NY Cops Part 2

[old 12 gauge]

Bottom line is, the chub was a place where people went to get drugs, weapons, or hookers, not to get baptized. isn't that one of those areas where a cop should carry a scatter gun with 00 buck?

makes me wonder how many lbs coke or meth the runner made away with?

 

[shaggy]

I don't know how many times he was convicted. Does it make a difference?

Nah, I guess not. All that crap about "innocent until proven guilty", "due process", and the "Constitution" really shouldn't matter here. If a cop thought fit to arrest him, he must be guilty; who needs a trial anyway?

 

[JuanCarlos]

Nah, I guess not. All that crap about "innocent until proven guilty", "due process", and the "Constitution" really shouldn't matter here. If a cop thought fit to arrest him, he must be guilty; who needs a trial anyway?

I know. And once you're convicted once, you should expect to just be assumed guilty for the rest of your life, too.

I think the drug war is useless, but it's not going away

You should go look up "self-fulfilling prophecy."

I don't know how many times he was convicted. Does it make a difference? In spite of what the cop bashers on this thread belive, when a cop puts handcuffs on someone, 99.9% of the time they did the crime.

I'd say you're pretty close. 99.9% might be a little high, but probably not by much.

Of course, we have to ask our selves what portion of that 99.9% committed something that should even be a crime. Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, we admitted it. For some reason we're still convinced it'll work for drugs, even marijuana. Even assuming these guys were all convicted of more violent crimes, such as robbery, it's always possible that had our War on Drugs not created and perpetuated a certain culture or crime they may not have fallen into that trap. Again, look at Prohibition and the number of secondary and tertiary crimes stemming from it.

Over 50% of people in this country have used drugs (largely marijuana) at some point or another (I'm too busy to link to the stats on that, maybe I'll look it up later if you want to dispute it). Somewhere in the vicinity of 10% of people are still active recreational users, IIRC.

I suppose having a black-or-white "good guys" vs. "bad guys" mentality might help you do the things you have to do as a cop, but for at least some of us common citizens we see the number of people labeled as criminals in this country who have done nothing "wrong," and it becomes less clear-cut. 1 out of 32 people in the US are currently in prison, on probation, or on parole. We lead the world in incarceration rate...at least the developed world. Either people people in the US are just "worse" that people in the rest of the world, or something went wrong somewhere. The problem could be socioeconomic, or it could be that our justice system lost its way somewhere...or it could be both.

As an aside, since it may or may not matter to any of you, I am not in that one out of 32. My entire criminal record consists of one count of driving on a suspended license, which had been suspended for forgetting to pay a speeding ticket. I do not use drugs (the military does not treat that kindly), though I did when I was a teenager. I just have this tendency to want to change things that I think are wrong, even if they don't directly affect me.

 

[Homerboy]

Why has this turned into a drug war thread? It's totally irrelevant.

Shaggy:

Would you want your daughter to go out with a guy who's been arrested 11 times but never convicted? To be found not guilty, you only need one perosn out of twelve to say Not Guilty. It's amazing anyone is EVER found guilty with those odds.

Whatever: Cops are OK, one mutt in the ground, the other two surviving mutts are already losing steam over this. Sharpton, Barron and Jackson are drifting off of this now that new evidence has come up. His fiance is already trying to make a buck on Nightline tonight. Guess she's not too broken up. Whatever money the city pays will NOT go to her since they weren't legally married yet. Maybe a portion will go the kids so when they turn 18 their mother will have money to pay for their bail and lawyers.

 

[Gary Conner]

Quote from Homerboy:

These three mutts should have been taken out back and shot long ago. None of them held a job, they've been nothing but burdens to the rest of society.

So if you are jobless, you should be taken out back and shot? Right.

And you posit the idea that anyone disagreeing with your synopsis of this shooting right away, is "Anti-Cop?"

How about Anti Murder?

Jesus.

 

[JuanCarlos]

Why has this turned into a drug war thread? It's totally irrelevant.

You make blanket statements about "criminals" and act as though prior convictions of a crime make somebody a bad person in black-or-white terms. Considering the number of people being defined as criminals due to the drug war, and the crimes being caused by it, we're arguing that perhaps such blanket statements aren't entirely warranted. I'd say it's relevant.

EDIT: Oh yeah, we also got on the subject because we were wondering why such criminals would be out walking the streets, and it's because our prisons are overcrowded with potheads.

Would you want your daughter to go out with a guy who's been arrested 11 times but never convicted? To be found not guilty, you only need one perosn out of twelve to say Not Guilty. It's amazing anyone is EVER found guilty with those odds.

Depends on the guy, and what he was arrested for. I'd say it's unlikely, but I wouldn't dismiss the idea out of hand.

Maybe a portion will go the kids so when they turn 18 their mother will have money to pay for their bail and lawyers.

This statement suggests that you believe these kids are doomed at birth to a life of crime...yet at the same time you act as though criminals are bad people and get what they deserve because they're responsible for their own actions. Wouldn't these two things seem contradictory? Or are you already willing to judge the kids as bad people, with no knowledge of their future actions?

