Why do we bother?

[InsaneApache]

I'd like to say that I'm suprised but I'm not.


A pregnant woman, her husband and their three-year-old son were killed in a house fire early yesterday as police who arrived before the fire brigade prevented neighbours from trying to save them. The woman screamed: “Please save my kids” from a bedroom window and neighbours tried to help but were beaten back by flames and were told by police not to attempt a rescue.

By the time firefighters got into the house in Doncaster, Michelle Colly, 25, her husband, Mark, 29, and son, Louis, 3, were dead. Their daughter, Sophie, 5, was taken to hospital and believed to be critically ill.

Davey Davis, 38, a friend of the family, said: “It was the most harrowing thing I have ever witnessed. Michelle was at the bedroom window yelling, ‘Please save my kids’ and we wanted to help but the police were pushing us back and not allowing us near. We were willing to risk our lives to save those kiddies but the police wouldn’t let us.

“Tempers were running very high, particularly with the women who were there, but the police were just saying we have to wait for the fire brigade because of health and safety.

“There were four or five police officers. They were here before the fire brigade. We heard the sirens and we came across to help but they wouldn’t let us.

“I thought the police were there to protect lives. At one time they would have have gone inside themselves to try and rescue them.

“When a family is burning to death in front of your eyes, rules should go out of the window – especially with kids. Everybody wanted to try and help.”

Mr Davis added: “They were a great couple, a real family. They loved their kids and the kids were smashing. It’s hard to take in.” Another resident, who asked not to be named, added: “There were lads with aluminium ladders who wanted to get to them but the police were shouting, ‘Stay away, get out of the yard.’ They were saying, ‘You have got to wait until the fire brigade gets here.’ Michelle was standing at the window banging on it – we all saw it – and shouting to save her kids but the police were just below her pushing us out and telling everybody to stay away.”

Jordan Fisher, 17, said: “The woman was screaming, ‘My kids are in here, my kids are in here’. Everyone was trying to get her to throw the kids out but then she disappeared. We tried to get a ladder up to the window but the flames were coming out of the ground floor, so we couldn’t do it.”

Mrs Colly, who ran a toddlers’ group, and her husband, a DIY store supervisor, were expecting their third child in two weeks.

A South Yorkshire Police spokeswoman said: “The senior officer in charge is confident we handled this incident as professionally as possible. In a situation like that you could end up with more deceased bodies than you had in the first place.”

The house and some neighbouring properties were cordoned off as police and fire investigators tried to establish the cause of the blaze. It is not thought to be suspicious.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5998930.ece

When I was a nipper my dad was a copper and I'm sure would never behave like these policemen did. The police are a joke these days. As for those PCSOs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_Community_Support_Officer) I wouldn't pay them in washers, absolute waste of space.

I'll recount a tale of an incident that happened last summer. I was walking the dogs in the park with my wife. We passed some youths, one of which said something to my wife. She is no shrinking violet and began to remonstrate with them. As we started to walk away a brick came hurtling over our heads and landed just in front of us, followed by several others. I got my moblie phone out and rang the police. The youths saw this and ran off. About ten minutes later two bobbies turn up. I told them what had happened and was shocked at what they said.

"Did any of the bricks hit you?" I said that they hadn't. "In that case no crime has been committed." No crime? Chucking half charlies at people heads is legal? It gets better. I said that I was going to photograph them so that the police could catch them. I was told that if I had taken a photograph that they would arrest me on charges of being a peadophile. I was dumbstruck.

That's what twelve years of the Blair/Brown has gotten us. Policemen who don't police anymore. I'm almost tempted to say I'd rather have those US policemen who beat you up first and ask questions later. Almost.

[Fragony]

There is something to say for the behaviour of these officers, this is really sad.

[caravel]

The police in the UK are indeed a joke. The mistake is in thinking that they're there for your protection. They're not, they are mere tools that are there to oppress you.

I'm quite sure that if you'd decided to stage a demonstration about it the following week with a good few supporters in tow, that the police would certainly not only turn up but, in force. That's where their priorities lie.

Unfortunately it wasn't any better under the Tory party. Labour have simply continued along the same route, which is why much of the critique of Labour policies by the Tories has been purely political, with the latter never offering any real ideas as to how they would do it differently. I agree though, it's about time that the Blair/Brown dynasty was booted out, but who replaces them?

[Fragony]

Opression is a bit much but having police playing outside is more trouble then it's worth they should be privatised you can't leave things like that to the government.

[tibilicus]

What is the actual point in PCSO's? They don't actually have the power to arrest anyone so seem like a total waste of time to me. Why not just train people to become police officers instead of PCSO's which serve no real purpose.

[CountArach]

Opression is a bit much but having police playing outside is more trouble then it's worth they should be privatised you can't leave things like that to the government.
Then you are one step away from private armies...

Oh wait, we have those too... and they are working out remarkably well aren't they?

[InsaneApache]

What is the actual point in PCSO's? They don't actually have the power to arrest anyone so seem like a total waste of time to me. Why not just train people to become police officers instead of PCSO's which serve no real purpose.

