• boyzmom said on Dec 23, 2006....

  The temptation to do wrong is everywhere and the police see the bad guys getting away with murder every week. I think satan attacks us all and uses what the police experience to twist things around and let them think that its okay to do wrong also. I wish there were more police chaplains to remind them why they are there and pray with them. After all we treat criminals better than we treat the police officers who put the criminals behind bars.

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 23, 2006....

  I'd have to say that the police chose to work with criminals, so they should have a reasonable expectation of being shot at, etc.
  
  The police have also sworn to follow the rules no matter what the conditions.  Just because they get excited and frustrated doesn't mean they get to brutalize a criminal after he has been caught.  They have sworn to play by the rules, even though the criminals do not.
  
  I have a police friend.  He was kicked off the force for beating a suspect in custody after a long and dangerous car chase.  He shrugged it off before he was kicked off as, "We always get really excited after a car chase.  It's impossible to not want to kill the guy when you finally catch him.  This kind of thing happens all the time."
  
  The local prosecutor disagreed.  As do I.
  
  I don't think any of the people in the articles above got treated better than a criminal is SUPPOSED TO (and all these people are innocent until proven guilty remember) and certainly they were treated worse than a police officer.
  

• unrestrained said on Dec 23, 2006....

  I haven't even got round to viewing  the shit you have wrote but would like to see how you would react in a situation where you actually need the police.
  
  I am no saint and am an ex convict, so know how important the police are when times get rough.
  
  Here in the UK, the police have just arrested a man for the murder of five women. He would still be out there preying on others, but for the police - you fucking shit-head...
  

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 23, 2006....

  Profanity is not well-received. Well-formed arguments are.
  
  I have been in many situations where I needed the police. Weren't any around.
  
  Yes, I've been following that case. Took them quite a while to figure out that all five crimes were connected. THEN, the guy turns out to have known all the women and lived in their neighborhood of operations.
  
  Sterling work. I noted that the chief of police made the incredible statement that "It's not safe for prostitutes to be working the street."
  
  This makes me react two ways:
  
  1. Even BEFORE the murders, was it SAFE for prostitutes to be working the street????
  
  2. Why do the police there, if indeed they are doing their job, allow known prostitues to so freely and openly practice their trade???
  
  Seems to me if they'd been doing their job and keeping them off the streets--and throttling prostitution--there'd be no prostitutes for the murderer to kill.  But you want to give them credit for catching the murderer, instead of asking why they weren't doing the job keeping prostitutes off the streets themselves. 
  
  Obviously, the police in Ipswich had surrendered to prostitution rather than doing their job.
  
  If you wish to debate the topic, do so in a civil manner addressing the topic at hand. If you do not, you'll simply be blocked and deleted with no great loss to the conversation.

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 23, 2006....

  unrestrained's two mouth-breathing attempts to rejoin the conversation fell well below the standards of decorum maintained here.
  
  Thus, unrestrained as been quite easily restrained.  Deleted and blocked.
  

• NobodySpecial said on Dec 23, 2006....

  Unrestrained- The duty of law enforcement is mainly to enforce the law AFTER THE CRIME. On average the reaction time to a dangerous situation is rarely prompt. From what I have seen in the past they are always there after the actual crime happened. What you do until the police arrive depends on the individual. Some might freak out an ddo something that would end up with them becoming a victim. Others might do something that will make the criminal flee. The cops are mearly there to provide a sense of security to the average citizen that if something bad was to happen they would either be able to make it in the nick of time or at the very least be able to provide justice.

  Gumpytooth- The one thing you forget to mention is that there are good cops and there are bad cops (of course there are always some inbetween). Most cops want to keep law and order in there juristiction (spelling?), but when there are more situations and provacations to act in an incredibaly wrong way more cops are likely to act that way. I guess we can't forget that there is a possibility that police brutalility has a tendency to go unspoken. If I were in a situation where I was a victim of police brutality I probaly would lose most trust I haven't already lost in the system and would probaly find another way that wouldn't be in the statistics to fight back. Come on gumpytooth don't delete 'unrestrained comment'. Even if it is profane or insulting it is better to let him make of fool out of himself than be the person who restricts his freedom to do so.

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 23, 2006....

  NobodySpecial,
  
  I would like to take your attitude about freedom of expression, but experience has taught me that when people really don't want to have a real discussion of facts, all they do is obfuscate those who do.
  
  They also do not learn.  I'd rather not have them driving away rational thinkers with salient points to make.  If the insulting person even has a GERM of an argument, I leave it, as I have left his original few.
  
  When it just turns into name calling, I see no need to reward that behavior.
  
  To your points, certainly there are good cops.  But I don't give them bonus points for that.  They're supposed to be "the good guys."  They are, if they're good, just doing their job.  I don't think a parade is in order.
  
  "I had to tell some parents their drunken kid was dead from driving drunk."  Oooh.  Let's throw a pity party for that cop.  And at the party, they can tell us what caliber of gun was held to their head when they were FORCED to join the police.
  
  If you don't want to tell people a loved one is dead, don't be a cop or a doctor.  If you join the force, don't expect a ticker tape parade for doing your damn job.
  
  If a single individual goes beyond the pale to do their job, then I stand up and applaud.  Like Sgt. Buck Frobisher of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in his pursuit of a criminal named Geiger.  I'd stand up for that guy.
  
  My point is that the average citizen has very little need for the police, and that there is a widespread culture of police misconduct which thanks to digital cameras and cell phones, is finally coming to the forefront.
  
  Thank you kindly for your response.

• LadyGamer said on Dec 23, 2006....

  Thank you, Gumby, for being a sterling example of a bitter selfish uninformed man.
   
  I don't have an anecdote of a police officer helping me change my tire. I CAN tell you many times the police have stopped speeders in my child's school zone. A LOT. I can tell you about the times *I* stopped to help someone and found an officer close enough to help me in moments when I called. In TWO instances it saved a life. ONE life each time, but saved nonetheless.
   
  The officers and firefighters of New York who died aren't heroes because they did their job which has inherent, expected risks. They are heroes because they walked willingly into hell, knowing they weren't coming back. KNOWING they weren't coming back. You can't respect that because I would bet that you would NEVER do that yourself, not for anyone, especially a stranger who is likely already dead.
   
  The widespread police misconduct you speak of? Typical media crap you are spouting. You scream as loud as you can when you find one bad boy, but those millions of men and women doing their "damn" job well and honestly won't get a peep from you. Beyond your flaccid "Sure they exist, I just haven't seen them" rubbish.
   
  Yes, their are bad people in that profession. There are bad people in EVERY profession. Even yours.
   
  I HAVE felt a solid police presence in my community and my life. And it has always been positive. Even the polite and professional man giving me my speeding ticket and thanking me for my courtesy.
   
   

• mom said on Dec 23, 2006....

  Hi Gumpy,
  I have to come in defense of police officers.  I used to work at a mini mart late at night. I worked alone and in a very bad area.  I had a few scary moments.  I called the police and asked them to come and sit in the parking lot while I went to my car.  I maybe had only 10 feet to get to my car outside but many times guys would come in the store late at night and when they left, they would linger in the parking lot.  It was scary.  From the first time I called and every night after, the police were right there to watch me stay safe.  They didn't have to do that, but they did and I was so appreciative for that.  I have met some police officers that didn't do the reputation of the law enforcement any good but over all I am greatful for them.  When I was in labor and had to drive 45 miles  to the nearerst hospital, a policeman  gave us a personal escort all the way there.  When my son jumped from a bridge and had to be fished out of the water, it was the police officers that had enough compassion for us to let my husband and I know what had happened.  I have had better memories of policemen than bad and I feel alot better knowing they are out there.
  I hope that your bitterness will be tempered and that you may feel better toward those that for the most part help us and keep us safe.  God Bless You, and I hope you have a very good Christmas.

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 23, 2006....

  >>Thank you, Gumby, for being a sterling example of a bitter selfish uninformed man.
  
  You open your post with this?  This will be your only warning.  Insults toward me or anyone else won't be tolerated. 
  
   
  I don't have an anecdote of a police officer helping me change my tire. I CAN tell you many times the police have stopped speeders in my child's school zone. A LOT.
  
  A lot is not a numerical value.  I have documented proof I have brought to the table.  Thus far, you have brought insult and opinion. 
  
  In additon, if they HAVE stopped people speeding in your child's school zone, that's their job.  No bonus points given there.  And, the vast majority of people will only interact with the police when they are traffic coordinating, I would think, although I have no facts to back that up at the moment, and readily admit so.
  
  Notice I didn't treat that as fact.
  
  I can tell you about the times *I* stopped to help someone and found an officer close enough to help me in moments when I called. In TWO instances it saved a life. ONE life each time, but saved nonetheless.
   
  Then tell us about your anecdotal information.  I say anecdotal because everyone thinks their experience is the statistical mean.  But you will have to at least tell us about it.
  
  Imagine if I stated, "I can tell you about the times I've seen officers beating school children just for walking home from school" and then didn't offer up anything concrete?  Please.  Tell us about these lives saved.
  
  You can't just CLAIM them.  Again, I offered proof, much of which you can go to the source and check out yourself.  Dispute it all you want then, but I was careful to include officers who were ARRESTED.  Or prosecuted.  Or found guilty. 
  
  Now who arrests people?  The police.  I would think if an officer is arrested, they're pretty serious about it.  If a DA charges an officer, they're pretty serious about it.  And if the officer goes to jail, I hardly think it's media BS.  It's what happened in a court of law.
  
