If you could kill a cop...

[ValleyDJing]

hey let me just make this clear - any officer who deals with real crime is honourable, I just believe that anyone who chooses to persue a career in harassment of the public is scum.

Ok, so whats you're definition of "real crime". Robberies? Murders? Drug Dealing? Because you do realize that the same guys that respond to calls of banks being held up, people dealing crack on the corners, shootings, stabbings, fights, etc....they're the same cops that are pulling over drunk drivers and writing speeding tickets. There's no way around that...they are one and the same.

 

[howardalex]

Letter of the law: There's no room to argue on this one...doesn't matter what the cop thinks, he has to arrest you or fine you whatever it might be, there's no room for compromise.

The grey area you're talking about is the Spirit of the Law.
In the Spirit of the Law, police are allowed to use their own judgement to decide whether or not to give you a ticket. But the key with spirit of the law is that the judgement is the police officers to make, not yours and mine.

yeah but they should make better use of the spirit of the law - if someone's doing 105 and you know they'll lose there licence when they're not actually being dangerous, do you give them 6 points (enough of a warning so they're more careful) or have their licence revoked (won't be able to drive, will find it hard to get to work and back, will completely change his life and will only serve to make him bitter)?

 

[howardalex]

Ok, so whats you're definition of "real crime". Robberies? Murders? Drug Dealing? Because you do realize that the same guys that respond to calls of banks being held up, people dealing crack on the corners, shootings, stabbings, fights, etc....they're the same cops that are pulling over drunk drivers and writing speeding tickets. There's no way around that...they are one and the same.

you see in the UK the traffic police ARE seperate otherwise I wouldn't make the distinction...and I disagree with drunk drivers because they're dangerous, whereas going over the speed limit isn't

 

[comic_relief]

funny, if you are good with people skills you can get away with traffic violations.

94 in a 65 on I-80 in the beginning of a flurry with an antique gun in my car that he found (last time, I ever went speeding).

believe me, you can get away with anything if you are good with people.

comic_relief

 

[howardalex]

funny, if you are good with people skills you can get away with traffic violations.

94 in a 65 on I-80 in the beginning of a flurry with an antique gun in my car that he found (last time, I ever went speeding).

believe me, you can get away with anything if you are good with people.

comic_relief

nah it's different over here - the traffic police are by the book

believe me, I've done my fair share of being nice to cops to avoid points and fines (they do love harassing motorists, especially anyone with a nice car :box: )

 

[ValleyDJing]

you see in the UK the traffic police ARE seperate otherwise I wouldn't make the distinction...and I disagree with drunk drivers because they're dangerous, whereas going over the speed limit isn't

well...I guess you learn something everyday. I can definitely see where you're coming from in that case.

You know its kinda funny, my dad's a cop and I always argued the same thing. I hate it when cops pull people over for speeding, absolutely hate it. But I'm talking like 15 mph over or less...not 105. But still, yeah I can see you're point to a degree, just not to the point where I'd wish death upon anyone, let alone carry it out myself. Thats why I think this thread is absolutely rediculous.

 

[howardalex]

well...I guess you learn something everyday. I can definitely see where you're coming from in that case.

You know its kinda funny, my dad's a cop and I always argued the same thing. I hate it when cops pull people over for speeding, absolutely hate it. But I'm talking like 15 mph over or less...not 105. But still, yeah I can see you're point to a degree, just not to the point where I'd wish death upon anyone, let alone carry it out myself. Thats why I think this thread is absolutely rediculous.

yeah I guess, although this sounds immoral and unjust, I would gladly kill that particular because he's completely changed my life, they seem to have absolutely no idea how much they can inconvenience someone by taking the wrong decision

 

[comic_relief]

Well, in all fairness it WAS started by some looks-matter guy that has recently received his long overdue banning.

wasn't it skip2mylou?

comic_relief

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

See thats where you and God of Getting Laid have no room to speak. You've spoken to ex-police officers while some of us are police officers, or live with police officers, or are making law enforcement their career paths. You guys seem like you got your information on cops off of TV or the new 50 cent or Tupac cd or whatever. So the people that actually know about police work are telling you two that you're wrong and you're too stubborn to admit that maybe we have a better handle on the subject than you guys do.

we dont need real police experience to make our conclusions.

We look at evidence and make our conclusions using logic.

You know what logic is dontcha?

To say we need to be cops to make our conclusions about how they clearly are harassing someone is ludicrous. all one needs is logic and evidence. I have both, and use both.

 

[CCKazi007]

You guys are argueing over the WRONG TYPE of COP. I'm pretty sure the thread starter meant if you could kill a corrupt cop. Like the ones who abuse their power by beating ppl and claiming self-defense, racial profiling or giving ppl speed tickets for going 1 MPH over the speed limit. I'm prett sure most ppl just like me like and respect the soldiers in the armed forces and most cops who work to catch dangerous criminals. But there's always that one evil cop/soldier who does more than they should and do more harm than good. Personally I met cool cops so I don't have anything against them. My friends who do drugs do though cuz they're on probation, but I think it's their fault so it's rediculous. Bottomline is only the corrupt ones should be punished, if one of those was going to hurt me or my family then I would kill him cuz he deserves it.

