What's Wrong With American Cops?

[Bigends]

Elroy Blue said:

Bigends said:

Exactly my point - different cultures - that doesnt happen over here - US public have the Police they ask for if thats what theyre dealing with.
Got any decent UK examples like this?
Easy to criticise from behind the safety of a keyboard.

If you were a Police Officer as you claim, then you'd be well aware that violence after traffic stops is frequent and often. Thankfully firearms are rare, but knives, scredrivers and just plain old fists are common. The only difference is we don't release our videos to You Tube.

So I don't sit 'behind the safety of a keyboard'. I'm out doing it every working day and night. But you'd class me as a 'traffic' Officer and you've already given your opinion on those.

Cadet 73-75
Shift/Response driver 75-89
89-2000 Response/Neighbourhood cop
PSU level 2 for over 20yrs involved in most of the major 1980's stuff,football spotter for major league club.PR24 /Quikcuf instructor,then finally 5 yrs on volume crime unit managing 23 staff executing warrants, legal visits and prisoner productions plus managing /executing forensic idents and arrests. I'm, currently my force crime manager and am well in touch with outside affairs and have a number of good mates on roads policing - what is my opinion of them? Yes there were some rough traffic stops - frequent and often though? Never drove a desk.

[340600]

Bigends said:

Yes there were some rough traffic stops - frequent and often though? Never drove a desk.

If it gives some perspective I've only been assaulted three times in four years but two of them were by occupants of vehicles I had stopped, and I used to work response in a city centre on weekends for quite a while.

The US is a different world if we're talking about guns and there's absolutely no way I would want to work as a Police officer out there, nothing good can come from carrying them IMO. I've actively turned down the chance to work firearms in this country for that very reason.

[XCP]

Tannedbaldhead said:

I notice many of the posters are getting overly hung up on whether or not "Soccer Mum's" tasering was justifiable or not. What would be more interesting would be Matt and Elroy's take on the treatment of the Paramedic, Fire Chief and Canadian tourist. Is the USA so different from the UK that we just don't get how unacceptable it is to defy a cop under any circumstances? That said, were the cops right to treat them the way they did? Would a cop be justified in going into "You wanna go to jail boy?" mode when a cyclist points out his bike hasn't a speedo when the cop asks "you know how fast you were going?".

Am asking this regularly and no-one is answering

Clearly an overreaction. Reinforces the view that it's best not to muck them about in my view.

[9mm]

Tannedbaldhead said:

I notice many of the posters are getting overly hung up on whether or not "Soccer Mum's" tasering was justifiable or not. What would be more interesting would be Matt and Elroy's take on the treatment of the Paramedic, Fire Chief and Canadian tourist. Is the USA so different from the UK that we just don't get how unacceptable it is to defy a cop under any circumstances? That said, were the cops right to treat them the way they did? Would a cop be justified in going into "You wanna go to jail boy?" mode when a cyclist points out his bike hasn't a speedo when the cop asks "you know how fast you were going?".

Am asking this regularly and no-one is answering

You're banging your (bald) head against the wall mate.

The US is a more violent place and the recourse to violence much swifter than it is over here. Coupled with a "I am the law" and "don't answer back" philosophy that runs right through their uniformed services and it's all easy to understand.

Long may it continue the way it is here, where we don't have towns that are the private fiefdoms of some local sheriff and people cannot easily be incarcerated on a whim/for crossing a cop. Moreover we know that the Police are public servants and accountable to us, not the other way round.

[spitsfire]

XCP said:

Clearly an overreaction. Reinforces the view that it's best not to muck them about in my view.

Very true - do not argue back or piss them off under any circumstances, or you'll likely end up regretting it.

I could be wrong, but I think that most of the posters on the 'anti' side of the argument here are opposed to the idea that the public should fear the police, and that officers should not have wide discretion to impose pain or injure as a form of punishment.

We're in danger of getting locked into a never-ending circular argument of cops do what they do to keep safe, and it shouldn't be questioned vs cops should try to de-escalate a situation rather than aggravating it, shouldn't use force unless it's absolutely necessary, and that force should be proportionate.