  You can't have it both ways.
  
  The officers and firefighters of New York who died aren't heroes because they did their job which has inherent, expected risks. They are heroes because they walked willingly into hell, knowing they weren't coming back. KNOWING they weren't coming back.
  
  That's just not true.  None of those guys knew or expected those buildings to fall.  Listen to the recordings or read them.  They weren't thinking they weren't coming back.  The buildings falling shocked EVERYONE.  Here, you're just flat out WRONG.
  
  In addition, after the 1993 World Trade Center event, the NYPD and NY Fire Department were ordered to develop a coordinated communications system because all their radio frequencies crossed each other and weren't coordinated.
  
  Due to the huge egos and schism between these organizations IT WAS NEVER DONE.
  
  Had it been, many lives could have been saved after the first building fell.  This blame lays squarely on both departments.  Another fact that you can read yourself in any of the 9/11 Reports.
  
  You can't respect that because I would bet that you would NEVER do that yourself, not for anyone, especially a stranger who is likely already dead.
   
  Immaterial.  What I would or would not do on the day we will never know.  You or I don't know what either one of us would do in an emergency and we won't know till one happens.  Conject away, but it really wont' mean much.
  
  The widespread police misconduct you speak of? Typical media crap you are spouting.
  
  I'm sure that 44 million dollar award was just trumped up.  Those death row inmates that were shocked in the genitals?  Made up so well that the Governor PARDONED all of them.  Right.  The retarded man shot in the back in New Orleans, sure.  Made up.  The world's foremost pathologist is lying.  Right.  Believe that all you want.  Go on back and re-read.  And again, the POLICE and DAs don't just arrest or charge or convict police on a whim, do they?  These are articles of officers either arrested or charged or convicted or caught on tape. 
  
  That's what some in law enforcement call evidence.  Look into it.
  
  You scream as loud as you can when you find one bad boy, but those millions of men and women doing their "damn" job well and honestly won't get a peep from you. Beyond your flaccid "Sure they exist, I just haven't seen them" rubbish.

   

  Yes, their are bad people in that profession.
  
  Yes, lots of them.  Some even work for the Luchese family. 
  
  There are bad people in EVERY profession. Even yours.

   

  Thank you for stating the obvious.  Now I will give you some obvious.  MY profession doesn't PROFESS to uphold the law.  If you do so, you shouldn't be breaking it, should you?  There is police misconduct in every single police force in the country.  Sounds kinda like a gang, to me.  Buncha guys with guns following the law only when they want to?
  
  I HAVE felt a solid police presence in my community and my life. And it has always been positive. Even the polite and professional man giving me my speeding ticket and thanking me for my courtesy.<<
  
  Good for you.  I take it you haven't had your genatalia shocked with a tazer while in lockup.  Or had your 81 year old blind grandfather's arm broken.  Or had your 14 year old sodomized by a cop in his van.  Or had your personal information pirated by a policeman for his private business.
  
  If you ever do, I trust you'll recall this blog, and the actual, factual, reviewable articles that came with it instead of a series of someone's melodramatic opinions.

  I'm sure that 44 million dollar award was just trumped up.  Those death row inmates that were shocked in the genitals?  Made up so well that the Governor PARDONED all of them.  Right.  The retarded man

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 23, 2006....

  I have to come in defense of police officers.
  
  Please, go ahead.
  
  I used to work at a mini mart late at night. I worked alone and in a very bad area. I had a few scary moments. I called the police and asked them to come and sit in the parking lot while I went to my car. I maybe had only 10 feet to get to my car outside but many times guys would come in the store late at night and when they left, they would linger in the parking lot. It was scary. From the first time I called and every night after, the police were right there to watch me stay safe.
  
  Wow.  Police willing to hang out near a mini-mart.  You're kinda making my point for me, you know.  Were there donuts in the mini-mart?
  
  I'm no stranger to five or six cop cars at the local 7-11.  Lingering in the parking lot, too.  "To serve (coffee) and protect (the donuts.)"  Some real Starsky and Hutch work there.
  
  Too bad they didn't tell you to employ a security guard so they could be out protecting the individual homeowner rather than using taxpayer money to watch the mini-mart.  They're law enforcement, supposed.  Not security guards.  Unless there's free coffee.  You gave them free coffee, didn't you?
  
  They didn't have to do that, but they did and I was so appreciative for that.
  
  All hyperbole aside, I'm sure you did appreciate it and with good reason.
  
  I have met some police officers that didn't do the reputation of the law enforcement any good but over all I am greatful for them.
  
  Then you simply have had a radically different experience than I have.  Or than many others illustrated in the above articles have had.
  
  When I was in labor and had to drive 45 miles to the nearerst hospital, a policeman gave us a personal escort all the way there.
  
  So the police are not law enforcement, they're an EMT?  This is another thing that if we are to assume is part of their job, should deserve no thanks.  Just because many times people see a policeman when they are in the middle of an emotionally harrowing situation doesn't mean they get bonus points for doing their job.  That's what they're paid for.
  
  When my son jumped from a bridge and had to be fished out of the water, it was the police officers that had enough compassion for us to let my husband and I know what had happened.
  
  Again, part of their job.  No bonus points.
  
  I have had better memories of policemen than bad and I feel alot better knowing they are out there.
  
  Again, your experience.  Countless others don't have your anecdotal experience and you will forgive us if your personal story is not binding.  You have done zero to explain or refute the numerous events occuring above just in the last six months.  
  
  And again, this list was culled down to be as fair as possible to the police.  Only officers charged, arrested, convicted or caught on tape.  In one case, all four.
  
  I hope that your bitterness will be tempered and that you may feel better toward those that for the most part help us and keep us safe.
  
  What a sensitve person you are.  Being able to "sense" bitterness where none exists.  I'm not bitter.  The people in the above articles are.
  
  Again, there's a "cop" on this very site who has SEVEN TIMES requested that I perform an unnatural sexual act upon him (illegal in certain states) simply because he didn't like my freely expressed and constitutionally protected thoughts on this site.
  
  THAT'S the "class" of person we're dealing with here.  Couldn't handle a few typed words and where did he go?  Straight to demanding that I perform fellatio on him.  And this is a MESSAGE board.  A blog site.  Imagine what he does when someone says something he doesn't like in REAL LIFE? 
  
  God Bless You, and I hope you have a very good Christmas.
  
  You may rely upon it.  Same to you.

• mom said on Dec 23, 2006....

  I am sorry that you feel the way you do.  I am sorry for you. How awful for you to have to feel so much negativity. 

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 23, 2006....

  I am sorry that you feel the way you do. I am sorry for you. How awful for you to have to feel so much negativity.
  
  I feel sorry for you to.  Sorry that you seem to instead of processing things with a thinking mind, feel the need to try and use your Jeanne Dixon-like abilities to combat logic by reducing other people to emotions you make up yourself--then attribute to another person--then treat as fact.
  
  Goes something like this if I were to trying such a dungbrained thing on you:
  
  "I'm so sorry you feel the way you do.  I'm sorry for you.  How awful for you to have such a gigantic inferiority complex from working at a mini-mart--which is about the lowest rung in the employment ladder--that you have to sling out totally fabricated emotions and apply them to other people because you have no factual evidence or reasoning ability beyond your own very very small and insignificant personal experiences."
  
  Doesn't seem real fair or open minded, does it?
  
  I guess all those articles from valid media sources didn't make you feel bad for the people whose genatalia were shocked with tazers.  Or maybe the 81 year old blind guy getting his arm broken.  Or perhaps the 14 year old raped by the policeman?
  
  Feel bad for THOSE people.  I'm content, happy, and enjoying expressing my opinion.
  
  The people who wrote the articles--in your world are THEY all bitter, too?  Or did I just call them all up and convince them to write those articles?
  
  You want me to accept your very non-pertient stories about cops at the mini-mart, yet you completely IGNORE all these stories of brutality.  Why don't you feel bad for them?
  
  And lastly, just how do you feel about a police officer who when confronted by simple typed words on a computer screen, asks someone seven times to perform an illicit sexual act upon him?  What's your opinion on that?
  
  Or aren't you "sorry" for THAT person?
  
  I have given you numeous valid examples.  You seem either unaffected by them or unable to respond to real evidence totally in conflict with your opinion.  And your opinion is one of three billion people on the planet, so you'll forgive us if it isn't binding.
  

• DispatcherGurl150 said on Dec 24, 2006....

  I work as a dispatcher for my local police department. Everyday I first hand see the great things that police officers do.
  All you can say are the negative things law enforcement has done. What has made you so critical? Get over the ticket you got for breaking the law and grow up. What this world doesn't need is people like you who are constantly negative about everything. Law enforcement isn't perfect because it's made up of people. People who make mistakes and like everyone, do suffer the consequences. In this line of work it is risky.  How many times do you go off to work wondering if tonight you are going to be sent to a call where you might get killed?
  One of our officers got killed about a year ago because they were doing their job. He was called to a residence where a husband was beating his wife and had a gun aimed at his wife's head. Guess who stepped in and took the bullet for the wife? Would you do that? You should go to your local police department and scehdule a ride-along to see just what your "horrible" officers do.
  You sit there and critize about everything officers do. How immature are you? Another thing that you mentioned was how officers were always in quick shops and eating donuts. We work long nights here. 12 hr shifts. That's not fun at all. Who wants to stay up working the night shift for 12 hrs when everybody else gets to sleep? You would complain if the cops fell asleep on the job, so like any other normal human being we drink coffee and eat food to. This is to stay awake and for our meals. Because I work 12 hrs, i'm sleeping during breakfast time and lunch so what is so wrong with eating something?
  Criminals are not like other the average citizen. They carry weapons, they are dangerous to work with and you never know what to expect. I think it's perfectly fine to be rougher with the criminals when arresting or detaining.  You seem to think that criminals are these dainty little people who aren't doing anything wrong. News flash! If they are getting arrested then they are breaking the law.
  I really don't know what somebody did to you to make you so horribly bitter but you need to see the world and realize you are a minority in your incredibly ignorant way of thinking.
   

