MustangWorks.com : Ford Forums - View Single Post

Mr 5 0 · 05-09-2002, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by Jeb_Bush_2000

Anyone can die in an accident, cops included.

My point is that many jobs carry a real risk of death including pilots, truckers, construction workers, etc. however, no one disputes the danger of police work, just the contention that the danger is an overiding factor that obscures all other negative aspects of police activity.

The actual numbers are these:

740,000 sworn law enforcement officers in the U.S. 130 police deaths in 1999 (latest figures available) and the majority were by firearms, used by convicted criminals. Average age of slain police officers is 38, average length of service is eight years.

This makes police deaths tragic but also rare, a tiny fraction of all active law enforcement officers are killed in the line of duty in any given year. This doesn't minimize the fact that they are in a dangerous job but it should put into perspective this knee-jerk police defense that says 'They could be killed' as if nothing else mattered and all conversation should cease once this statement has been made.

It's obvious that I'm in the minority here, and I hesitate to call the nice folks here "hypocrites", but...c'mon. What do you guys do for a living?

This got my attention.

Hypocrites? What does that mean?

If we aren't a cop we can't have opinions on police attitudes and actions? Are you serious? I'm not a teacher but I have strong opinions how the sad state of public schools and the union mentality that has helped ruin them. I'm not a politician but I have strong opinions on what politicians do. I'm not a politician either so does that make me a 'hypocrite'?

Check the dictonary definition of the word, as you've misused it here.

These groups, including police officers, have one thing in common. They derive their income from taxpayer money and that, alone, entitles anyone who pays taxes (not to mention exercises his constitutional right of free speech) to examine and offer a critical analysis of these taxpayer-supported officials.

They are not above this kind of honest examination and while most of us support our police, we also frown on the petty uses of power they sometimes exhibit and as Jacsracing pointed out, the sometimes blatant use of police power to generate income from otherwise law-abiding citizens for petty 'violations' that pose no traffic threat but guarantee town or city income.

That's undemocratic and corrosive to the community support any police organization must have to operate in a compentent manner. Not to be taken lightly.

Your support of police in general is not a minority view but casting aspersions on those who simply point out flaws and problems in the police organizations is not admirable. Stick to facts and avoid attempting to kill the messengers that hold an opinion that differs from yours. It makes a better exchange that way.

05-09-2002, 03:06 PM	#42
Mr 5 0 Conservative Individualist Join Date: May 1997 Location: Wherever I need to be Posts: 7,487	Still more Cops Originally posted by Jeb_Bush_2000 Anyone can die in an accident, cops included. My point is that many jobs carry a real risk of death including pilots, truckers, construction workers, etc. however, no one disputes the danger of police work, just the contention that the danger is an overiding factor that obscures all other negative aspects of police activity. The actual numbers are these: 740,000 sworn law enforcement officers in the U.S. 130 police deaths in 1999 (latest figures available) and the majority were by firearms, used by convicted criminals. Average age of slain police officers is 38, average length of service is eight years. This makes police deaths tragic but also rare, a tiny fraction of all active law enforcement officers are killed in the line of duty in any given year. This doesn't minimize the fact that they are in a dangerous job but it should put into perspective this knee-jerk police defense that says 'They could be killed' as if nothing else mattered and all conversation should cease once this statement has been made. It's obvious that I'm in the minority here, and I hesitate to call the nice folks here "hypocrites", but...c'mon. What do you* guys do for a living?* This got my attention. Hypocrites? What does that mean? If we aren't a cop we can't have opinions on police attitudes and actions? Are you serious? I'm not a teacher but I have strong opinions how the sad state of public schools and the union mentality that has helped ruin them. I'm not a politician but I have strong opinions on what politicians do. I'm not a politician either so does that make me a 'hypocrite'? Check the dictonary definition of the word, as you've misused it here. These groups, including police officers, have one thing in common. They derive their income from taxpayer money and that, alone, entitles anyone who pays taxes (not to mention exercises his constitutional right of free speech) to examine and offer a critical analysis of these taxpayer-supported officials. They are not above this kind of honest examination and while most of us support our police, we also frown on the petty uses of power they sometimes exhibit and as Jacsracing pointed out, the sometimes blatant use of police power to generate income from otherwise law-abiding citizens for petty 'violations' that pose no traffic threat but guarantee town or city income. That's undemocratic and corrosive to the community support any police organization must have to operate in a compentent manner. Not to be taken lightly. Your support of police in general is not a minority view but casting aspersions on those who simply point out flaws and problems in the police organizations is not admirable. Stick to facts and avoid attempting to kill the messengers that hold an opinion that differs from yours. It makes a better exchange that way.