To be fair, there are some merits to both arguments, but I've noticed that - and this is an observation rather than a dig before Snowboy starts - Elroy, Matt, and Snowboy don't seem to have checked out the links posted that might undermine their argument.

Matt - I appreciate that, with a daughter in the Fuzz, you want to defend and explain police behaviour you'd consider reasonable in light of what you've probably seen and heard about, but you've repeatedly made stated that bad cops get forced out and US cops don't cover for other cops engaged in inappropriate/unlawful behaviour. The New Yorker article and This is American Life podcast demonstrate that this is not the case, and they do so fairly emphatically. One report from the rural South, one from NY. The parallels between the two suggests there is an institutional failure in US law enforcement.

Snowboy - I think we've done that one to death

Elroy - Please do have a look at the article and podcast I've mentioned above. As a serving officer, I'd be interested to know your views on whether you think these stories call into question the attitudes and philosophy of US law enforcement. Would you be okay with serving on a police force where this sort of thing was the norm and implicitly endorsed from on high?

[spitsfire]

This quote about the officer who tasered Israel Hernandez also suggests that something is very rotten in US law enforcement:

Huffington Post said:

Mercado was placed on paid leave after the incident, which will be the focus of an independent review by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement as well as an investigation by Miami Beach Police and local prosecutors. Internal Affairs files obtained by The Huffington Post show Mercado has been accused of excessive force in the past, particularly a 2008 incident during which two Iraq war veterans were beaten -- and one tasered -- in their South Beach hotel room.

Records show Mercado was also alleged to have broken a man's nose while brawling off-duty, disciplined for failing a drug test, investigated for arresting a woman trying to ask for help getting home in 2012, and caught up in a scandal over questionable overtime. The drug test failure was the only accusation to stick against Mercado after the Iraq veterans dropped their complaint because of the damage a court battle would have done to their careers and families.

I simply don't understand how a police force can continue to employ an officer with a track record like that and not feel ashamed. If US cops have to be on high alert for any signs of danger from MoPs at all times, shouldn't they be able to see a 'red flag' when he's sharing the same locker room? Again, this comes back to Lord Acton - "There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it". The above quote demonstrates that cops in the US do literally 'get away with murder', the public are afraid of criticising the cops (even war veterans), and I'd suggest it's because the police are treated as, and behave like, an absolute moral authority.

[carinaman]

You get bad cops both sides of the Atlantic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22165242

Covering up wrongdoing protects the 'brand' and the careers of officers. If it means using the rules to excuse or justify wrong doing they probably will, no differently from posters here selectively choosing their cases to prove their agendas. It's how the game is played.

When the banks, regulators, schools and hospitals try to escape censure for their wrongdoings and criminality why wouldn't you expect police forces to? People are people.

How many officers can relate to what's in that thread, in the way Lemmonie was dealt with by that school:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Fight or flight? Most people would try to avoid a Charlie Foxtrot blemishing their careers and reputations and hope that like the school exam revision or changing that warped front disc that it'll go away if they ignore it?

Edited by carinaman on Thursday 10th October 00:34

[Red Devil]

Another question for Matt Harper. Joe Arpaio. Hero or villain?

[spitsfire]

Red Devil said:

Another question for Matt Harper. Joe Arpaio. Hero or villain?

To any non-US audience, that's a bit like saying 'Joseph Goebbels - was he actually quite a nice bloke?'

[carinaman]

I think that shirtless chap tasered at Manchester airport may have deserved it and the deployment of the taser could well be consistent with PLAN.

[Matt Harper]

spitsfire said:

Matt - I appreciate that, with a daughter in the Fuzz, you want to defend and explain police behaviour you'd consider reasonable in light of what you've probably seen and heard about, but you've repeatedly made stated that bad cops get forced out and US cops don't cover for other cops engaged in inappropriate/unlawful behaviour. The New Yorker article and This is American Life podcast demonstrate that this is not the case, and they do so fairly emphatically. One report from the rural South, one from NY. The parallels between the two suggests there is an institutional failure in US law enforcement.

Assuming they are true.

[Matt Harper]

Red Devil said:

Another question for Matt Harper. Joe Arpaio. Hero or villain?

A little eccentric perhaps - but those that know him (but are not incarcerated at his jail) say he's a jolly nice chap and has a lovely singing voice.

[Matt Harper]

Tannedbaldhead said:

I notice many of the posters are getting overly hung up on whether or not "Soccer Mum's" tasering was justifiable or not. What would be more interesting would be Matt and Elroy's take on the treatment of the Paramedic, Fire Chief and Canadian tourist. Is the USA so different from the UK that we just don't get how unacceptable it is to defy a cop under any circumstances? That said, were the cops right to treat them the way they did? Would a cop be justified in going into "You wanna go to jail boy?" mode when a cyclist points out his bike hasn't a speedo when the cop asks "you know how fast you were going?".

Am asking this regularly and no-one is answering

I think it's because there is nothing to say. The cops who gets into it with the fire chief and the paramedic are bonkers. The CBP officers aren't cops, so I don't see the same relevance.
The soccer mom scenario was more questionable, which is why it has received the response.
The rest of your post makes zero sense to me.

[Red Devil]

Matt Harper said:

Red Devil said:

Another question for Matt Harper. Joe Arpaio. Hero or villain?

A little eccentric perhaps - but those that know him (but are not incarcerated at his jail) say he's a jolly nice chap and has a lovely singing voice.

Very droll. Does that include the United States Department of Justice and District Court Judge G. Murray Snow?

[Snowboy]

I'd just say those YouTube clips aren't a representative example of the US police.

If you showed a freeman-on-the-land clip to an American they may well think that the UK public is full of wobble. But that's not true either.

If you gave an American a selection of UK newspapers they would be full of bad police stories - because good stories aren't news.

Yes, the US police are more stern in their approach to things. But that's a cultural thing.
We can compare it to the UK police for conparisons, but we shouldn't judge the US police against our UK expectations.

The US polices approach works within the US culture.
It wouldn't work here, but similarly the UK police approach wouldn't work well in the US.

[spitsfire]

Matt Harper said:

Assuming they are true.

I think that's a fairly safe assumption to make. The New Yorker is (as I've already posted) a well respected news magazine, and is known for it's rigorous fact checking. They do print some controversial stories, but they have a reputation for making sure they're accurate before publishing.

As for the podcast about abuse of process, bullying and misuse of authority, that is the subject of 4 different investigations, and most of the material in the podcast is excerpts from on-duty sound recordings made by a police officer.

So if we assume they are correct, what are your thoughts on them?

[Devil2575]

Elroy Blue said:

Oh look. A routine traffic stop on a car with three kids in it. What could possibly go wrong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1aVBdQ-Hdg

Routine traffic stop. Nothing to fear here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AokjLn-fpww

Routine traffic stop:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywVrhnZAKfg

Routine traffic stop;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNxz4EyDFoo

Easy to criticise from behind the safety of a keyboard.

None of those were like the situation with the Soccer mom, unless of course you're autistic and cannot read people or situations.

[Devil2575]

Snowboy said:

I'd just say those YouTube clips aren't a representative example of the US police.

I'd say that you can't say that with any certainty.

[Snowboy]

Devil2575 said:

Snowboy said:

I'd just say those YouTube clips aren't a representative example of the US police.

I'd say that you can't say that with any certainty.

So your going to base your entire judgement of US police on a dozen YouTube clips?

[Devil2575]

Snowboy said:

Devil2575 said:

Snowboy said:

I'd just say those YouTube clips aren't a representative example of the US police.

I'd say that you can't say that with any certainty.

So your going to base your entire judgement of US police on a dozen YouTube clips?

That's not what I said.

No, I would not base my judgement of anyone or anything on YouTube clips.

The point I was making is that the YoueTube clips are evidence that certain behaviours exist within the US Police force, that is all. There is no evidence as to how common this behaviour is, or indeed whether it is typical or not.