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 24, 2006....

  I work as a dispatcher for my local police department.
  
  That's good news.  I was afraid for a second that you were someone with a vested interest.
  
  Everyday I first hand see the great things that police officers do.
  
  OK.  Right out of the box...you're a dispatcher, right?  You sit at the main office there and aren't out on the street, right?  SO HOW ON EARTH CAN YOU SEE FIRSTHAND WHAT IS GOING ON.
  
  Poor way to start things off in a testimony is with a complete exaggerated fabriaction.
  
  All you can say are the negative things law enforcement has done.
  
  Perhaps you're in need of some clarification.  I didn't write all those stories.  Those were written by valid media sources.  
  
  In addition, I have not refuted any of the positive things cops do.  When the mini mart lady brought up her police escort, I didn't say anything negative.  I stated a FACT.  That's part of their job.  And I fundamentally believe you shouldn't get your ass kissed for simply doing your job.
  
  What has made you so critical? Get over the ticket you got for breaking the law and grow up.
  
  I have never received a ticket of any kind, nor have I ever broken the law.  I don't even go over the speed limit.  So, what we have here is your taking all your dissatisfaction with something you've read, and now you're making things up because you don't really have a rational argument.  You're 0-2, going on 0-3 in your assertions.
  
  What this world doesn't need is people like you who are constantly negative about everything.
  
  So pointing out valid cases of police misconduct and brutality is NEGATIVE?  You must surely believe that the prosecutors, officers, and juries that charged, arrested and/or convicted these people are REALLY negative.
  
  Law enforcement isn't perfect because it's made up of people. People who make mistakes and like everyone, do suffer the consequences.
  
  I think the death row inmates in Illinois who had their gentals shocked with tazers suffered more consequences than their torturers, but I guess you have a different take on it, seeing things "firsthand" from behind a computer screen and microphone.
  
  In this line of work it is risky.  How many times do you go off to work wondering if tonight you are going to be sent to a call where you might get killed?
  
  Zero.  Because I didn't take a job where that was one of the risks.  If someone DOES VOLUNTARILY take such a job, they get what comes with it.  Any moron knows that.  You don't get bonus points or sympathy for it, sorry.
  
  One of our officers got killed about a year ago because they were doing their job. He was called to a residence where a husband was beating his wife and had a gun aimed at his wife's head. Guess who stepped in and took the bullet for the wife?
  
  Well, that was really stupid.  Is that according to police procedure?  Were you there?  Can you provide us with all the details?  Did he get shot at point-blank range?  If he was alone, then he was dead and the husband still had the gun on the wife.  If there were two...well, something could have been done.
  
  In most of these hostage situations, are you saying that the police have a standard operating procedure to be shot themselves?  Can you give us the name of the officer and the town this happened in so we can validate your claim?  I've given you verifiable information.  
  
  Forgive me, but with your track record on this post, I'm simply not willing to take  your word for it.  Gimme the town and the date, and I'll look it right up.
  
  Unless of course, you made it up.
  
  Would you do that?
  
  No, of course not.  I'm not a police officer.  And I have to think a GOOD police officer wouldn't get shot, either.
  
  You should go to your local police department and scehdule a ride-along to see just what your "horrible" officers do.
  
  I've already SEEN Cops, thanks.
  
  Yes, the police take things SO seriously.  That's why the Muncie, Indiana police department--within a year of shooting an unarmed epileptic man dead, and killing a woman trying to get into her house in broad daylight--has actually DEPUTIZED LaToya Jackson, Eric Estrada, Wee Man, and Trish Stratus.  For a TV show.  
  
  Yes, they're really doing the job, aren't they?
  
  You sit there and critize about everything officers do. How immature are you?
  
  So criticizing the police makes a person immature?  Interesting.  I guess those people who nailed the detectives working for the Luchese family were immature.  And the Governor of Illinois, too.  Try reading the friggin' articles posted here.  Learn something.  You're ALLOWED to criticize the police, particularly the bad ones.
  
  Another thing that you mentioned was how officers were always in quick shops and eating donuts. We work long nights here. 12 hr shifts. That's not fun at all. Who wants to stay up working the night shift for 12 hrs when everybody else gets to sleep?
  
  Someone who voluntarily of their own free will enlisted in the police force???  Not my fault they took a stupid job.  You seem to want to absolve them of all their shitbrained thinking.  At what point are they responsible for living up to the occupation they chose.
  
  You would complain if the cops fell asleep on the job, so like any other normal human being we drink coffee and eat food to. This is to stay awake and for our meals. Because I work 12 hrs, i'm sleeping during breakfast time and lunch so what is so wrong with eating something?
  
  Apparently, you're under the misguided notion that police are the only people working 12 hour shifts.  Cab drivers do, amongst others.  Yet why are cops the only vocation you can see packing them in at the donut coffee places for hours at a time?
  
  Criminals are not like other the average citizen.
  
  Yet such a tiny percentage of the population is criminal.
  
  They carry weapons, they are dangerous to work with and you never know what to expect.
  
  Are you speaking of the police or the criminals here?  Read the above articles and you'll find it's hard to tell.
  
  I think it's perfectly fine to be rougher with the criminals when arresting or detaining. 
  
  BIG SURPRISE.  SO you BELIEVE in police brutality.  WHEN DOES A PERSON BECOME A CRIMINAL?  Since you don't have a clue, I'll tell you--it's after a trial by a jury of their peers.  During an arrest they are merely a suspect and are INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty.
  
  So during arrest or detaining, they're NOT criminals in the eyes of the LAW unless they have escaped a prison.
  
  You seem to think that criminals are these dainty little people who aren't doing anything wrong. News flash! If they are getting arrested then they are breaking the law.
  
  See above.  The fact that you don't know the law is really telling.  Just because the police arrest someone doesn't mean they've broken the law.  Christ, are you ignorant.
  
  Had you taken the time to read the above verifiable articles (different than your unsupported "stories") you'd know that people have been brutalized for sitting in the back of a car.  
  
  A handcuffed man in a holding cell PARALYZED FOR LIFE.  (44 MILLION DOLLAR JUDGEMENT.  The jury must have been immature.)  
  
  An 81 year old BLIND MAN thrown to the ground and his arm broken.  
  
  A man handcuffed and threatened with a beating for asking for a ride to the interstate (luckily he had the whole thing going out over his cell phone.
  
  I could go on.  The articles are right on this page, just scroll up.  But I'm guessing you'll want to continue wallowing in ignorance.
  
  So, no, getting arrested doesn't mean you're breaking the law, and even if it does, the police aren't allowed to brutalize anyone.  
  
  I really don't know what somebody did to you to make you so horribly bitter but you need to see the world and realize you are a minority in your incredibly ignorant way of thinking.
  
  I see.  I'M ignorant, but you think people who are arrested are criminals, period.  You think it's "OK" to be rough with them.  And you think you see what goes on firsthand because you dispatch.  
  
  So if I buy a CB radio, I know what goes on with truckers, firsthand?
  
  You have a nice time working with Officer Yeast, Patrolman Jelly and Detective Cruller.  Oh, and the guy on this site who keeps asking me to perform a sexual act on him because he doesn't like what I write.
  

• peedee said on Dec 24, 2006....

  Hi ! GJT, I fully concur with your views and I do remember a newsitem that  beating up a black by the police Created  a furore. The police all over the world are a first rate scoundrels whEther it is India ,UK or USA.They are in fact the stooges of the politicians. A recent case in India, son of a minister shot dead a bar girl and the police manipulated the case to ensure his acquittal. The public resentment aired by the media led to the retrial by a higher court and he was sentenced to LIFE IMPRISON MENT. The police all over the world need policing by the people with courage and strength.

• boyzmom said on Dec 24, 2006....

  I used to work for General Motors Customer Service and I sometimes think the Silverado or Tahoe sucks because a lot of calls came in about faulty fuel injectors or vibration issues but less than 1/10 of a percent of GM customers were calling in, we have to assume that there are some dissatisfied customers who had issues resolved at the dealership and never called in, but the Majority of the customers were not dissatisfied with their vehicle.
  If a study could be done to prove that these cases were only happening a small fraction of the time, your idea that "Cops Suck" could be more of a generalization than a truth. My ex was arrested several times and never experienced police brutality. My cousin was an officer and it was too stressful and he got out of that profession, but from what he says there are some training issues that could be dealt with.
  If the police force were aware of the dangers and not in fear of loosing their life, less excessive force would be seen (possibly). It would be difficult to be trained to use force when necessary because it could mean the difference between life and death without becoming overzealous I would think. I come to that conclusion because I knew people in a personal defense class I took that would strike first and ask questions later because the fear of what could happen is so prevalent. They didn't even bother to see if it was a friend, or family member, or security officer that caught them off guard and kicked and hit like their life depended on it.
  And I just wonder when you say, "... and the guy on this site who keeps asking me to perform a sexual act on him because he doesn't like what I write.", are you repeatedly bringing this up because you are offended by his freedom of speech or are you trying to make him look bad so you look better than him?

