posted
Bigotry is not the right word here. You should stop assuming people have extreme viewpoints and viewpoints that are incapable of changing. I don't think anyone has advocated a hatred of the police as a system (outside of the band).
If we poll a district, and the majority of citizens have an "I hate cops!" attitude, I see that as an indicator there is something wrong with the police, not as an indicator the majority of citizens are sore about getting caught, blaming the police for unjust laws, or falling victim to their own stereotyping and bigotry. We don't even have to say a majority of the people. If a majority of the poor, racial minorities, or any other group report dissatisfaction with the police, something could be wrong there.
You'll have to explain why mistrust of the police in corrupted areas in harmful, and how "sweeping the anti-police attitude as the bigotry it is" will help solve anything, especially in problem areas.
What do you think the real problems are? You've ended your post with a very bold statement, but I can only foresee your plan (the public sweeps away their anti-police bigotry and adopts a more police-friendly bigotry) as solving some minor superficial problems at best, and aggravating the situation at worst. Sure, it would promote the general moral of officers, and mean a lot to the officers that aren't corrupt, but I don't see it solving anything. Misplaced reliance and trust would allow corrupt and apathetic officers to more easily abuse people. When you talk about the issue, I see people, most likely people unaffected by the problems, brushing off the needs of a minority in favor of a more friendly world view. You aren't helping anything by calling us bigots, you're just trying to stay in your comfort zone and pretend that our problems don't effect you.
It's difficult for a minority group to influence policy, especially when that group happens to be the poor. Sure, we could go on an outright civil-rights style movement to try to get our voices heard, but many people lack the conviction to do that, in part because they are so used to their voices being ignored.
Posts: 247 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by vonk: First off, the use of 'hate' in the phrase is similar to the use of 'hate' in the phrase "I hate asparagus." I don't really hate it, just the idea of it makes me unhappy and my experience in the past with it has not been pleasant.
posted
I'm torn on this. In my hometown, an utterly boring and completely safe suburb, the general feeling was that they just didn't have enough to do. I also got pulled over once because my father neglected to renew the inspection on his car, and the officer proceeded to give me a $200 ticket while kindly saying he had let me out of two additional tickets that would have totaled $400. Considering many of the other families we knew who had been pulled over for this same reason and received only a warning and stern instructions to renew their inspection....well, who knows.
Living in Washington is a bit of a different story. First of all, we have ten times as many cops as other cities and ten times as many *types* of cops as other cities. We have, in no particular order, the metro police, the Park Police, the Capitol Police and the Secret Service. All of whom prowl all over town and all of whom have powers of arrest, traffic ticketing, etc etc. As a single girl living in a the city and not engaging in any illegal activities, I'm happy when I see metro police patrolling my neighborhood because it makes me feel safer. Because I work on Capitol Hill and don't do anything illegal, I really like the Capitol Police because I see the same ones every day posted outside offices. Same goes for the Secret Service; I've become friendly with a number of the officers, and since their purpose is protection and I'm generally innocuous things work out well.
But I was driving one time and I accidentally didn't yield in a roundabout to a Park Police guy. I would have hated to get a ticket for it, but, well, I screwed up, and I would have understood. But instead the guy just pulled me over and screamed at me through the window about how stupid I was, then drove away. Guess he didn't want to deal with the hassle of actually ticketing me. He just wanted to yell. *That* really made me mad.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't hate the police at all and generally respect them. But then I'm half white and middle class; unlikely to be racially profiled in any way.
I respect police officers because in my mind they aren't closely associated with the shortcomings of the political establishment (perhaps a naivety). I make a distinction between the director of police for example, and the average officer.
In my experience police officers have been amiable people anyway. Some have a swaggering gait, but otherwise I haven't run into any that were on a power trip.
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Verily, I'm not sure if your second to last post on the last page was a response to my post or not, but I'll respond as if it were.
I think the OPer was interested in why people would say "I hate the police." Most, if not all, of the people that have admitted to uttering the phrase have been quick to point out that it is mostly hyperbole. It's something to say when you feel like there's a bad situation and there's nothing you can do about it. If you want to understand why people say it, maybe you should reread what people have posted, instead of insinuating that anyone that says "I hate cops" must be a bigot and/or racist.
Also, again, most of the comments haven't been about breaking the law and not liking the consequences. It's been about multiple, individual police overreacting to situations and/or the attitudes with wich many are observed doing their job.
