see the point you're trying to make. It's misplaced.

I specifically said:

I'm not speaking specifically about you; thank you for that.

So you can try to divert and hand wave all you want. Again... I merely made the point that your self-congratulatory snipe, meant to play the moral high-card to Raz, was misplaced.

If you want to deal with the logic and dispute it, go for it. If you want to divert with priest-diddling talk, you can find someone else to do it with.

 

[n_huffhines]

1. How does he "profile"?

2. From the outset, who is acting the most inappropriate or unreasonable?

3. Officer clearly gives the individual behind the camera the reason why he's speaking to him and asking for identification.

4. The LEO seems a little rattled by the guy's response. It happens. It's not fun and it can knock you off your game.

5. From the second the individual refused to give the LEO his name/DOB/ID, he could have been cuffed and detained.

6. INSTEAD, he attempts to speak with who I assume is his mother and explain to her his reasoning in an effort to persuade her to assist the LEO in his investigation.

7. Officers investigate suspicious activity/behavior every. single. day.

8. This officer articulated to all parties involved why he had reasonable suspicion to conduct a "Terry Stop" (Terry v. Ohio).

9. While he (LEO) was noticeably rattled, he conducted himself in a calm and courteous manner. The other guy acted like a d*ck.

The cop had no reason to stop him in the first place. The cop was being a dick first. He is the public servant inconveniencing somebody for no good reason.

The cop did a good job of not escalating the situation and I think it's because he realized he had no PC to bother this man. He'll probably think twice about being a public nuisance next time. Good on this citizen for "being a dick" and not taking the easy way out by complying with authoritative bull****.

 

[n_huffhines]

That's funny because I thought that was the Supreme Court's purpose too.

Say it with me, "slavery was wrong, even though it was legal".

Just want to make sure you get the point he's driving at.

 

[ob79]

I see the point you're trying to make. It's misplaced.

I specifically said:



So you can try to divert and hand wave all you want. Again... I merely made the point that your self-congratulatory snipe, meant to play the moral high-card to Raz, was misplaced.

If you want to deal with the logic and dispute it, go for it. If you want to divert with priest-diddling talk, you can find someone else to do it with.

It is no more misplaced than the point that you and others have made; that one act by one cop speaks to the actions of the whole.

You can't dismiss that by saying "oh hey, we weren't talking about you, you did a good job. It's the rest of them, they're all corrupt."

 

[ob79]

Say it with me, "slavery was wrong, even though it was legal".

Just want to make sure you get the point he's driving at.

Trust me, I get it. I always have.

I don't agree with it, that's the point. Thought I was making that clear...

 

[Orange_Crush]

It is no more misplaced than the point that you and others have made; that one act by one cop speaks to the actions of the whole.

You can't dismiss that by saying "oh hey, we weren't talking about you, you did a good job. It's the rest of them, they're all corrupt."

Point out where I made that point, please. Specifically.

 

[ob79]

Point out where I made that point, please. Specifically.

.

You can't mug an old lady, then help another across the street so that you can claim to be a good person.

Police can't destroy innocent lives or trample citizen rights then point to their good deeds and expect people to feel like the scales have been balanced. It doesn't work that way.

And I get it, that may not be what you intended to infer or perhaps I read it within the context of other's posts/opinions...

My point is this...

I consider myself to be a good man, not perfect by any means and no better than you, Ras, DTH, or whoever...

I work with 100 men and women who feel the EXACT same way and work in a profession that I KNOW others do too.

The video that Huffhines posted is an example of that; an officer sees what, based on his experience and training, appears to be suspicious behavior from a black male. He approached that person and is immediately accused of racism, profiling, etc, even though he did so in a professional and courteous manner.

That's the job. You see suspicious behavior, you check it out...sometimes it's something, sometimes it's not, either way that's the job.

 

[n_huffhines]

.



And I get it, that may not be what you intended to infer or perhaps I read it within the context of other's posts/opinions...

My point is this...

I consider myself to be a good man, not perfect by any means and no better than you, Ras, DTH, or whoever...

I work with 100 men and women who feel the EXACT same way and work in a profession that I KNOW others do too.

The video that Huffhines posted is an example of that; an officer sees what, based on his experience and training, appears to be suspicious behavior from a black male. He approached that person and is immediately accused of racism, profiling, etc, even though he did so in a professional and courteous manner.

That's the job. You see suspicious behavior, you check it out...sometimes it's something, sometimes it's not, either way that's the job.

There are so many problems with it, but let's just look at it this way....is it even good police work?