• evillinclinations said on Dec 24, 2006....

  You know, I once wanted to BE a cop, but my recent experiences with the ones in this neighborhood have made me start to dislike them as well. I've seen at least three in the four months I've been here that have no qualms whatsoever with the idea of abusing their power, and it makes me sick.
  
  I know there ARE cops who are not like this, but they don't seem to be working the jurisdiction I live in.....
  

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 24, 2006....

  peedee,
  
  Thanks so much for the international perspective!
  
  Where I live, a cop shot another cop to death in front of a WHOLE bunch of people during a training demonstration.  Seems he forgot to TAKE THE LIVE AMMO OUT OF HIS WEAPON.
  
  Bright.  In any language.
  
  Thanks so much for your comments.  Much appreciated.
  

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 24, 2006....

  Boyzmom,
  
  Thank you for your comments.
  
  I used to work for General Motors Customer Service and I sometimes think the Silverado or Tahoe sucks because a lot of calls came in about faulty fuel injectors or vibration issues but less than 1/10 of a percent of GM customers were calling in, we have to assume that there are some dissatisfied customers who had issues resolved at the dealership and never called in, but the Majority of the customers were not dissatisfied with their vehicle.
  
  A few things.  First, with all due respect, this is anectodal.  Your personal experience.  That's nice, but you're trying to turn your personal experience into a statistical certainty.  It would be nice to have some actual facts and figures from a valid source.
  
  But for the sake of things, let's just assume your information is correct--which it really can't be without stats from dealerships, just for starters.
  
  The next point is that we're not talking about general dissatisfaction with the police.  We're talking about police breaking the law and brutalizing the citizenry.  So, the valid analogy isn't "I'm dissatisfied with my car."  It's "My car did not perform as it was promised to, and in fact exploded and seriously injured me."
  
  And what percentage of the vehicles is an acceptable level for exploding cars?  Some would say a certain percentage.  I would say zero.
  
  In addition, if we're just talking about majorities, then 49% of the customers could be dissatisfied.  Because 51% is still a majority.
  
  If a study could be done to prove that these cases were only happening a small fraction of the time, your idea that "Cops Suck" could be more of a generalization than a truth.
  
  So your position is the above articles aren't ENOUGH to come to the conclusion that Cops Suck?  Remember, this is a culled down list, in order to be as fair as possible to the police.  Only arrested, charged, prosecuted, convicted and/or caught on tape.
  
  I believe that these instances are enough.  I am inferring that you would like more examples?  I'm not going by a statistical average.  These incidences alone are enough.
  
  "Cops don't paralyze a LOT of guys who are handcuffed in a holding cell" isn't something I can abide.  The one instance is enough of an outrage for me.  
  
  My ex was arrested several times and never experienced police brutality. My cousin was an officer and it was too stressful and he got out of that profession, but from what he says there are some training issues that could be dealt with.
  
  I'm glad your ex was never brutalized.
  
  If the police force were aware of the dangers and not in fear of loosing their life, less excessive force would be seen (possibly). It would be difficult to be trained to use force when necessary because it could mean the difference between life and death without becoming overzealous I would think.
  
  If you look at the above articles, you will find that the majority of them do not come in life-threatening situations to the officer.  Was the officer threatened by the handcuffed individual in a holding cell?  Or the retarded man walking away from them on a bridge during a flood some called Katrina?  Was the officer that was convicted of stalking in danger?  Was the officer who raped the 14 year old in fear for his life?  No.
  
  I come to that conclusion because I knew people in a personal defense class I took that would strike first and ask questions later because the fear of what could happen is so prevalent. They didn't even bother to see if it was a friend, or family member, or security officer that caught them off guard and kicked and hit like their life depended on it.
  
  A trained professional should be above that.  Once more, the police have sworn to uphold the law.  The don't get to break it and blame it on human frailty.  The public, after all, doesn't.
  
  And I just wonder when you say, "... and the guy on this site who keeps asking me to perform a sexual act on him because he doesn't like what I write.", are you repeatedly bringing this up because you are offended by his freedom of speech or are you trying to make him look bad so you look better than him?
  
  Looking better than him is automatic.  No, I ask the question for two reasons:
  
  1.  To provide a real-life, I-know-that-guy, working analogy right here from this site.  You need go no further to find a policeman whose behavior is indirect conflict from the alleged high standards of their behavior.  It is an example of how they react.  In this case, to simple words they don't like.  They could have called me every name in the book.  They could have used their intellect to come up with a counter argument.  They could have clicked on by, which I do every time I'm not interested in what another person has to say.  Instead they chose TO REQUEST FELLATIO FROM ME.  Seven times.  Takes a special brand of warped to do that.  Just another VALID PROVABLE example of police behavior, albeit on a smaller scale.
  
  2.  To get certain posters to respond to how that sort of behavior sits on their scale for police behavior and decorum.  If they think that sort of thing is OK behavior, where does their line reside?  Is it also OK for that officer to speak that to a suspect for speeding if the suspect says something the officer doesn't personally like?  As you notice, the vast majority have chosen not to answer the question.  WHY?
  
  All you have to do is go to that person's numerous posts whose point is to sling mud at one individual and you will see that those posters have a decided vested interest in NOT answering the question because they are "online friends" of the person REQUESTING FELLATIO FROM ANOTHER MAN SEVEN TIMES.
  
  So, I'm drawing them out in the open and forcing them to either condone that behavior or condemn it.  Since they are too intellectually honest to ask themself the question in good faith and answer it, they've shown their true colors.  Seems a simple question.
  
  Boyz, thank you so much for your considered response.  It's been a pleasure discussing the issue with you, and I hope you would like to discuss it further.
  
  Happy holidays.

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 24, 2006....

  evilinclinations,
  
  Great post.  Thanks for participating.
  
  Since I always ask the opposing side to give examples and such, could you perhaps illustrate some of the abuses of power and the attitude of the police in your experience?
  
  I know, I know.  I've already provided a large number of specific, verifiable examples--but those disagreeing with me frequently gloss over them.
  
  I think it would be helpful to have your personal experience on the matter, since everyone else is relating their personal experiences.
  
  Could ya shine some light for us please?
  
  Thanks again, and happy holidays.

• GrapeKoolaid said on Dec 24, 2006....

  Gumpy-
  
  I hope you're not suggesting that we get rid of the profession all together? 
  
  While I agree that these abuses of power are most aggregious, especially because theirs is a profession to uphold the law, would you throw out the baby with the bathwater?  Like so many have stated here before me, there are many who dutifully perform their duties day in and day out.  Like you say, they're just doing their jobs.  Even if they're just doing the bare minimum.  Of course, there are others who go above and beyond the call of duty as well.  Like all profession, there are good ones and bad ones. 
  
  I personally think that it's ridiculous that people need to be poiced in the first place, especially in this day in age.  However, the reality of the situation is we(the masses) need to be policed.  Without the police keeping law and order, we'd have Libertarian anarchy, and/or Afghan-style warlords.  Perhaps a brand of oriental despotism, where power is consolidated solely by the strength of arms.  A "Mad Max" type of living.  Look at many places in the world where there is no law and order(like parts of Africa). 
  
  As to someone asking you to perform fellatio on you(seven times), somehow I don't think that was to be taken literally.  I think it was a figurative way of saying that he rejects your premises, ideas and/or opinions.  When someone says "F*** you", they don't literally mean they'd like to engage you coitally.  You'd think a self-proclaimed "SuperGenius"(needs a space in between the words, by the way.  Maybe a hyphen.  No need to capitalize, either) would be able to infer that. 
  
  Merry Christmas,
  
  Grape. 
  

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 25, 2006....

  I hope you're not suggesting that we get rid of the profession all together? 
  
  Why not?  Have you ever needed the police?  Do you notice people not speeding on the road because there ARE police?  I have lived 43 years and never once had a need for the police.
  
  I had a friend whose house was burglarized in Atlanta.  I came over while the police were there.  They told him they'd never be able to catch the guy and that all his things were gone and they'd never see them again.  To serve (coffee) and protect (the donuts.)
  
  We locked up his house and left an hour later.  Where did we see the police cruiser as we drove away?  THE DONUT SHOP.  We came back two hours later.  What was in the parking lot of the donut shop?  The same police cruiser.  
  
  But, this is simply anecdotal.
  
  Who is policing the police?  These allegations above weren't discovered by the police.  NO.  They were brought to the attention of the public by citizens.  Police seem to want to enforce the laws on everyone but themselves.
  
  While I agree that these abuses of power are most aggregious, especially because theirs is a profession to uphold the law, would you throw out the baby with the bathwater? 
  
  I see no baby here.  Do you mean would I do away with all forms of law enforcement?  That's a different subject.  
  
  What I WOULD do is multiply TIMES TEN the amount of scrutiny and enforcement that is directed toward the police.  It is no random accident that since the advent of portable digital cameras and video recorders the number of instances of police abuse has SKYROCKETED.
  
  Before, it was the word of the citizen against that of the cop.  And we all know the Blue Line doesn't bend.  Cops back up each other's stories regardless of the facts.  Not so easy to do now that we citizens carry around our own evidence.
  
  These people are far more in need of policing than the general public.  If you would like, I can repost ALL the instances of reported police abuse.  Not just the open and shut slam-dunk ones from the last six months, above.
  
  Like so many have stated here before me, there are many who dutifully perform their duties day in and day out.  Like you say, they're just doing their jobs.  Even if they're just doing the bare minimum. 
  
  And don't deserve ass-kissing or any extra credit for doing the job they chose to do.
  
