| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lumping the tens of thousands of good officers and detectives into the same group as the handful of bad ones is just plain wrong. What most people forget is a police force, no matter how big or small, is a direct reflection of the community they serve because the pool of officers comes from that community. If you really want to fix the problem, it is fairly simple. Better screening during the hiring process and better pay. When communities hire people to become officers and carry weapons that can maim and kill, and they pay the, less than a McDonalds manager makes, something is wrong.
Without attempting to derail the thread - I cannot "like" the above enough.
The media *loves* to focus on atrocity, in all its forms. When it happens because of someone who's supposed to be a "good guy", it's even that much more terrible (or "juicy", if you work for said media). For every "incident" involving a police officer, soldier, judge, or anyone else who wields weapons or law "for the people", there are thousands upon thousands of honest, hard-working people who dedicate their lives to doing things the right way.
But so many others have tainted the well sufficiently you can't trust the cops to be telling the truth. Or even not fabricating evidence.I'm a scientist. "Tainting the well" is often layman's speak for "not scientifically/statistically significant, but the fact that it exists at all is/will be enough for Jane Q. Public to get up in arms about it".
Considering I'm running around a bit nuts today, I can't recall if this is something referring to the FBI or CIA...but the phrase "our triumphs are secret, our failures painfully public" comes to mind too.
Carry on.
The problem is that we are paying them to protect us. So when cops kill innocent people, I get angry. You can't fix a dead person. You can't bring them back. "Getting it right next time" isn't enough.
Police officers have a sacred trust. If they want a good public opinion as well, they need to do better.
I agree that there are lots of cops out there who do their job well. The problem is that at the same time, they give cover to their comrades who don't do their job well, or even do their job purposely bad.
Things like this DO happen. You can argue about it being a statistical anomaly, but it doesn't matter how statistically likely it is, it is HAPPENING.
Even though it's a minority of cops, it's exceptionally difficult to find law enforcement groups who are lobbying for changes to policy that would make it easier to get rid of this behavior.
Oh, and as for statistics:
298 police departments...
210 task forces...
Have used the forfeiture laws to fund 20% or more of their operating budgets since 2008, even though it is illegal to do so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe its just me, but if you're wielding a weapon I'd say you have a responsibility for what happens with that weapon.
Let's use another example and see if it helps clarify. And yes, I understand it is fictional but I'm trying to see if it helps clarify.
A doctor diagnoses a patient and says they have symptom XXXXX so what is wrong with that person is XXXXXX. They relay that information to the surgeon. The surgeon then cuts the person open to start performing the surgery on what he was advised was wrong. When he opens the person on the table up, he sees that the info he was given was wrong, that the person does not have XXXXXX, and he immediately tells the nursing staff to start sewing this person back up. When the nursing staff starts seeing the person back up, the patient goes into cardiac arrest and dies. Who should be held accountable? The doctor providing the incorrect info that led to the surgery, or the doctor who was performing the surgery based on the information he received from another professional in his same field? It was, after all,the tools used to cut the person open and the complications that arose from that, that caused the person to die, not the original doctor that provided bad info.
The surgeon should verify diagnoses before operating.
Similarly, if you have a standing rule for cops, "if you melt the face off a baby with a flash bang then you will be held accountable. It doesn't matter if someone told you there were no children, it doesn't matter if someone told you the room was clear. If you melt off a baby's face you will personally be held accountable," then I bet you would see an insane drop in police violence. Because if an officer knows that he will be personally held accountable NO MATTER WHAT mitigating circumstances, then those cops will take it upon themselves to actually behave appropriately.
Maybe its just me, but if you're wielding a weapon I'd say you have a responsibility for what happens with that weapon.
Let's use another example and see if it helps clarify. And yes, I understand it is fictional but I'm trying to see if it helps clarify.
A doctor diagnoses a patient and says they have symptom XXXXX so what is wrong with that person is XXXXXX. They relay that information to the surgeon. The surgeon then cuts the person open to start performing the surgery on what he was advised was wrong. When he opens the person on the table up, he sees that the info he was given was wrong, that the person does not have XXXXXX, and he immediately tells the nursing staff to start sewing this person back up. When the nursing staff starts seeing the person back up, the patient goes into cardiac arrest and dies. Who should be held accountable? The doctor providing the incorrect info that led to the surgery, or the doctor who was performing the surgery based on the information he received from another professional in his same field? It was, after all,the tools used to cut the person open and the complications that arose from that, that caused the person to die, not the original doctor that provided bad info.
The surgeon should verify diagnoses before operating.
In addition, the surgeon normally is going to see the evidence before cutting anyways. If it's a broken bone, or cancer, or something else, they need to see the information so they know where and how to cut.