Not sure what the numbers are, but if they are anything like the numbers I've seen on car searches, I'm betting one in hundreds (if not thousands) of these types of stops result in busting a dangerous criminal. I'm willing to bet this isn't how you collared your child rapist.

I'm sure you can nab quite a few guys carrying a little bit of coke this way, but that's a waste of time and resources. Maybe you even find an illegal gun, but if you're in a dangerous neighborhood we probably can't assume they are carrying for any other reason than personal protection.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

.

That's the job. You see suspicious behavior, you check it out...sometimes it's something, sometimes it's not, either way that's the job.

Can you explain to me, for my own sake, how a black man should park a car and exit it without raising suspicion?

 

[Orange_Crush]

.



And I get it, that may not be what you intended to infer or perhaps I read it within the context of other's posts/opinions...

My point is this...

I consider myself to be a good man, not perfect by any means and no better than you, Ras, DTH, or whoever...

I work with 100 men and women who feel the EXACT same way and work in a profession that I KNOW others do too.

The video that Huffhines posted is an example of that; an officer sees what, based on his experience and training, appears to be suspicious behavior from a black male. He approached that person and is immediately accused of racism, profiling, etc, even though he did so in a professional and courteous manner.

That's the job. You see suspicious behavior, you check it out...sometimes it's something, sometimes it's not, either way that's the job.

That didn't say what you claim it says. So...?

You admit you're reading into my statement, and that what you read into it was most likely not my intent, yet you talk to me about me diddling the kids in my church.

How about you just take a long walk now?

 

[RikidyBones]

orangeblood, thank you for your daily service to your community. :hi:

 

[ob79]

Can you explain to me, for my own sake, how a black man should park a car and exit it without raising suspicion?

Terry v. Ohio articulates what constitutes reasonable suspicion. What the officer stated he witnessed the individual doing adequately fit within the context of reasonable suspicion. Consequently, a man simply parking his car does not.

That's not what the officer stated he saw...but then, he's a police officer so he's obviously lying, amirite?

 

[ob79]

That didn't say what you claim it says. So...?

You admit you're reading into my statement, and that what you read into it was most likely not my intent, yet you talk to me about me diddling the kids in my church.

How about you just take a long walk now?

I was attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt and extend an olive branch.

My point still stands, if the overarching point that is reiterated over and over within this thread everyday is true (that the actions of the few represent the actions of the whole) then the same can be said for all professions or callings.

A point with which I wholeheartedly disagree.

If it offended you, welcome to police work. I hear it everyday.

 

[Orange_Crush]

I was attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt and extend an olive branch.

My point still stands, if the overarching point that is reiterated over and over within this thread everyday is true (that the actions of the few represent the actions of the whole) then the same can be said for all professions or callings.

A point with which I wholeheartedly disagree.

If it offended you, welcome to police work. I hear it everyday.

You are such a hypocrite. You accused me of hyper generalizing police officers and blaming innocents for the sins of bad actors. In doing so, you hyper generalize everyone who posts in this thread and accuse me of the arguments of others. Instead of apologizing, you double down on your arrogance.

The only thing that offended me is you bringing the kids in my church into it... discussing whether they are being raped. Well done. Triple down on it. You lost all moral high ground. I will say it again... take a long slow walk and never type another word to me.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Terry v. Ohio articulates what constitutes reasonable suspicion. What the officer stated he witnessed the individual doing adequately fit within the context of reasonable suspicion. Consequently, a man simply parking his car does not.

That's not what the officer stated he saw...but then, he's a police officer so he's obviously lying, amirite?

What did that officer in the video say prompted him to question/detain him?

I want you to state it and then defend it so that you can put the words together on your screen/laptop and still try to defend the cop's actions. I bet once you see it in text, you will crawfish and crawl back from your defense.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

I was attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt and extend an olive branch.

My point still stands, if the overarching point that is reiterated over and over within this thread everyday is true (that the actions of the few represent the actions of the whole) then the same can be said for all professions or callings.

A point with which I wholeheartedly disagree.

If it offended you, welcome to police work. I hear it everyday.

There is a distinct difference between your profession and most others. My job in life doesn't put me in a situation to take someone's life and/or liberties. That is a huge responsibility that a lot of you cops still don't seem to understand nor appreciate. People don't like it when you harass them over minor infractions. Not to mention, that you seem to have the peons of society living in fear of the cops, but the top 1% goes unscathed and unmolested by these same cops.

Carry a few oz of reefer or coke? Go to jail.