  Of course, there are others who go above and beyond the call of duty as well.  Like all profession, there are good ones and bad ones. 
  
  What do you consider going above and beyond the call of duty?  Writing a few more traffic tickets?  Passing on that fourth donut?  Seriously, what is going beyond the call of duty?
  
  I personally think that it's ridiculous that people need to be poiced in the first place, especially in this day in age.  However, the reality of the situation is we(the masses) need to be policed.  Without the police keeping law and order, we'd have Libertarian anarchy, and/or Afghan-style warlords.  Perhaps a brand of oriental despotism, where power is consolidated solely by the strength of arms.  A "Mad Max" type of living.  Look at many places in the world where there is no law and order(like parts of Africa). 
  
  This is really just speculation on your part.  Do you really think the average American will devolve into crime?  Or, that if outlaws sprang up, we wouldn't take care of it?  There are some 110 million guns in this country.  And a number of ex-military types.  How do you know that we'd break down into warlords?  I'm not talking about doing away with government.  That would still exist.  As would the military and national guard.  I'm not interested in playing SimEarth, thanks.
  
  Cops suck because they are brutalizing the public and are largely in charge of policing themselves--the public serves as the police OF the police.  If we are to be the police, why do we need them?  But this is YOUR question of doing away with them.  I don't recall indicating we should eliminate the police, although it is a delightful thought.
  
  The donut industry as we know it in this country would crumble, so maybe we better not.
  
  As to someone asking you to perform fellatio on you(seven times), somehow I don't think that was to be taken literally.  I think it was a figurative way of saying that he rejects your premises, ideas and/or opinions. 
  
  Then there are two observations:
  
  1.  So it's OK for a person who drapes themselves in "I'm a police officer" to respond in such a manner?  Here or anywhere else?  Again, I ask the question--if they respond in such a manner to simple typed words on a computer screen, how will they respond in real life when someone doesn't agree with them?  Would it be OK with you if someone disagreed with a policeman and the policeman then requested them to perform fellatio on them?  That's cool with you?  In court or at a street crossing?  Yeah, we citizens sure are craving that.
  
  2.  This is a shining example of the "class" of people who are police.  Now, had not this individual draped themselves in "I'm in Law Enforcement, cut me open and I'll bleed a blue uniform" well, then the comparison couldn't be made.  But, if this is the best they can contribute to the debate, I think we all see that we are dealing with someone who has the intellect of a gerbil.  Rather than confront the offending opinions with counterarguments, they are reduced to third grade name calling.  And this is someone who is supposed to be "above" emotional, brainless reactions.  Particurly when faced with the imposing, awesome, terrible, and life-threatening threat of words on a computer screen.
  
  Is it your assertion that you support this kind of behavior from police or anyone else?  
  
  When someone says "F*** you", they don't literally mean they'd like to engage you coitally. 
  
  How do you know what they mean?  Are you ALSO a mindreader?  Read some of this person's posts.  Nearly ALL of them involve sex or his need for sex, or the fact that he can't get sex.  YOU may wish to think he's not actually requesting fellatio.  However, considering the actions of the cops in the above stories (stalking and rape), and the person-in-question's obsessive posts about the waitress he can't nail or the fact that he is old and can't get laid any more, the jury is still out here.
  
  In addition, requesting fellatio SEVEN times is not saying "go to hell."  It's requesting fellatio seven times.  Could be Freudian.  Could be he's not smart enough to think up a different insult--which again says much about this person's brainpower.  OR, it could be yet another sexual reference.  In either case, what does it take in terms of typed words that seem to overload someone's circuitry to push them to such a request?  Seven times.  
  
  Have you seem ME starting not one, not two, not three, but four separate topics specifically about this person?  No.  Yet they have about me.  I imagine you don't consider THAT to be evidence of the cop's immature mind, either, eh?
  
  If it's THIS easy for me to push a cop's buttons just with my keyboard and my DLS connection, how easy would it be for someone in real life?  And what would be the reaction then, I wonder?  
  
  You'd think a self-proclaimed "SuperGenius"(needs a space in between the words, by the way.  Maybe a hyphen.  No need to capitalize, either) would be able to infer that. 
  
  SuperGenius is the self-applied occupation of Wile E. Coyote.  The spelling is--and always has been--intentional and an homage to him.
  
  Incidentally "poiced" is not POLICED.  Just thought I'd point that out to you.  Also, "Ive" is not a word.  "I've" requires more punctuation than you have provided.
  
  Merry Christmas,
  
  Same to you.

• GrapeKoolaid said on Dec 26, 2006....

  "Ive"?  I agree, that's not a word.  Though I don't recall writing it. 
  
  "DLS connection", you mean DSL, right?  I know, kind of nitpicky. 
  
  "Who is policing the police?  These allegations above weren't discovered by the police.  NO.  They were brought to the attention of the public by citizens.  Police seem to want to enforce the laws on everyone but themselves."
  
  Internal Affairs is supposed to police the police.  I agree with you that most of the times cops cover for each other, but the police isn't the only branch that fail in their duties and are guilty of cover-ups.  In my opinion, the systematic failure and the cover-ups by the congress is far more aggregious. 
  
  "This is really just speculation on your part.  Do you really think the average American will devolve into crime?  Or, that if outlaws sprang up, we wouldn't take care of it?" 
  
  Specultaion on your part as well. 
  
  "There are some 110 million guns in this country.  And a number of ex-military types."
  
  How many will be used in crimes?  How many for defending homes?  There's no way to know.  A silly mental exercise.  Fun maybe, but pointless.  
  
  "How do you know that we'd break down into warlords?  I'm not talking about doing away with government.  That would still exist.  As would the military and national guard.  I'm not interested in playing SimEarth, thanks."
  
  You would let the military and/or the national guard police the citizenry?  NOT in their job description. 
  
  I'm guessing you don't live in a big city.  Parts of the city that I live in(Chicago) is already besieged by gangbangers and the cops here are engaged in urban warfare day in and day out. 
  
  "What I WOULD do is multiply TIMES TEN the amount of scrutiny and enforcement that is directed toward the police.  It is no random accident that since the advent of portable digital cameras and video recorders the number of instances of police abuse has SKYROCKETED."
  
  No arguements on that.  But if I may add to it, it's not just law enforcement that needs it.  Government at every level, city, state and federal, need to be scrutinized.  Having bad cops, to me, is just a symptom of a greater problem, you see.  Corruption at every level leads to having "connected" people land comfy jobs.
  
  I don't have the time to finish this right now.  I have to go to work soon and I would like to read and respond to some other posts before I'm off.  I would, however, like to get back to you on the rest of the points you've made. 
  
  As to defending copsunited, he doesn't need me to defend him.  He's a grown man.  He can do that himself.  It was the generalization of the profession that I took issue with. 
  
  Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comments.  It is appreciated.  I thought for a moment, that you'd dismiss it, or delete it as you've done in the past.
  
  Until next time,
  
  Best reagards,
  
  Grape. 
  

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 26, 2006....

  "Ive"?  I agree, that's not a word.  Though I don't recall writing it. 
  
  It is in your profile.
  
  "DLS connection", you mean DSL, right?  I know, kind of nitpicky. 
  
  You are right.  I stand corrected.
  
  Internal Affairs is supposed to police the police.  I agree with you that most of the times cops cover for each other, but the police isn't the only branch that fail in their duties and are guilty of cover-ups.  In my opinion, the systematic failure and the cover-ups by the congress is far more aggregious. 
  
  Yes, IAD is SUPPOSED to police the police.  Yet, in each instance above, citizens brought the misconduct to the attention of police.
  
  In several of the cases, the city or the police department contested charges.  As in the case of New Orleans police shooting the retarded man in the back.  
  
  Specultaion on your part as well. 
  
  I assume you mean speculation.  And, I pointed out in my post that it was such, and that I was not interested in playing SimEarth. I was merely providing conjecture to your supposing--which was interesting, but largely unprovable.
  
  In other words, YOU brought forth the speculation, so I ran with more speculation to show you the opposite side of the speculation coin before dismissing the endeavor as interesting and thought-provoking to some extent, but not very binding.
  
  How many will be used in crimes?  How many for defending homes?  There's no way to know.  A silly mental exercise.  Fun maybe, but pointless.  
  
  Right.  Did I start the debate about your Mad Max vision of the world?  No.  You did this.  I simply reacted to it.  The points you bring up sprang from your poisoned branch.  As do the following.  I'm simply indulging your speculation.
  
  You would let the military and/or the national guard police the citizenry?  NOT in their job description. 
  
  Funny.  They're doing it in Iraq.  They can't do it here?  But again, you're putting words in my mouth.  I'd have the police or military respond to your "warlords."  Again, more dreck from your sci-fi speculation.  But I'm willing to indulge you.
  
  I'm guessing you don't live in a big city.  Parts of the city that I live in(Chicago) is already besieged by gangbangers and the cops here are engaged in urban warfare day in and day out. 
  
  Dallas, Texas is usually considered a big city.  The city you live in is a living commercial for police misconduct, graft, and brutality.  Perhaps that's why they haven't managed to get crime under control?
  
  No arguements on that.  But if I may add to it, it's not just law enforcement that needs it.  Government at every level, city, state and federal, need to be scrutinized.  Having bad cops, to me, is just a symptom of a greater problem, you see.  Corruption at every level leads to having "connected" people land comfy jobs.
  
  I'm only discussing the police at the moment.  If you'd like, start a thread and do the necessary homework to come up with examples of the misconduct you find in goverment.  I'd read it.
  
