Seattle Police, Protecting & Serving

deadrose said:
While the brass were figuring out how to respond to that, a video from last week's Martin Luther King, Jr. Day march was also put up on Youtube which appears to show a single officer losing her cool and hosing down everyone in the vicinity with pepper spray, including a high school teacher who had just stepped off the stage after a speech. He was talking on his phone with his wife when he was sprayed in the face for no visible reason. Nor did there appear to be any reason for the pepper spray to be used at all.
Click to expand...

It's funny how these YouTube videos never seem to show what led up to an incident. I wonder why?
 
Let's assume every single cop does a crappy thing thread is perfectly legit.

The number of officers who do their job well and without incident would fill an entire forum worth of threads if people were inclined to talk about police success as much as failure. But as is human nature we are trying to paint this as a police problem, when it is simply a human problem.

People in all jobs can and do suck at them, cops simply have greater media presence, and it is easier for a layman to pass judgment on them versus, a surgeon.
 
sadhatter said:
Let's assume every single cop does a crappy thing thread is perfectly legit.

The number of officers who do their job well and without incident would fill an entire forum worth of threads if people were inclined to talk about police success as much as failure. But as is human nature we are trying to paint this as a police problem, when it is simply a human problem.

People in all jobs can and do suck at them, cops simply have greater media presence, and it is easier for a layman to pass judgment on them versus, a surgeon.
Click to expand...

The legal implications of challenging a surgeon are also probably less profound IMO.
 
sadhatter said:
Let's assume every single cop does a crappy thing thread is perfectly legit.

The number of officers who do their job well and without incident would fill an entire forum worth of threads if people were inclined to talk about police success as much as failure. But as is human nature we are trying to paint this as a police problem, when it is simply a human problem.

People in all jobs can and do suck at them, cops simply have greater media presence, and it is easier for a layman to pass judgment on them versus, a surgeon.
Click to expand...


Are you saying that because the majority of policemen behave well then those that don't should get a pass from criticism?
 
I'm sorry but I think it's absolutely laughable to have 5 foot tall female police officers.

Part of the job is being able to engage physically with suspects, most of whom are male.

No serious police force should be fielding overweight males or females full stop, IMO.

Are there a few females out there who can do the job physically and otherwise? Yea. There are always exceptions to any rule. The problem is that once you abandon the sensible "police officers out on the street must be male" rule we used to have, you will never successfully keep it restricted to only those few females who can actually meet the requirements. Once that door is opened, inevitably it allows for (and will result in) people saying "why aren't there more female officers? You have to work to get these numbers up!" and then the standards are relaxed, and relaxed, and relaxed.

Consider me sexist all you want, I don't think there should be female soldiers, police, or firefighters. I just think that reflects the biological realities of our species.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Tank said:
I'm sorry but I think it's absolutely laughable to have 5 foot tall female police officers.

Part of the job is being able to engage physically with suspects, most of whom are male.

No serious police force should be fielding overweight males or females full stop, IMO.

Are there a few females out there who can do the job physically and otherwise? Yea. There are always exceptions to any rule. The problem is that once you abandon the sensible "police officers out on the street must be male" rule we used to have, you will never successfully keep it restricted to only those few females who can actually meet the requirements. Once that door is opened, inevitably it allows for (and will result in) people saying "why aren't there more female officers? You have to work to get these numbers up!" and then the standards are relaxed, and relaxed, and relaxed.

Consider me sexist all you want, I don't think there should be female soldiers, police, or firefighters. I just think that reflects the biological realities of our species.
Click to expand...



I would disagree. I could understand an argument that said "These are the tests, if you can pass them you can apply" and let those that can pass, regardless of gender, go on and apply for police/fire etc. and there being no 'lesser' tests for ladies. I don't see how you could deny them access to those jobs based solely on gender (rather than ability) and not be considered deeply sexist.
 
Another bad cop thread? Seriously? And this is all you could come up with?

Bad cop pickings must be a mite slim at the moment. Perhaps if you waited a few days...who knows. Some cop somewhere might do something really bad. I mean, it's bound to happen sooner or later. Have some patience.

BTW, aren't there any bad European cops? I want to read about some bad European cops. But not Russians. It's a given that they're all bad.
 
Last edited:
sadhatter said:
Let's assume every single cop does a crappy thing thread is perfectly legit.

The number of officers who do their job well and without incident would fill an entire forum worth of threads if people were inclined to talk about police success as much as failure. But as is human nature we are trying to paint this as a police problem, when it is simply a human problem.

People in all jobs can and do suck at them, cops simply have greater media presence, and it is easier for a layman to pass judgment on them versus, a surgeon.
Click to expand...

In many jobs bad employees are kept on for whatever reason, though usually this is a mistake (generally, the error is an implicit goal of having many underpaid unproductive workers instead of fewer well-paid productive ones, but that is a topic for another thread). For police that shouldn't happen, especially for those who just have the wrong temperament. My parents once witnessed a cop in a Seattle park calm down a ranting homeless woman who threatened and shouted obscenities at him for several minutes (they didn't see what she did to attract his attention initially). He remained calm and friendly the whole time. That cop should be given a raise or promoted, the ones who would just taze or pepper spray the woman and take her in should be demoted or fired.
 
3point14 said:
I would disagree. I could understand an argument that said "These are the tests, if you can pass them you can apply" and let those that can pass, regardless of gender, go on and apply for police/fire etc. and there being no 'lesser' tests for ladies. I don't see how you could deny them access to those jobs based solely on gender (rather than ability) and not be considered deeply sexist.
Click to expand...

Some police departments have height requirements for men that would eliminate 99% of women from consideration if applied equally.
 
A few years ago I read that women cops are hugely better at quieting down domestic disputes, which are the most common events for violence.

Hmm, somebody must have some figures for rates of brutality complaints by sex of cop.
 
Modified said:
In many jobs bad employees are kept on for whatever reason, though usually this is a mistake (generally, the error is an implicit goal of having many underpaid unproductive workers instead of fewer well-paid productive ones, but that is a topic for another thread). For police that shouldn't happen, especially for those who just have the wrong temperament. My parents once witnessed a cop in a Seattle park calm down a ranting homeless woman who threatened and shouted obscenities at him for several minutes (they didn't see what she did to attract his attention initially). He remained calm and friendly the whole time. That cop should be given a raise or promoted, the ones who would just taze or pepper spray the woman and take her in should be demoted or fired.
Click to expand...

I think we should draft cops. Because anybody that wants to be one probably has reason not to be permitted to be one.
 
casebro said:
I think we should draft cops. Because anybody that wants to be one probably has reason not to be permitted to be one.
Click to expand...

Maybe this sound snarky to some, but it's actually not a ridiculous idea. We draft jurors, after all. Some countries seem to work fine with a period of mandatory service for everybody when young, and it would provide a way of learning some skills and making some money for a lot of poor people. Trouble is that it's nearly always military service, which makes people think in terms of enemies and killing them.

This would have the auxiliary benefit of training people in firearms use and conflict resolution, which would probably reduce crime. There would probably still have to be career detectives and SWAT teams, but most citizens, properly trained, would be just fine for community policing.

It'll never happen, though, because the purpose of the entrenched police system is not to reduce crime or catch criminals or make the streets safer or protect citizens or anything like that. It's to bully people and generate a permanent underclass. So the last thing that they would want to do is allow the little people or townies to participate. The rules of copdom are as follows:

1) Everyone is guilty of everything all the time, except

a) Cops are never guilty of anything at any time, and

b) Auxiliary professionals, such as nurses, physicians, EMTs, or even barroom owners who hire off-duty cops etc. are never guilty of anything while on duty but are guilty of everything while off duty.

