Should We Do What They Tell Us?

[Darth F.Takeda]

Yes, the Brass, or the Whores as my ex-Patrolman Sensei would call them, will advocate taken it, but I love how the cheif pig thinks he can predict what would have happend. The punk might have shot him and his Mom for the Hell of it, punks are getting worse, not better, many Gangs want their prospects to kill before granting full membership.

Talk to street cops and you'll hear a different story.

I went to summer school in a real bad are when I was 15, and because it was an instant expulsion for fighting, I basically let myself get hit and pushed around in an incedent.

Well I end up in the Office with the Principle and the school Cop, when the Principle left the room, the cop told me, "You know you do have a right to protect yourself, you have a freebie from me, he messes with you again, beat his *** and I will back your play."
I did and he did, one ghetto punk found out that not all white boys are wimps and he got expelled for being a punk, the cop stood there and watched me beat him down and then pulled me off when I started to stomp on the jerk.
No Brass would ever condone that, but many a street cop like to see a Thug get what's coming.

When an Authority figure tells you to just take it, you need to think "Nazi" and disobey that UnAmerican order.

 

[MA-Caver]

Yes, the Brass, or the Whores as my ex-Patrolman Sensei would call them, will advocate taken it, but I love how the chief pig thinks he can predict what would have happened. The punk might have shot him and his Mom for the Hell of it, punks are getting worse, not better, many Gangs want their prospects to kill before granting full membership.

When an Authority figure tells you to just take it, you need to think "Nazi" and disobey that UnAmerican order.

The two bold lines are out of order and uncalled for I think. Cops can face liability by telling the average citizen to fight back. It's the lawyers that'll jump on that opportunity quick as they can. But cops know that we average citizens are just not trained to handle situations like that. We can study martial arts all we want, we can be rational (legal) concealed weapon carriers and all of that but we do not have the (specific) training that they have, nor do we have their experience(s).
Don't get me wrong, I'll fight back and fight back hard and hurt the suckers if they try to hurt me or mine. But I'll assess the situation best as I can and act on it or not act on it. But I'm not going to disobey a LEO if they're on the scene. It's not Nazism it's not even pacifism, it's plain common sense. They have their job(s) for a reason so that we the average joe-blow don't lose it and cause more casualties than necessary. They've seen more bad endings than good endings than you have so think upon that the next time they give you an "un-American" PIG order. Gang members are getting worse, sure. But it doesn't mean we have to either.

 

[CoryKS]

The two bold lines are out of order and uncalled for I think. Cops can face liability by telling the average citizen to fight back. It's the lawyers that'll jump on that opportunity quick as they can. But cops know that we average citizens are just not trained to handle situations like that. We can study martial arts all we want, we can be rational (legal) concealed weapon carriers and all of that but we do not have the (specific) training that they have, nor do we have their experience(s).
Don't get me wrong, I'll fight back and fight back hard and hurt the suckers if they try to hurt me or mine. But I'll assess the situation best as I can and act on it or not act on it. But I'm not going to disobey a LEO if they're on the scene. It's not Nazism it's not even pacifism, it's plain common sense. They have their job(s) for a reason so that we the average joe-blow don't lose it and cause more casualties than necessary. They've seen more bad endings than good endings than you have so think upon that the next time they give you an "un-American" PIG order. Gang members are getting worse, sure. But it doesn't mean we have to either.

What he said. It's way over the top to refer to law enforcement as pigs and Nazis, and let's have a little context here:

While acknowledging the gamble succeeded, authorities stressed that it’s safer to cooperate in such a case.
“Give them the money and give them the keys,” Sheriff Harry Lee said. “You make an insurance payment on your car, and nobody gets shot.”

He wasn't giving an "UnAmerican order". He was giving advice. Nazi's don't do that.

 

[JBrainard]

When an Authority figure tells you to just take it, you need to think "Nazi" and disobey that UnAmerican order.

...But I'm not going to disobey a LEO if they're on the scene. It's not Nazism it's not even pacifism, it's plain common sense. They have their job(s) for a reason so that we the average joe-blow don't lose it and cause more casualties than necessary. They've seen more bad endings than good endings than you have so think upon that the next time they give you an "un-American" PIG order. Gang members are getting worse, sure. But it doesn't mean we have to either.

I think the phrase "Civil disobedience is an act of patriotism" fits very well into this debate. "Taking it" and letting the authorities handle it later is very un-American, IMHO. But I must also say that yes, of course, if there is an LEO on the scene then you will do what they tell you to do. That is just common sense.