Quotas mate, quotas. :shame:

[Fragony]

Then you are one step away from private armies...

Oh wait, we have those too... and they are working out remarkably well aren't they?

Industrial and commercial area's are already patrolled by private security-organisations, works fine, I don't see why that wouldn't work for neighbourhoods. If a security-company doesn't deliver you can hire a better one, police is useless there is no reason for having it. That or the inevitable vigilanties

edit, I like the Spanish guarda civil, they leave you alone if you don't cause any problems, won't fine you over silly stuff, and are nobody's fool.

[Vuk]

I'd like to say that I'm suprised but I'm not.



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5998930.ece

When I was a nipper my dad was a copper and I'm sure would never behave like these policemen did. The police are a joke these days. As for those PCSOs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_Community_Support_Officer) I wouldn't pay them in washers, absolute waste of space.

I'll recount a tale of an incident that happened last summer. I was walking the dogs in the park with my wife. We passed some youths, one of which said something to my wife. She is no shrinking violet and began to remonstrate with them. As we started to walk away a brick came hurtling over our heads and landed just in front of us, followed by several others. I got my moblie phone out and rang the police. The youths saw this and ran off. About ten minutes later two bobbies turn up. I told them what had happened and was shocked at what they said.

"Did any of the bricks hit you?" I said that they hadn't. "In that case no crime has been committed." No crime? Chucking half charlies at people heads is legal? It gets better. I said that I was going to photograph them so that the police could catch them. I was told that if I had taken a photograph that they would arrest me on charges of being a peadophile. I was dumbstruck.

That's what twelve years of the Blair/Brown has gotten us. Policemen who don't police anymore. I'm almost tempted to say I'd rather have those US policemen who beat you up first and ask questions later. Almost.

lol, the police in Britain are a result of anti-police sentiment that has made them scared to be real police anymore.
Also, you do not know what you are talking about with American police. They are the farthest thing from "beat you up first and ask questions later". They do their job and make sure people obey the law. Sure you have some isolated cases of corruption or misuse of power, it happens anywhere where people have power, but the good ones do their best to keep it undercontrol and punish the bad ones for it. No matter what you want to say about American policemen, if the Fire Department could not get there in time, they would give their lives if necassary to rescue a burning human. 99% of them are really true protectors of the people, and deserve more respect than they get for it. Considering the number of policemen in America (and the limited funding they get), there is VERY little corruption or abuse of power. Sorry to rant on you Apache, but before you go believing what the media tells you about American police, perhaps you should come live here and see for yourself.

[InsaneApache]

My step mums an American citizen.

[Vuk]

My step mums an American citizen.

lol, so? :P

[InsaneApache]

I might not be as ignorant of the USA as you assume.

[FactionHeir]

I think you should have taken your story to a newspaper. Very sad.

[Vuk]

I might not be as ignorant of the USA as you assume.

I'm sorry Apache, but you are very wrong about US police. It is a stereotype put forth by police haters in the US, and trumpetted abroad esp in places that are not friendly to the US. (and I know enough Englishmen to know that you guy's opinion of us is very low :P) In Hungary for example, I was talking to one of my friends about the police here and how they were directing the procession at Mohacs, and I commented that they were very friendly when I accidently wandered off into a restricted area. She tells me, "Yeah, they are not like police in the Americas, they will not shoot at you for something like that." WHAT?! I almost died of laughter when she said that. :P Shoot you for walking in a closed off place?! How do foriegners learn such ridiculous things about us? All I can think of is the media (and Hollywood shares blame equally for it I think).
I not saying that you are as ignorant as that dear lady was, but I think that you suffer from a misconception much akin to that. :P In all fairness, American police are friendly, responsible people, who do their best to uphold justice, and from what I have seen in Europe, seem to be pretty top-notch. Looking for police who abuse their power? Look at Russia, not the US. :P The police in Russia are like what most people think of the police in the US. :P

[Louis VI the Fat]

That's what twelve years of the Blair/Brown has gotten us. Policemen who don't police anymore. I'm almost tempted to say I'd rather have those US policemen who beat you up first and ask questions later. Almost.Look at it on the bright side, IA. Not that far from where you live there are countries where the police strangely manages to combine both incompetent non-interventionism AND a 'shoot first, shoot again if asked questions' mentality. :shame:


More in general, I think the unarmed British bobby is still one of democracy's most powerful symbols. In the entire world, how many states make it a distinct policy to approach their population unarmed? :2thumbsup:

[Vuk]

Look at it on the bright side, IA. Not that far from where you live there are countries where the police strangely manages to combine both incompetent non-interventionism AND a 'shoot first, shoot again if asked questions' mentality. :shame:


More in general, I think the unarmed British bobby is still one of democracy's most powerful symbols. In the entire world, how many states make it a distinct policy to approach their population unarmed? :2thumbsup:

Problem is that it doesn't work. :P Criminals are armed and need to be approached armed. A policeman does not know when he is going to be confronting an ordinary citizen or a criminal. The weapon is not there for the ordinary citizen, so he has no need to fear it. The weapon is only there to defend the policeman, to defend others, and to force criminals to comply. It is like what we do in Taijichuan. We hold out a closed fist, and bring an open palm onto it. It means I know martial arts, but I am not here to use them. It should not matter to a lawfull citizen if the policeman is armed, because he knows that it will not affect him.