IF, that information is falsified, then it comes down to why someone died of cardiac arrest on the table. If it was due to surgeon error, then it would be on the surgeon.
If it was due to the type of surgery, and it was a risky surgery, then it is plausible that the surgeon would not be accountable at all since they were acting on falsified information given to them. It would mean someone would have to have the injuries or sickness, and instead of giving them the right patient to match the information, someone gave them wrong information (which is HIGHLY dangerous and a big bad in the medical profession).
In either case, the surgeon is going to see the evidence of the information before hand themselves in order to be able to know how to approach the surgery.
It's amazing what public outcry, a possible lawsuit, AND...a THE THREAT OF FEDERAL INVESTIGATION does.
second link talking about federal investigation from US Attorney's office
so now it appears Habersham county is finally saying they will pay for the bills.
Swat team not charged, County claims they will pay medical bills
Habersham County is currently claiming they will pay the child’s medical bills, but they have put that promise on hold pending the outcome of the lawsuit
It's amazing what public outcry, a possible lawsuit, AND...a THE THREAT OF FEDERAL INVESTIGATION does.
http://www.14news.com/story/26729103/federal
so now it appears Habersham county is finally saying they will pay for the bills.
http://www.inquisitr.com/1524103/georgia-swat-team-that-disfigured-baby-boo -boos-face-with-a-flash-grenade-will-not-be-charged/
Habersham County is currently claiming they will pay the child’s medical bills, but they have put that promise on hold pending the outcome of the lawsuit
Ie. If they win the lawsuit they will retract the promise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that we are paying them to protect us. So when cops kill innocent people, I get angry. You can't fix a dead person. You can't bring them back. "Getting it right next time" isn't enough.
Stop being angry and actually look at this from a logical perspective.
Accidents happen. Period. It doesn't matter WHAT your job is. You can slip and fall, chop off a limb, or accidentally injure or kill someone depending on your job.
That last one is a terrible act, yes, and should be investigated thoroughly to determine the exact circumstances involved.
If the accidental injury/killing was due to negligence on the party responsible (or worse, was not "accidental" at all), then he should absolutely be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. His f~@@ up had much bigger consequences than another person's, and he should have been that much more diligent than the average person.
But if he did everything he was supposed to, followed procedure, used a very measured response, even, as in this case, then the fault does not lie with him. There is no reason to prosecute him except for sheer outrage over the fact that the act occurred in the first place, even though it was due to events outside his control (shoddy police work from the investigative team, and the arrival/existence of the child).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dont think anyone here is arguing against that at all. I encourage everyone on this thread to write the Habersham County DA and ask what the hell? However, the DA did his job by bringing the case to the grand jury. I believe a grand jury of citizens failed to pass a true bill on any officer in this case. If you want to hold anyone accountable, hold the citizens of Habersham County responsible. They are the ones who refused to true bill the case and send it back to the DA's office so he could seek prosecution.
No wonder you are so confused by all this outrage if you blame "the citizens of Habersham County" for a baby taking a grenade to the face. It's that kind of thought process we are complaining about. Look at your own argument.
1. Cop shoots baby in the face...
2. Because of faulty police work...
3. DA fails to indict...
4. Blame the public.
I dont think anyone here is arguing against that at all. I encourage everyone on this thread to write the Habersham County DA and ask what the hell? However, the DA did his job by bringing the case to the grand jury. I believe a grand jury of citizens failed to pass a true bill on any officer in this case. If you want to hold anyone accountable, hold the citizens of Habersham County responsible. They are the ones who refused to true bill the case and send it back to the DA's office so he could seek prosecution.No wonder you are so confused by all this outrage if you blame "the citizens of Habersham County" for a baby taking a grenade to the face. It's that kind of thought process we are complaining about. Look at your own argument.
1. Cop shoots baby in the face...
2. Because of faulty police work...3. DA submits case to grand jury...
4. Grand jury fails to indict...
4. Blame the public that made up the grand jury.
You had a step confused on what he said...
I dont think anyone here is arguing against that at all. I encourage everyone on this thread to write the Habersham County DA and ask what the hell? However, the DA did his job by bringing the case to the grand jury. I believe a grand jury of citizens failed to pass a true bill on any officer in this case. If you want to hold anyone accountable, hold the citizens of Habersham County responsible. They are the ones who refused to true bill the case and send it back to the DA's office so he could seek prosecution.No wonder you are so confused by all this outrage if you blame "the citizens of Habersham County" for a baby taking a grenade to the face. It's that kind of thought process we are complaining about. Look at your own argument.