 

[martinshernwood]

I would kill them all. I swear, I get pulled over for no reason. After I get pulled over, they hassle me like no tomorrow. I say - IT'S TIME TO DIE PIGGY!

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Right, just like I don't need an M.D. to diagnose you for appendicitis, then cut you open and take out your appendix. Who says you need TRAINING to do a job where lives are at stake?

2 different things my friend

in once case, your having to do an actual operation which requires skills. in the other you just looking at observations and comming to a conclusion about what really happened in the given situation. One requires training and skills, the other just requires evidence and the ability to find a theory that best fits those observations. This is called inference. We do it everyday in our everday lives. no training needed.

In the case I have been speaking of, the best fitting theory is that the cop was harrasing the guy, its unlikely that he actually felt threatened. the cop knew he was not threatened, he knew it!

Who's "we", dude? As far as I know, you're the only felon on this thread still advocating the murder of a peace officer.

Im not a felon. Ive never been arrested. I did commit "street justice" yes, but I gave no details on exactly what that consists of (for my safety from the law). It could have been a misdemeanor or a felony, I gave no details of which is the case.

all one needs is logic and evidence. I have both, and use both.

You use logic, but it's severely flawed. You have evidence, but it's based on a TV show you saw. Your logic is that because a citizen that has committed a traffic violation is driving a nice car, the police officer no longer has the right to protect himself. My logic is that the police officer would be an idiot to let the kind of car a person is driving influence the measures he must take to endanger is safety. So you have your logic, and we have ours.

1. yeah, my evidence is from a TV show. so what? are you saying video evidence cant be used in a court room? what do you call that TV show? nothing was edited accept for curse words. More importantly, the camera showed everything the cop saw. It showed the traffic violation, it showed the car, it showed the guy in the car from the cop's point of view (who was sitting still, not shuffling around or anything when he got pulled over). Basically, the camera gave me the same amount of neccesary and relevant information I would have gotten if I were actually there in the cop's shoes. So that TV show is definitely credible and useful evidence.

2. and no, my logic is not that the cop has "no right" to protect himslef just becuase the guy was dricing a nice car. My logic was that the information the cop had to make his decision told him that his risk was equal to that of pulling over some harmless old man or some Business CEO. But we know if those people were who he stopped, its clear that the risk is low. so if the TV show situation is pretty much the same as pulling over some CEO, then so is the risk. So then the risk was low, the cop did not need to draw his gun, not neccesary! The cop was in about as much danger as if he were pulling over Hugh Hefner. Sure Hefner could go crazy and pull a gun, but the chances of this are so low!

So if a cop draws his gun in a low risk situation, hes more likely to be doing it for harrassment than for his safety.

3. A cop does have aright to defend himself, and personally, If I set the rules, cops would be required draw their gun and to have people show their hands no matter who they are or what the reason for the pull over. I dont care if he's pulling over George w bush, he should draw his gun and ask for a show of hands. This would guarantee cops are never ever vulnerable. But I dont make the rules.

But the fact is, cops dont have procedures like that. Cops are only required to draw their gun when it is reasonably neccessary (when theres a high risk of danger). And when they are at low risk, they dont draw their gun.

Becuase cops do discriminate between high risk and low risk to decide if they draw their gun, then this means when they are using a their gun in a clearly low risk situation, it means theyre more likely to be doing it for harrassment effect than for their own safety. why? becuase the situation is clearly at low risk, and therefor the cop would have to conclude the same thing. this begs the question why would the cop draw his gun in a situation that he sees as low risk when he only draws his gun if it is high risk?

This is my logic, the theory that he was at high risk just isnt fitting with the evidence seen.

 

[martinshernwood]

man, you two are both a couple of fags for arguing this one over. it's not even debatable, if you get a shot to knock a pig out of the arena of life, you take it. one less uniform to tell me what to do!

Deus, are you a pig or something?

 

[martinshernwood]

You are a hypocrite. Why? If you followed your own ignorant, sick little fantasies, you would be in prison right now holding onto somebody's pocket, instead of calling men "fags" on the Net. These "uniforms" that you seem so opposed to are the ones to come save your ass when worms like you get into a jam.

Deus, are you a pig or something?

No, just another citizen that realizes the vitalness of a police force. Without one...rape, torture, and human sacrifice would run rampant and society would collapse. An angry mob would recognize that you played a major role in this apocalypse, as you were a strong supporter of the mass-murder. They would take you into the streets, rip your clothes off, and stone you as somebody slit your throat and snipped your vocal chords with a pair of wire-cutters. And guess what? There would nobody around to stop them. Things wouldn't be going very well for you, Martin Shernwood.

First off, you need to re-think why I'm a hypocrite, because getting raped in prison, and calling you a fag, doesn't add up to me being a hypocrite.
Second, damn you are sicker than me. Pretty graphic detailing in that post. I think you are a cop or a wannabe cop, only pigs are that violent. Either admit you’re a pig, or join the kill a cop club.

