Protecting And Serving: Cop (mis)behavior and consequences general discussion

Typhonis

Well-known member
Well if found guilty of withholding evidence then the prosecutor must face an inquiry into all of his former cases to see if he did the same thing in those cases as well. Each subsequent discovery adds time to the sentence he faces.
 

Wilykit

Well-known member


Indiana has a good model for how to level the playing field against illegal searches and seizures by police; lethal self-defense against illegal actions by cops is now legal in the state.

Problem is a lot of people have no idea what is legal and what isn't. I don't want my daughter or my little brother being shot because some idiot didn't think they should get a speeding ticket.
 

bintananth

behind a desk
Problem is a lot of people have no idea what is legal and what isn't. I don't want my daughter or my little brother being shot because some idiot didn't think they should get a speeding ticket.
I think some of that law was prompted by the Carmel Police Department deciding to go after and arrest an off-duty State Trooper because he and his car "didn't fit the neighbourhood" with "driving while black" tossed in for fun.
 

bintananth

behind a desk


A guy, standing still with his hands on his head, is tased, and when that doesn't work, kicked in the back for no reason. Also, my new canned response for anyone saying "Just comply!" They'll beat you anyway.

That's cop misbehavior and in no way indicative of how polite society should work.
 

Wilykit

Well-known member
Maybe voters should do their jobs and vote in politicians who actually give a rip. Are there bad police out there? Sure there are, I'm married to one ( thankfully retired) and raised 2 more. You want to put the blame where it really belongs. Blame the DAs that won't prosecute the bad ones and the judges that refuse hand down harsh sentences. Blame the politicians that hire incompetent police chiefs whose main qualification are their race, gender or who they know. Blame the the ones who weren't willing to tell the unions no. Blame the ones who won't raise the education standards who say they want more training but won't implement it because God forbid they (the politicians) actually solve a problem instead of creating more.
Edit. Oh my God!.😱 I just reread this post it sounds like I'm saying my husband was a bad cop and I raised two more bad cops!!! My husband was an exemplary police officer and so are my little brother and my daughter.🫣
 
Last edited:

Wilykit

Well-known member
The police unions are a big part of it. Not only do they fight to keep the bad ones, but they also actively try to get rid of the good ones.
The problem with the police unions isn't a police problem, it's a union problem. The police unions act and are run just like any other union. The cure is to treat them like a union. Call their bluff tell them no. If they go on strike so be it. Call in the State police or the National Guard. It might suck but the Police Unions are not there for us. Just like the UAW isn't there for Ford or GM. They exist for their members.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
The problem with the police unions isn't a police problem, it's a union problem. The police unions act and are run just like any other union. The cure is to treat them like a union. Call their bluff tell them no. If they go on strike so be it. Call in the State police or the National Guard. It might suck but the Police Unions are not there for us. Just like the UAW isn't there for Ford or GM. They exist for their members.
No. It's a public sector union problem. No public sector union works well (well, it works well for the unionized, but it's shit for everyone else in society), because unlike private sector unions, there's no pushback from management. In a private sector, the owners/management want to lower costs and keep the company running as well as possible, so there is pushback against union desires, and things work out somewhere in the middle. Meanwhile, with a public sector union, there's little to no desire to cutdown on costs, and worse, if a politician is negotiating, they align in desires of giving unions everything, as the union is a ton of votes. The only pushback will be temporary outrage, which cannot compete with the sustained push of a public sector union.

Basically, a public sector union is a cancer that must be completely banned. If not fully eradicated, it will metastasize.
 
Last edited:

Cherico

Well-known member
No. It's a public sector union problem. No public sector union works well (well, it works well for the unionized, but it's shit for everyone else in society), because unlike private sector unions, there's no pushback from management. In a private sector, the owners/management want to lower costs and keep the company running as well as possible, so there is pushback against union desires, and things work out somewhere in the middle. Meanwhile, with a public sector union, there's little to no desire to cutdown on costs, and worse, if a politician is negotiating, they align in desires of giving unions everything, as the union is a ton of votes. The only pushback will be temporary outrage, which cannot compete with the sustained push of a public sector union.

Basically, a public sector union is a cancer that must be completely banned.

FDR actually warned people that this would be the case.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top