Rob millions of people of billions of dollars? No cops anywhere to be found.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Did you molest one of your patrons? There have been more than a fair share of youth pastors and priests have...

See, this is the type of distracting and deflecting that you typically see in this thread by the LE defenders in this thread and what I thought Grand Vol was engaging in the other day.

Fact is that they can't defend their tactics as being just, so the deflect.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Terry v. Ohio articulates what constitutes reasonable suspicion. What the officer stated he witnessed the individual doing adequately fit within the context of reasonable suspicion. Consequently, a man simply parking his car does not.

That's not what the officer stated he saw...but then, he's a police officer so he's obviously lying, amirite?

Also, what was he under suspicion of doing by parking his car?

If the cop is going to say the driver looked suspicious, I would ask, "looked suspicious of doing what?"

 

[Orange_Crush]

Rob millions of people of billions of dollars? No cops anywhere to be found.

Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, he can rob the world.

 

[ob79]

You are such a hypocrite. You accused me of hyper generalizing police officers and blaming innocents for the sins of bad actors. In doing so, you hyper generalize everyone who posts in this thread and accuse me of the arguments of others. Instead of apologizing, you double down on your arrogance.

The only thing that offended me is you bringing the kids in my church into it... discussing whether they are being raped. Well done. Triple down on it. You lost all moral high ground. I will say it again... take a long slow walk and never type another word to me.

If you understood me from the beginning, like you say you did, then you understood it was a general point I was making and not a specific accusation. However misplaced you felt it was, it wasn't, it simply hit close to home and you didn't like it. I get it, I do.
For the record, those monsters who have been caught doing that sort of thing are the EXCEPTION not the RULE. It hit close to home for you and I get that...

Sort of like when an officer involved shooting happens and all of a sudden every cop is a trigger happy racist who can't wait to take down a bunch of minorities.

Again, you didn't accuse me of these things, but it parallels the point I'm making here; the actions of the few do not represent the actions of the whole.

 

[Orange_Crush]

If you understood me from the beginning, like you say you did, then you understood it was a general point I was making and not a specific accusation. However misplaced you felt it was, it wasn't, it simply hit close to home and you didn't like it. I get it, I do.
For the record, those monsters who have been caught doing that sort of thing are the EXCEPTION not the RULE. It hit close to home for you and I get that...

Sort of like when an officer involved shooting happens and all of a sudden every cop is a trigger happy racist who can't wait to take down a bunch of minorities.

Again, you didn't accuse me of these things, but it parallels the point I'm making here; the actions of the few do not represent the actions of the whole.

...

Do you know what? It's not for me to defend myself or berate you. You just do you, however you choose to do so.

Good day and good luck, officer.

 

[ob79]

We've already agree that I never generalized the police, nor blamed all of them for the actions of a few. I merely made a logical statement that you're yet to negate. So, with that out of the way, I'll paste in your response to me, someone who had not made blanket accusations against you, nor the police in general.



With me not having accused you and all of police, your point was misplaced and incredibly offensive.

You've tripled down in your arrogance.

In the decade-plus that I've been on VN, I've told exactly two people to completely get lost and stop interacting with me. Both were within the past couple of months, and both were due to them talking about the kids at my church getting diddled. (It seems to be a very recent phenomenon becoming more popular than it should be, eh?)

The first, having realized what an ass he'd been, apologized and we still speak.

You go ahead and quadruple-down. As you do, get lost. I refuse to interact with your ignorant arrogance again.

For your own sake, learn to read before talking pedophilia about a pastor's kid's ministry again.

Good day and good luck, officer.

The first statement that you made to me was defending a point that DTH made, which was there are no good cops. I took that personally and responded in kind. While you may have given credence to the fact that I busted a child rapist this week, you argued my good act does not cancel out all the bad acts by people within my profession, and then lectured me on why I ever brought it up in the first place. That was not and was never my point. It was an affront to DTH's comment and your defense of his comment, which I also took personally, warranted my subsuquent response.

You then saw fit to list all of the good deeds that you have done within your profession this week as a snide affront to mine.

My response was not misplaced, though harsh. As I've stated before, its intent was to give you a very real glimpse of the generalizations that are reiterated concerning police officers within this thread everyday. It was said in anger for you defending DTH's comments and mean spirited and for that, I apologize. I brought myself down a level while speaking in anger. I do not wish to make enemies here but if my comments have then that's the price I pay.

What I will not apologize for is bringing relvant information to this thread when I belive it's needed. Information that sheds light onto situations so that people can understand the actions taken by law enforcement, good and bad.