  I don't have the time to finish this right now.  I have to go to work soon and I would like to read and respond to some other posts before I'm off.  I would, however, like to get back to you on the rest of the points you've made. 
  
  As to defending copsunited, he doesn't need me to defend him.  He's a grown man.  He can do that himself.  It was the generalization of the profession that I took issue with. 
  
  No, you went to great lengths to categorize someone asking me to "blow me" and "suck my dick" as just insults.  My response is that someone should come up with better insults or at least more variety.  In another thread I'm sure you've seen, I ask the question of how YOU can be so certain they're not just insults and are not in fact actual requests.  Considering the amount of time he has devoted on his blog to the subject.
  
  I may also add that you quickly rushed to his blog to report what you had written here.  The purpose of which remains a mystery to me.  Perhaps you could state your purpose?
  
  Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comments.  It is appreciated.  I thought for a moment, that you'd dismiss it, or delete it as you've done in the past.
  
  This post is on-topic.  This post does not give lip service to the topic while doing other things.  I do not agree with much of it necessarily, but it is not offensive and addresses the topic at hand.
  
  Which is always welcome.
  

• GrapeKoolaid said on Dec 26, 2006....

  Hey gumpy. 
  
  Decided not to go into work today.  This is more fun(not to mention the fact that I'm quitting my job anyways).  Even having said that, my time here will be short, 'cuz I'm going out with my friends in a little bit.  So I'll try to be brief. 
  
  " "Ive"?  I agree, that's not a word.  Though I don't recall writing it. 
  
  It is in your profile."
  
  Look at it again.  There's an apostrophe in there.  I didn't change it, either.  It's always been in there. 
  
  As long as the point gets across, let's not nitpick each other about typos, huh?  It's a silly waste of bandwidth.  Unless it's a clear mistake that is made again and again, where it becomes obvious that the person doesn't know how to spell.  Everyone's fingers slip once in a while. 
  
  "December 4th, 2006, Chicago Sun-Times: More Chicago cops arrested in corruption investigation. 
  
  Several Chicago police officers were arrested Monday as part of an ongoing corruption investigation, a police spokeswoman said.

  Monique Bond said those arrested were members of the department's Special Operations Section. She declined to discuss other details, including how many officers were involved and what specific charges they faced.

  The arrests are part of a corruption investigation conducted by the police department and the Cook County state's attorney's office, Bond said."

  This above article seems to prove both your point and mine, that there are corrupt cops, and that the IAD is doing its job.  Checks and balances.  The system works(sometimes....Not often enough in your opinion, and mine as well). 
  
  "Funny.  They're doing it in Iraq."
  
  I don't think the US military should be policing the Iraqi citizenry, either.  Not in their job-description, or at least it shouldn't be. 
  
  I still hold to my belief that people NEED to be policed.  We're a bunch of savages.  We're not as civilized as we'd like to think.  Lawlessness is something no one should want. 
  
  I understand.  That's not what you're getting at, either.  What you're saying is that the police need to be better policed themselves.  The watcher needs to be watched.  I'm in agreement with you there. 
  
  "No, you went to great lengths to categorize someone asking me to "blow me" and "suck my dick" as just insults.  My response is that someone should come up with better insults or at least more variety.  In another thread I'm sure you've seen, I ask the question of how YOU can be so certain they're not just insults and are not in fact actual requests.  Considering the amount of time he has devoted on his blog to the subject.
  
  I may also add that you quickly rushed to his blog to report what you had written here.  The purpose of which remains a mystery to me.  Perhaps you could state your purpose?"
  
  I don't consider the lengths I went to be that great at all.  It just seemed that you were happily referencing the fellatio thing over and over, and I thought a self-proclaimed "SuperGenuis" would be able to infer the meaning behind the words.  You can't ask someone for fellatio on-line unless a), you two live in the same town and you'll meet each other later, or b) there is some virtual-technology I've not heard of. 
  
  As to me copying and pasting the previous comment in someone else's blog, you've been in the habit of deleting my comments, and I wanted a record of what I'd written kept elsewhere.  Since you two are at each other's e-throats, I thought it was a good place to keep it.  You even deleted an example I posted here about the police abusing their power(Lester Siler), so I had no assurances that any of my comments here would be kept. 
  
  The last comment of mine you deleted on another post of yours, you purport that I give "lip service" to the topic while doing other things.  I took issue with it because I actually took the time and thought into writing it out.  I felt that I addressed the issue, but since you disagree with it, being the moderator of your blog, you can do what you wish.  I would like to remind you that I am free to comment, make copies and post them anywhere I like.  It is the responsibility of the moderator to do what they wish with my comments. 
  
  Since you have another post regarding blog moderators, perhaps I'll finish this thought there. 
  

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 26, 2006....

  "Ive"?  I agree, that's not a word.  Though I don't recall writing it. 
  It is in your profile."
  
  Look at it again.  There's an apostrophe in there.  I didn't change it, either.  It's always been in there. 
  
  Maybe it's a Macintosh thing, but when I rollover your profile, the apostrophe is not there.  
  
  As long as the point gets across, let's not nitpick each other about typos, huh?  It's a silly waste of bandwidth.  Unless it's a clear mistake that is made again and again, where it becomes obvious that the person doesn't know how to spell.  Everyone's fingers slip once in a while. 
  
  Why, how mature of you.  Perhaps you don't recall STARTING punctuation theater with THIS bon mot?
  
  You'd think a self-proclaimed "SuperGenius"(needs a space in between the words, by the way.  Maybe a hyphen.  No need to capitalize, either) would be able to infer that.
  
  I don't point out someone's mistakes in this regard unless they a) start examining mine, which you did--indicating to me your willingness to engage in that sort of thing, or b) they call me stupid or indicate I lack intelligence.  Which isn't a good idea if they can't spell or punctuate.
  
  "December 4th, 2006, Chicago Sun-Times: More Chicago cops arrested in corruption investigation. 
  Several Chicago police officers were arrested Monday as part of an ongoing corruption investigation, a police spokeswoman said.
  Monique Bond said those arrested were members of the department's Special Operations Section. She declined to discuss other details, including how many officers were involved and what specific charges they faced.
  The arrests are part of a corruption investigation conducted by the police department and the Cook County state's attorney's office, Bond said."
  
  This above article seems to prove both your point and mine, that there are corrupt cops, and that the IAD is doing its job.  Checks and balances.  The system works(sometimes....Not often enough in your opinion, and mine as well). 
  
  Except that we have no way of knowing what spurred the investigation.  Could have been as a result of a citizen's complaint.  Could have been an extension of the death row situation, which wasn't reported by the police.
  
  I find it strange that you don't see the huge loophole here:
  
  She declined to discuss other details, including how many officers were involved and what specific charges they faced.
  
  Gee.  Some (several) offers have been arrested.  But we won't tell you who, how many, why, and what they face.  Sounds like more real good police policing the police so far.
  
  "Funny.  They're doing it in Iraq."
  
  I don't think the US military should be policing the Iraqi citizenry, either.  Not in their job-description, or at least it shouldn't be. 
  
  Shouldn't be?  That's not the same as IS.  Your point is that it wasn't in their job description.  My point, which you seem to have overlooked, is that not being in the job description is no exclusionary for the function not being fulfilled anyway.
  
  I still hold to my belief that people NEED to be policed.  We're a bunch of savages.  We're not as civilized as we'd like to think.  Lawlessness is something no one should want. 
  
  But you're the person who believes their is no justice, only forgiveness, right?  So which is it?  Do we need the police so we can have forgiveness?  Or justice?
  
  I understand.  That's not what you're getting at, either.  What you're saying is that the

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 26, 2006....

  continued due to techno-freakishness on SC....
  
  I understand.  That's not what you're getting at, either.  What you're saying is that the police need to be better policed themselves.  The watcher needs to be watched.  I'm in agreement with you there. 
  
  Actually, I'm also saying that this profession seems to either attract or create through experience people who feel themselves to be "above the law" or "the law."  Mr. Cop says he IS the law.  No, the law is a codified set of rules established by elected representatives and executed in a court of law.  LAW ENFORCEMENT is what eats donuts all day.
  
  I don't consider the lengths I went to be that great at all.  It just seemed that you were happily referencing the fellatio thing over and over, and I thought a self-proclaimed "SuperGenuis" would be able to infer the meaning behind the words.  You can't ask someone for fellatio on-line unless a), you two live in the same town and you'll meet each other later, or b) there is some virtual-technology I've not heard of. 
  
  Happily?  No.  Not one single other person has made me a similar offer.  Not once.  Yet one person made it seven times.  So, once more, Grape--and this is the third time--that person either is too stupid to engage in a reasonable argument, has no brainpower to come up with a wider variety of gutter insult, or indeed is fixated on  receiving such from me.
  
  Given the many, many instances of his obsession with describing such acts, I can't be sure someone so addled in the brain isn't really wanting such.
  
  And, you can certainly request such online and receive it online.  As is done in chat rooms all over the internet.  You ARE aware we're allowed to meet people in real life after speaking on the internet, right?  I mean, it doesn't take a SuperGenius to realize THAT.
  
  As to me copying and pasting the previous comment in someone else's blog, you've been in the habit of deleting my comments, and I wanted a record of what I'd written kept elsewhere.  Since you two are at each other's e-throats, I thought it was a good place to keep it. 
  
  This is a crock.  You could have kept it on your own blog.  Or on your computer hard drive.  I can think of only ONE reason you would post it where you did.  You wanted bonus points from a cretin.  I hope you got them.
  