1. Cop shoots baby in the face...
2. Because of faulty police work...
3. DA fails to indict...
4. Blame the public.
Um you miss typed 4, it should read blame the dirtbags having a baby in that spot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The funny thing is all of you cop haters will teach the dealers and whatnot to go full on daycare to make the police afraid to come after them. You will create a situation of children in the line of fire when the criminal figures out that you are on THEIR side when they use a tiny human shield.
Um you miss typed 4, it should read blame the dirtbags having a baby in that spot.I dont think anyone here is arguing against that at all. I encourage everyone on this thread to write the Habersham County DA and ask what the hell? However, the DA did his job by bringing the case to the grand jury. I believe a grand jury of citizens failed to pass a true bill on any officer in this case. If you want to hold anyone accountable, hold the citizens of Habersham County responsible. They are the ones who refused to true bill the case and send it back to the DA's office so he could seek prosecution.No wonder you are so confused by all this outrage if you blame "the citizens of Habersham County" for a baby taking a grenade to the face. It's that kind of thought process we are complaining about. Look at your own argument.
1. Cop shoots baby in the face...
2. Because of faulty police work...
3. DA fails to indict...
4. Blame the public.
I agree that having the playpen in front of the door is a bad idea (whether the front door was often used or not) I'm just not sure it rates a "grenade to the face" as punishment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The child being injured wasn't a "punishment" the child didn't deserve to be injured, nor did the parents deserve to have their child injured.
However, when you pick a stupid place to put your kid, things might happen to them. No child deserves to get mauled by a dog, but decide to put one's playpen in the back yard with the dog, and that could be the consequence.
So you're saying we should "put down" the cop for doing his job properly?
If you want to take the analogy that far, yes I would put the dog down.
I would also arrest the parents for gross negligence.
So, arrests for everybody!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The child being injured wasn't a "punishment" the child didn't deserve to be injured, nor did the parents deserve to have their child injured.
However, when you pick a stupid place to put your kid, things might happen to them. No child deserves to get mauled by a dog, but decide to put one's playpen in the back yard with the dog, and that could be the consequence.
So grenades to the face is a common enough occurrence that the mom should of thought ahead?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People coming through the front door is a common occurrence. The kid could honestly just as easily been injured, though not as grievously, had someone flung the door open forcefully and smacked him in the face with it.
Police visits should also be expected when you're STAYING AT A DRUG DEALER'S HOUSE.
So either accept the fact that occasionally cops are going to to bad things and don't expect them ever to be held accountable for their actions or just don't use the police at all?
So either accept the fact that occasionally cops are going to to bad things and don't expect them ever to be held accountable for their actions or just don't use the police at all?
I guess you rethought that post?
People coming through the front door is a common occurrence. The kid could honestly just as easily been injured, though not as grievously, had someone flung the door open forcefully and smacked him in the face with it.
Police visits should also be expected when you're STAYING AT A DRUG DEALER'S HOUSE.
I'm just not entirely convinced the suspected drug dealer told everybody he was a drug dealer but maybe "dirtbag" moms should just suspect everyone is a drug dealer.
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So either accept the fact that occasionally cops are going to to bad things and don't expect them ever to be held accountable for their actions or just don't use the police at all?I guess you rethought that post?
Not really. Just figured it isn't worth debating. People are not going to change their minds - you, me, or anyone else in this thread.
There are people that think cops will do nothing but screw them over. They discredit them every chance they get, even the good cops with never a negative mark against them in a 20 year career, and don't honor the good ones who sacrifice their own lives to protect complete strangers. For those people, I guess they would rather live in an anarchy and protect all of their stuff on their own. That's fine. That is what they think. I disagree and there isn't really a middle ground to come to.
When people start twisting words to make it sound like the cop walked up, with malice and aforethougt, and shot the baby in the face at point blank range, it's time for me to exit the conversation. It is clear that those people don't want to discuss the topic. They only want to crucify the cop. They fail to see that every emergency incident like this has grey areas. Mistakes happen. If you think the system is broken, go make strides to fix it. I've already advised several times in this thred that bad police work should be held accountable. People seem to have ignored that and want to keep championing the position that all police are evil.
I'm not mad. Im not frustrated. It is what it is. I got out of police work because I got tired of all the people who didn't appreciate the service willingly offered and the risk of me losing my life every day for people that don't appreciate it. It isn't my loss. I work for a gaming company. It's really children who would have been protected had I stayed. They unfortunately don't receive the same level of investigation, and subsequent protection, that they would have received if I was still a crimes against children detective.
So, since there is no middle ground to come to in this conversation, I choose to bow out of the conversation and wish you good luck in your life.
So either accept the fact that occasionally cops are going to to bad things and don't expect them ever to be held accountable for their actions or just don't use the police at all?I guess you rethought that post?Not really. Just figured it isn't worth debating. People are not going to change their minds - you, me, or anyone else in this thread.
There are people that think cops will do nothing but screw them over. They discredit them every chance they get, even the good cops with never a negative mark against them in a 20 year career, and don't honor the good ones who sacrifice their own lives to protect complete strangers. For those people, I guess they would rather live in an anarchy and protect all of their stuff on their own. That's fine. That is what they think. I disagree and there isn't really a middle ground to come to.
When people start twisting words to make it sound like the cop walked up, with malice and aforethougt, and shot the baby in the face at point blank range, it's time for me to exit the conversation. It is clear that those people don't want to discuss the topic. They only want to crucify the cop. They fail to see that every emergency incident like this has grey areas. Mistakes happen. If you think the system is broken, go make strides to fix it. I've already advised several times in this thred that bad police work should be held accountable. People seem to have ignored that and want to keep championing the position that all police are evil.
I'm not mad. Im not frustrated. It is what it is. I got out of police work because I got tired of all the people who didn't appreciate the service willingly offered and the risk of me losing my life every day for people that don't appreciate it. So, since there is no middle ground to come to in this conversation, I choose to bow out of the conversation and wish you good luck in your life.
You are so lucky to not be mad or frustrated. I'm both. I don't think all cops are bad. I don't even think most cops are bad. I'm mad because the bad cops get protected right along with the good. Even you equate anger at police misconduct as people wanting to be rid of all cops and that's just not true. We want to be rid of the bad cops but there is a whole system in place to protect. If people can't even criticize bad cops without all cops washing their hands of us, than how are we supposed to have any faith in the system, any redress of wrongs? You blame us for being angry and then try to talk good cops into quitting the force. What hurts the system more, angry internet posters or you?
|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know what you never hear and would sell tons of papers? "Cop shoots other cop to save innocent." That would be a cop who would deserve to be honored. Where are the good cops when the bad cops are gunning people down in the street?
It happens more than people think. It just doesn't get the same media coverage.
Here you go from two weeks ago.|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
.What hurts the system more, angry internet posters or you?
Angry Internet posters. It does more to burn out good cops than anything else. You can say it doesn't. I've seen first hand that it absolutely does. Again, we aren't going to come to a compromise on this because you aren't going to believe what I say regardless of how much I've seen it happen over the ten years I was on the police force. I'm trying to talk my friends out of the job because I don't want them hurt or dying for people who don't appreciate the sacrifice they are willing to give. Again, I wouldn't mind having a beer and discussing face to face, unfortunately, that isn't an option so I choose to take my wife on a date and a nice dinner than continuing to have a conversation here where nothing is going to be solved and no one is going to change their opinion. It is what it is. Good luck.
|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
Ok, shooting someone who is shooting at you and shooting your partner to save someone else are TOTALLY different things. Do you not see that?You know what you never hear and would sell tons of papers? "Cop shoots other cop to save innocent." That would be a cop who would deserve to be honored. Where are the good cops when the bad cops are gunning people down in the street?It happens more than people think. It just doesn't get the same media coverage.
Here you go from two weeks ago.
They didn't respond to shoot him. They responded to save his wife and talk him out of the incident without it escalating. He choose to go off the deep end. You said we never hear of cops shooting other cops to save innocent people. I think they shot a person to save an innocent person, the other cop's wife. Again, people like to twist words to make it fit their story. A bad cop was threatening to kill his wife and started to shoot at the responding officers, placing innocent civilians in the area at risk. Its what you asked for. Also, you will notice, he shot at them, they tried to talk to him instead of returning fire immediately, and when he continued pointing his weapon at them, they then shot and killed him. They didn't just show up with guns blazing.That was just a quick example I thought of immediately. If I did a Google search, I could probably find a dozen more examples.
I showed it. And you still don't want to accept that good cops actually stopped a bad cop from hurting an innocent person by killing him. You said those are cops that should be honored in your post that I quoted. You failed to do it, again making excuses instead of even following up in what you posted just a few minutes ago. Your dislike for the police doesn't even allow you to give credit where it is due, even when you set the qualifiers and they meet that. Again, it is what it is and not worth arguing with you any longer. It's a holiday weekend. I'm out. Good luck to you.
What if there was a bad guy that police wanted to arrest, but good people were preventing that, what would you think of those people? Does the same apply to the police?
While I was once the victim of an unprovoked police attack that left me with severe injuries I would like to echo the posters in this thread who say it's not about all police being corrupt or evil it's about a system that sometimes doesn't handle police corruption well or sometimes authorizes what is excessive force for a situation with no real accountability if things go horribly wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that we are paying them to protect us. So when cops kill innocent people, I get angry. You can't fix a dead person. You can't bring them back. "Getting it right next time" isn't enough.Stop being angry and actually look at this from a logical perspective.
Accidents happen. Period. It doesn't matter WHAT your job is. You can slip and fall, chop off a limb, or accidentally injure or kill someone depending on your job.
That last one is a terrible act, yes, and should be investigated thoroughly to determine the exact circumstances involved.
If the accidental injury/killing was due to negligence on the party responsible (or worse, was not "accidental" at all), then he should absolutely be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. His f#+& up had much bigger consequences than another person's, and he should have been that much more diligent than the average person.
But if he did everything he was supposed to, followed procedure, used a very measured response, even, as in this case, then the fault does not lie with him. There is no reason to prosecute him except for sheer outrage over the fact that the act occurred in the first place, even though it was due to events outside his control (shoddy police work from the investigative team, and the arrival/existence of the child).
Deliberately pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger is not an accident.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is clearly a very polarizing topic.
As stated, I do believe that most police officers have good intentions. I also believe that people with good intentions make mistakes, and that they should be treated fairly when they do.
However, I also believe serving a no-knock warrant using flashbangs in a residential area at 2AM -- apparently without confirmation of who was/was not in the home -- represents a serious lapse in judgement. Something about the way that department operates must change.
Deliberately pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger is not an accident.
The problem is that we are paying them to protect us. So when cops kill innocent people, I get angry. You can't fix a dead person. You can't bring them back. "Getting it right next time" isn't enough.Stop being angry and actually look at this from a logical perspective.
Accidents happen. Period. It doesn't matter WHAT your job is. You can slip and fall, chop off a limb, or accidentally injure or kill someone depending on your job.
That last one is a terrible act, yes, and should be investigated thoroughly to determine the exact circumstances involved.
If the accidental injury/killing was due to negligence on the party responsible (or worse, was not "accidental" at all), then he should absolutely be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. His f#+& up had much bigger consequences than another person's, and he should have been that much more diligent than the average person.
But if he did everything he was supposed to, followed procedure, used a very measured response, even, as in this case, then the fault does not lie with him. There is no reason to prosecute him except for sheer outrage over the fact that the act occurred in the first place, even though it was due to events outside his control (shoddy police work from the investigative team, and the arrival/existence of the child).
Did I miss the part where this SWAT officer deliberately shot a baby?
I thought it was a flashbang thrown into a presumed empty room.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would you throw a flashbang into an empty room?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then wouldn't you be presuming the room is occupied?
Why would you throw a flashbang into an empty room?
Sorry, empty of civilians/noncombatants/innocents/however you wanna put it.
|
Then wouldn't you be presuming the room is occupied?
Thus the use of NON-LETHAL force.
It was a terrible mistake. But you know what? S+~% happens. All the good intentions, professional training, and preperation in the world doesn't change that fact....sometimes s!!$ just happens.
The guy that threw the flash-bang will have to live with that for the.rest of his life, despite the fact that he did.nothing wrong. Do we really need to throw more on top of that?
Why would you throw a flashbang into an empty room?Sorry, empty of civilians/noncombatants/innocents/however you wanna put it.
I was just yanking your chain a little.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was a terrible mistake. But you know what? S#@% happens. All the good intentions, professional training, and preperation in the world doesn't change that fact....sometimes s#&& just happens.The guy that threw the flash-bang will have to live with that for the.rest of his life, despite the fact that he did.nothing wrong. Do we really need to throw more on top of that?
Yes accidents happen and it's important when they happen to not only find out what when wrong but also who was responsible. That's the only way to prevent future accidents. Just saying "oh well" or "they were just dirtbags so who cares" helps nothing.
I was just yanking your chain a little.Why would you throw a flashbang into an empty room?Sorry, empty of civilians/noncombatants/innocents/however you wanna put it.
I gotcha, but it was a valid nitpick. =)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then wouldn't you be presuming the room is occupied?Thus the use of NON-LETHAL force.
It was a terrible mistake. But you know what? S%~& happens. All the good intentions, professional training, and preperation in the world doesn't change that fact....sometimes s#~% just happens.
The guy that threw the flash-bang will have to live with that for the.rest of his life, despite the fact that he did.nothing wrong. Do we really need to throw more on top of that?
Yes. When a civilian does that it's called criminal negligence and on top of having to live with it for the rest of their lives, they also go to jail. When you melt a baby's face off you should feel bad about it AND go to jail.