Originally Posted by
MuscleSportMag
GF - You apparently are very knowledgeable in certain aspects of general law, which you have shown in this and other threads. But all your experience seems to be from the 'other side,' if you will. So your argument is one-sided and short sighted.
I'm not knocking your points, merely disputing some of them. We are all entitled to our opinions, so you seem to be giving yours. You obviously have a problem with the police, and even went as far as knocking them for only needing a HS diploma in some agencies, further stating that their income and health benefits should be questioned. In most areas of employment, even a GED HS diploma is suffice, and medical coverage is part of the union's package.
In NY, the cops earn one of the lowest salaries in the country as far as comparisons go for the type of place they work in and need more than a HS diploma to get on the job and then to go higher in rank, even more college credits are a requirement. Talk to some of them about their medical, dental, optical and prescription coverage. I'm sure that you'll be surprised to hear how thin it is.
I am assuming that in your work, you have run into slime-ball lawyers (most likely defense attorneys), haven't you? Just as there are bad apples in that field, some cops will make bad headlines, which causes the trickle-down effect on the majority.
We all appreciate your pointing out the difference between a suspect and a criminal, but you're talking semantics here. Without the cop effecting an arrest at the street level, then there wouldn't be any opportunity to give the 'suspect' his day in court. And just to be picky, if someone is caught committing a crime, for all intents and purposes, they are a criminal. The police officer is making the arrest on Probable Cause, which is the burden of proof needed and more than an 'alleged' act being committed, especially in cases where the PO is a witness to the crime.
In conclusion, to touch base on your 'appropriate force' comment, everyone has a different threshold for what would be deemed necessary to pursue, catch, control and place a 'suspect' under arrest. If you're 6'5", 250 and the 'alleged' bad guy is 5'5 and 110 soaking wet, then - barring the presence of any weapons - the bigger guy should make it a quick ending. But if the roles were reversed, why would you have a problem if the cop needed to use non-lethal force, either macing, clubbing or punching someone enough times to effect the arrest? Going home to your family should be paramount, especially to a cop. You have no right to patronize that statement, as you attempted to do. I would love to see if you would have had the balls to tell the co-workers and family of the deputy killed by that savage in the video clip that he was just an "unintelligent, overpaid cop that should be thankful he received benefits." Unfortunately, that cop won't have to worry about finger-pointers such as yourself anymore, or if you deem his shooting back "excessive force." No, he won't have to worry about people like you pulling out the "Force Continium."
You stated that you have proven your point "beyond a reasonable doubt," but in my opinion - which you have the right to disagree with - all you have proven is that you're going through life with your eyes half-closed. Keep sticking up for the animals that fight with the cops. They'll do you a lot of good.
Reply With Quote
I'll take it into consideration. I really just don't want to waste my time with you and do all that writing that I did that one night because it is honestly a spiral that goes nowhere. But good luck with your efforts.
