Anonymous wrote:The problem with many police is they don't like the public having firearms. Everytime they contact with the public in a stop or something, they get all scared and wussy and trigger happy nervous.

They "disarm" you for "their safety". What about disarming the cops for "our safety"?? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Cops should be fired and jailed on the spot for doing power trip moves like that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seizure of properties like they do is basically just piracy.

What property is being seized and why? This is the second time this wacky comment has come up.

Anonymous wrote:Seizure of properties like they do is basically just piracy.

Anonymous wrote:It always amazes me when people want to take the things that keep police safe away from them because they look scary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TLDR, I don’t dislike law enforcement. They serve an incredibly important and difficult role and are constantly seeing and dealing with the worst of humanity. With that said, I dislike qualified immunity, the lack accountability and closing of ranks when a bad apple does something obviously wrong and the types who are pushing paper instead of building relationships with the community and walking a beat. I dislike unions that do this for the same reason. Law enforcement should be serving their community, not exploiting it for their benefit and the bad apples need to be held accountable.

Two honest questions:

1. Would you rescind qualified immunity for everyone, or just law enforcement?

2. How does law enforcement exploit the community for their benefit?

PP, I would rescind qualified immunity for everyone. I don’t think law enforcement should be treated any differently and especially shouldn’t be given a blanket presumption of immunity in the face of obvious wrongdoing. There should also be independent investigations and accountability rather than leaving it to the dept to police misconduct.

Police misconduct, including false arrests, illegal seizure/forfeiture of assets without due process, retaliation, and excessive use of force, not to mention too many officers working desk jobs to collect a cushy paycheck and not out actually policing and building bonds in the neighborhoods. If you want an example of one community that did reforms, look at Camden, NJ. They basically laid off the existing force and built it back up and violent crime is at multi decade lows now. It’s not perfect but looking to a model that works with the community rather than being seen as a warrior in opposition is at least a starting point. I lean in on protecting AND serving. After all, they’re supposed to be public servants too.

The only benefit to law enforcement you identified is a random police officer working a desk for an hourly wage. That’s why I asked. Thanks for answering though.

Illegal seizure and forfeiture of assets without due process is a big problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There appears to be a contingent of posters here that dislike federal and local law enforcement. I’m wondering if people’s reasoning is similar or if there are several distinct opinions. I’ve seen several “defund” posts and even one calling for the death penalty for ICE agents. Maybe it’s only one or two posters. I’ll be interested to see your replies.

Are you an idiot?

ICE officers are wearing masks they are criminals. They are not trained; they are racist garbage.

Police officers are not bad as a whole only the Blue Line ones are the idiots. Sure lets support the guy who stole from NY 9/11 first responders fund!!!! Let's support the guy taking away your overtime!

NP.

It is you who is the idiot, PP.

ICE is doing great work; they are keeping us safe and helping secure the border. The ONLY reason they need masks is prevent idiot-weirdos like you from doxxing them and threatening their families.

Anonymous wrote:I'm against the militarization of law enforcement. There is no reason for police to have military grade vehicles, drones, and weaponry. Police are there to enforce the laws, not subdue the population.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TLDR, I don’t dislike law enforcement. They serve an incredibly important and difficult role and are constantly seeing and dealing with the worst of humanity. With that said, I dislike qualified immunity, the lack accountability and closing of ranks when a bad apple does something obviously wrong and the types who are pushing paper instead of building relationships with the community and walking a beat. I dislike unions that do this for the same reason. Law enforcement should be serving their community, not exploiting it for their benefit and the bad apples need to be held accountable.

Two honest questions:

1. Would you rescind qualified immunity for everyone, or just law enforcement?

2. How does law enforcement exploit the community for their benefit?

PP, I would rescind qualified immunity for everyone. I don’t think law enforcement should be treated any differently and especially shouldn’t be given a blanket presumption of immunity in the face of obvious wrongdoing. There should also be independent investigations and accountability rather than leaving it to the dept to police misconduct.

Police misconduct, including false arrests, illegal seizure/forfeiture of assets without due process, retaliation, and excessive use of force, not to mention too many officers working desk jobs to collect a cushy paycheck and not out actually policing and building bonds in the neighborhoods. If you want an example of one community that did reforms, look at Camden, NJ. They basically laid off the existing force and built it back up and violent crime is at multi decade lows now. It’s not perfect but looking to a model that works with the community rather than being seen as a warrior in opposition is at least a starting point. I lean in on protecting AND serving. After all, they’re supposed to be public servants too.

The only benefit to law enforcement you identified is a random police officer working a desk for an hourly wage. That’s why I asked. Thanks for answering though.

Illegal seizure and forfeiture of assets without due process is a big problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TLDR, I don’t dislike law enforcement. They serve an incredibly important and difficult role and are constantly seeing and dealing with the worst of humanity. With that said, I dislike qualified immunity, the lack accountability and closing of ranks when a bad apple does something obviously wrong and the types who are pushing paper instead of building relationships with the community and walking a beat. I dislike unions that do this for the same reason. Law enforcement should be serving their community, not exploiting it for their benefit and the bad apples need to be held accountable.

Two honest questions:

1. Would you rescind qualified immunity for everyone, or just law enforcement?

2. How does law enforcement exploit the community for their benefit?

PP, I would rescind qualified immunity for everyone. I don’t think law enforcement should be treated any differently and especially shouldn’t be given a blanket presumption of immunity in the face of obvious wrongdoing. There should also be independent investigations and accountability rather than leaving it to the dept to police misconduct.

Police misconduct, including false arrests, illegal seizure/forfeiture of assets without due process, retaliation, and excessive use of force, not to mention too many officers working desk jobs to collect a cushy paycheck and not out actually policing and building bonds in the neighborhoods. If you want an example of one community that did reforms, look at Camden, NJ. They basically laid off the existing force and built it back up and violent crime is at multi decade lows now. It’s not perfect but looking to a model that works with the community rather than being seen as a warrior in opposition is at least a starting point. I lean in on protecting AND serving. After all, they’re supposed to be public servants too.

The only benefit to law enforcement you identified is a random police officer working a desk for an hourly wage. That’s why I asked. Thanks for answering though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TLDR, I don’t dislike law enforcement. They serve an incredibly important and difficult role and are constantly seeing and dealing with the worst of humanity. With that said, I dislike qualified immunity, the lack accountability and closing of ranks when a bad apple does something obviously wrong and the types who are pushing paper instead of building relationships with the community and walking a beat. I dislike unions that do this for the same reason. Law enforcement should be serving their community, not exploiting it for their benefit and the bad apples need to be held accountable.

Two honest questions:

1. Would you rescind qualified immunity for everyone, or just law enforcement?

2. How does law enforcement exploit the community for their benefit?

PP, I would rescind qualified immunity for everyone. I don’t think law enforcement should be treated any differently and especially shouldn’t be given a blanket presumption of immunity in the face of obvious wrongdoing. There should also be independent investigations and accountability rather than leaving it to the dept to police misconduct.

Police misconduct, including false arrests, illegal seizure/forfeiture of assets without due process, retaliation, and excessive use of force, not to mention too many officers working desk jobs to collect a cushy paycheck and not out actually policing and building bonds in the neighborhoods. If you want an example of one community that did reforms, look at Camden, NJ. They basically laid off the existing force and built it back up and violent crime is at multi decade lows now. It’s not perfect but looking to a model that works with the community rather than being seen as a warrior in opposition is at least a starting point. I lean in on protecting AND serving. After all, they’re supposed to be public servants too.

Anonymous wrote:TLDR, I don’t dislike law enforcement. They serve an incredibly important and difficult role and are constantly seeing and dealing with the worst of humanity. With that said, I dislike qualified immunity, the lack accountability and closing of ranks when a bad apple does something obviously wrong and the types who are pushing paper instead of building relationships with the community and walking a beat. I dislike unions that do this for the same reason. Law enforcement should be serving their community, not exploiting it for their benefit and the bad apples need to be held accountable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There appears to be a contingent of posters here that dislike federal and local law enforcement. I’m wondering if people’s reasoning is similar or if there are several distinct opinions. I’ve seen several “defund” posts and even one calling for the death penalty for ICE agents. Maybe it’s only one or two posters. I’ll be interested to see your replies.

Are you an idiot?

ICE officers are wearing masks they are criminals. They are not trained; they are racist garbage.

Police officers are not bad as a whole only the Blue Line ones are the idiots. Sure lets support the guy who stole from NY 9/11 first responders fund!!!! Let's support the guy taking away your overtime!