  So you thought since two people were having an argument, putting your deleted comments on the other party's blog would be a good idea why?  To defuse the situation?  Is that what that would do?  If you really want your assertions taken seriously, making statements like the above is a really poor way to go about it.
  
  Your protestation here is flimsy to the point of being laughable.
  
  You even deleted an example I posted here about the police abusing their power(Lester Siler), so I had no assurances that any of my comments here would be kept. 
  
  I did not see any such post, nor did I delete it.  If you posted it, post it again, because I would never remove a post about this individual (who I just looked up on wikipedia.  
  
  Why would I delete a story of police brutality?  I'm sorry, but I did no such thing.  I'm willing to blame it on technology.  I won't imply you didn't post it or posted it incorrectly.  Frankly, it's a point in my favor.  
  
  Will you repost it here, or shall I?
  
  The last comment of mine you deleted on another post of yours, you purport that I give "lip service" to the topic while doing other things(self-promotion and such).  I took issue with it because I actually took the time and thought into writing it out. 
  
  Your second post had lots of escolding and very little on topic.  Sorry you spent so much time on it.  
  
  I felt that I addressed the issue, but since you disagree with it and since you are the moderator of your own blog, you can do what you wish.  I would like to remind you however, that I am also free to comment, make copies of it, and post it anywhere I like.  Just like you(or any other moderators) can delete them.
  
  Thanks, I was totally unaware of it.  

• GrapeKoolaid said on Dec 26, 2006....

  You don't remember a comment on here beginning with the words, "Gumpy, if I may..."?  That's what contained the example of Lester Siler.  I even posted a link to the transcript of the torture.  Hmm...  I wonder why that comment was deleted.  If you're willing to blame it on technology, that's fine.  I was trying to provide you with yet another example of police brutality and the abuse of power. 
  
  "Why, how mature of you.  Perhaps you don't recall STARTING punctuation review with THIS bon mot?"
  
  I'll give you one example.  "We'll leave the spelling mistake alone for now, since you believe cop to be "intelligent" which, ironically, absolves you of being able to spell if he's smarter than you, since HE can't spell.".  Not directed at me, but this comment was made by you 3 days ago, on another thread.  So, no.  I don't recall starting it at all.  It was your style, and I was just mimicking it(maybe poorly) to show you what it's like. 
  
  "Gee.  Some (several) offers have been arrested.  But we won't tell you who, how many, why, and what they face.  Sounds like more real good police policing the police so far."
  
  Perhaps because the investigation is ongoing?
  
  "But you're the person who believes their is no justice, only forgiveness, right?  So which is it?  Do we need the police so we can have forgiveness?  Or justice?"
  
  Why not both? 
  
  "And, you can certainly request such online and receive it online.  As is done in chat rooms all over the internet.  You ARE aware we're allowed to meet people in real life after speaking on the internet, right?  I mean, it doesn't take a SuperGenius to realize THAT."
  
  Actually, if they were to meet, they would be requesting it online and receiving it in flesh.  Cyber fellatio just doesn't have the same effect.  Unless JD propositioned you to meet at a certain location, I gather that he was trying to insult you.  Albeit the insults lacked creativity. 
  
  "This is a crock.  You could have kept it on your own blog.  Or on your computer hard drive.  I can think of only ONE reason you would post it where you did.  You wanted bonus points from a cretin.  I hope you got them."
  
  I'm not in the habit of saving things I write.  I tend to shoot from the hip.  Which is why I took issue with you deleting my comments.  Perhaps I will take your advice on the matter and start saving things from now on. 
  
  "So you thought since two people were having an argument, putting your deleted comments on the other party's blog would be a good idea why?  To defuse the situation?  Is that what that would do?  If you really want your assertions taken seriously, making statements like the above is a really poor way to go about it.
  
  Your protestation here is flimsy to the point of being laughable."
  
  I don't really care about the feud between you and cops.  It would be nice if you two can engage each other and keep a civil tongue, but due to the personality conflicts, or you two getting off on the wrong foot or whatever, it seems that's not a possibility.  Though the topic of the post where I copied and pasted was about you, so I didn't see it as anything inflammatory. 
  
  "Your second post had lots of escolding and very little on topic.  Sorry you spent so much time on it."
  
  It did have some escolding in it, yes.  What little I had on the topic, I thought was quite enough.  It's not the length of the post, but the quality of the content that is important.  Dont you think so?
  
  Notice I've kept a civil tongue thus far, even after your comments laden with sarcasm. 
  
  Back to the topic at hand.
  
  I agree with you that the abuses of power by the police are most aggregious, especially because their profession is one to uphold the law, and that a higher level of scrutiny is needed in screening and "policing" of law enforcement.  However, your assertion that cops suck, and your
  condemnation of the entire profession, citing a few bad examples is unfair. 
  
  These comments are getting longer and longer...
  
  I enjoyed this little conversation thus far.  Thanks for letting me partake in it. 
  
  I have to go for now, but I'm anticipating another well-thought out response from you. 
  
  Best regards,
  
  Grape. 
  

• GumpyJumptooth said on Dec 26, 2006....

  You don't remember a comment on here beginning with the words, "Gumpy, if I may..."?  That's what contained the example of Lester Siler.  I even posted a link to the transcript of the torture.  Hmm...  I wonder why that comment was deleted.  If you're willing to blame it on technology, that's fine.  I was trying to provide you with yet another example of police brutality and the abuse of power. 
  
  What part of my response didn't you understand?  I never saw your post.  So how can you assume it was deleted?  I appreciate the extra example, but I think my argument stands with or without it.
  
  I'll give you one example.  "We'll leave the spelling mistake alone for now, since you believe cop to be "intelligent" which, ironically, absolves you of being able to spell if he's smarter than you, since HE can't spell.".  Not directed at me, but this comment was made by you 3 days ago, on another thread.  So, no.  I don't recall starting it at all.  It was your style, and I was just mimicking it(maybe poorly) to show you what it's like. 
  
  Really?  So you wander onto MY blog, and you "allegedly" observe me interacting with someone else, and appoint yourself the "show you how it feels guy"?  Why didn't you state that intention?
  
  Secondly, as you perhaps have read in another thread, I don't pick on grammar and spelling unless someone does it to me first, or they call me stupid or unintelligent.  Since this is MY blog and all.  That's what the person in question did.  And then you did it.  I think you would be intellectually dishonest to claim I did it to you before you chose to do so.
  
  In real life, do you wander upon a conversation with two people and appoint yourself referee in someone's house?  Please don't fan on this question as you have several others.
  
  "Gee.  Some (several) offers have been arrested.  But we won't tell you who, how many, why, and what they face.  Sounds like more real good police policing the police so far."
  Perhaps because the investigation is ongoing?
  
  And you believe other police won't be aware their fellow officers have been arrested or for what?  Nice dream.  If those cops are arrested or charged, not only will the whole force know, but CERTAINLY other police doing the same illegal thing will be tipped off.
  
  "But you're the person who believes their is no justice, only forgiveness, right?  So which is it?  Do we need the police so we can have forgiveness?  Or justice?"
  Why not both? 
  
  THIS is the sort of intellectually dishonest thing that won't be appreciated or tolerated here.  You are two-faced.  In a previous post, I asked you the same question.  You had no answer.  Now you want to use this logic against me?  Wrong.  Defend your own ideas before you adopt someone else's.
  
  You're dangerously off-topic here.  I am not the topic.  
  
  "And, you can certainly request such online and receive it online.  As is done in chat rooms all over the internet.  You ARE aware we're allowed to meet people in real life after speaking on the internet, right?  I mean, it doesn't take a SuperGenius to realize THAT."
  Actually, if they were to meet, they would be requesting it online and receiving it in flesh.  Cyber fellatio just doesn't have the same effect.  Unless JD propositioned you to meet at a certain location, I gather that he was trying to insult you.  Albeit the insults lacked creativity. 
  
  I'm begining to wonder just how much of this you read.  My point, clearly stated, is that people receive online and offline sex upon request every single day.  Someone has to make the REQUEST and have it agreed to before meeting places and arrangements are made.
  
  As for cyber not having the same effect, I will defer to your expertise in this matter.
  
  YOU gather that he was trying to insult me.  Funny.  This ain't your blog.  He didn't insult YOU, did he?  Your impressions of this do not interest me in the least.  I have proven beyond a doubt that this man is obsessed with such.  And yet you still defend this person.
  
  "This is a crock.  You could have kept it on your own blog.  Or on your computer hard drive.  I can think of only ONE reason you would post it where you did.  You wanted bonus points from a cretin.  I hope you got them."
  I'm not in the habit of saving things I write.  I tend to shoot from the hip.  Which is why I took issue with you deleting my comments.  Perhaps I will take your advice on the matter and start saving things from now on. 
  
  You should change your habits.  I hate to say this, but only a dolt would use another person's blog as a storage recepticle.  Perhaps the fact that it's SoulCast is your malfunction?  If this were on my personal website, would you consider it an extension of your hard drive?  
  
  Above, you flatly stat that you took issue with ME deleting comments on MY blog.  Amazing.  Do you even read this before you post it?
  
  Learn to control your own words.  You will find that I control the ones here.  On MY blog.  You will also find that I have no interest in controlling the ones on YOUR blog.  Which is not as oft-read as this one.  I wonder why?
  
  I don't really care about the feud between you and cops.  It would be nice if you two can engage each other and keep a civil tongue, but due to the personality conflicts, or you two getting off on the wrong foot or whatever, it seems that's not a possibility.  Though the topic of the post where I copied and pasted was about you, so I didn't see it as anything inflammatory. 
  