 

[martinshernwood]

yep boys, this guy is a pig. just tell me where you patroll, cuz i'll be sure to stay away from your power mongering ass.

 

[djbr]

I've noticed a lot of threads about the police force lately. And in these threads there is a lot of cop bashing going on. I'm not sure I hate the cops as much as some people on this site, so I'll pose the question: would you kill a cop if you had the chance, and knew you would get away with it.

I sure wouldn't. I think cops for the most part serve the community, and I thank them for it. The only reason I'm posting this is because I saw someone else say that they would.

You can answer the question or just give your opinions on cops.

Try loving a cop here in Brazil.

Sometimes I wonder if they aren't worse than the thieves themselves.

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Such a long post, man... Alright, let's do it.



Profound. You should start writing a letter to send out to various police departments explaining to them why the police academy should be abolished. Let me know how that goes.

Ill say it again, what I have been discussing was about weither or not the cop was harrassing the guy. I have the video evidence (the TV show example), and I use logic to conclude the best fitting theory to explain what was actually happening. It just so happens that the harrasment theory fits best in this case, not the one where the cop felt engdagered.

No skills required to look at evidence and make an inference and draw a conclusion. But maybe you can show me why and what classes I would need to take to do such a thing. And show me what these "classes" would show me where my logic is wrong given the evidence and my conclusions.

Basically, the camera gave me the same amount of neccesary and relevant information I would have gotten if I were actually there in the cop's shoes.

Including information about whether or not the car was stolen, if the driver was a wanted fugitive, and whether or not the police officer has encountered this individual previously...right?

yes exactly!

If the car was stolen, the cop would have said something like "I ran your tag, and its reported stolen blah blah". The cop said no such thing. remember, he pulled the guy over for a routine violation. If he had encountered him before, he would have said something about it: "we got to stop meeting like this bob. blah blhah". THe officer ran his license to check for warrents, he found none (standard procedure for a pullover you know), if he did, he would have handcuffed the guy, he did not. So the answer is yes!!! the video did tell me if these things were the case or not by watching what happened.

Ill say it again, the video told me all the relevant info i need. All the same info the cop had access to that he used to make his decision on weither or not he needs to use his gun.

So if a cop draws his gun in a low risk situation, hes more likely to be doing it for harrassment than for his safety.

Yeah, man. Cops draw their weapons to "harass" citizens. Totally.

Well, if the cop is competant, which most are, can you give me another reason why he would break his own rule besides "for harrassment". If the cop doesnt feel threatened, he wont use his gun. If he does, he will. Given the situation, we can tell he could not have concluded he was threatened. Either he was harrassing, or breaking his own rule. Id say the former is the best fitting explanation.

 

[TheVirtualMind]

To the mods: People here are openly admitting that they would like to commit acts of murder/torture. Somebody needs to ban these clowns and get em some serious psychiatric help.

I'll look the other way on this one.

I don't like cops. I see them pull people over driving either really nice or really messed up cars doing 60 in a 55, and let the "average" cars blow past at 80-120.

They will ride up my @ss and give ME a ticket for "tailgating" when the car infront of me is slowing down because we just got an area with a reduced speed limit and I'm atleast 5 car lengths back. Then I get questioned "why were you following him?" when it's my only way home and I'm right up the road from my house.

I've seen cops just stand there as shoplifters run past. I've seen 6 of them search for 2 "african american" females because "2 white girls got assaulted."

I've seen cops sit there and smoke a joint. I've seen them question and threaten students who stand infront of their dorm, talking to their friends.

Yeah, cops are great!

 

[ValleyDJing]

I'll look the other way on this one.

I don't like cops. I see them pull people over driving either really nice or really messed up cars doing 60 in a 55, and let the "average" cars blow past at 80-120.

They will ride up my @ss and give ME a ticket for "tailgating" when the car infront of me is slowing down because we just got an area with a reduced speed limit and I'm atleast 5 car lengths back. Then I get questioned "why were you following him?" when it's my only way home and I'm right up the road from my house.

I've seen cops just stand there as shoplifters run past. I've seen 6 of them search for 2 "african american" females because "2 white girls got assaulted."

I've seen cops sit there and smoke a joint. I've seen them question and threaten students who stand infront of their dorm, talking to their friends.

Yeah, cops are great!

So you want to kill them because of this? If no, then please stfu, because although I personally respect police officers, I'm not gonna argue with someone who doesn't like cops. However I would urge everyone to take a look at the title of this thread.

Notice people, that the thread does not say..."do you like cops?" It says..."If you could kill a cop, would you?" People on here are saying police pulling over people for 5 mph over the speed limit is petty, but so is wanting to kill someone for that reason.

Again...this is not a survey to see who likes cops, this is a thread for people who advocate murdering police officers. And that, is what I have a big problem with.

On a side note...martinshernwood, shut the f.uck up and leave.

 

[TheVirtualMind]

That's it, VirtualMind. Allow your personal beliefs to influence your moderation duties, and subsequently disregard them. Very admirable.

It's called a joke.