Either way I feel comfortable saying you sound like a bitter, hateful person. It sounds like you're no longer an officer, and that's probably a good thing.

 

[shaggy]

Would you want your daughter to go out with a guy who's been arrested 11 times but never convicted?

Well, I'd probably feel more comfortable with her going out with someone arrested 11 times and never convicted than with a cop who has little or no regard for the people in the community, the law, the constitution, or the civil rights of American citizens. That said, I'd want her to look at the individual, the charges, and the circumstances surrounding those arrests. From the way you talk, once a cop has arrested someone once (regardless of whether they're actually guilty or not) that person is to be forever considered a criminal and only worthy of being "taken out back and shot". That sort of "justice" may work in some 3rd world craphole, but it sure isn't what the founding fathers envisioned for this country.

And FWIW, I don't just talk the talk. My family and I employ a felon. He's done his time (drug possession), and has time after time proved himself to be trustworthy, respectful, and a very hard worker. People make mistakes and sometimes they do try to make up for their bad acts.

Now consider what happens when gun bans or more stringent gun laws are enacted in a jurisdiction where cops who think like you get to enforce the gun laws. I suppose the rest of us all become "MUTTS" simply by virtue of owning guns and similarly only worthy of being "taken out back and shot" sans due process.

 

[Homerboy]

Face it: When you are raised in a household of perps, you generally become one yourself. Same goes for kids who are abused, have alcoholic parents, or are children of divorce. Studies show time and time again that the cycle continues. Those who beat the odds are to be commended.

I was arrested once in college long before I became a cop. I broke a window while in a fight and wore the cuffs that night. Guess what? I didn't try to assault the cops who were doing their lawful job arresting me. I made full restitution immediately and went on to become a cop years later. Quite a difference from the career criminals involved in this case.

Forget it. You guys have a problem with cops. That's your right. Doesn't change the fact that they are the cops and you are not. When they tell you to put your hands behind your back, blow into a tube, pull over, it is a lawful order. You do not have the choice to follow it or not. And stop throwing the Constitution around. I have no problem with lawful citizens carrying guns. Unfortunately, NY is a bitch of a place to get that right. Not my fault. But if you carry a gun illegally in NY, you should expect to go to jail. As for employing a drug offender, you didn't say if he was arrested for carrying a bag of weed or selling meth. Big difference. if you choose to employ someone, what do I care? You want a medal?

 

[Homerboy]

And by the way, I was being facetious when I said they should have been taken out back and shot. I'm not actually advocating murdering them. I just think the world would be better off without them. What do unemployed, career felons contribute to society? How many people have they hurt in their criminal careers?

 

[JuanCarlos]

Face it: When you are raised in a household of perps, you generally become one yourself. Same goes for kids who are abused, have alcoholic parents, or are children of divorce. Studies show time and time again that the cycle continues. Those who beat the odds are to be commended.

So you admit that the odds are against them from birth, yet still treat them as subhuman because they fail to beat them. Apparently empathy is not a natural human trait.

Forget it. You guys have a problem with cops.

No, in this thread at least we have a problem with you. Unfortunately, you and the (hopefully minority of) cops like you make them all look bad.

I seriously had a pretty good loathing of cops going into this weekend due to your comments...luckily I got to hang out with some of my buddies who are cops, and it helped me remember that there are some out there who aren't like this.

 

[Gary Conner]

And by the way, I was being facetious when I said they should have been taken out back and shot. I'm not actually advocating murdering them. I just think the world would be better off without them. What do unemployed, career felons contribute to society? How many people have they hurt in their criminal careers?

Well Homer, you have to understand. With so many cops doing the throw down thing over history, when a cop says on the Internet "they should have been taken out back and shot" because they are unemployed, it kind of has a way of making us law abiding, tax paying, never been arrested, never gave anyone any trouble whatsoever over my fifty three year of life "civilians" scared
#$%^-less of people who wear badges.

I would hate to be mistaken by someone such as yourself, as unemployed. I guess I better start carrying a VOE document with me at all times in order to avoid being "adobe walled" if I get pulled over.

It is absolutely chilling to know you are a police officer somewhere.

It really is.

 

[mvpel]

It wasn't just because they were unemployed, unemployment was the least of their anti-social traits, such as armed robbery.

 

[Gary Conner]

Quote from MVPL:

It wasn't just because they were unemployed, unemployment was the least of their anti-social traits, such as armed robbery.

Well MVPL, I don't think you are correct when you say that, with all due respect. I quoted his statement ver-batim.

He did not say they should be shot due to "armed robbery." He said they should be "taken out back and shot" because they did not hold any job, and that they "were not contributing to society."

You can make excuses for him all day long. The fact is, he stated that they should be "shot" due to not holding a job, and then came back later after I posted my opposition to this idea, and claimed to only be joking.

Additionally, you have to realize he repeated the justification for his "joking" by providing the EXACT reasoning Hitler used when claiming there was a need for a "final solution" since the Jews (in his opinion) "were not contributing to society."

The fact is, he said what he said because he believes it, or thinks it funny. Neither qualify him for a position in law enforcement under our Constitution.

(Oh by the way, please excuse me for "throwing the Constitution around" when discussing legal issues. That is something else he doesn't like us so-called "anti-law enforcment" folks to stoop to as evidenced by one of his earlier posts)

 

[mvpel]

We have the whole thread behind us, plus another locked one, I don't think you're being fair in taking that one post out of such context.

 

[Camp David]

Come on, where are you JuanCarlos? Where are you Camp David? What do you have to say now? I'll go further on this one: Spent shell casings were found in the car. When the gun is found, it will match the shell casing found, meaning the cops were fired upon.

What they find inside the car does not change what happened outside of it; the police fusilade of 50 shots was overkill. Whether or not the police were fired-upon or not (and I have my suspicions it was the latter) 50 shots in the general direction of the victims could have terminated innocent civilians. Ever think of that? Anyone firing 50 shots better have a good reason; these NY cops didn't.

It is the same story of over-reaction of police speeding and endangering civilians; there was a family killed just recently by a rookie cop speeding somewhere. In this instance, and others, the physicians maxim of "First do no harm" applies... In the New York shooting, a better response, in my opinion, could have resulted. 50 shots in response is not what I would consider a good response... Are these cops paranoid?

 

[JuanCarlos]

What they find inside the car does not change what happened outside of it; the police fusilade of 50 shots was overkill. Whether or not the police were fired-upon or not (and I have my suspicions it was the latter) 50 shots in the general direction of the victims could have terminated innocent civilians. Ever think of that? Anyone firing 50 shots better have a good reason; these NY cops didn't.

Actually, he did think of that...or rather it was mentioned in the last, locked, thread. He dismissed it because they were in fear of their life and at that point they wouldn't be thinking of innocent civilians. Cops, after all, are not necessarily supposed to put their lives above innocent bystanders.

Or so I seem to remember him arguing before.

We have the whole thread behind us, plus another locked one, I don't think you're being fair in taking that one post out of such context.

Yes, we have plenty of context by which to judge Homerboy's statements. While I doubt he literally spends his evenings finding unemployed ex-cons to take into dark alleys and execute, I think it's safe to say based on the attitudes shown in all his other posts that it wasn't exactly said in the "ha ha, just kidding" sense either.

 

[Homerboy]

OK, One at a time:

The unemployment issue means nothing to me. People are often unemployed. What I said was they were UNEMPLOYED CAREER CRIMINALS WITH MULTIPLE FELONY ARRESTS BETWEEN THEM. The are scum and contribute nothing to society other than grief. Bell's fiance was unemployed, as well, and receiving public benefits. So they had 2 kids out of wedlock, neither one of them worked, and they are both able bodies people capable of doing somthing. They chose not to. You know how many times I've heard "why should I work in McDonalds? I can make more on welfare". There is a lack of motivation here.

As for the number of shots, the NYPD is the MOST RESTRAINED PD in the country. The cops literally have MILLIONS of contacts a year, and VERY FEW of them result in shots fired. Of those that do, 99% of them are immediately ruled justified. Minorities represent only about 40% of the population in NYC, but over 97% of cops shot or assaulted in NYC have minorities as attackers. You want to know why cops are more "trigger happy" in these neighborhoods? Because they have a FAR higher chance of being killed or wounded by one. I know good people live there. And by the way, what I said was "when you feel your life is in danger, you're not gonna care about some civilian three blocks away". Are you any different? if you have to pull your gun when you're being robbed, are you worried about where the bullets you fire are going to go other than the guy trying to take your life? Are you going to "fire three and then assess" when you are running behind a car and have no idea if the shots you fired even hit? Are you even going to have the presence of mind to count your shots? I know the one time I fired my gun (at a pitbull), I had NO IDEA how many shots I had fired. The adrenaline, sounds, flash, and smoke drown out everything else.

You're so eager to throw mud. The truth is, none of you guys would have been any more restrained than these cops. Shooting at paper doesn't make you a gunfighter. These guys got shot because of THEIR BEHAVIOR. They made a bad choice. One of them is dead, and the other two have some holes in them. Oh well. You play with fire, you get burned.

 

[Ausserordeutlich]

Gary, surely Homerboy was being figurative, not literal, when he suggested that the perps be taken out back and shot? As to Shaggy's input...defies adult cognitive reasoning. I've never been arrested for anything, let alone 11 times, neither have my offspring. "Innocent until proven guilty" is shallow demagoguery in this discussion, not to mention non sequitur.

 

[Homerboy]

Exactly. I'm not advocating actually taking useless cretins out back and shooting them. I'm just saying it's no loss to the rest of us when they kill each other.

 

[Al Norris]

Gary and Juan, may I suggest you both study this word, as it relates to some things said by Homerboy?

Hyperbole: noun : extravagant exaggeration (as "mile-high ice-cream cones")

Then there's the self-serving rhetoric all three of you use....
:barf: