The type of person who cares about people and their community. Deadly car accidents due to stupidity and senseless crime takes a toll on a person.
Cops are human like everyone else. The wide bulk of law enforcement are stern because they care not because they have a power trip.
Strongly disagree, but each to their own.
Have you actually ever known a police officer?
As a matter of fact, yes. When I was trooping with the 501st, a couple of them were serving police officers.
I know a handful of officers and none of them are monsters.
They wanted to be cops because they needed a job and went to VMI... so their options were limited.
They didn't become cops because they wanted to "serve out justice" or play cowboy.
Still showing classic "in group vs out group bias"
Not sure why I bother debating this here.
Agreed! Pointless isn't it?!
I think being a cop is sort of inherently 'bad,' because that's what the job entails.
We've seen this over and over, news story after news story, wherein the good cops get pushed out by the bad cops, and the bad cops cover for one another.
This is what happened with this story also. The bad cops covered for each other, because we all know, that this wasn't an accident. It was an intentional mistake, based on anger.
I am one to think that not all cops want to be a drill sergeant that can abuse you verbally, physically, and mentally, with no recourse, but instead... they view themselves superior, similar to the likes of a senior in high school, talking down to a freshmen.
It's the "you don't tell me," "I tell you!". Attitude. It's the I'm better than you, and if you dare resist me, you deserve to get whooped. That is not professional, that is not logical, and that is not civilized.
Let's not pretend that cops are good guys. They are the judge, before the judge. They are the bad guys, stopping the other bad guys at the door.
What you described is the human aspect not evil. As on the flip side of that coin because the police officer is in a position of authority a person will immediately dislike or even hate them.
In group vs out group bias.
I agree that the officer should loose his job and stand trial.
Mob mentality won't solve the problems with the US criminal justice system either.
I actually don't believe in Evil, because we've all done bad things that we aren't proud of, but I don't think anybody would consider themselves "bad," because it's the universal term for what we all try to avoid, and that also applies to "evil".
Cops are by definition 'immoral' because that's what the job entails. Just like Capitalism is inherently unfair and competitive, cops do bad things like kidnap, steal, and use violence.
Even if you're a good guy, and you're a cop, the job requires you to do things that are bad for anyone else to do, so that makes you a means to an end, but also a function of the state, and inherently bad.
Even if you save someone's life. Sure it makes the job worth it. That is in an overwhelming minority of cases, and the majority are frivolous and profit driven.
But I do see what you're saying about it being human nature. I think though, that another aspect you bring up is also true, because in any group, there's going to be dividing lines, and because of that, disparity.
Due to the disparity of power between citizens and police, we have the tension that we have today.
You have a reasonable point of view. That the job entiles things that are unpleasant.
But we come to the core issue is how to fix it? Who waches the watchmen?
hehe, well I did have this idea of like a twitch.tv website, where every police officer is live streaming from like a gopro on their hat.
Then there's a live chat and a review / comments section.
Then when you get cited or do something wrong, you are obligated to write what you did wrong on his page, how he handled himself, and how the situation made you feel, and if it was justified.
That's just an idea -_-
Turn police officers into live streamers with fans. I'm sure they'd start to chill out and enjoy the popularity a bit.
But it does open the door to the loss of privacy to victims.
Very interesting. I've never thought of it that way.
@Quixotic_Autocrat Knock it off. Your position remains indefensible in theory and practice on large scale. You bear the burden of proof to make such assertions and you are working off of anecdotes.
I feel like some of the arguments being made here are a bit misguided here. I look at things from a more grounded stand point which is there's nothing inherent other than the fact that we're human and we are subject to environment, some more than other. To label an institution as being a certain way, because that's it's inherent nature is a bit silly because it's just grouping and unless it's overt like mamals being warm blooded as that's part of the definition of that grouping, it's pointless. With that said, what we can say is that the presence or absence of certain incentives or penalties can introduce corrosive behavior. So the real issue is that within the law enforcement structure, there needs to be a more robust accountability and unfortunately even in the entertainment industry, internal affairs always get presented as a bad guy which sadly is somewhat culturally held too. Again, it's stupid to just run with labels, what you need is the ability to audit, because moaning and groaning that an institution is a bad isn't going to solve the problem and in fact may perpetuate it as it becomes normalized and self fulfilling.
Here's two cases where a lack of enforcement led to some ugly results one in law enforcement and the other in the military . You would not argue both of these institutions as being pro-child sex offender, but here's to situations that make your blood boil. In one case you have top brass wanting to surround themselves with "Yes men" and don't want to hear a word of criticism and as such go untouched as they have such a high ranking (if their ass was on the line that wouldn't be the case). In the other you have a lazy prosecutor who should have faced some sort of criminal negligence for how they handled the case.
So in short I'm annoyed with both sides, because one side is just dismissive and at points provided shallow excuses and on the other painting with broad a brush that it just diverts the real issues at hand. At the end of the day we're all human and if our asses on the line, when asked to jump, we'll ask how high.
I'm gonna have to save that and keep it. While the guy deserves everything he gets for murdering his wife, that cop deserves to go to jail for excessive use of force and attempted murder.
What are you even talking about?
You disagree that cops are human, thus fallible?
Not sure what the problem with that is.
I'm starting to feel like I'm talking into a void.
Stating that cops are human and not all are bad simply detracts from holding those accountable and conversely saying they're all this way just provides a soft target for the issue to be dismissed. There is an issue, it's one of a lack of accountability. Public workers across the board (fire dep., police, sanitation, dmv) all face stress, but we wouldn't extend the same permissiveness if a DMV receptionist snaps and jump over the divider to beat the shit out of the smart ass.
I said to hold him accoutable. Via losing his job and stand trial.
My point is how do we hold all police accountable in a way to prevent more incidents such as this?
Snap emotional decisions are difficult to safe guard against. How would you audit? And what is the criteria?
I don't question because I disagree @anadon.