Fuller Malarkey
Regular Member
Stay on topic. This thread ain't about you. What you assert about how wonderful you are has nothing to do with the topic. More red herring from the poster child for asshattery.
Last edited:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
An officer's duty to care for and protect people
- Thread starter PALO
- Start date
Stay on topic. This thread ain't about you. What you assert about how wonderful you are has nothing to do with the topic. More red herring from the poster child for asshattery.
Primus
Regular Member
Wimwam is that you? Did you change you name on here?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
Take it easy, guys. Or, the moderator will be along shortly to lock the thread, calling it a train-wreck, etc. Don't give him a reason/excuse.
Primus
Regular Member
Agreed. This subject has been beat to death but it should remain open for those who want to discuss it. It would probably help to relax with the bashing and to stay out of conversations between individuals.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
The OP was a trainwreck from the gitgo. As far as beating it to death you are still trying to push what is already spelled out as not true in SCOTUS decisions. Besides the fact that police cannot stop crime, it is impossible. Criminals do not intentionally commit crimes in front of police, and when seconds count, police are minutes away.
The OP and you are trying to stick your foot in the wrong door selling what most of us are not willing to buy.
Primus
Regular Member
Your right ww I want you to believe in me. I want to be your hero. I want you to be comforted in knowing me and the op are like batman and robin luriking around your village keeping you safe. I'm trying to sell you a sense of security and peace of mind.
Ok back to reality..... I already acknowledged the case law is true. I conceded that many many posts ago. You have yet to admit that your case law means squat to myself or the guys I work with. Your hung up on the case law probing we don't HAVE to do anything. So hung up you refuse to realize we do things anyways.
So be it. I've had my say. The 4 or 5 guys who disagree will always disagree with me. I'm ok with that. As I said I'll still go to work tomorrow and enjoy when I help people. And relax with the "oh you think your a hero" bs. I'm not a hero and never said I was in any way. I just actually get to help people and enjoy doing so. No more no less.
If you need a hero go talk to a firefighter they'll gladly tell you they are heros lol
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Reasonable
New member
Holy cow. Bunch of badge envy on this thread.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
Relevance? You have all the time in the world to type about these experiences of yours but I can't for the life of me figure out how you would have time to do it. So I simply asked if all cops steal WiFi at night to brag on forums about how they interpret an individual's exercising the right to remain silent as an admission of guilt like you do. How am I off topic? Do you sleep or do you get jacked up on Monster so you can tell us about all of your exploits?
Your right ww I want you to believe in me. I want to be your hero. I want you to be comforted in knowing me and the op are like batman and robin luriking around your village keeping you safe. I'm trying to sell you a sense of security and peace of mind.
Ok back to reality..... I already acknowledged the case law is true. I conceded that many many posts ago. You have yet to admit that your case law means squat to myself or the guys I work with. Your hung up on the case law probing we don't HAVE to do anything. So hung up you refuse to realize we do things anyways.
So be it. I've had my say. The 4 or 5 guys who disagree will always disagree with me. I'm ok with that. As I said I'll still go to work tomorrow and enjoy when I help people. And relax with the "oh you think your a hero" bs. I'm not a hero and never said I was in any way. I just actually get to help people and enjoy doing so. No more no less.
If you need a hero go talk to a firefighter they'll gladly tell you they are heros lol
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Don't be disrespecting firerfighters son. While you're screaming into your radio that you're pulling back to a safe distance, they're ripping the doors off a burning vehicle that will likely explode and leave their family without a father/mother. That's what a hero does. Do you have problems with paramedics too?
Superlite27
Regular Member
My apologies. Please forgive my ignorance. The "rantish" quality of the OP simply gave the appearance of "butt-hurt" as it appeared unsolicited. The courtesy of starting a new thread instead of derailing another speaks volumes. Is the regulation requiring courtesy right next to the one requiring heroism?
Dammit, Citizen! Stop being reasonable and injecting calm entreaties to keep a cool head into this discussion!
You're supposed to be hot-headed. Try putting more emotion and less reason into your comments so eye95 will actually have some evidence of his previous claim instead of the exact opposite.
Last edited:
Maverick9
Regular Member
Yeah, I was wondering that, too.
Primus
Regular Member
Win wag.. where did I ever say that a right to remain silent is an admission of guilt? Either your intentionally twisting or your just not understanding the process. Either or fits I think.
And for the record no I really don't sleep much and yes I do enjoy monsters.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Primus
Regular Member
Relax. I know a lot of firefighters. If you were either one or knew either one personally you'd know we like to jab each other in a loving way.
Why are there fire fighters? So cops can gave hero's too. Lol
I have no qualms with anyone in any profession. Especially the guys that when I get hurt come fix me. That's akin to giving your medic crap. Sure you do it outta love but never disrespect.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Fuller Malarkey
Regular Member
So, everything is as it was before this "plea to emotion" was posted?
Still no case law that indicates the individual has a realistic expectation to police care and protection?
Still no statutory legislation indicating the individual has a realistic legal expectation for police protection and care?
Still no constitutional expectation for the individual to have police protection and care?
How much does response time and "care" hinge on collective bargaining? A local union wanting to put more cops on, slowing response times might be their means of justifying the "need". Meaning we have no way of knowing what may be taking precedence over our "protection".
I doubt anyone now believes one can call 911 and request that "one of the true boy scouts" be dispatched. You'll probably get what you get.....possibly some self pitying, low impulse control with lil' weiner complex and resentments about being "told what to do" that directs their resentment towards whoever they feel privileged to direct it to.
"We took an oath" Remember, a lot of the same that took that oath repeated marriage vows.
http://www.policeone.com/health-fitness/articles/1182709-Sex-lies-police-work/
Not all police officers became police officers for altruistic reasons. Some are just plain thugs. It's unrealistic to believe they are putting themselves out there for any other reason than to establish dominance through force, and won't enter a situation where the odds aren't in their favor through manpower and firepower.
Some can't produce anything and need the structure of someone telling them when to show up, what to wear, when to take break, when to punch out.
Some joined to feed their ego. "Look at me, aren't I precocious"? And there's Camp Counselor Dudley Do-Right, grew up and his uncle gets him a job where his OCD can be channeled.
Somewhere in there some came to work to do a job. And I respect that. But please. What are their numbers?
And among the rest are some flat out cowards. Just a reality. What are the percentages of those less than altruistic? I will bet money that number is not single digit. Of those that are just followers, putting in time? Again, not likely single digit. Percent that are cowardly? The total of those unknowns comprise a large percentage of those who's values we are supposed to trust with our safety.
Not very compelling information to base an expectation of "protection" on.
Still no case law that indicates the individual has a realistic expectation to police care and protection?
Still no statutory legislation indicating the individual has a realistic legal expectation for police protection and care?
Still no constitutional expectation for the individual to have police protection and care?
How much does response time and "care" hinge on collective bargaining? A local union wanting to put more cops on, slowing response times might be their means of justifying the "need". Meaning we have no way of knowing what may be taking precedence over our "protection".
I doubt anyone now believes one can call 911 and request that "one of the true boy scouts" be dispatched. You'll probably get what you get.....possibly some self pitying, low impulse control with lil' weiner complex and resentments about being "told what to do" that directs their resentment towards whoever they feel privileged to direct it to.
"We took an oath" Remember, a lot of the same that took that oath repeated marriage vows.
http://www.policeone.com/health-fitness/articles/1182709-Sex-lies-police-work/
Not all police officers became police officers for altruistic reasons. Some are just plain thugs. It's unrealistic to believe they are putting themselves out there for any other reason than to establish dominance through force, and won't enter a situation where the odds aren't in their favor through manpower and firepower.
Some can't produce anything and need the structure of someone telling them when to show up, what to wear, when to take break, when to punch out.
Some joined to feed their ego. "Look at me, aren't I precocious"? And there's Camp Counselor Dudley Do-Right, grew up and his uncle gets him a job where his OCD can be channeled.
Somewhere in there some came to work to do a job. And I respect that. But please. What are their numbers?
And among the rest are some flat out cowards. Just a reality. What are the percentages of those less than altruistic? I will bet money that number is not single digit. Of those that are just followers, putting in time? Again, not likely single digit. Percent that are cowardly? The total of those unknowns comprise a large percentage of those who's values we are supposed to trust with our safety.
Not very compelling information to base an expectation of "protection" on.
77zach
Regular Member
Though I've been somewhat inured to political slavery living in Amerika, where people care more about "the game" than freedom, I'm not sure how an adult can come to the conclusion that police exist for any other purpose than to serve and protect the state. It's obvious that revenue generation and body production (for the prison unions/contractors) is their raison d'etre, with individual prime directive Officer Safety. That is why the ruling class wants them around. Modern policing is a scam, and if I could choose not to pay for their proactive "services" I eagerly would. Actually, I would pay them to stay at the police station unless called out after a serious crime. That way, I could open carry in my fascist state and travel by car at a reasonable speed without having to worry about getting robbed at gun point.
OC for ME
Regular Member
The "no duty to protect" is nothing but a means to indemnify cops before they screw-up. The courts have consistently held that QI mitigates the loss of vitally needed funds to maintain the state police forces. I have trained my kids to call the cops if the bad man tries to get into the house while i and my DW are not at home. When the cops show up they are trained to do exactly what they are told to do or the cops will hurt them.
Superlite27
Regular Member
Bingo! +1000......
A couple of weeks ago, my 22 year old daughter was driving back to western Illinois from Indiana. Unfortunately, she had forgotten to keep her license plates current, and had no proof of insurance on her. (She did have current insurance, but did not have the card in her possession.)
As she was passing through Springfield Illinois, she was stopped by a local officer.
The penalty for the aforementioned beurocratic atrocities was to HAVE HER VEHICLE TOWED......AND BE TRANSPORTED TO A LOCAL GAS STATION AND LEFT TO HER OWN DEVICES.
Hooray for the heroic officers! They saved the innocent motorists of Illinois the potential risk of sharing the road with a girl driving a car with the wrong colored sticker on her license plates!
The inevitable result was a $125 ticket, a $100 license renewal fee, a $200 impound fee, a $75 "processing" fee ($25/day) and the wonderful experience of having a 22 year old frightened girl feel extremely vulnerable for the three hours until 9:30 p.m. at a shady gas station until i could drive there and pick her up.
I'm not really disturbed by the money. That's the bureaucratic price paid for not maintaining the proper forms, paperwork, and other devices of licensure and registration required by the empire.
However, I'm just curious how the people are protected and served by LEAVING A 22 YEAR OLD GIRL ALONE AT A GAS STATION HALFWAY ACROSS THE STATE FROM HER HOME?
Is she included in the people that the police are supposed to protect and serve? Or is it just everyone else who might be forced to deal with the horrible atrocity of someone driving a car with the wrong colored sticker?
77zach's post above might appear as a paranoid rant or unwarranted "cop bashing" to some. Especially to various biased posters here. But for those who have had loved one's ditched at questionable gas stations, some folk's attempts to validate "protect and serve" is woefully inadequate.
77zach
Regular Member
Sorry your daughter got "served". Primus will be along shortly to say that procedure was followed, or that it could have been worse and that the highwaymen did her a favor by not kidnapping her and taking her to jail.
I don't think there will be a violent revolution in this country, at least not one that increases liberty and prosperity. But if there is, I am going to have a good time, right until the end.
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
Here is where police officers are responsible, once a police officer takes a person into custody they ARE responsible for their safety. Your daughter should have been transported to someplace safe. Sometime in the late 70s a police officer stopped a MC rider in Sherman Il for DUI, BUT released him anyway. He went on to get in an accident, I don't remember the outcome but the officer was sued for his negligence.
We were made to understand that once a person was in our custody/detained we were responsible for them. And IMO that would include dumping a young lady in someplace unsafe.
Primus
Regular Member
Nothing to refute or defend them for. Story was too vague to even make an opinion on. It was a gas station . Ok? So we have 24 hr gas stations with benches and coffee and bright lights and multiple people attending the place. Not a blade place to get stuck.
Did the officer drive her there and drop her off? Was it the only place he knew that was open in his jurisdiction that was open? Did he offer her to hang out at the station but she said no?
Cmon guys..... I always say theres a million better stories of police being evil and malicious. Maybe the cop could have warned her and not cited her. Don't have any idea what they do or why they did it.
I'm under the impression this place she was stopped was "half way across the state"? So the cop needed to leave her somewhere.
And you own a person once you take custody. When you release them not unless it was something you knew of while in your custody. So the DUI thing? Yea. A girl being released then getting murdered later? Not so much. Not unless you could prove the cop knew she was LIKELY to get murdered.
We are just what iffin for the hell of it now.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk