Anyone been a police officer?

Either way, there is no way to prove "the very fact that they overwhelmingly DO NOT report fellow officers", so point is moot. Once special by the Washington Post is no doubt evidence that this stuff goes on, but not proof that it happens in overwhelming numbers.  

Choga

[QUOTE="Choga"]

Either way, there is no way to prove "the very fact that they overwhelmingly DO NOT report fellow officers", so point is moot. Once special by the Washington Post is no doubt evidence that this stuff goes on, but not proof that it happens in overwhelming numbers.

SIapshot

If its a fact then I'm sure you can prove it. Just remember, showing me an article about a cop who doesnt report crimes wont suffice. Accually, showing me anything other than a chart or a graph showing the number of cop reported crimes as opposed to crimes cops have not reported, but have been discovered, will be the only means of proving this. 

F*** tha police comin straight from the underground/

I just got it bad cuz I'm brown.

LUI360

im brown and im going to the police academyafter i move back to florida in may. 

So now your advocating civilians taking the law into their own hands? This will never work because there will be people who take it too far, and then we will be living in a state of total anarchy. Now before you go comparing this situation to your "Blue Wall of Silence", police officers answer to the government, while in a state of total anarchy, civilians asnwer to nobody. 

Choga

Go ahead and look it up. If you use deadly force against someone who is threatening you, and you had a route of escape, be it a back door, or just running away from the bullet, then you will be charged with a crime. The only exceptions are for when you are confronted in your own home, and even then you have to prove that you felt that your life was in danger.

[QUOTE="LUI360"]

F*** tha police comin straight from the underground/

I just got it bad cuz I'm brown.

wiiforever25

I was quoting N.W.A's classic jam "F*** Tha Police".

im brown and im going to the police academyafter i move back to florida in may. 

[QUOTE="Choga"]

So now your advocating civilians taking the law into their own hands? This will never work because there will be people who take it too far, and then we will be living in a state of total anarchy. Now before you go comparing this situation to your "Blue Wall of Silence", police officers answer to the government, while in a state of total anarchy, civilians asnwer to nobody.

SIapshot

Go ahead and look it up. If you use deadly force against someone who is threatening you, and you had a route of escape, be it a back door, or just running away from the bullet, then you will be charged with a crime. The only exceptions are for when you are confronted in your own home, and even then you have to prove that you felt that your life was in danger.

You misunderstood my post. If the law permitted all citizens to be able to use deadly force, there would surley be great injustices, even greater than your supposed "Blue Wall of Silence". In the "Blue Wall of Silence" case, the officers do in fact answer to the government, because in the event they are discovered, they will be in a world of ****. In the "self defence" situation, you will have citizens running around, shooting people who want to steal a few dollars, or some of their belongings. I dont think police officers should use deadly force on petty criminals, but should use as much force as is necessary to aprehend a criminal.

If its a fact then I'm sure you can prove it. Just remember, showing me an article about a cop who doesnt report crimes wont suffice. Accually, showing me anything other than a chart or a graph showing the number of cop reported crimes as opposed to crimes cops have not reported, but have been discovered, will be the only means of proving this. 

Choga

[QUOTE="Choga"]

If its a fact then I'm sure you can prove it. Just remember, showing me an article about a cop who doesnt report crimes wont suffice. Accually, showing me anything other than a chart or a graph showing the number of cop reported crimes as opposed to crimes cops have not reported, but have been discovered, will be the only means of proving this.

SIapshot

Therefore, it makes your arguement a moot point, since you admit there is no way to prove it. Oh and, if we did it with the Mafia, we can do it with police (that is, if what you say is accually true). 

You misunderstood my post. If the law permitted all citizens to be able to use deadly force, there would surley be great injustices, even greater than your supposed "Blue Wall of Silence". In the "Blue Wall of Silence" case, the officers do in fact answer to the government, because in the event they are discovered, they will be in a world of ****. In the "self defence" situation, you will have citizens running around, shooting people who want to steal a few dollars, or some of their belongings. I dont think police officers should use deadly force on petty criminals, but should use as much force as is necessary to aprehend a criminal.