The purpose of a cop is to get 'em, and it doesn't matter much who they are. It is occasionally embarrassing when a cop harasses or beats up an off-duty cop, but that happens seldom. Black people are good for harassing and beating up, not necessarily because of particular racism (though racism is often present), but because you can see that they are black at a distance, and so a cop can tell that they are relatively safe to harass and beat up without repercussions. It was probably much more difficult to be a cop in the old days before the black diaspora after World War II, when a lot of Southern black people were helped by military service and got to live away from the plantation.

The diaspora never really got to the Pacific Northwest, though, unfortunately for cops. There's a shortage of black people in general, let along black people so poor that they cannot afford a good attorney. This has unfortunately also caused some of the very white people who live there to put questions of race out of their minds and others to ascribe to white supremacist ideas much stronger than anything that remains as a significant force in the South.

An old guy walking around with a cane seems like a safe target, because if he had money, he probably would be taking a cab or something. Who's going to care? At worst there will be some demonstrations. Preferably some riots, as it makes black people safer as targets for cop brutality, which is of course why so many on-duty cops have been caught inciting riots and even setting fires. More crime is better for cops; it gives them something to do.
 
casebro said:
I think we should draft cops. Because anybody that wants to be one probably has reason not to be permitted to be one.
Click to expand...

This. So many times this.

Policemen and politicians. Anyone who acutqally wants the job should, on no account, be allowed to have it.
 
3point14 said:
Policemen and politicians. Anyone who acutqally wants the job should, on no account, be allowed to have it.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree with that. There is a certain mindset necessary for these jobs (and for politicians, a certain level of drug and alcohol abuse). The problem is that the type of person attracted to police work can seem like the type of person suited to it, at least at first, without a in-depth evaluation that is rarely ever done. Better screening of police would certainly be a good step to changing police culture.

One of the biggest problems with changing police culture is changing the factors that drive it. Institutionalized racism and classism, irrationality and superstition, excessive risk-aversion, and the bunker mentality. All of these things are endemic in American culture (and to a lesser extent, other European and Anglosphere cultures); so given the stresses of the job, it's no coincidence that they often come to the fore in police work.

The other problem is the glorification of police by certain segments of the culture (part of the "law and order" culture); and the rush to dismiss incidents of abuse of power as statistically insignificant anomalies, when in fact they are a widespread systemic problem manifesting in many forms, ranging from the common and petty, to the rare and lethal. It's this mentality more than anything else that has stymied or weakened efforts to enact reforms and improve accountability.
 
All cops, all over the globe will use any tactic possible to put you at odds with the law, irrespective of how you come to be interacting with them. You should avoid contact even if your life is in imminent danger. More so if they armed.

Unfortunately they are the least trustworthy individuals of any occupation, in any society, on the planet.

At least you know a robbers gonna rob you and a guy with a knife is gonna stab you. With a cop you only know he/she's going to put you at odds with the law but you don't know what the repercussion will be when they succeed.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
It's funny how these YouTube videos never seem to show what led up to an incident. I wonder why?
Click to expand...

She's really got a couple of problems here regardless of what lead up to this. The first rule of crowd control is self control. She's has clearly lost her command presence. Here tone is closer to a petulant child than an officer commissioned to uphold the law. I'd be curious to know if she asked people to give them some space before she started yelling.

The device she used was not appropriate for the circumstances. The "party can" of mace as we liked to call it is not useful when there are casual bystanders. The guy on the phone is not threatening and should not have been sprayed. I don't know what the rest of the crowd was doing but she has an obligation to no spray people who aren't a threat. There are smaller units that shoot a tight stream at an individual that would have been more appropriate.
 
CORed said:
Me too, assuming of course, that all the bikini-clad women I encounter are as hot as they were on Baywatch.
Click to expand...

Meh, I wouldn't mind if it were a nude beach at a retirement home. Its still the beach and I'm spending most of my time lounging and watching the water and may occasionally pouring hot water on sting ray stings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom