Why do so many sound so anti LEO II

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gunslinger

Moderator
This thread probably should have been allowed to die rather than be reopened as a part two. However after dong my usual evening reading of TFL I retired to bed and was troubled by some of the post I had read here tonight and felt compelled to get up and reopen it.
When I first became a member of TFL there were many former, retired and active LEO's members here and I suspect there still are. Those members willingly shared their experiences and offered advice when requested.
More years ago than I care to remember my (then) wife and I were police officer for a major metropolitan city when we excepted jobs in a South Florida department known for its corruption among its officer. Upon reporting for the job the police cheif, two other officers (our back up team) the prosecutor and a select few FDLE agents were the only ones that knew we were officers. Over the next several months we conducted operations and developed connections purchasing narcotics. As our reputation grew we began to receive the business of a few corrupt officers. However we also drew the attention of several good officers who made it their goal to put us out of business. These officers, the good officers, did everything in their power to arrest us and stop our dealing. Once the operation was over we sought and were given numerious indictments including those for the few officers that had succeeded to the easy money that the corruption had offered. The media went into its usual frenzy. However there was no mention of the officer whom had worked so hard in putting us, the under cover officers, whom they thought to be dealers away. Nor was there any mention of us or our back up team. We were simply referred to as undercover officers involved in a covert narcotics operation. The police cheif was not mentioned for his vision in creating the operation to stop narcotics trafficing in the area by anyone involved, including corrupt police officers. The guilty officers officers did however make front page news on a daily bases for weeks to come.
Many of you here seem to believe that the police are not there to protect you when you need them. Every time a police officer works hours on a case investigating a crime he is there when you need him. Every time a repeat burglar is arrested after hours of intensive investigation, convicted after the officers have satisfied all the rules of court that our politcians have given us he is one less out there to break into your home. You see the people in our prisons are the bad guys. They are not political prisoners. They are not there because they broke some liberal unneeded laws. These are the people that steal your car. These are the people the break into your home when you are away or, God forbid home, and rip off your stuff. These are the people that stand on the street corner and sell drugs to your kids. These are the people that rape your wife. Hell, these are the people that would sodomize your dog if he didn't have teeth. And these people didn't get in prison because they were arrested by another rapist, murderer, drug dealer, et. al. They are not there because they decided to give themselves up. They are in prison, away from society and your family because of the work of many dedicated, professional police officers. Were it not for those officers these prisoners would be free to walk the streets and perpitrate the crimes that they wished. So the next time you think that the police are never there when you need them stop to ask yourself how many times in our society would you have the need to protect yourself if it were not for them. They are there every day. Everyone of the bad guy working out and watching cable television and waiting for the liberal system to release him from prison is there becasue a police officer some where was doing his job protecting you and your family.
For a good officer, a really good officer, police work is not what they do. Police work is who they are. It defines them. They are not doing the job for the money. They could make better money in other professions. They are not there to harass innocent citizens. They are not there to strut or posture. The good officers are there to protect and to serve. No, they were not drafted. They choice to do what they do. They choice not a job but a way of life. It becomes a part of them as real as the hand on the end of their arm. Those officers are not the ones shown on the nightly news or pictured in your local paper. No more so then are private citizens who with the use of a legally owned firearm come to the aid of someone in need. They don't receive any glory or glamour nor do they ask any. However those officers neither deserve the scorn of those who either would not or could not do their job.

I probably should have stayed in bed.

------------------
Gunslinger

We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
 
I thought maybe we should let it die too, but if it had to be reopened that was probably the best way. If it makes you feel any better, you gave me pause. I still haven't personally met but one good cop, but I feel a lot better about cops in general after reading this. I'm sure you're right that those good cops are probably in the mix somewhere in most of the corruption cases that make the news, just not reported. You sound like you'd be the exception in any profession, sir. Thanks.
 
while this topic always generates more heat than light, I'll stir the coals a bit more anyway.

folks always bring up the point that "all we hear about are the few bad apples." but if we flip that notion around, that applies to the various ethnic groups as well, but I have yet to hear of a large police department that *doesn't* regularly perform the "driving while ethnic" traffic stop and illegal vehicle search. LEOs always complain about being painted with a broad-brush generalization, but they are the first to
resort to that logic. black guy in a sports car? must be a car thief. baggy pants? gang-banger. messy car interior? must have drugs.

especially with the recent revelations concerning the Rampart division of LAPD, one wonders if what we hear from the mainstream media is merely the tip of the iceberg rather than just an exception.

I, for one, don't really long for "the good old days" of law enforcement. I would much rather have too much criticism and scrutiny of LEOs than too little. we tried the lassez faire approach in the first half of this century, and we got J. Edgar Hoover and cops who handed out regular beatings for "ethnicity violations".
 
And then we have this...


Secret LA Police Group Routinely Broke Law - Paper
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A rogue officer turned informant has told investigators a secret group of Los Angeles Police Department anti-gang officers and supervisors routinely broke the law and celebrated their shootings and frame-ups of innocent people, the Los Angeles Times reported on Thursday.

The paper reported that former officer Rafael Perez said that the more than 30 current and former Rampart Division officers who were ``in the loop,'' including at least three sergeants, conspired to put innocent people in jail and cover up unjustified shootings and beatings.

The group celebrated shootings by awarding plaques to officers who wounded or killed people, according to transcripts of Perez's interviews with LAPD detectives and Los Angeles County deputy district attorneys, copies of which were obtained by the Times.

In its investigation of the Rampart Division anti-gang CRASH unit, the LAPD has uncovered alleged wrongdoing by officers ranging from unjustified shootings, beatings and drug dealing to false arrests and evidence planting.

Perez has been cooperating with detectives as part of a plea agreement that is expected to cut time from his prison sentence for stealing 8 pounds of cocaine from an LAPD evidence room.

He has implicated himself and other officers in numerous alleged cases of police misconduct and crimes, including the shooting and subsequent framing of an unarmed gang member.

To date, 20 LAPD officers have been relieved of duty, suspended without pay or fired as a result of the probe, and more than 20 criminal convictions overturned.

While investigators believe they have corroborated many of Perez's admissions and allegations, the former officer failed a polygraph test, the Times said it learned.

It said Perez's failure to pass the lie detector test could jeopardize his plea bargain and undermine his credibility as a potential witness against the other officers.

Several officers have told the Times they believe Perez is fabricating allegations to protect himself.


From Yahoo.com news, 10 Feb '00
 
As a former LEO, I feel that times have changed a lot. For one thing, the anti-gun gang has deliberately poisoned the once good relationship between honest gun owners and the police.

New officers are products of an urban society where guns are not for sport but for murder, and they act accordingly. Military influence on police is heavy, even though the missions are different and the "kill 'em all" thinking of the super-elite military units has no place in police work.

The result has been widely publicized excessive force actions. Those that involve gun owners are usually approved by the anti-gun media. The cops beat Rodney King and there is a big hoopla. The cops kill innocent people in a raid on "an arsenal" and the press applauds.

The norm in a lot of departments today seems to be a clear division between old timers who are putting in time, totally disillusioned by the criminal non-justice non-system, and the gung ho, shaved head, ex-military or military trained types who want to shoot or beat everybody in sight.

Remember, when you talk about violent videos influencing a generation of criminals, that the same videos have influenced a generation of cops. Many became police officers after deciding that it would be "cool" to be able to spray the neighborhood legally. Some police training programs seem to encourage, not discourage, that attitude.

Jim
 
A police dep`t usually reflects the society it comes from. The worst thing to happen to law enforcement was doing away with the draft. You got 2-4 years of free training which now has to be done in 4 to 6 months if you`re lucky. The best young cops I worked with were ex military or came from LE families. The military "nut jobs" seem to gravitate to the feds for the most part. Maybe they`re recruited but I really don`t know.
Another problem is EEO nonsense. "If you can be a cop, so can I." This is taxpayer money. The government seems to figure since it`s public money, it should be spread around equally. Disregarding the wishes of people who foot the bills is certainly nothing new.
About 15 years ago a NYC Police entrance exam was given to a group of public school 6th graders as an experiment. The kids did just as well as the average police recruit!
When I was an instructor the recruits were required to write a critique of the course. The spelling, grammer and punctuation of some of them were out of this world. People may not realize that police work requires a lot of paperwork. How can someone who can`t spell write a coherent report? Anything put on paper is a legal document which can be required for court. Should I also mention that if you can`t spell, your reading comprehension is also limited? This is not really surprising since one of the instructors I worked with who was a former NYC school teacher couldn`t spell either.
Maybe this thread is being beaten to death but it`s the taxpayer who`s really taking the beating.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>While investigators believe they have corroborated many of Perez's admissions and allegations, the former officer
failed a polygraph test, the Times said it learned.

It said Perez's failure to pass the lie detector test could jeopardize his plea bargain and undermine his credibility as
a potential witness against the other officers.

Several officers have told the Times they believe Perez is fabricating allegations to protect himself.
[/quote]

Whenever someone brings up "The Rampart Division of the LAPD", why don't they mention this part?

Just wondering.

LawDog
 
I was driving along on a suburban road on a rainy day, it was the kind of road where the speed limit changed from 45 to 35mph every mile or so. Anyhow, a police officer pulled me over, got out of his car (with no rain gear or jacket on) came up to my car and said - "you deliberately splashed my car back there, didn't you!" My jaw dropped as I looked at him. He added ....."and you were going 10 miles over the speed limit." In the meantime, it was raining hard and he was getting soaked. I explained to him that I never even saw him, wouldn't do something like that if I had seen him and that I tried to stay within the limit but I may have missed one of the changing speed limit signs due to the heavy rain. He asked for my drivers license and then said - "ah, your from Chicago", as though that was an offense. More silence on my part. To sum things up he let me go without citation.

This was an example of what I would call an overzealous officer. I think what saved me from his irrational rath was that I stayed in my car and put both hands in plain sight on the steering wheel, license in one hand, with my window rolled down. This seems to calm down even hostile police officers. Well, thats the lesson to my story. :)

Of course most officers would never do something like this. I think this officer was new.
 
Ivanhoe let's take a moment to evaluate how the perception of racism enters into law enforcement.
In the early to mid 80's (the last period I know the statistics) 24% of the population of Kansas City, Missouri was black. That is including males and females from infants to the elderly. However 87% of all crime in that city, both white and blue color, was committed by black males between the ages of 17 and 25. Members of the black community complain that their areas are crime riden and the police doing nothing to help them. Most crimes are, by and large, committed black on black and white on white. Therefore the blacks are preying on other blacks in their community. In order to protect that segment of the population the police must arrest the blacks that are comiitting the crimes against their fellow blacks. Then the cry goes up that there is a dispreportionate number of blacks being arrested in the community.
Now how do you propose we fix the problem?

This thread should not be about racism. Racism is not the issue here. If the discussion becomes one focused on racism then it should and in all likelihood will be shut down.
The issue here is the perception the public has of the ones being paid to police their communities. The above is just one example of being "damned if you do and damned if you don't". Sure there are abuses by officers. New Orleans was one of the worst examples in recent memory. However, eventhough we did not hear about them, I'm willing to bet there were several good officers on that department that were appalled by their corrupt breathren and worked dilegently to bring them to justice.

------------------
Gunslinger

We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
 
A seen by the responces by many of the membership, many remember the negitve aspect of thier encounters with law enforcement. I learned after first starting out that alot if not most people don't like police in general. They don't want any intrusion into thier lifes and getting a ticket or served a civil paper is not a bright spot in thier day. I used to work as a golf course superintendent, and it never failed to amaze me, no matter how great the course looked if someone for instance; hit a hole or some other distraction that's what they would remember about that day's golf outing. It's the same thing in police work, all the taking of criminals off the streets, other routine and mundane duties police perform day in and out. Most folks remember the ticket or other run in with police that pissed them off and contaminated thier view on police work. For those members out there with these types of views, try a ride along program if it's offered where you live at. See what it's REALLY like to do this job and what it entails before = you pass judgement. What have you got to lose? the illusion or sterotyping of police offers and what thier job is like on a day to day basis. There are some that will never change thier views on police, [i can live with that] rather they view life in a negitive way rather than positive. That's one of the main things i've learned from police work is to take the positive side; and if i'm willing it always has something to teach me about myself and or others while out on duty.
 
I am Pro-LE for the most part, the single largest problem imho is that many dept's quit being law enforcment and became political org's with the top people being anti-gun, well at least the ones that get on tv but that is another matter is'nt it

My father was a Ft. Worth PD officer for 6 years my family knows that Leo's have a very hard and for the most part selfless profession but we also saw the US / Them side of LE and as one of the "THEM" I don't much like many of the things that "US" do. For one the millitarization of the police force, I mean really is the "tactical responce" needed as often as we see on the tube (once agin this may be more tv than the LEOs). Why is it that when I see a Police car the words "revenue inhancment" come to mind. Why can I be driving at the speed limit and have a NON-FLASHING police car zip by me.

sorry I seem to be rambling know must back away from the keyboard...



[This message has been edited by Nestor Rivera (edited February 10, 2000).]
 
Gunslinger: Again, from having read a bunch of posts here since late 1998, the majority of folks here are pro-law-enforcement. Maybe, as evidenced in LA, there are just more bad apples than we used to have. I just don't know. I generally note more hostility toward the federal badges than toward locals. And face it: We're racking up an impressive score in dead bodies who were not at all involved in any crime.

Law Dog: Go to the URL http://www.latimes.com/news/front/20000210/t000013218.html and look for the part in the article where it said that in some of the areas where the polygraph said Perez was lying, independent investigation corroborated him.

Regards, Art
 
It is refreshing to read a post like 12-34hom's. It’s good to see people thinking positively. I guess that it is only human nature to let a bad experience taint your outlook whether you are citizen or police officer.

I think that the biggest source of friction between law-abiding citizens and officers is that most people are not aware of how you need to act when pulled over. There is no training for the population at large on this subject. They don’t even teach this in driver education. Perhaps a course should be taught by the police in high school.

For the average person being pulled over is a high-pressure situation in which they forget their common sense. Also, if your driving down the freeway with the radio on, watching the cars in front of you, you may not notice a police car with its lights flashing 5 or 6 car lengths behind you especially during the day. And, you don’t even know if it is you that they want to pull over unless they are right behind you. Nothing seems to p*ss an officer off more than not noticing them and not immediately pulling over.

In the N.Y. Diallo case, I read in the paper that in the country this guy was from, the normal thing you do when confronted by police is to pull out your papers. As a result he had his wallet in hand and the police shot him thinking it was a gun.

I understand the police point of view – if you don’t pull over immediately, you could be a felon on the run or if you reach for your wallet, you may be pulling out a pistol.

I think the problem is that there is not a clear set of rules of engagement. Perhaps the Chief’s of Police should spend their time educating the public on how to act instead of making speeches praising the glories of gun confiscation.

On another point, it is strange how times have changed. I remember with the Rodney King incident and before, how I always used to take the police side of the argument. Now however, in these politically correct times when having a useless bayonet lug on your rifle can make you a felon and if say you have a classic book like the Rise and Fall of the 3rd Reich in your book case you are labeled a white supremacist – and its o.k. for the police to kill you.

Lately I have been looking at things differently. I think that a lot of people are. Perhaps this is why officers are wondering why people who normally support them are looking at them cautiously these days.
 
Can't live with em, can't live without em.

My biggest problems with LE today are:

1. Militarization. The FF specifically warned against a standing army. That's what we have, mainly due to the drug war.

2. Willing enforcement of unconstitutional laws. I can and will be arrested for numerous things that I have a constitutional right to indulge in: unlicenced CCW,open carry, self-medication, non-payment of income taxes, etc,etc,etc.

3. Corruption. I'm sure only a minority of cops are corrupt, but enough are to make it a bad problem.

I don't doubt for a minute that when a state gun-grab plan is instituted, the vast majority of cops will enforce it. See #2.

These are systemic problems. I still think the 'cop on the beat' deserves our support.
 
Gunslinger; you inadvertently made my point. the percentage of criminals in the black population does tend to be higher than the white population (though of course ethnicity is slowly becoming a "gray area"). however, for serious crime it is a matter of small percentages, like 5% versus 3%. the other 95% are getting pulled over or stopped and questioned.

the current LE philosophy seems to be, "use a big net, stop and search everybody, and throw the innocent ones back." you shouldn't be surprised that such a tactic rubs some folks the wrong way. the public's perceptions are based on what they see in the mainstream media, what they experience themselves, and tales told by family and friends. this is no different than how police perceive the general public; cops spend all day dealing with shoplifters, and all night with domestic disputes, drunks, and hookers. one state patrolman was shot and killed by a guy whose car had heavily tinted windows. from that point on, everyone who had window film was treated as a potential cop-killer. cops always complain about bad cops being the exception, but they never listen to citizens who counter with the fact that criminals are the exception, too.

LE in a constitutional republic is very difficult if done properly. enforcement of the important stuff requires a lot of manpower, training, and focus, which is why most depts seem to focus on the easy stuff like vice, public drunkeness, parking tickets, and speed traps.
 
I see a lot of you guys pissing and moaning about cops, but I don't see you guys doing a damn thing about it. Go get hired and set an example.

I've been pulled over (white male late 20's)a few times. BUT GUESS WHAT? Each time I was.... I was breaking the law. WOW it's almost weird how that works!! You know what though, I was polite, had my papers in order,said yes sir and no sir and told the truth and guess what? No ticket. See a pattern developing?

If you cruise around at 2am in an area that is known for drugs and prostitution, chances are you'll get pulled over.

Should I care if I get pulled over for a minor traffic or equipment violation? Maybe. Do the cops use it as an excuse? Sure they do. But a lot of the time it's piece lowlife crminal with no license, no insurance, more than likely warrants for their arrest. Just watch an episode or two of COPS. The people the police contact trashy lowlifes. They are for the most part a waste of oxygen. Sometimes a little sacrifice on our part is necessary to acheive a larger goal.

I say get rid of the ACLU. You can't so much as fart in someone's direction without them being all over your ass.
 
LawDog
The answer to your question about Perez failing the polygraph, and why nobody says any thing about it when they talk about "The Rampart division of the LAPD" is that the polygraph was given by...surprise, surprise "The Rampart division of the LAPD!

I hope they really stick it to those elitist pigs!

[This message has been edited by JUNG1999 (edited February 11, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top