Choga

[QUOTE="Choga"]

You misunderstood my post. If the law permitted all citizens to be able to use deadly force, there would surley be great injustices, even greater than your supposed "Blue Wall of Silence". In the "Blue Wall of Silence" case, the officers do in fact answer to the government, because in the event they are discovered, they will be in a world of ****. In the "self defence" situation, you will have citizens running around, shooting people who want to steal a few dollars, or some of their belongings. I dont think police officers should use deadly force on petty criminals, but should use as much force as is necessary to aprehend a criminal.

SIapshot

Your right, there would be an IMMENSE amount of murder. 

Therefore, it makes your arguement a moot point, since you admit there is no way to prove it. Oh and, if we did it with the Mafia, we can do it with police (that is, if what you say is accually true). 

Choga

[QUOTE="Choga"]

Therefore, it makes your arguement a moot point, since you admit there is no way to prove it. Oh and, if we did it with the Mafia, we can do it with police (that is, if what you say is accually true).

SIapshot

Maybe because cops accually benefit society, not like a scum-bag mafioso. Now, this doesnt excuse corrupt cops, but like I said, cops make a difference. Instead of the government concentrating on busting a cop on speeding, or beating a criminal, it should concentrate on more important things. 

[QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

You misunderstood my post. If the law permitted all citizens to be able to use deadly force, there would surley be great injustices, even greater than your supposed "Blue Wall of Silence". In the "Blue Wall of Silence" case, the officers do in fact answer to the government, because in the event they are discovered, they will be in a world of ****. In the "self defence" situation, you will have citizens running around, shooting people who want to steal a few dollars, or some of their belongings. I dont think police officers should use deadly force on petty criminals, but should use as much force as is necessary to aprehend a criminal.

Choga

Your right, there would be an IMMENSE amount of murder. 

wrong again

and again

Legal defensive violence by private citizens armed with firearms is a significant form of social control in the United States. Evidence indicates that private gun use against violent criminals and burglars is common and about as frequent as legal actions like arrests, is a more prompt negative consequence of crime than legal punishment and is often far more severe. In 1980 about 1,500-2,800 felons were legally killed by gun-wielding civilians, about 8,700-16,000 were nonfatally wounded and guns were used defensively about one million times. Victim resistance with guns is associated with lower rates of both victim injury and crime completion for robberies and assaults than any other victim action, including nonresistance. Survey and quasi-experimental evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that the private ownership and use of firearms deters criminal behavior.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

Therefore, it makes your arguement a moot point, since you admit there is no way to prove it. Oh and, if we did it with the Mafia, we can do it with police (that is, if what you say is accually true).

Choga

Maybe because cops accually benefit society, not like a scum-bag mafioso. Now, this doesnt excuse corrupt cops, but like I said, cops make a difference. Instead of the government concentrating on busting a cop on speeding, or beating a criminal, it should concentrate on more important things. 

[QUOTE="Choga"][QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

You misunderstood my post. If the law permitted all citizens to be able to use deadly force, there would surley be great injustices, even greater than your supposed "Blue Wall of Silence". In the "Blue Wall of Silence" case, the officers do in fact answer to the government, because in the event they are discovered, they will be in a world of ****. In the "self defence" situation, you will have citizens running around, shooting people who want to steal a few dollars, or some of their belongings. I dont think police officers should use deadly force on petty criminals, but should use as much force as is necessary to aprehend a criminal.

SIapshot

Your right, there would be an IMMENSE amount of murder.

wrong again

and again

Legal defensive violence by private citizens armed with firearms is a significant form of social control in the United States. Evidence indicates that private gun use against violent criminals and burglars is common and about as frequent as legal actions like arrests, is a more prompt negative consequence of crime than legal punishment and is often far more severe. In 1980 about 1,500-2,800 felons were legally killed by gun-wielding civilians, about 8,700-16,000 were nonfatally wounded and guns were used defensively about one million times. Victim resistance with guns is associated with lower rates of both victim injury and crime completion for robberies and assaults than any other victim action, including nonresistance. Survey and quasi-experimental evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that the private ownership and use of firearms deters criminal behavior.

It appears that you have accually made an effort to compile some evidence and I respect that. But how in the world is 17,800/1,000.000 legal kills/injuries a good figure? This just goes to show that the other 982,220 people who used violence were arrested. Now dont get me wrong, people have a right to defend themselves and whatnot, but it is obviously wiser (based on the figure you provided) to let the police do the "dirty work" than risk you yourself getting arrested. 

[QUOTE="Choga"][QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

Therefore, it makes your arguement a moot point, since you admit there is no way to prove it. Oh and, if we did it with the Mafia, we can do it with police (that is, if what you say is accually true).

SIapshot

Maybe because cops accually benefit society, not like a scum-bag mafioso. Now, this doesnt excuse corrupt cops, but like I said, cops make a difference. Instead of the government concentrating on busting a cop on speeding, or beating a criminal, it should concentrate on more important things.

How about instead of trying to arrest police officers, the government severly punishes gang violence and criminals? Surely it is more important to get the "thugz" either arrested/killed than to do the same to police officers. I would rather have one of the people in my neighborhood killed than have a croocked cop put in jail. Maybe you have never experienced these kinds of people, but they are more of a threat to citizens than a croocked cop. 

It appears that you have accually made an effort to compile some evidence and I respect that. But how in the world is 17,800/1,000.000 legal kills/injuries a good figure? This just goes to show that the other 982,220 people who used violence were arrested. Now dont get me wrong, people have a right to defend themselves and whatnot, but it is obviously wiser (based on the figure you provided) to let the police do the "dirty work" than risk you yourself getting arrested. 

Choga

[QUOTE="Choga"]

It appears that you have accually made an effort to compile some evidence and I respect that. But how in the world is 17,800/1,000.000 legal kills/injuries a good figure? This just goes to show that the other 982,220 people who used violence were arrested. Now dont get me wrong, people have a right to defend themselves and whatnot, but it is obviously wiser (based on the figure you provided) to let the police do the "dirty work" than risk you yourself getting arrested.

SIapshot

If you have ever been robbed, you would know that if they had a weapon, you give them what they want. There is no use in trying to be superman and risking your own life for some money. I have experience with this, and I know.  

How about instead of trying to arrest police officers, the government severly punishes gang violence and criminals? Surely it is more important to get the "thugz" either arrested/killed than to do the same to police officers. I would rather have one of the people in my neighborhood killed than have a croocked cop put in jail. Maybe you have never experienced these kinds of people, but they are more of a threat to citizens than a croocked cop. 

Choga

[QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

It appears that you have accually made an effort to compile some evidence and I respect that. But how in the world is 17,800/1,000.000 legal kills/injuries a good figure? This just goes to show that the other 982,220 people who used violence were arrested. Now dont get me wrong, people have a right to defend themselves and whatnot, but it is obviously wiser (based on the figure you provided) to let the police do the "dirty work" than risk you yourself getting arrested.

Choga

If you have ever been robbed, you would know that if they had a weapon, you give them what they want. There is no use in trying to be superman and risking your own life for some money. I have experience with this, and I know.  

[QUOTE="Choga"]

How about instead of trying to arrest police officers, the government severly punishes gang violence and criminals? Surely it is more important to get the "thugz" either arrested/killed than to do the same to police officers. I would rather have one of the people in my neighborhood killed than have a croocked cop put in jail. Maybe you have never experienced these kinds of people, but they are more of a threat to citizens than a croocked cop.

