Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Blackjack, Jan 22, 2008.
Here is something to consider regarding the good vs. bad cop debate.
Well you wanted my opinion so good or bad here it is.
Yes it was wrong. That is the good ole' boy network. That is the very seat of corruption. "I scratch your back you scratch mine" then right/wrong goes out the window. Millitary, church, polititians, cops and similar groups let each other get away with everything including murder for the sake of "loyalty". Just because a guy saved your ass once does not mean you let him get away with a crime. You do the same to him, risk your neck to help him but you don't cross the line and throw morals out the window. Just because you had a bbq with a guy does not mean you let him get away with a crime either.
Lets set this to another profession. A janitor punches someone. Does it matter how many floors he has cleaned ? Does it matter how well he has cleaned them ? A baker stabbs his wife and kills her. Does it matter how good his cakes are ? How many he has baked ? So why is it when a cop kills his wife all of the sudden his profession comes into play ? All of the sudden his commendations = a discusting amount of leniency ? Why not do the same for a farmer ? He plants more crops when he kills his wife the number of crops he plants = leniency. I'll tell you why, because it is wrong. But for some reason right and wrong goes out the window when the good ole' boy club effect kicks in.
Ok, next would be what would the "right" thing be in your case with the homeless jerkoff. Simple, he is handcuffed and needs medical attention. Just stop giving him medical attention till he stops being nasty. I personaly don't care if he bleeds to death handcuffed. If he is being nasty just do absolutely nothing. This includes feeding him. At some point he will choose to be civil or just die. Either way the lines of right and wrong are not crossed. At the same time nobody is exposed to his nastiness. Just be sure to film everything so it can be proven his nastiness = his refusal of your services.
It really is quite simple and we all profess to believe in this...... NOBODY IS ABOVE THE LAW. It sucks to have to testify against a buddy for a crime. But then again that buddy shouldn't have commited that crime. If anything else people should be pissed their professed "friend" would put them in that position to begin with. (by doing something criminal).
This is what we teach our kids, to do right and not wrong. But yet we don't do it ourselves. The blue wall of silence is wrong, always has been.
Yes, that's exactly what I want, honest opinions. Overall, I've got a fairly clear conscience, but that incident is one of the thorns that sticks me once in a while.
And I didn't mean to imply that the "silent" officers shouldn't have said anything, I only meant that in that situation, it's very difficult for a person to do so.
Good cop, bad move.
I would agree with Hartage, I was a Police Dispatcher for 5 years went to recruit school and was less than a year to complete before I decided that that wasn't the career for me. But during my 5 years I had many officers put me in a situation of seeing something that I really didn't want to see.
Several times I had to give statements after the fact because someone said they were roughed up while in custody, in most cases I can say that wasn't the fact, there were a few though, nothing ever came of them but it left me in a position of do I say something about it or not, in the few cases I had to deal with I did take it to my supervisor, because you know when the **it hits the fan everyone goes down, and I wasn't willing to take that hit for anyone.
In your case he spit at a nurse, that happen often when I worked for the PD and there are issues you need to be careful with in that case, does this person have a illness I now need to be worried about, so on, does it justify giving him a crack across the noodle, no, duct tape across the mouth, that would have been my answer, or as was said before do nothing and sooner or later he will comply
Yes it is difficult. I also want to acknowledge that your position is a difficult one to be in. I don't envy you being in that position, nor the nurse, nor your coworkers.
I would have just prefered it if you did nothing but step back. The nurse file a complaint against the homeless guy. The homeless guy get x more years in jail with bubba as a cellmate. That way you would not have the guilt nor the worry you had and may still have.
On a side note. I would have nothing against a secondary scenario. The homeless guy beating on your coworker and you in protecting your coworker's life put a .357 round in the homeless guy's head. That would have been just him getting what he asked for.
It was wrong, it was a crime.
I would have done it too.
IMHO: what tracy said: " best motives and intentions.buuut...
Tough situation glad you're out of it.
My human side says what happened was very understandable (perhaps expected?).