I think you should have taken your story to a newspaper. Very sad.

Agreed. That I think would be the best thing to do. Let everyone hear your story, and hopefully something will be done when the community cries out loud enough.

[Fragony]

Thread needs comedy. Here is the Norwegian police showing their LEET flashbang skillz.

http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/39799/3e462b86/noorse_humor.html

[Vuk]

Thread needs comedy. Here is the Norwegian police showing their LEET flashbang skillz.

http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/39799/3e462b86/noorse_humor.html

That was hillarious. :laugh4: At least they were goodsports about it though. :P I just hope my life never depends on their using a flashbang correctly. :P

[Mooks]

99% of them are really true protectors of the people, and deserve more respect than they get for it.

Now its my turn to laugh. No offense, but that statistic you pulled out of your rear end is ridiculous. Id say the cops that are truly commited to "Protect and serve" are few and far between.

When you mentioned the russian police, it reminded me of something. This funny video where a big drug deal was going down with the red mafia. The russian cops pop out of the bushes, and the gangsters go straight to the ground voluntarily.

[Vuk]

Now its my turn to laugh. No offense, but that statistic you pulled out of your rear end is ridiculous. Id say the cops that are truly commited to "Protect and serve" are few and far between.

When you mentioned the russian police, it reminded me of something. This funny video where a big drug deal was going down with the red mafia. The russian cops pop out of the bushes, and the gangsters go straight to the ground voluntarily.

I was not using the figure as a statistic, but as a hyperbole. I thought that would have been obvious, but I guess I was wrong. I have had experience with police men and women from many different states since I was a small child (my dad did work related to the police, and I often accompanied him on his work, and became involved in the justice system in some small ways myself since a young age), so I have had a pretty good chance to see first hand. Many of my families best friends are or have been in the police force. I have had police barricade themselves inside my house in the middle of the day when they were trying to stop my crazy neighbor from murdering his family. I have had lots of personal experience with the justice system myself in many ways. I say this to point out that I probably have known more policemen and women in one year of my life than you have in your entire life, and my experience has been a lot richer. Sure, I have gotten bum deals from a policeman (a Statey (all the jerks become Stateys :P) gave me a citation for going off the road in ridiculous Wisconsin winter weather, then the courts :daisy: me over when I tried to contest it), there are bad people everywhere, and the justice system is no different. From my experience though, the people who serve in the justice system are USUALLY quite a cut above the common person. They are people who really would give their lives for others, people who care about justice, and people who care about the common citizen. Of the all the policemen I have known, I have only known two who I would classify as bad apples. The thing is that you never hear about when the tens of thousands of policemen across the nation daily put their lives on the line to protect and serve. A policeman doing his job and making his community and country a better place does not make headlines, a policeman who abuses his power does. Naturally most things you read on the police are going to be negative, as that is what people are interested in. No one wants to hear the millions of possible stories on tens of thousands of policemen and women serving their country, they want to hear about the exceptions, they want to hear about the bad cops.
Your statement about good cops being few and far between makes me wonder, what do you base that on? Do you base that statement on what you read about the police and the accounts you have heard of others who think that they were wronged by them, or do you base it on your own experience? How extensive is your experience with police men and women, and what about makes you say that?

[Major Robert Dump]

The cops at the fire weren't firefighters and should not have been allowed to decide whether or not a total quarantine of the fire was required, thats for firefighters to decide.

And Vuk, I love you man, but you're idea that they are scared to be cops because of police-hating is high on rhetoric and low on thought. There's a reason people hate police, and its not because of the media, it's because of personal experiences and the actions of the police. While I agree that a lot of US cops are good folk, the fact that they "put their life on the line" does not give them free riegn to do when and what they, which is exactly what they do and more often than many think because a lot of it still goes unrecorded. And when it is recorded the person who did the recording is suddenly criminalized or has an agenda. I think a lot of this abuse stems subtley and indirectly from the blank check that has been provided to cops for the drug war so we could grow our prison culture that politicians profit so richly from, but thats another thread entirely.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8027854162700568157&q=ktla

[Vuk]

The cops at the fire weren't firefighters and should not have been allowed to decide whether or not a total quarantine of the fire was required, thats for firefighters to decide.

And Vuk, I love you man, but you're idea that they are scared to be cops because of police-hating is high on rhetoric and low on thought. There's a reason people hate police, and its not because of the media, it's because of personal experiences and the actions of the police. While I agree that a lot of US cops are good folk, the fact that they "put their life on the line" does not give them free riegn to do when and what they, which is exactly what they do and more often than many think because a lot of it still goes unrecorded. And when it is recorded the person who did the recording is suddenly criminalized or has an agenda. I think a lot of this abuse stems subtley and indirectly from the blank check that has been provided to cops for the drug war so we could grow our prison culture that politicians profit so richly from, but thats another thread entirely.

Sorry Major, but 99% (oh no! There goes another hyperbole! Replace that with most :P) of the people I know who have a gripe with the police have it because:
A) The had committed a serious crime such as drug possesion and the police did what they are paid to do by the people of the country and took their drugs away from them.
B) They have gotten speeding tickets that they think they do not deserve, so they decide to hate the police for it. :P
C) They saw this thing on TV, or they read this thing in the paper, etc.

Most times (there, no hyperbole) that people, in my experience, have a gripe against the police because of some experience that THEY personally had with the police, they were breaking the law and the police did not act inappropriately at all. Those people then latch onto whatever stories they can find in the media to justify their hate of the police. My ex-gf used to hate the police because she had her liscense suspended because she kept speeding. Ever since then she would use any story that came onto the news to justify her hatred for the police. It had nothing to do with the police abusing power though, it to do with her not liking that she had to answer for endangering other people's lives and speeding. The subject is actually what eventually led to us breaking up. :P She did not like the fact that I thought her behavior was putting other people's lives in danger and that she deserves to have her liscense suspended for continuing it. :P Point is though that she, like so many others that I have known, have broken a law in a way that they thought was harmless, and have had to answer for it, so they do not like the police and cry police abuse of power whenever there is an incident of it in the papers. What you said about police thinking they have free reign and doing whatever they want is ridiculous. They are loaded down with so many restrictions and regulations that it would make your mind boggle, and most of them do their best to uphold them. They are not above the law themselves, and they know it. As far as tons of police abuse going on behind the scenes and people not reporting it...I do not know of anyone who would not protest if a policeman misused his power (and many even if he didn't :P).

EDIT: Just saw the video you linked to. That is my point exactly Major. Things like that happen, and instead of labelling the person as a nut and punishing the person, they label police as "pigs". It was one mental case who did this. If it was an auto mechanic who shot someone, would it be fair to say that auto mechanics are pigs and they abuse their power? People take these isolated cases of nuts who get into the profession and abuse it, and use it to justify a hatred of the police.

[Strike For The South]

Then you are one step away from private armies...

Oh wait, we have those too... and they are working out remarkably well aren't they?

I will point out blackwater probably would've let them run into the burning building.

[Dutch_guy]

A South Yorkshire Police spokeswoman said: “The senior officer in charge is confident we handled this incident as professionally as possible. In a situation like that you could end up with more deceased bodies than you had in the first place.”

It's a sad story, but I believe the above quote deserves mentioning. Having civilians without any proper training run into a burning building is pantamount to suicide, whatever their motives may be, and it's the same for a member of the police. This article could very well have been about the ignorant and cowardly officers who let untrained civilians get themselves killed by running into a burning building. So yes, there is indeed something to say for the behaviour of the officers in question.

:balloon2:

[Vuk]

It's a sad story, but I believe the above quote deserves mentioning. Having civilians without any proper training run into a burning building is pantamount to suicide, whatever their motives may be, and it's the same for a member of the police. This article could very well have been about the ignorant and cowardly officers who let untrained civilians get themselves killed by running into a burning building. So yes, there is indeed something to say for the behaviour of the officers in question.

:balloon2:

You are quite right, and that is something that has been overlooked in this thread I believe. Related to that though, there have been many American policemen (not firefighters) who entered burning buildings to save people without proper equipment. These people went above and beyond though, it is 'not in their job description' to do things like that, and they should not be considered cowards for not doing so. To run into a building that is consumed in flames, without the proper equipment and training, you are basically kissing your life goodbye. To do it is heroic and deserves praise, but it is not something that should be expected of people. People today like to lay blame even if wrong has not been done. Like my dad used to always say, ":daisy:ed if you do, :daisy:ed if you don't".

[InsaneApache]

In the UK the first duty of a policeman is too save life and then uphold the law. This is reminiscent of the two PCSOs who stood by and allowed a kiddy to drown in a lodge. Elf and safety you see.


This article could very well have been about the ignorant and cowardly officers who let untrained civilians get themselves killed by running into a burning building. So yes, there is indeed something to say for the behaviour of the officers in question.

I hear what you're saying but the fact is twenty years ago the bobbies would have been the ones to have a go at rescuing the family, not the onlookers. They certainly wouldn't have prevented others from trying. We've certainly lost summat these past few years.

Watched the local news earlier (it happened about 20 miles from where I live) and the folks down there aren't happy with the police at all. There's a lot of condemnation of the (in)action they took.

[Vuk]

In the UK the first duty of a policeman is too save life and then uphold the law. This is reminiscent of the two PCSOs who stood by and allowed a kiddy to drown in a lodge. Elf and safety you see.



I hear what you're saying but the fact is twenty years ago the bobbies would have been the ones to have a go at rescuing the family, not the onlookers. They certainly wouldn't have prevented others from trying. We've certainly lost summat these past few years.

You also have to realise that this is a different world. Every action that a police officer does is so deeply scrutinized now adays and if there is any way that they can, people will try to blame the police for doing something wrong. (like the imaginary headline Dutch guy wrote) How many times have policemen tried to save someone's life/did save someone's life and something went wrong or someone got hurt so A) they were villanized in the media and very often B) they were sued. If you do not treat the police like your image of an ideal policeman, someone who will sacrafice themselves to save the innocent, then they will not act like it. Why should someone give their own life to save someone else, and leave their family on whatever pathetic benefits they are getting when everyone thinks of them as monsters and any action they do could result in a flurry of negative media attention or a lawsuit?

[InsaneApache]

I can't recall a single incident where a policeman faced censore for attempting to save someones life.

There was a case of a lifeguard being given a written warning for saving a girls life because he didn't have the correct safety equipment. He was out walking his dogs when he happened across her clinging to a cliff top. He reached down and pulled her up. The authorities said he should have gone back to pick up the harnesses issued to them. But like he said, If he hadn't reacted there and then the little girl would have tumbled to her death.

Elf and safety trumps all, even a life. Disgusting. :no:

[Vuk]

I can't recall a single incident where a policeman faced censore for attempting to save someones life.

There was a case of a lifeguard being given a written warning for saving a girls life because he didn't have the correct safety equipment. He was out walking his dogs when he happened across her clinging to a cliff top. He reached down and pulled her up. The authorities said he should have gone back to pick up the harnesses issued to them. But like he said, If he hadn't reacted there and then the little girl would have tumbled to her death.

Elf and safety trumps all, even a life. Disgusting. :no:

Well if you send me a PM reminder tomorrow I will try to find some links if I can. (going out to my late night class now, then to bed) I have read quite a few news stories though where here in the US a policeman does something like saving a person from a burning vehicle he believes will blow up, and he accidently hurts the person when he does, and the vehicle doesn't blow up after all, so he gets sued for not following procedure and injuring someone. Stuff like that happens all to often, and is pretty disgusting. They have made laws in my State to protect civilians from getting sued in such cases, but policemen are still fair game if they are un-duty.

[rory_20_uk]

Yes, the Health and Safety in this country is mad. Rules are here to be followed with blind obendience, and with utter disregard to initiative or outcome: as long as they are followed that's the only thing.

Having said that, to play devil's advocate, what happens if these two either tried themselves or let others enter the building? I imagine they would be responsible for any injuries that occur.

How bad was the fire when this occurred? Would the people - with no equipment - have possibly got inside to get the persons, only to have their shoes / clothes melt and burn, killing them and those they are trying to save?

It is always easier to criticize inaction and bemoan the 3 deaths thus caused, and not be aware of the 5 deaths caused by semi-mindless bravery.

~:smoking:

[seireikhaan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8UtojJT8ts&feature=related

[Husar]

Rory does have a point, but why did they not allow rescue attempts with a ladder? Noone would've gone inside, still a bit risky but if it wasn't the 4th story or higher then the dangers couldn't have been all that great, could they?

There is a point about the cops getting into trouble had they allowed this though, it's a distinct possibility, especially in countries where the government/law has thrown all common sense out of the window.

[Vuk]

There is a point about the cops getting into trouble had they allowed this though, it's a distinct possibility, especially in countries where the government/law has thrown all common sense out of the window.

What country HASN'T? :P

[Major Robert Dump]

So according to Vuk people who scrutinize the police are themselves criminals who are mad they got caught. This argument as radical as people who think all cops are corrupt and call them PIGS, and plays directly into the good ole boy mindset of protecting the other boys in blue whatever the cost. Both sides make me sick.


While I understand the cops wanting to not possibly get into trouble by allowing untrained civilians to charge to help, I am highly curious what led them to assess the situation as being so dire that the civilians would in fact be harmed as well. Would they have made the same decision had it been a grease fire in the kitchen? My guess is probably yes, which means that they were following some sort of policy set forth by their unit to protect the police from lawsuits etc.

[Vuk]

So according to Vuk people who scrutinize the police are themselves criminals who are mad they got caught. This argument as radical as people who think all cops are corrupt and call them PIGS, and plays directly into the good ole boy mindset of protecting the other boys in blue whatever the cost. Both sides make me sick.


While I understand the cops wanting to not possibly get into trouble by allowing untrained civilians to charge to help, I am highly curious what led them to assess the situation as being so dire that the civilians would in fact be harmed as well. Would they have made the same decision had it been a grease fire in the kitchen? My guess is probably yes, which means that they were following some sort of policy set forth by their unit to protect the police from lawsuits etc.

Not at all Dump. I am not talking about people who scrutinize police men and women, I am talking about people who stereotype, lump all policemen and women together into a hated category of "pigs". Is it any different than racism? Discriminating against a group of people because of that group status? And do not tell me that does not happen, because many people I have met (including several on this board) have said that they hate the police, that they do not care when they die, that they wish they would die, etc. It is this illogical hatred and discrimination that I find offensive. There are cops I do not like, and there are cops I hate. People like the one in the video posted above are murderous scum, and should be put to death for being murderous scum. Other police men and women should not be discriminated against for it though. And what I said about most people I know who hate police is the absolute truth. MOST people I know who hate the police have done things (usually minor things) that they think are harmless and they should be allowed to do (taking drugs, drinking, fighting, speeding, etc), and got in trouble for it. My point was, that maybe these people should be getting mad at the law makers, and electing the right ones to make the laws, because the police just enforce the laws that we as a people (through our representatives) have put in place to protect society. The police here do not act as a political enforcement group like they do in several Eastern European countries that I will not mention. And the stereotype that bothered me was not what was said about the English police, but that American police are "beat you up first, ask questions later" police. It simply is not true, and is an unfair characterization of a broad group of people (in this way no better than racism or sexism). I take serious offense to racism and sexism, and I also do to people taking the same attitude with policemen. And like I have said, I have had quite a bit of experience with them, and if you are going stereotype, then I honestly would say that they QUITE a cut above the common person. They are some of the most honest, open, responsible, kind, caring people I have met. When my father died and I was still quite young, my very large family was left to fend for itsself, and my two sisters and I worked part time jobs (all we could get at our age) to try to make ends meet. It was people from the justice system (and it would be very unfair NOT to mention people from the Post Office) who gave considerable amounts to help our family keep food on the table, have a new well drilled, etc. We actually had people from departments three states away who contributed. I have never met more supportive people in my entire life, and seriously doubt you would find them most other lines of work. I think that this is because the prospect of serving ones community appeals to people of strong character and high ideals. (two traits I think most police personnel I have met have)
And just so you know, they are regular people, like me and you. Not some political machine bent on making life miserable for the common man. Sorry to give a soapy story, but that really did help me get an even more favorable impression of the police, and I think goes to demonstrate the type of people most of them are.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I'd like to say that I'm suprised but I'm not.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5998930.ece

When I was a nipper my dad was a copper and I'm sure would never behave like these policemen did. The police are a joke these days. As for those PCSOs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_Community_Support_Officer) I wouldn't pay them in washers, absolute waste of space.

I'll recount a tale of an incident that happened last summer. I was walking the dogs in the park with my wife. We passed some youths, one of which said something to my wife. She is no shrinking violet and began to remonstrate with them. As we started to walk away a brick came hurtling over our heads and landed just in front of us, followed by several others. I got my moblie phone out and rang the police. The youths saw this and ran off. About ten minutes later two bobbies turn up. I told them what had happened and was shocked at what they said.

"Did any of the bricks hit you?" I said that they hadn't. "In that case no crime has been committed." No crime? Chucking half charlies at people heads is legal? It gets better. I said that I was going to photograph them so that the police could catch them. I was told that if I had taken a photograph that they would arrest me on charges of being a peadophile. I was dumbstruck.


That is astonishing. I'll point out that I've seen video of US police preventing a guy from rescuing his dog from an icy lake. When he tried to get past, they arrested him. But nothing like preventing rescue of people.


Then you are one step away from private armies...

Oh wait, we have those too... and they are working out remarkably well aren't they?

Actually, there are some libertarian arguments for private police forces, because those would be easier to control by the citizens than the government enforcers we currently have.


Sure you have some isolated cases of corruption or misuse of power, it happens anywhere where people have power, but the good ones do their best to keep it undercontrol and punish the bad ones for it. No matter what you want to say about American policemen, if the Fire Department could not get there in time, they would give their lives if necassary to rescue a burning human. 99% of them are really true protectors of the people, and deserve more respect than they get for it. Considering the number of policemen in America (and the limited funding they get), there is VERY little corruption or abuse of power.

False. Abuse is systemic throughout all police in this country. I know a guy applying for a police job and he's told me departments will just fake physical training results if the officer isn't in shape. Because having an officer who's failed can be a liability.

The good ones keep it under control? Again false. Here's the story of one police department that kept 50 pounds of explosives in their building, near apartments (http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=5970514). A huge potential danger. The higher ups knew about it.

So one 20 year veteran, named officer of the year in 2004, went to the feds, who ordered it moved immediately. He also fights other problems. So what does the department do? It fires him.


The weapon is not there for the ordinary citizen, so he has no need to fear it.

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

I'm sorry, but that is the response such a statement deserves. Should I link to the diabetic man who got tasered (http://www.digtriad.com/news/features/article.aspx?storyid=115481&catid=216) by police for not complying, because he was in diabetic shock?! Or maybe link to all the innocent people slaughtered (http://www.cato.org/raidmap/) by police on raids?

Nothing to fear. I can't fully express my contempt for that statement.


People like the one in the video posted above are murderous scum, and should be put to death for being murderous scum. Other police men and women should not be discriminated against for it though.

But they will not be, because they are police. And the other police will protect and stand by them, and that is why they should be discriminated against.


And the stereotype that bothered me was not what was said about the English police, but that American police are "beat you up first, ask questions later" police. It simply is not true, and is an unfair characterization of a broad group of people (in this way no better than racism or sexism).

In my state, two police officers beat up a man at his home after he refused, legally, to let them in. They claimed he assaulted them by closing the door on one officers foot. That officer had to put his foot in the doorway because the 'rickety wooden steps" to the door made him lose his balance. Problem was that their were no wooden steps, just a concrete ramp that's been there for two decades. The police establishment stood 100% behind those abusive officers.

But maybe a better phrase would be "ask questions and then beat you up".


How bad was the fire when this occurred? Would the people - with no equipment - have possibly got inside to get the persons, only to have their shoes / clothes melt and burn, killing them and those they are trying to save?

Maybe. Maybe it would have been as suicidal as going into a grain tower after someone.

Or maybe not, and those children would not have burned to death. Either way, my life is my own. I am not a ward of the state, and as such I should be free and able to try and save people, even at danger to myself. At the end the question is if we are a free people or merely peasants under the state.

CR

[Meneldil]

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

I'm sorry, but that is the response such a statement deserves.

You can admit that you miss Tribesman :no:

[Crazed Rabbit]

Lol. I don't think good ole tribesy would be arguing my side in this, though. I do wonder where he's gone...

CR

[InsaneApache]

Perhaps he joined the police! :laugh4:

[Major Robert Dump]

I have never met more supportive people in my entire life, and seriously doubt you would find them most other lines of work. I think that this is because the prospect of serving ones community appeals to people of strong character and high ideals. (two traits I think most police personnel I have met have)
And just so you know, they are regular people, like me and you. Not some political machine bent on making life miserable for the common man. Sorry to give a soapy story, but that really did help me get an even more favorable impression of the police, and I think goes to demonstrate the type of people most of them are.

Fair enough. It mostly boils down to personal experience, and I would agree that the good cops I know are generally very good people, which is why I don't understand why they sometimes defend the bad, ugly, negligent cops so diligently. Actually, I do understand why they do it, but I think it's wrong, and it only serves to make the situation worse. And the reactions of otherwise decent police to the criticism, lawsuits and charges against cops who acted with high negligence or malice has shocked me. And I'm not talking about just national stories, I'm talking about local stuff involving cops with a very clear and well-known pattern. Again, personal experience.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Nevermind, crazed is here

[Vuk]

False. Abuse is systemic throughout all police in this country. I know a guy applying for a police job and he's told me departments will just fake physical training results if the officer isn't in shape. Because having an officer who's failed can be a liability.

lol CR, I think it is my turn to laugh now. First of all, there are all different departments that have VERY little communication with each other. Second of all, your story of one man's experience at one department hardly goes to prove that the entire police force is corrupt.

The good ones keep it under control? Again false. Here's the story of one police department that kept 50 pounds of explosives in their building, near apartments (http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=5970514). A huge potential danger. The higher ups knew about it.

So one 20 year veteran, named officer of the year in 2004, went to the feds, who ordered it moved immediately. He also fights other problems. So what does the department do? It fires him.

Again, there was a corrupt department, that means that the tens of thousands of departments across America are all linked together in a massive conspiratorial chain of corruption? Sorry, I do not buy it.

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

I'm sorry, but that is the response such a statement deserves. Should I link to the diabetic man who got tasered (http://www.digtriad.com/news/features/article.aspx?storyid=115481&catid=216) by police for not complying, because he was in diabetic shock?! Or maybe link to all the innocent people slaughtered (http://www.cato.org/raidmap/) by police on raids?

Nothing to fear. I can't fully express my contempt for that statement.

lol, I think that CATO link tells us a lot about where you stand CR. :P As I said, the police are made of people, and bad people can get in. Look at all the things with Postal workers, should we all hate Postal workers and be afraid of them now?
And those statistics you posted, does it include the death of innocents at the hands of criminal perpetrators? Betya 10 to 1 it does. They put their lives on the line and do their best. Sure, some times innocents get killed, and some times officers do. Because the police try to rescue innocents and it goes wrong and the innocents die, does that mean the police are bad? No, because they were trying to rescue them. Do your statistics take that into account? So what would you rather have, an imperfect police force that does its best to protect you from armed criminals, or an unarmed police force that cannot do crap for anyone, not even themselves? Suddenly people should be afraid of armed police because police raids have gone wrong? THAT is laughable. I think people should be more afraid of the armed criminals who neccesitate police intervention.


But they will not be, because they are police. And the other police will protect and stand by them, and that is why they should be discriminated against.

lol, again, because there are corrupt policemen, you should discriminate against all police men and women? Do you realise that is exactly like the argument of a racist or antisemite? "Black men and women have been commiting crimes and blacks in their community have tried to defend them, they are corrupt and evil! Let's discriminate against them!" See what I mean? Your argument (the way that you described it) amounts to nothing better than racism IMHO. I am sorry if you find that offensive, I do not intend it to be so. I just hope that by me pointing that out, you may give some serious thought to your position. It is not rational to hate a whole group of human individuals because of the actions of other members of that group. Peace. :bow:

Vuk

[Major Robert Dump]

Wow, Vuk, now you diss CATO, too. Yes, that evil, evil, CATO. I suppose the Heritage Foundation is more to your liking. Oh wait, they think the drug war is bogus and no-knock raids are BS, too.

You're so pro-police you can't even admit that certain practices are commonplace, and that other practices -- like no knock raids -- serve absolutely no good but do costs lives unnecessarily. The power wielded by law enforcement is awesome, their word is the law, which is all the more reason to be aggravated when this power is abused. In just about any other job in the world negligence and major mistakes are punished. But in law enforcement, people don't lose their jobs or get charged nearly enough. The video CR posted in the other thread where the cop falsely accuses the guy whose nose he broke of assaulting a police officer, and the guy was facing ten years, and was only let off the hook when the owner of the building released a video of the incident....and no charges, no firings. The cop blatantly fabricated the incident out of spite, almost sending a man to prison....no charges, no firings.

If a bus driver runs a stop sign and gets t-boned, kapow, negligent homicide. If a cop shoots a man in the back he just told to stand up, kapow, he was stressed out, acquittal. In most cases he wouldn't even be charged because in most cases it wouldn't be on video and his word would have been the gospel. All I can say is thank god for dash cams and thank god for security cams and thank god for cell phone cams, because if it weren't for those our prisons would be even more over crowded with people who don't deserve to be there.

I don't think anyone here is arguing to take guns away from police. But the fact that they have guns is all the more reason for them to be held to the same, if not a higher standard, than joe regular.

The fact that there are plenty of good cops is no reason for people to muzzle their criticism or act like nothing is wrong. In fact, it's all the more reason to.

Waco, Texas, dude. Waco, Texas.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

lol, I think that CATO link tells us a lot about where you stand CR. :P As I said, the police are made of people, and bad people can get in. Look at all the things with Postal workers, should we all hate Postal workers and be afraid of them now?
And those statistics you posted, does it include the death of innocents at the hands of criminal perpetrators? Betya 10 to 1 it does. They put their lives on the line and do their best. Sure, some times innocents get killed, and some times officers do. Because the police try to rescue innocents and it goes wrong and the innocents die, does that mean the police are bad? No, because they were trying to rescue them. Do your statistics take that into account? So what would you rather have, an imperfect police force that does its best to protect you from armed criminals, or an unarmed police force that cannot do crap for anyone, not even themselves? Suddenly people should be afraid of armed police because police raids have gone wrong? THAT is laughable. I think people should be more afraid of the armed criminals who neccesitate police intervention.
You didn't even look at the link, did you. The CATO map lists 333 incidents of paramilitary raids where:

An innocent died - 43
The raid was on an innocent person - 25
A police officer was killed or injured - 23
A nonviolent offender was killed - 173
"Other examples of paramiliary excess" - 55
"Unnecessary raids on doctors or sick people" - 14

And this misses the overal context of the CATO paper - that we allow the police to use military-style tactics and weaponry too often. To quote the CATO site,


What does this map mean?

The proliferation of SWAT teams, police militarization, and the Drug War have given rise to a dramatic increase in the number of "no-knock" or "quick-knock" raids on suspected drug offenders. Because these raids are often conducted based on tips from notoriously unreliable confidential informants, police sometimes conduct SWAT-style raids on the wrong home, or on the homes of nonviolent, misdemeanor drug users. Such highly-volatile, overly confrontational tactics are bad enough when no one is hurt -- it's difficult to imagine the terror an innocent suspect or family faces when a SWAT team mistakenly breaks down their door in the middle of the night.

But even more disturbing are the number of times such "wrong door" raids unnecessarily lead to the injury or death of suspects, bystanders, and police officers. Defenders of SWAT teams and paramilitary tactics say such incidents are isolated and rare. The map below aims to refute that notion.

Of the 43 cases where an innocent died in a paramilitary raid, I don't know how many involved actual violent criminals. But I would wager it isn't all of them. And then there's still 290 other cases of botched raids.



lol, again, because there are corrupt policemen, you should discriminate against all police men and women? Do you realise that is exactly like the argument of a racist or antisemite? "Black men and women have been commiting crimes and blacks in their community have tried to defend them, they are corrupt and evil! Let's discriminate against them!" See what I mean? Your argument (the way that you described it) amounts to nothing better than racism IMHO. I am sorry if you find that offensive, I do not intend it to be so. I just hope that by me pointing that out, you may give some serious thought to your position. It is not rational to hate a whole group of human individuals because of the actions of other members of that group. Peace.
You don't choose to be black or Jewish. You do choose to be a police officer, which may (or may not) involve a system that as a whole protects its members from accountability in wrong-doings, which is particularly offensive when they are given a monopoly on force in society.

[rory_20_uk]

:focus:

~:smoking:

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

The topic seems to be about ineffective (and possibly criminal) police actions. I think we're on track...

[tibilicus]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7990423.stm

I feel with this news that the topic should be BUMPED....