SIapshot

I disagree, one lie will land one innocent person in jail. One criminal will terrorize hundreds of people in his neighborhood. So many neighborhoods in NY are trash because of drug dealers, petty criminals, murderers, and whatnot. If all of these cocoroaches were to die, then my neighborhood would be a safer place. Once we have the street trash done with, then we can focus on arresting cops. If 1000 cops die, there will be 1000 more criminals to take their place. I didnt presume to tell you what you have experience, I simply stated that maybe you have never experienced the uselessness of a street thug. Your sollution of citizens taking things into their own hands is an illogical one. Cops are there for a reason, to get rid of the filthy maggots that infest MY streets and terrorize and murder MY friends. Frankly, I could care less if one innocent person went to jail, if that meant 1000 criminals dead.  

[QUOTE="Choga"][QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

It appears that you have accually made an effort to compile some evidence and I respect that. But how in the world is 17,800/1,000.000 legal kills/injuries a good figure? This just goes to show that the other 982,220 people who used violence were arrested. Now dont get me wrong, people have a right to defend themselves and whatnot, but it is obviously wiser (based on the figure you provided) to let the police do the "dirty work" than risk you yourself getting arrested.

SIapshot

If you have ever been robbed, you would know that if they had a weapon, you give them what they want. There is no use in trying to be superman and risking your own life for some money. I have experience with this, and I know.

Im not totally ruling out the use of lethal force by citizens. If the street thug wanted sexual pleasure, then by all means use lethal force if it is available. But on a larger scale, the use of lethal force will ussually land you in trouble. 

[QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

How about instead of trying to arrest police officers, the government severly punishes gang violence and criminals? Surely it is more important to get the "thugz" either arrested/killed than to do the same to police officers. I would rather have one of the people in my neighborhood killed than have a croocked cop put in jail. Maybe you have never experienced these kinds of people, but they are more of a threat to citizens than a croocked cop.

Choga

I disagree, one lie will land one innocent person in jail. One criminal will terrorize hundreds of people in his neighborhood. So many neighborhoods in NY are trash because of drug dealers, petty criminals, murderers, and whatnot. If all of these cocoroaches were to die, then my neighborhood would be a safer place. Once we have the street trash done with, then we can focus on arresting cops. If 1000 cops die, there will be 1000 more criminals to take their place. I didnt presume to tell you what you have experience, I simply stated that maybe you have never experienced the uselessness of a street thug. Your sollution of citizens taking things into their own hands is an illogical one. Cops are there for a reason, to get rid of the filthy maggots that infest MY streets and terrorize and murder MY friends. Frankly, I could care less if one innocent person went to jail, if that meant 1000 criminals dead.  

I was a police for Halloween couple years backFlow4U

[QUOTE="Choga"][QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="Choga"]

How about instead of trying to arrest police officers, the government severly punishes gang violence and criminals? Surely it is more important to get the "thugz" either arrested/killed than to do the same to police officers. I would rather have one of the people in my neighborhood killed than have a croocked cop put in jail. Maybe you have never experienced these kinds of people, but they are more of a threat to citizens than a croocked cop.

SIapshot

I disagree, one lie will land one innocent person in jail. One criminal will terrorize hundreds of people in his neighborhood. So many neighborhoods in NY are trash because of drug dealers, petty criminals, murderers, and whatnot. If all of these cocoroaches were to die, then my neighborhood would be a safer place. Once we have the street trash done with, then we can focus on arresting cops. If 1000 cops die, there will be 1000 more criminals to take their place. I didnt presume to tell you what you have experience, I simply stated that maybe you have never experienced the uselessness of a street thug. Your sollution of citizens taking things into their own hands is an illogical one. Cops are there for a reason, to get rid of the filthy maggots that infest MY streets and terrorize and murder MY friends. Frankly, I could care less if one innocent person went to jail, if that meant 1000 criminals dead.

Oh I aint from NY? What part of NY are you from buddy? Upstate? Buffalo? Long Island? I bet your from some rich whiteboy neighborhood with no idea how it is to be terrorized day after day after effing day by the same damn people because the cops dont have enough "power" to kill these bastards. I live in damn Queensbridge buddy, one of the most criminally infested neighborhoods in the country. Have you even heard of Queensbridge? Or are you just pulling all of this NY stuff outta your ass.

Anyone took this job before?ycdeo