JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Status
It's simple, and I did define for you, but you choose not to see it is all. Anyways, I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest in your last paragraph. I would never catch myself hating America or our constitution. If I ever did, I would be smart and not a hypocryte and I'd move. It's the same stuff everyday. People hate the police, feds, military whatever but who are the first people you call for when in need (mommy doesn't count).
Respectfully, you're allowed to have your opinion and I wont tell you that you're wrong, I just don't have to agree is all.

Respectfully, I'm telling you your definition of a "threat" is absurd and your acquiescence of police brutality is immoral and barbaric.

Newsflash: cheering on cops as they shoot innocent people is the definition hating America and everything it used to stand for. Freedom and liberty is now stormtroopers and legalized plunder.
 
Respectfully, I'm telling you your definition of a "threat" is absurd and your acquiescence of police brutality is immoral and barbaric.

Newsflash: cheering on cops as they shoot innocent people is the definition hating America and everything it used to stand for. Freedom and liberty is now stormtroopers and legalized plunder.

I should know better than to try to rationalize with the cop bashing here, but I was just curious how many bad apples it takes for you to refer to all cops as stormtroopers, paramilitary, and the greatest threat to America.

Now, I wasn't at any of these situations. Wasn't at Pace University. Wasn't at the CostCo. I've read a bunch about the CostCo incident, and none of the stories seem to match. While I'm not sure I agree with giving these officers awards, I'm not sure I agree with throwing them to the mob either. If the officers in either case were guilty, I hope they burn for it. But its not fair to refer to all of the decent, honest, hardworking men and women working as police officers to refer to them as stormtroopers who are a threat to America. And you are either arrogant or ignorant if you think you know the mindset of why officers do their jobs. People keep saying its not "to protect and serve" anymore, but my question for most of you is: how would you know?

I'll probably keep reading this thread. I guess I just enjoy getting riled up on occasion. But really, sometimes it just saddens me after a while. I've known hundreds of officers over the years. One was dirty. His fellow officers investigated him, he was arrested, he was convicted, and he went to jail. He got what he deserved. All other dirty cops should get the same. But they don't deserve a public lynching by a bunch of monday morning quarterbacks.
 
I should know better than to try to rationalize with the cop bashing here, but I was just curious how many bad apples it takes for you to refer to all cops as stormtroopers, paramilitary, and the greatest threat to America.

Now, I wasn't at any of these situations. Wasn't at Pace University. Wasn't at the CostCo. I've read a bunch about the CostCo incident, and none of the stories seem to match. While I'm not sure I agree with giving these officers awards, I'm not sure I agree with throwing them to the mob either. If the officers in either case were guilty, I hope they burn for it. But its not fair to refer to all of the decent, honest, hardworking men and women working as police officers to refer to them as stormtroopers who are a threat to America. And you are either arrogant or ignorant if you think you know the mindset of why officers do their jobs. People keep saying its not "to protect and serve" anymore, but my question for most of you is: how would you know?

I'll probably keep reading this thread. I guess I just enjoy getting riled up on occasion. But really, sometimes it just saddens me after a while. I've known hundreds of officers over the years. One was dirty. His fellow officers investigated him, he was arrested, he was convicted, and he went to jail. He got what he deserved. All other dirty cops should get the same. But they don't deserve a public lynching by a bunch of monday morning quarterbacks.

I'm sure that you are correct about not publicly lynching all cops, unfortunately it is difficult or impossible to find the dirty one's being that most don't get found out since they are being shielded from public view by their brother officers. I'm sure the good cops find out who the bad ones are, seems to me like the "officer brotherhood" allows some of these "bad cops" to still keep a job & also allow them to continue being "bad".
 
I should know better than to try to rationalize with the cop bashing here, but I was just curious how many bad apples it takes for you to refer to all cops as stormtroopers, paramilitary, and the greatest threat to America.

Now, I wasn't at any of these situations. Wasn't at Pace University. Wasn't at the CostCo. I've read a bunch about the CostCo incident, and none of the stories seem to match. While I'm not sure I agree with giving these officers awards, I'm not sure I agree with throwing them to the mob either. If the officers in either case were guilty, I hope they burn for it. But its not fair to refer to all of the decent, honest, hardworking men and women working as police officers to refer to them as stormtroopers who are a threat to America. And you are either arrogant or ignorant if you think you know the mindset of why officers do their jobs. People keep saying its not "to protect and serve" anymore, but my question for most of you is: how would you know?

I'll probably keep reading this thread. I guess I just enjoy getting riled up on occasion. But really, sometimes it just saddens me after a while. I've known hundreds of officers over the years. One was dirty. His fellow officers investigated him, he was arrested, he was convicted, and he went to jail. He got what he deserved. All other dirty cops should get the same. But they don't deserve a public lynching by a bunch of monday morning quarterbacks.

If bad cops are truly reviled by the good cops, why do the "good cops" give awards to the bad cops? Cops always demand respect for their fallen so why would they piss on the graves on their victims? Why do the DA's seem to label just about every shooting "justified", including both shootings shown in this video: YouTube - Radley Balko on the 3 Worst Cases of Police Abuse in 2011?

I refer to cops as stormtroopers because they willfully enforce the bureaucratic law, no matter how immoral and unconstitutional. Cops gleefully pursue civil forfeiture cases because they yield monetary rewards (4 part article: <broken link removed> ). Cops toss millions of recreational drug users in prison every year because the fascists in Congress passed a law deeming such substances "illegal". They bludgeon the citizenry with SWAT teams and militarized tactics (Botched Paramilitary Police Raids), then get the courts to send resisters to death row (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Maye).

You ask me why I question cops' commitment to "protect and serve", it is their silence in the face of these outrages. When the local PD refuses to utilize civil forfeiture, refuses to enforce drug prohibition, refuses to deploy SWAT teams for anything other than an ongoing armed faceoff, refuses to use no-knock raids at midnight, and put cops that shoot people through the same prosecutorial standards as a civilian instead of the standard "justified" horse and pony show, then I'll start supporting them.
 
I just realized the Seattle cop had his gun out when he left the car.He was ready to shoot the guy.

Y'all are giving me a head ache with your useless arguing.You know you'll never agree.
 
Yeah, officers do their job and enforce the laws that you and your elected government make and they're stormtroopers. That's sensible...:nuts:

As for those of you who claim brother officers protect bad deeds, I'm curious what proof you have. A few cops being given awards over incidents that you don't agree with? I may or may not agree with the awards, but have seen just in Central Oregon over the last few years several officers who were "bad apples" that were not protected. They were tossed out on their ears just like they should have been.

former Deschutes County Sheriff Greg Brown, prosecuted, served time for embezzlement.
Redmond Lt. Larry Prince. Dismissed and indicted for theft of county property.

Where was your so called thin blue line on these?
 
Yeah, officers do their job and enforce the laws that you and your elected government make and they're stormtroopers. That's sensible...:nuts:

As for those of you who claim brother officers protect bad deeds, I'm curious what proof you have. A few cops being given awards over incidents that you don't agree with? I may or may not agree with the awards, but have seen just in Central Oregon over the last few years several officers who were "bad apples" that were not protected. They were tossed out on their ears just like they should have been.

former Deschutes County Sheriff Greg Brown, prosecuted, served time for embezzlement.
Redmond Lt. Larry Prince. Dismissed and indicted for theft of county property.

Where was your so called thin blue line on these?

The difference between you and me is I don't think "the law" is always morally right because it was endorsed by the "elected government". You automatically assume actions deemed legal by some government lawyer is automatically morally correct. Hence you consider my criticism of the drug prohibition stormtroops and civil forfeiture thieves to be crazy simply because they obeyed the law, even though their actions are still immoral and unconstitutional. Same goes for the police shootings, some government lawyer said it was legally justified, so it must morally correct as well!

I suggest you read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Law-Frederic-Bastiat/dp/1936594315/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1303840985&sr=8-1
 
The difference between you and me is I don't think "the law" is always morally right because it was endorsed by the "elected government". You automatically assume actions deemed legal by some government lawyer is automatically morally correct. Hence you consider my criticism of the drug prohibition stormtroops and civil forfeiture thieves to be crazy simply because they obeyed the law, even though their actions are still immoral and unconstitutional. Same goes for the police shootings, some government lawyer said it was legally justified, so it must morally correct as well!

I suggest you read this book: Amazon.com: The Law (9781936594313): Frederic Bastiat: Books

There you go assuming again. You have no idea how, why, or if I find the law morally acceptable. Perhaps what you consider immoral, others do not. All I said is its not right to demean an individual for doing their job. You are lumping all officers in as evil simply because you do not agree with the laws they enforce. Here's a newsflash. Run for office and change the laws. Stop whining that laws are being enforced and change them...
 
I think you guys are getting off track. This is not an issue of good law vs bad law or strict enforcement vs non-enforcement. The first issue at hand is whether or not Police are exercising reasonable policies and judgment in the performance of their duties. By reasonable I mean striking the proper balance between the protections granted in the Bill of Rights and intrusions on personal liberty that are necessary in maintaining order and public safety. The second issue is whether or not Police are being held accountable when they do overstep their authority and violate someones rights.
Not being direct party to the investigation I can only comment on the various accounts I have read about the Costco incident. Those accounts seem to indicate a strong likelihood that overreaction by Police led directly to the needless death of a citizen. Just being armed does not equal intent of wrongdoing nor does it warrant a guns drawn approach by law enforcement in my opinion. Had the man been brandishing a gun and making threats then that is another matter but it doesn't sound like that is the case here.
 
There you go assuming again. You have no idea how, why, or if I find the law morally acceptable. Perhaps what you consider immoral, others do not. All I said is its not right to demean an individual for doing their job. You are lumping all officers in as evil simply because you do not agree with the laws they enforce. Here's a newsflash. Run for office and change the laws. Stop whining that laws are being enforced and change them...

Care to explain how you find it morally acceptable for cops to smash into a home at midnight and shoot a guy with a golf club, or to arbitrarily seize property which they deem to be connected to a crime without any proof?

People who willfully enforces immoral and evil laws deserve the trashing, even if they are just "doing their jobs". If cops involved in that type of "law enforcement" had a shred of morality they'd resign and get a job that doesn't involve screwing the citizenry.

By the way, asking people to run for office to change the laws is an absurd proposition. This country has fully embraced the tyranny of the majority and abandoned any adherence to natural rights.
 
Did the cops do the right thing? None of us will ever know we were not there we can just speculate. But do they deserve to be honored with an award for their heroism? I don't see how, its not like they were shot at, in the line or fire or anything that I would consider "above and beyond"
 
Status

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top