 

[MA-Caver]

I think the phrase "Civil disobedience is an act of patriotism" fits very well into this debate. "Taking it" and letting the authorities handle it later is very un-American, IMHO.

I have to disagree here. To fight for your life and the life of someone else close to you isn't just an American concept. But it's a judgement call. Eventually these guys get caught, especially if they're driving your car and the call goes out asap to the LEO's and specific directions as to where they were heading helps them quite a bit in stopping the guy. If the guy wrecks your car while being pursued it still doesn't matter, your insurance (unless of course you got just plain liability) will cover it and the guy still goes to jail.
Civil disobedience isn't an act of patriotism, it's in defiance of patriotism. Following the laws of the land is being patriotic. If the laws turn against you then it's patriotic but (so far) that hasn't happened yet ... and I'm talking about a mass scale where curfews are enforced militarily and your basic rights as an American are taken away (speech, assembly, religion and so forth), fighting against that is patriotism.

But patriotism is another topic altogether. We're talking about self defense against a criminal (that's not patriotism -- which by my definition is self-defense against a tyrannical government ANY government foreign or domestic) who is directly threatening you. It's a judgement call on whether or not to take action and which course of action that will be the least harmful to you and even the criminal themselves.

I wish I can recall the exact quote (and the author) but it's something like: "... I am a civilized person, and anyone who attacks me is uncivilized... " There's no reason what-so-ever to stoop to their level of mentality. You stop that person by any means possible (not necessary) that will be the least harmful to you and yours. If that means letting them go and allowing the police to handle him then so be it. If you can (safely) subdue the criminal and hold/sit on them until the police arrive to make a proper arrest then so be it.
How much value are you putting on your life?

 

[tellner]

What JBrainard and Darth said, even if a few words might have been ill-chosen. Do what you believe you have to to go home in one piece. If the police departments had a tad of human decency and a little creativity they could say something like "There are serious legal and personal risks in fighting back. If you believe that you are in immediate danger and have no other reasonable choice you have the right to do what you need to to prevent yourself from being hurt, killed or victimized by a violent criminal." But they don't. Ever. I'm sorry if this sounds "anti-cop" but here it is:

Every profession has its group-think and common traits. Police are no exception. There's a certain sort of conservatism (not the national politics kind) that you see in many if not most officers. Creative lateral thinking is not all that common. Standard Operating Procedures, the safe way, what your training officer taught you and the way we've always done it are more the order of the day. So they'll do what they've always done and let the brass do what they've always done.

Look at what MA-Caver said. The cop could lose his job. You are supposed to risk your own irreplaceable life because someone, somewhere might have employment problems? I'm sorry. Protect the cop isn't that important to me. Letting good people get raped, kidnapped or killed to keep some faceless civil servant I've never met from having to get his wrists slapped by a review board of his peers - the most likely outcome - is a travesty. What's really at stake is that the city's insurance rates could be hiked. That's even less of a concern compared to innocent life. I should die to protect him while he isn't even required to lift a finger if he sees me being murdered just doesn't balance.

I respect many individual police officers. And I understand the systemic reasons for why the bureaucracies behave the way that they do. That in no way requires me to respect such a disgusting self-serving arrogant mindset. It works both ways. If the police collectively don't value my life enough to say "If your back's to the wall do what you have to to survive" while holding that their own officers can do the same at the merest hint of trouble I am under no obligation to give them any more consideration.

In other words, I'll tip my hat to Officer Smith if he's a standup kind of guy. His job is frequently tedious and sometimes dangerous. But The Police as an institution? Not as long as they consider my life worth not even a word of advice they'd give one of their own. Let the FOP lobby for that kind of change and I'll change my tune in a heartbeat. But the "Cops get to carry anywhere even retired cops" law was supposed to pave the way for national CCW for the rest of us. So far the silence from the police unions and their members has been deafening.

It goes both ways. If your lives are worth defending so are ours.

 

[Yeti]

What JBrainard and Darth said, even if a few words might have been ill-chosen. Do what you believe you have to to go home in one piece. If the police departments had a tad of human decency and a little creativity they could say something like "There are serious legal and personal risks in fighting back. If you believe that you are in immediate danger and have no other reasonable choice you have the right to do what you need to to prevent yourself from being hurt, killed or victimized by a violent criminal." But they don't. Ever. I'm sorry if this sounds "anti-cop" but here it is:

Every profession has its group-think and common traits. Police are no exception. There's a certain sort of conservatism (not the national politics kind) that you see in many if not most officers. Creative lateral thinking is not all that common. Standard Operating Procedures, the safe way, what your training officer taught you and the way we've always done it are more the order of the day. So they'll do what they've always done and let the brass do what they've always done.

Look at what MA-Caver said. The cop could lose his job. You are supposed to risk your own irreplaceable life because someone, somewhere might have employment problems? I'm sorry. Protect the cop isn't that important to me. Letting good people get raped, kidnapped or killed to keep some faceless civil servant I've never met from having to get his wrists slapped by a review board of his peers - the most likely outcome - is a travesty. What's really at stake is that the city's insurance rates could be hiked. That's even less of a concern compared to innocent life. I should die to protect him while he isn't even required to lift a finger if he sees me being murdered just doesn't balance.

I respect many individual police officers. And I understand the systemic reasons for why the bureaucracies behave the way that they do. That in no way requires me to respect such a disgusting self-serving arrogant mindset. It works both ways. If the police collectively don't value my life enough to say "If your back's to the wall do what you have to to survive" while holding that their own officers can do the same at the merest hint of trouble I am under no obligation to give them any more consideration.

In other words, I'll tip my hat to Officer Smith if he's a standup kind of guy. His job is frequently tedious and sometimes dangerous. But The Police as an institution? Not as long as they consider my life worth not even a word of advice they'd give one of their own. Let the FOP lobby for that kind of change and I'll change my tune in a heartbeat. But the "Cops get to carry anywhere even retired cops" law was supposed to pave the way for national CCW for the rest of us. So far the silence from the police unions and their members has been deafening.

It goes both ways. If your lives are worth defending so are ours.

I think you missed MA Caver's point entirely. I disagree almost entirely with what you've written here, and find your attitude to be problematic at best - but so be it - to each his own. And yes, your message seems pretty "anti-cop" to me - or at the very least "anti-establishment". If that's your opinion, why apologize for it?

 

[tellner]

Ah, so you believe that the police should never say that it's alright to defend yourself?

And you believe that a risk of raising the city's insurance rates if someone takes that advice is a fair trade for innocent live lost because people take the department's advice and die?

And you believe that it is right that we should die for a city's insurance rates while the police are under no legal obligation to defend us even if they see a murder in progress?

And believing that real human lives are worth saving and defending makes me against the police or at least against social order?

If my life is more important to me than the convenience of a bureaucracy or I say that collectively the profession of "police officer" has its blind spots I am against the police?

I'm not sure we should settle for that sort of a world. But I suppose that makes me some sort of terrible anarchist just like Madison, Jefferson and Franklin.

 

[JBrainard]

I respect many individual police officers. And I understand the systemic reasons for why the bureaucracies behave the way that they do. That in no way requires me to respect such a disgusting self-serving arrogant mindset. It works both ways. If the police collectively don't value my life enough to say "If your back's to the wall do what you have to to survive" while holding that their own officers can do the same at the merest hint of trouble I am under no obligation to give them any more consideration....But the "Cops get to carry anywhere even retired cops" law was supposed to pave the way for national CCW for the rest of us. So far the silence from the police unions and their members has been deafening. It goes both ways. If your lives are worth defending so are ours.

This part of Tellner's post jumped out at me. Before I make a rather bold statement, I will present an illistration: To the best of my knowledge about Oregon law, if a criminal breaks into my home and I consider him to be a threat, I can shoot him... once. If I shoot him twice, it's excessive force. Many, but not all, cops would unload their entire clip on a criminal who has broken into a home and is threatening the people who live there. In these two situations, I will get procescuted in some form or another, and the cop will get a month paid holiday, I mean suspension
What is my point? That there is an intense double standard when it comes to the actions of LEO's and citizens excersising their undeniable right to protect themselves and theirs. Some of this is inherent in the system and I fully understand that. But on the other side of the coin you can find some complete crap.

 

[Darth F.Takeda]

Yes, the Brass, or the Whores as my ex-Patrolman Sensei would call them, will advocate taken it, but I love how the cheif pig thinks he can predict what would have happend. The punk might have shot him and his Mom for the Hell of it, punks are getting worse, not better, many Gangs want their prospects to kill before granting full membership.

Talk to street cops and you'll hear a different story.

I went to summer school in a real bad are when I was 15, and because it was an instant expulsion for fighting, I basically let myself get hit and pushed around in an incedent.

Well I end up in the Office with the Principle and the school Cop, when the Principle left the room, the cop told me, "You know you do have a right to protect yourself, you have a freebie from me, he messes with you again, beat his *** and I will back your play."
I did and he did, one ghetto punk found out that not all white boys are wimps and he got expelled for being a punk, the cop stood there and watched me beat him down and then pulled me off when I started to stomp on the jerk.
No Brass would ever condone that, but many a street cop like to see a Thug get what's coming.

When an Authority figure tells you to just take it, you need to think "Nazi" and disobey that UnAmerican order.[/quot

O.K. I'll agree that the use of the word Cheif Pig was over the top, so I'm sorry on that.

The Whores is what my Sensei, a veteren street cop, with valour awards and having killed a punk, who was aiming a gun at him, on duty, calls Police Brass, and many other cops I know share the same outlook on their higher ups, who tend to be Politicians first, authoritarians second and concerned with true public safety, somewhere after worring about getting sued. So I'll stand by it, but I did not need to put it in there, as it could offend good, honest and carring cops, who do a hard job and get hung out to dry, by Brass and whinning Liberals all the time. To them and those cops I know, I am sorry, I was knee jerking a bit.

My gripe is with Police higher ups and associations, who say the opposite of what the patrolmen and Detectives I know feel is right. The Brass is largly anti gun and anti self defense, whereas most cops I know will tell you they dont have to many problems with legal gun owners and applaud most acts of self defense.

I also said nothing about disobeying an Officer on scene, I am talking the B.S. like that cheif put out, like he could predict that if the young man did not resist, they would be safe #1 and this attitude that you should not defend what is yours, that is a personal choice, and to Hell with any Goverment that infringes that, our Goverment has grossly limited us from what the Founders thought was our rights. They came from a time when a man could use lethal force to protect self, others, property and one's Honor, now you might go to jail for defending even your life.
So Nazi will stay in there, it seems to fit what is being done to us slowly but surely, by both Republicans and Democrates.

I used my summer school exp. to show an example of when a Cop knew what was truly right and letit go down that way, he stopped my before the punk could be seriously hurt.

All that said, there is a huge double standard and I bet it has cost lives and sorrow in this country.

The person who pointed out how they might be able to put 1 round in an intruder but 2 will get them in trouble illistrates that point, as most with firearms training know that it's very common for someone to unload their weapon into an attacker under fear and stress. Lawmakers, who are usually Lawyers, who obviously know nothing of combat (or do and are insidiously setting up work for their brethren, or a mechinism to oppress the good) or firearms.

Any Cop though, who abuses his power or wants me to submit to a criminal will forever in my eyes deserve the title of Pig, even if that's an insult to our farm dwelling freinds.=)

 

[tellner]

Before I make a rather bold statement, I will present an illistration: To the best of my knowledge about Oregon law, if a criminal breaks into my home and I consider him to be a threat, I can shoot him... once. If I shoot him twice, it's excessive force.

Not exactly. The actual Statute says that one has an affirmative defense if one uses deadly force to stop a burglary against a dwelling. It doesn't say how many shots. It doesn't detract from your point. What would be a bad shoot for you or me might well be excused for an officer by Internal Affairs. I can't shoot someone who makes a "furtive movement". A police officer can.

 

[theletch1]

Ah, so you believe that the police should never say that it's alright to defend yourself?

And you believe that a risk of raising the city's insurance rates if someone takes that advice is a fair trade for innocent live lost because people take the department's advice and die?

And you believe that it is right that we should die for a city's insurance rates while the police are under no legal obligation to defend us even if they see a murder in progress?

And believing that real human lives are worth saving and defending makes me against the police or at least against social order?

If my life is more important to me than the convenience of a bureaucracy or I say that collectively the profession of "police officer" has its blind spots I am against the police?

I'm not sure we should settle for that sort of a world. But I suppose that makes me some sort of terrible anarchist just like Madison, Jefferson and Franklin.

Tellner, knock it off! I'm a conservative and I'm not supposed to agree with you. But here you go, making sense and all. Man, can you get someone all conflicted or what?

 

[Darth F.Takeda]

Actually he is taken a true conservative opinion, self relience, the right to protect yourself, and putting good people first and criminals in a hol are very old school Conservative principles.

More and more, I like Tellner, label him Liberal or Conservative if you want, but the guy has great points.

 

[tellner]

Tellner, knock it off! I'm a conservative and I'm not supposed to agree with you. But here you go, making sense and all. Man, can you get someone all conflicted or what?

It's all part of my Secret Plan for World Domination. If I can confuse everyone they will be defenseless against the Hopping Hordes of my Warty Toad Minions

Seriously, Left, Right, Liberal, Progressive, Conservative and all the rest are labels used by those who would divide us to increase their own power. People of good will are people of good will and usually want pretty much the same things for their families and communities. When they can quiet the dogmatic part of the brain that wants to be led and actually sit down and work together on the important things it's amazing how much they have in common.

 

[Darth F.Takeda]

It's all part of my Secret Plan for World Domination. If I can confuse everyone they will be defenseless against the Hopping Hordes of my Warty Toad Minions

Seriously, Left, Right, Liberal, Progressive, Conservative and all the rest are labels used by those who would divide us to increase their own power. People of good will are people of good will and usually want pretty much the same things for their families and communities. When they can quiet the dogmatic part of the brain that wants to be led and actually sit down and work together on the important things it's amazing how much they have in common.

YES!

My FMA teacher and I are from differnt sides of the Politicol spectrum, but when we sat down and stated "What I would want if I ran things, we were pretty much in agreement.
1. Kids are number 1- Better education (way more money for it and higher standards for teachers. No adult TV till after 10pm.

2. A Strong and big Military, so when we do go to war, we win by ovewhellming force. Just like in a fight, mercy should only be granted from a position of supreme domination, never before.

We just vote for differnt jerks.

 

[SKB]

OK, this conversation went way out there. I think you guys missed something really important. The kid shot the guy twice and the bad guy lived! Someone needs to teach the kid how to shot!!!! Two in the chest and one in the head!!!

 

[Darth F.Takeda]

2 in the chest, 2 in the head, 2 in the pelvis as well.

 

[Yeti]

Ah, so you believe that the police should never say that it's alright to defend yourself?

And you believe that a risk of raising the city's insurance rates if someone takes that advice is a fair trade for innocent live lost because people take the department's advice and die?

And you believe that it is right that we should die for a city's insurance rates while the police are under no legal obligation to defend us even if they see a murder in progress?

And believing that real human lives are worth saving and defending makes me against the police or at least against social order?

If my life is more important to me than the convenience of a bureaucracy or I say that collectively the profession of "police officer" has its blind spots I am against the police?

I'm not sure we should settle for that sort of a world. But I suppose that makes me some sort of terrible anarchist just like Madison, Jefferson and Franklin.

I'm glad it comes so easy for you to put words in my mouth, although it seems your powers of deduction leave a lot to be desired.

Here's what I do believe. I believe you and I are on very different pages about this matter and while I would actually welcome a discussion with you about it, there is nothing to be accomplished by using this forum to do so. Plus I fear it wouldn't make for interesting reading for many others.

 

[SKB]

2 in the chest, 2 in the head, 2 in the pelvis as well.

Ok you have to work your way up or down. If you go up then down they might say you shot the guy to much!!!!

You guys need to remember what LEOs can and can not do or say is a reflection of what society tells us we can do. Some agencies can not use choke holds since they are a mean thing to do to the bad guys............. and like any other group there are LEOs who are just plain idiots........ and some times it does appear all the idiots rise to the top! I really think you guys should yell at the lawyers!!!!!!

 

[MaartenSFS]

Yes, the Brass, or the Whores as my ex-Patrolman Sensei would call them, will advocate taken it, but I love how the cheif pig thinks he can predict what would have happend. The punk might have shot him and his Mom for the Hell of it, punks are getting worse, not better, many Gangs want their prospects to kill before granting full membership.

Talk to street cops and you'll hear a different story.

I went to summer school in a real bad are when I was 15, and because it was an instant expulsion for fighting, I basically let myself get hit and pushed around in an incedent.

Well I end up in the Office with the Principle and the school Cop, when the Principle left the room, the cop told me, "You know you do have a right to protect yourself, you have a freebie from me, he messes with you again, beat his *** and I will back your play."
I did and he did, one ghetto punk found out that not all white boys are wimps and he got expelled for being a punk, the cop stood there and watched me beat him down and then pulled me off when I started to stomp on the jerk.
No Brass would ever condone that, but many a street cop like to see a Thug get what's coming.

When an Authority figure tells you to just take it, you need to think "Nazi" and disobey that UnAmerican order.

Amen. Though I hardly think that it applies to Americans only. It applies to men. You know, that small minority with dangling sexual organs, though often lacking ball-shaped aparatus'.