And I don't think this is specific to the police profession, as you suppose. Many, many a time when I hang up after a telemarketer calls I say "I hate telemarketers." Rest assured, I'm no bigot, I don't hate telemarketers and I have never burned anything in their yards. I have heard many people say "I hate the dentist," "I hate lawyers" or "I hate those kiosk sales people at the mall." I think your anger may be a little out of proportion to what is really being expressed by the phrase "I hate [blank]": frustration, helplessness, annoyance, defensiveness.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am made uncomfortable by anyone with power over me. That includes the cops.
But I usually don't hate them unless they're blocking traffic. (why do people slow down to 40mph in a 65 just becuase a cop is around?)
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kasie H: But I was driving one time and I accidentally didn't yield in a roundabout to a Park Police guy. I would have hated to get a ticket for it, but, well, I screwed up, and I would have understood. But instead the guy just pulled me over and screamed at me through the window about how stupid I was, then drove away. Guess he didn't want to deal with the hassle of actually ticketing me. He just wanted to yell. *That* really made me mad.
I must say, only as one being somewhat familiar with the area, though admittedly more familiar with the next large-ish city to its north-ish vector up the 9-5, that I cannot understand for the life of me why the thought had not occurred to you that the officer was fully prepared to do what may have needed to be done with summonses, but chose to do otherwise despite his annoyance because he could possibly have been under the impression that you were in all other manner harmless and not requiring the need for such a punitive action.
It is not unheard of, in my experiences in conversing on the subject with officers and former officers from various cities across the country, for a police officer to perform a traffic stop for an otherwise minor violation if there are factors involved that could lead one to believe there may be worse behavior taking place. This type of assessment, to the officer who is on a patrol in a car, bicycle, or on foot, is partially trained and often followed up in workshops given to their local precinct regarding specific problematic areas relevant to their city and locale. I had no noticable amount of surprise to hear more than one officer speak in an unfriendly manner of how they knew a fellow officer of the law who was known to have performed the "driving while black" traffic stop on at least one confirmed instance. This is an unfortunate verification that, no matter the profession being discussed, there are bound to be individuals who reflect poorly on their fellows who share the same or similar responsibilities within the field.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Methinks thous doest protest a wee bit too much, considering the ratio of honest to corrupt is likely not equal to your ratio of brownies to anger.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is not unheard of, in my experiences in conversing on the subject with officers and former officers from various cities across the country, for a police officer to perform a traffic stop for an otherwise minor violation if there are factors involved that could lead one to believe there may be worse behavior taking place.
In many areas it's not just not unheard of, but standard operating procedure for anything short of reckless or drunk driving. There are officers whose primary purpose for traffic stops is to make a quick reasonable suspicion/probable cause determination and then either wave them on (admonishing them to slow down/get the car inspected/register/etc.) or attempt to get consent to search.
It's surprisingly effective, not least because people with drugs in the car often think the officer already knows and think the officer will search anyway. It is generally targeted at specific areas and at specific legal but suspicious driving behavior (sudden U-turns or turns into a laundromat after seeing the cruiser, or circling the block repeatedly).
Absent something like a missing kid where the officers want to be able to eliminate as many cars as quickly as possible, I generally suggest people not give consent to search, even if they have nothing to hide. Do it politely and don't try to stop them from searching - just say "I do not consent" and obey their instructions regarding where you stand, hands in pockets, etc.
One thing that is often unappreciated is how scary a traffic stop is from an officer's perspective. There's a reason they control every aspect of the stop as much as possible - to minimize the chances they'll either get shot or have to shoot someone.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
To what Dagonee said: I can fully concur that just as much has been related to me from professionals in the law enforcement and criminal justice fields.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've come into contact with the police only ever indirectly. The first time we were teenagers engaged in a scavenger hunt which often (although it didn't for us) resulted in theft and vandalism and underage alcohol and unsafe driving.
Although we hadn't done anything wrong a policeman pulled us over and proceeded to swear angrily in a clear attempt to intimidate us away from our scavenger hunt. He kind of picked the wrong group to swear at because we had no intention of stealing. The poor guy at the wheel was really worried.
I thought that the policeman's attitude was over the top, but justified to an extent. Other groups of the scavenger hunt WERE rampaging around, stealing various things. Instead of doing whatever it is they normally do, these police were forced to do babysitting duty for a bunch of graduating teenagers. I would be annoyed.
I can see, though, how such an incident- we weren't doing anything illegal, hadn't, and really had no intention of doing so- could be the key to the beginning of a bad relationship with the police because this guy was probably one of the angriest most intimidating people I've ever come into contact with.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In your hindsight, to which you admit included others in different groups engaging in unwarranted behavior, could you not come to an equal conclusion that said officer was not able to discern whether you were also engaged in such behavior just from looking at you?
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sure. That leaves the question of why said officer lost his temper and started swearing at a bunch of kids that had not done anything wrong. Several people have alluded to this before, but a big problem that some people have with cops' attitudes is that they see a criminal in everyone and tend to treat them in that manner.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I do understand that hate is undoubtably too strong a word but fitting with the thread, indirectly abstractly if a cop does harm through graft, corruption, and laziness for no purpose other then selfish reasns then abstractly Ill support measures that ensure said cops get caught and punished and will complain when justice isnt meated out.
However I perfectly accept grey areas. as described in James Clevels Taipan novels regarding Hong Kong and its description of the HK Police, I can unstand why moderate corruption that is essneitally a means to and end ( preserving order and protecting the public interest ) and to me in that situation tolerable and abstractly acceptable while of course not actively or publicly encouraged.
IP: Logged |
posted
I think Teshi is right...a big part of people's dislike of police probably has a lot to do with the intimdating tactics they use, often on people who have done nothing wrong.
I don't like it when anybody tries to intimdate me. I once worked at a concert where the club sent over their LARGEST, TALLEST, HUGEST, SCARIEST BOUNCER THE SIZE OF A TREE to record my starting inventory counts so that the club would know how much of a cut they got. That was so unnecessary.
quote:I think Teshi is right...a big part of people's dislike of police probably has a lot to do with the intimdating tactics they use, often on people who have done nothing wrong.
I agree, when used, it's unpleasant for the victim of the tactic. But I'll be honest: until we start paying them better, I'm comfortable (and this is speaking as someone who has been the 'victim' of this tactic as well) permitting them that method as a means of protecting themselves, and making their jobs easier.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Several people have alluded to this before, but a big problem that some people have with cops' attitudes is that they see a criminal in everyone and tend to treat them in that manner.
I think this comes from them constantly seeing the worst that humanity has to offer. In other words, I don't think people with this attitude become cops, I think cops tend to acquire this attitude.
I am personally grateful to cops. They put their lives on the line every day and I think of it as a noble career. All of my experiences with the police have been positive. At the same time though, I'm a nerdy looking white girl and I strongly suspect that police are kinder to me than they might be to others that don't look so innocuous.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's true, I'm not. However, you also said the cop was a female, blunting some of the edge you get by pointing out that you're also female. But on an individual basis-which is where cops generally live, btw-a female can make their life just as hard and dangerous as a male can, both immediately and in the future.
---------
Also, you certainly did do something wrong in the situation you outlined, unless you meant "not too close" to mean "not illegally close" when you turned out in front of the officer. I'm operating from that assumption, because you said she said she could write you a ticket and take you to jail, and you didn't (in the post) dispute that claim.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: That's true, I'm not. However, you also said the cop was a female, blunting some of the edge you get by pointing out that you're also female. But on an individual basis-which is where cops generally live, btw-a female can make their life just as hard and dangerous as a male can, both immediately and in the future.
---------
Also, you certainly did do something wrong in the situation you outlined, unless you meant "not too close" to mean "not illegally close" when you turned out in front of the officer. I'm operating from that assumption, because you said she said she could write you a ticket and take you to jail, and you didn't (in the post) dispute that claim.
She definitely had no cause to take me to jail. And as I said before, I think the fact that it was a female cop made it WORSE. But that's the thing - you don't have to be a man to intimidate a woman, especially not a skinny, young woman. I'm not a very scary-looking person, and I'm not much of a fighter. I wasn't driving recklessly, nobody was hanging out the window, we didn't reek of booze or pot...we were just LOST (and I told her we were lost). There was no reason for her to behave that way.
Also, although you are not actually saying so, by pointing out that you're a skinny young woman and it doesn't take much to intimidate you, it appears that you're implying that a large, muscular young man should not receive the same treatment from a cop for the same offense.
I'm just speaking to appearance here, not what you actually said, please bear that in mind.
quote:There was no reason for her to behave that way.
Perhaps she just wanted to frighten you sufficiently so you wouldn't pull out ahead of cars at an intersection in the future, pH.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Perhaps she just wanted to frighten you sufficiently so you wouldn't pull out ahead of cars at an intersection in the future, pH.
How is scaring people part of a police officers job? Prevent people from breaking the law and capturing people who broke the law, obviously, but scaring people?
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
You seem to be getting a little bent out of shape about this, and I don't know why..so okay. You either aren't intimidated by police ever or don't mind when they try to intimidate you. I do. You apparently think it's justifiable in most situations. I don't. I've been written tickets by cops who've been perfectly nice to me, and I didn't hold the ticket against them. In this particular instance, my problem was with her attitude and her behavior.
posted
My issue with being pulled over but not ticketed wasn't the fact that I was pulled over - it was how the police officer treated me. Literally yelling and berating me as "stupid and incompetent". I mean...professionalism, anyone? This was like sanctioned road rage.
Edit: Also, it was approximately 9:30 a.m., I was drinking coffee (he yelled at me for that, too: "You're just going on, drinking your coffee, you just f*ing cut me off!") and driving at a relatively low speed. I'm almost certain he didn't do it because he thought I was drunk.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
You seem to be getting a little bent out of shape about this, and I don't know why..so okay. You either aren't intimidated by police ever or don't mind when they try to intimidate you. I do. You apparently think it's justifiable in most situations. I don't. I've been written tickets by cops who've been perfectly nice to me, and I didn't hold the ticket against them. In this particular instance, my problem was with her attitude and her behavior.
OK, it wasn't in 2006. Chances are, though, that the language of the law hasn't changed...and no, I'm not particularly interested in digging up the exact year and local law on the books for your incident. If you're willing to hide behind that, fine, but you certainly sound like you were guilty of reckless driving.
It's strange that you're accusing me of getting bent out of shape over this...I've been polite and reasonable about the whole thing. Can you point to something that says I am, please?
Also, I've said nothing that would lead anyone to think I think intimidation is justifiable in most situations, unless someone is going to just guess at my opinions. I've also never said I don't mind when I'm being intimidated. For what I actually said...:
quote:I agree, when used, it's unpleasant for the victim of the tactic. But I'll be honest: until we start paying them better, I'm comfortable (and this is speaking as someone who has been the 'victim' of this tactic as well) permitting them that method as a means of protecting themselves, and making their jobs easier.
I said I was comfortable with it, in the sense that I, as a citizen, am comfortable with it. I should have been more specific and pointed out I was speaking in broader terms.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
By that definition, we're all too worked up about quite a lot of discussions here on Hatrack, pH.
--------------
quote:I'm sorry, but that really sounds like justification to me.
Huh? She was saying it was unjustifiable, I was pointing out a means by which it could be justifiable. Obviously it's a justification, vonk.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kasie H: My issue with being pulled over but not ticketed wasn't the fact that I was pulled over - it was how the police officer treated me. Literally yelling and berating me as "stupid and incompetent". I mean...professionalism, anyone? This was like sanctioned road rage.
Edit: Also, it was approximately 9:30 a.m., I was drinking coffee (he yelled at me for that, too: "You're just going on, drinking your coffee, you just f*ing cut me off!") and driving at a relatively low speed. I'm almost certain he didn't do it because he thought I was drunk.
I couldn't speak for that individual myself, but it could very well have been frustration on top of work related stress. The whole stop itself could have been justified as making you later for work if one was assuming regular business hours. As for the screaming, I agree that it's unprofessional.
quote:Originally posted by pH: ...this was not in 2006.
You seem to be getting a little bent out of shape about this, and I don't know why..so okay. You either aren't intimidated by police ever or don't mind when they try to intimidate you. I do. You apparently think it's justifiable in most situations. I don't. I've been written tickets by cops who've been perfectly nice to me, and I didn't hold the ticket against them. In this particular instance, my problem was with her attitude and her behavior.
-pH
Intimidation does indeed play a role in it, and were I in a similar situation I may have even been less intimidated due to my familiarity with some who are in law enforcement. There are demographical differences for who tends to be more intimidated in those cases, and you have every justification feeling intimidated (and possibly unfairly so) in your description. I can sympathize due to my own sense of intimidation in airports. I tend to get by assuming the best of intentions until I get a feeling of something otherwise.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I went to England the first thing I did was have a car accident. It was clearly my fault, being unfamiliar with "roundabouts" and driving on the wrong side of the road.
The other guy hit me, and he could have avoided it, but I was definitely in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he was furious.
When the police showed up, I thought they were crossing guards. They didn't carry guns, and their only uniform was slacks, white shirts and a sash across their shirt. They must have had badges or something, but I don't remember them. They were so polite that I was reminded of waiters. They calmed the other guy down, without using any of the American cop swagger or intimidation. They had us exchange information, verified our paperwork, and sent the other guy off.
After he was gone I explained that I really didn't understand what I had done wrong, since I saw no traffic control device or sign in front of the roundabout. The other guy had entered the roundabout after I had, but I was blocking his exit on the other side (to my left), and he had come from my right, so I was supposed to yeild right of way to him. They took their time explaining this to me, and even got out a traffic manual to show me diagrams.
Several kids I went to high school with became cops, and I've had conversations with them at reunions and so forth. I definitely get the feeling they've been indoctrinated to operate under the assumption that everyone is guilty, and that macho strong arm attitude is a requirement.
Funny thing is, there was a cop when I was a teenager named Dixon Smith. I never met him, but all the kids who grew up to be cops had had run-ins with him. He had a reputation of being able to talk with teenagers and defuse the situation without arresting them. Once I was talking to two cops and they asked me if I knew him. I didn't answer, but got a kind of smirk on my face, because I'd heard all the stories. They said "why do they always do that?" And kept prying me for information. I had never met him, so I really didn't have anything to say, but they went on about how he was always solving crimes, trying to be a good cop, as if that was a bad thing. I never figured that out.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blayne Bradley-what in the world were you trying to say when you wrote this?
quote: I do understand that hate is undoubtably too strong a word but fitting with the thread, indirectly abstractly if a cop does harm through graft, corruption, and laziness for no purpose other then selfish reasns then abstractly Ill support measures that ensure said cops get caught and punished and will complain when justice isnt meated out.
I am not the grammar queen by any means, but that "sentence" does not make any sense.
Posts: 306 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've had a few good experiences with police and a few bad ones. The problem comes that the upside is normally very small (unless you're in a hostage situation or being attacked and are saved) and the downside is huge, even for a law-abiding person in day to day life.
The few times I've had "good" interactions with police, it was when I made an honest, non-dangerous mistake, and they let me off the hook. Essentially they used their discretion to be friendly, and I was no better off than I was before.
The few times my friends or I have had "bad" interactions with police, it's involved screaming, threats, violation of civil rights, and obvious abuses of power for no good reason.
I don't hate the police, but as an arm of the legal system, I distrust and fear them much more than I respect them.
On a personal basis, many are great people, but their job encourages them to distrust the public, treat people as criminals and as potentially dangerous, and use force, up to and including killing, in their every day jobs.
That's a great deal of power and responsibility for one person to have. Some people who have the job should not. Some people can normally handle it, but make mistakes. I would imagine that most of the people who would be best suited for the job have no desire to take it, and many of the people who are ill suited to the job have a great desire for the power and authority it holds.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:What traits are policemen selected for, and what kind of people are drawn to the position? In my experience, they are generally not the brightest and tend towards smug.
Given your past history (around here, anyway) of voicing openly anti-white racist views, anti-establishment views, and generally anti-The Man views (frequently in an openly smug, condescending, morally superior tone), the first thing I wondered when I read your post was, "How was your behavior when you encountered police officers?"
quote:They are the enforcing arm of a flawed legal system, using violent solutions to address moral problems. In a way, they are our legally sanctioned terrorists, and I don't think that we should be so supportive in our public policy of threatening people to be nice.
This is so much bu@#!@#. Not the part about being the enforcing arm of a flawed legal system, because obviously they are acting in support of a flawed legal system. What human system isn't? No, the part that's excrement is the part about legally sanctioned terrorists. While undeniably there are police who use terror as a means to an end (and do so unjustifiably, I mean, not in an attempt to apprehend a criminal threatening someone's life, for example), indicting them as a whole is complete nonsense.
You can see this with even a casual examination of how a police officer spends their day. Most police officers-the vast majority, in fact, across the nation-don't spend their time Shield style thumping heads and shaking down informants, dropping the hammer to make their job easier down the line. Generally they spend their time, you know, in their cars driving, and responding to calls.
I am in complete, unashamed support of a public policy of threatening people who are violent themselves, or who prey on other citizens. You are too, if you're willing to be honest with yourself. If you've just gotten mugged and the guy's running away, you don't want him to politely yell down the street to stop that guy, you want him to run up, tackle that jerk, and get back your wallet.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm. Well, to be honest, I did so for two reasons. One, it didn't ding the Trolldar nearly as much as it did you, apparently. That's genuinely surprising to me, given our past differences. I don't mean that to be snarky, but I would've simply said previously that it was unlikely that in a social or political discussion, there would be something left-leaning that you found trollish and absurd, and unworthy of response, and I didn't.
So...well, I apologize then for my incorrect misconception. My bad. The other reason is because someone I respect has personal reasons for not voicing their opposition to the statement Irami made, and since I read it I had intended to at least voice some opposition to it, since that person couldn't. I just got caught up in the Florida reckless driving stuff is all.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry. I've got to be faster on deleting posts that I rethink. Basically, I said, why would you engage him? What purpose do you think it serves. Irami was the guy who says something really stupid/apalling. It stops conversation for a bit, everyone stares for a second, and then they move on having actual sensical conversation. The only thing that elevated him above that was Rakeesh actually addressing his statement.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't mean that to be snarky, but I would've simply said previously that it was unlikely that in a social or political discussion, there would be something left-leaning that you found trollish and absurd, and unworthy of response, and I didn't.
You apparently know very little about me.
---
edit: I don't particularly like people saying ridiculous things and it matters little to me what "side" these statements belong to. But that doesn't actually damage the forum or make productive discussion more difficult. What does is people addressing them like they merit a serious response, especially when this addressing takes on a provocative, spoiling for a fight aspect as yours often seem to do.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That probably has something to do with why I used words like "apologize", "misconception", and "my bad", Mr. Squicky.
Jutsa, before you go trotting that bullcrap out, let's just remember who called who a Fox News fan in that thread that got deleted, hmm? And then just drop it. I have no interest in furthering our disagreements in this thread, unless it's actually topical.
And unlike you, if I say I won't respond to you anymore, I'll mean it Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I appreciate that, Rakeesh. I should have acknowledged your apology.
I was trying to emphasize that the statement you made pretty much has to come from someone who really has very little understanding of why I do things.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I was trying to emphasize that the statement you made pretty much has to come from someone who really has very little understanding of why I do things.
Hey, I admit to that.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I stand by what I said. When people act "in line" out of fear of negative martial consequences, that's a form of terrorism and not something we should be proud of. It's a hallmark of a criminal justice system that trafficks in fear, and yes, I think that there is something politically and morally lazy about this approach. I think the same thing about parents who overprescribe threatening and hitting children. There are a lot of them, and I hope a great majority of them will come around.
There is a quote for Dr. Zhivago that's stuck with me for years:
"If the beast who sleeps in man could be held down by threats—any kind of threat, whether of jail or of retribution after death—then the highest emblem of humanity would be the lion tamer in the circus with his whip, not the prophet who sacrificed himself. But, don’t you see, this is just the point—what has for centuries raised man above the beast is not the cudgel but an inward music: the irresistible power of unarmed truth, the powerful attraction of its example."
We aren't so enlightened such that we fully understand this inner music Pasternak speaks of, but I think that we should spend less energy exualting the ways and means of our penal system, and understand the whole business as shameful and at best, a necessary evil.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I lived in Washington State I had several unpleasant interactions with the police.
On one occasion I was pulled over because of a malfunctioning head light and issued over $400 dollars in bad citations. When I began to cry, the officer told me that if I did not calm down he would arrest me for assaulting a police officer. (note I was simply crying, nothing else, no swearing, no aggressive action). In the end a judge overturned all of the citations but it did cost me half a day of my time to get it over turned.
On several other occasions I was stopped and detained by police for over 30 minutes without any explanation. A friend of mine was arrested for swearing at a cop who nearly ran him over. The officer was backing his car through an intersection and ran a stop sign. For swearing at the cop, my friend was charged with reckless driving (on a bicycle) and assaulting an officer. Both charges were thrown out by a judge but not until my friend had spent the night in jail.
On couple of occasions when I actually needed the police such as when I was robbed, the police were rude and indifferent.
In other places where I've lived my interactions with the police have been largely neutral or positive, but it only take one incident in which a police officer misuses his authority to sour a person against the police. I'm a middle class well educated white woman, yet I've had enough such incidents to be suspicious of police. I can't imagine what it must be like if you are poor or a minority or just an improperly dressed male.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