I completely understand the whys; But Monday morning lawyering in the calm conference room, sorry sounds like "battery".
you weren't defending someone at the time.It may have prevented a future assault but we don't do "pre-crime" yet As far as the"wink wink nudge" by the Sgt: remnants of the "bad old days of rubber truncheons...I would like to think we don't beat suspects under a bare naked hanging lightbulb anymore.
I would want you to come running for backup too, but that idea an officer would ever choose not to be there in time, is morally offensive. (I.E.The threat implicit in the blue wall "if you rat on me I may not be there for backup "
To me is a less than noble threat...
IMHO Sorry bud the fluid tense situation is grey but some calm paper laws are fairly clear.
My whole understanding of the application of force is based on immediacy and threat.
I hope you don't think that I meant I would do that to someone...... I was just highlighting what might have been on the minds of the younger officers. If I were in their place, I would have considered that possibility as well.
And please don't get me wrong folks, I'm in no way saying what I did was "right", I'm just saying that sometimes the human part of you sneaks into the officer side and you react in a way you shouldn't...... or at least for me it was that way.
I firmly believe that the guy deserved a punch in the mouth...... but we can't allow an officer to be the one to do it. When I was a bouncer it was so much simpler.
Isn't it sad the the exact opposite is true ? Bouncers are more likely to be careful about applying too much force than cops. At leat in my neck of the woods bouncers don't have a bad reputation nearly as much as cops. Bouncers would be more reasonable in applying force.
That dont match up to the bars Ive worked or my friends worked. There tended to be competitions with drunk tossing to see who could get the best distance tossing them out the door before they hit ground, IIRC the record was cleared the sidewalk and the first 2 lanes of the street then landed in the third lane of traffic. Of coarse the tossing was after they were...pasified.
That sounds about right for this area also. Around here you gotta know when to shut your mouth or you could wind up with more than you bargained for.
Last Thursday we came to work and discovered that the job site was hit by thieves. The electricians had at least 15-20 spider box cords stolen, spider boxes weren't stolen. We lost a small amount of copper pipe that was in our job shack, maybe $300-$400 worth. We found our acetylene B bottle by some of the other contractors Conex's, apparently they thought you could cut a lock with acetylene alone. They also tried getting into one of the job site trailers through the exterior wall. We discovered where they attempted to rip off the siding to get into the trailer. One of the entrances to our job site is city jurisdiction and the other is county jurisdiction, according to the police officers who arrive on site. In talking with the officers after they had been there awhile, I made the statement that maybe I should leave out an oxy/acetylene rig for them with faulty regulators and put some oil on the threads of the oxygen regulator, so the perps will have a little surprise when they go to use it, KABOOM. Officers response was well accidents do happen. Most cops I've spoken to around this area have the same frustrations as most citizens do, when it comes to criminals abusing the legal system.
Wow, around here that would be an instant lawsuit. Unlike cops though bouncers don't have immunity from civil liability. Here they are very careful about too much force. Places with bouncers have gone as far as putting cameras inside AND outside to have proof of the incident. But then again sometimes bouncers out here have short lifespans sometimes. El Cajon (city) had a bouncer shot and killed when a booted patron came back gunning for the bouncer.
That would be setting a trap. If I remember correctly a person in LA set a trap for a burglar after his business was broken into 11 times in a short span. He got him alright, shotgun blast. Homeless guy a young druged out barely human piece of trash. Unfortunately the store owner is now doing prison time something like 15 years before possible parole.
Yup, very aware that it would be setting a trap and the implications that would follow but it still is a nice thought.
I believe there is a world of difference between a booby trap with (for example a shotgun with a trip wire) and leaving a tools out by accident. Careless, maybe, but not premeditated. IMHO, anyway.
It would be more suspicious putting oil in the oxygen regulator than just faulty regulators. I do believe the officer was of the same thought process of what you speak ghrit. Very hard to prove, unless you cave in to questioning regulators do go bad.
Yeah, a nice thought. Sad that the law protects scumbag's ability to steal from good people. Maybe it's politicians feeling of kinship to other theives that compels them to protect.
For God's sake don't mention it to the cop, or us for that matter. Loose ends suck.
it called job security when you have a revolving door
Separate names with a comma.