  This is just a lie.  If you didn't care about it, why did you post your deleted comment from here on HIS blog?  You still have failed to answer this.  Anyone who has read this thread can see why.
  
  You first claim that you felt a feud was going on.  In the same paragraph, you then claim posting a comment I DELETED wouldn't be inflammatory if you posted it on his blog?  Amazing.  You are either intentionally ignorant, or obtuse as a practice.
  
  And again, your claim that his blog was a good storage area for that particular piece of writing doesn't pass the smell test.
  
  "Your second post had lots of escolding and very little on topic.  Sorry you spent so much time on it."
  
  It did have some escolding in it, yes.  What little I had on the topic, I thought was quite enough.  It's not the length of the post, but the quality of the content that is important.  Dont you think so?
  
  Certainly.  And there was nothing of quality there.  Escolding me for defending my own blog won't be tolerated, so leave it out.  
  
  Notice I've kept a civil tongue thus far, even after your comments laden with sarcasm. 
  
  Sarcasm IS permitted here.  In droves.  And your claim of a civil tongue is disingenuous to me.  Look at how much you have commented on ME.  And the nature of my blog to this point as compared to THE TOPIC AT HAND.
  
  Now, in the interest of fairness, I have indulged you.  But we're done now.  NO MORE.  ANY MORE and I'm finished indulging you.  The large gaps in intellectual honesty and what I perceive to be intentional ignorance are the reason.
  
  THIS IS NOT THE SPOT FOR A DISCUSSION OF ME, MY DELETION OF YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS, OR YOUR VIEWS ON HOW I RUN MY BLOG.  NOR IS IT A PERSONAL STORAGE AREA FOR YOUR WRITINGS--a thought which strikes me as the height of pomposity.
  
  I hope this is crystal clear.
  
  Back to the topic at hand.
  
  Finally.  
  
  I agree with you that the abuses of power by the police are most aggregious, especially because their profession is one to uphold the law, and that a higher level of scrutiny is needed in screening and "policing" of law enforcement.  However, your assertion that cops suck, and your
  condemnation of the entire profession, citing a few bad examples is unfair. 
  
  A few bad examples?  OK.  How many do you require?  How many paralyzed people handcuffed in holding cells?  How many kids raped?  You see the examples.  How many will it take to reach YOUR personal level of outrage?
  
  I'd like a number.
  
  Do you think these are the only instances?  How many do I have to post to suit YOU?  Since you seem to feel this is YOUR blog?
  
  "A few bad examples?"  Hmmm.  Earlier it was quality of quantity.  NOW, when it suits your purpose, you want quantity over quality.  Death row inmates with genatals shocked is a sufficient QUALITY for me to ignore your request for QUANTITY.  
  
  Which I could provide.  Had I not provided more concrete examples of my point than you've shown concrete anything.
  
  Oh, except for the ONE example you provide (allegedly earlier) which backs up MY point?
  
  Tread carefully.  I'm pretty sure you're just being obtuse.  Feigning ignorance.

• sickofcopsattitude said on Jul 21, 2008....

  I agree. Cops think they are gods of all people. They love to treat people like shit. Especialy in JENKS OKLAHOMA. Look out for the blonde BITCH in uniform. She is divorced and holding a grudge, no wonder the poor bastard left her nasty fat ass! What an attitude she has. But we all know that you can screw over so many people untill you get whats coming to you. Talks to people like they are dogs. Is this what the police are here for? Mind you, there are still a few good ones out there..... maybee. My advice is never go to Jenks Oklahoma at night. Thats how they make their money. You will be followed everywhere until you make a small mistake or they make one up, And LIE about it on paper. And Sapupla Oklahoma is bad too. Why do they treat people like crap on their shoes? I think they love to ruin your life and sit around and laugh about it and say, Look what i did.

• vvelez5 said on Aug 12, 2008....

  im with you cops do suck a cop has never helped me even when a guy cut me off thought it was my fault and chased me around town. no lie he cut me off and pressed his brakes pulled beside me got real close trying to ram me off the road. i call the cops they say to pull over and wait at a gas station for acop to show up.... WTF! idk if this man has a gun or not or wants to beat my assi finally find a cop pulled over on the side of the road i pulled over next to him got out guy sped off i told him what happened cop said to call the police and file a report and that he was busy. checking for speeders asshole. they have never been but the biggest racist towards me and my family when i was small i grew up adoring cops i wanted to be one and im saddened that in every city in the US cops are like a movie of serpico.

• theavenger said on Sep 07, 2008....

  Judges know that cops lie in court because the same lying cops lied for them when they were prosecutors. Yes, cops suck.They are jackbooted thugs in a uniform. Cops are little more than low level city employees who are given a badge and gun so they can be involuntary tax collectors. Tickets and arrests=fines which helps fill the city coffers. For this cops think they're hot stuff? What moronic thinking by these mentally deficient scumbags. I have never known a single honest cop, and pushing 60, I ain't a youngster no more.

• pinkelephant said on Sep 22, 2008....

  Fire em all!!  Esp ones in wisconsin state patrol.  I'm sorry but watching for speeders in times like now is soo stupid!  Yeah that's really helping your economy!  SENSE

• proapp said on Oct 13, 2008....

  great blog, where to start? cops suck, stay tuned....

• rnblk34 said on Oct 30, 2008....

  California cops kill newlywed man by mistake 30 Oct 2008, 0016 hrs IST, AP ANANHEIM (California): A newlywed killed by police after he stepped outside his home to confront suspected burglars was shot in a case of mistaken identity, police said. Julian Alexander died after being shot twice in the chest by a police officer who was chasing four burglary suspects early Tuesday morning. Police chief John Welter said the officer ran into Alexander, mistook him for one of the four juvenile suspects and shot him. "The last thing we ever want to do, No. 1, (is) take somebody's life," he said. "And we certainly don't want to take the life of someone who is mistakenly believed to be involved in some criminal activity." "He was a good kid, trying to protect his house," said Alexander's mother-in-law Michelle Mooney. "And the police, instead of asking questions, they just shot first. Somebody has to be held responsible for this." Welter would not release the officer's name, but said he was a 10-year veteran of the department. The officer was placed on paid leave pending an investigation. "It's mistaken identity, but that doesn't bring my son back," said Alexander's father Jerry. He said Alexander got married last weekend and his 19-year-old wife is expecting a baby in December. Alexander's wife said she heard the gunshots and tried to go into the yard, but the officer told her to stay inside. From the window they saw Alexander handcuffed and bleeding in the front yard. Paramedics took him to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead. ----------------------- Basically - guy is sitting in his place, says "whats that noise honey, think ill go check..."; steps out to his front porch where he gets one directly in the chest...yea... great. So now I get to wonder every day if i hear a noise outside my house - i cant be sure if i go to check on said noise that its not some criminal running from a cop who is going to mistake me on my doorstep for the criminal and kill me. Cops need to be held responsible for these actions. The cop responsible needs to be fired and jailed. This is recklessness - but more than likely, because hes a "law enforcement officer" - he'll just get a stamp on his job record and go into probation with a fellow officer shadowing him. Ahh - Justice, the lack of it astounds me...

• jeffries1984 said on Feb 14, 2009....

  dude you know why people praise coppers so much when its a good thing? Because they are so used to thinking negative towards them. So its a matter of fact that the good will be over praised!!!!!!! I think the dude who put this article together for my enjoyment kicks ass!!! thank you sir for showing me the truth behind our fake civillian army, that HAS no POWER because I say they dont!! I AM THE PEOPLE AND WE NEED TO STAND UP!!!!

• bobbysteels216 said on Apr 29, 2009....

  I have no understanding of unwarranted police brutality. In most cases, the actions that these police decide to take are generally actions that a person takes in retaliation to an individual or group. In situations where unwarranted police brutality are taken the cops are in no kind of danger. Why they would resort to unwarranted police brutality despite not being threatened remains an enigma to me. I think that laws should be tougher against police who wrongfully exaggerate or fabricate a story to get a "stronger case" against an individual; it shouldn't be a misdemeanor, it should be a felony. Many things that "bad apple" police do should result in them being slapped with a felony charge and them being stripped of the "right" to be a policeman/policewoman. What I don't like is that police who use their "authority" to commit crimes are "pardoned," or don't receive the due amount of justice. When people who aren't police commit a crime they're considered "dangerous." Why aren't police who commit crimes considered dangerous also? Not considering police who commit crimes "dangerous" is basically telling them that they're above the law! If you don't give them an "incentive" to not commit "crimes" they will consider it an "option." There are cops who are under the impression that they wield "martial law" and they will continue to feel that way and act accordingly until laws are added that will let them know that they will be held responsible for their misconduct.

• Cophater said on Jun 17, 2009....

  Cops abuse power. Its that simple, and they are that corrupt. Almost ever God Damned one of them. I hate 'em, don't trust 'em, and don't think anyone ever should. Fuck a cop!

• yourmind said on Sep 09, 2009....

  "We the people" have vested the police with powers above that of a civilian, Einstein. There are far more people thankful for cops for the good things and crimes they've stopped than the minority like you who were conducting misdemeanor, got handcuffed and think it's brutality. Pathetic

Comment on "Why Cops Suck"

Currently tagged	police criminals themselves Cops bitterness does not become you dumb cops suck misconduct judges scumbags too many examples to list tonight Heres something to top your list Shit-head J UNIT wanker police suck sad Lie cheat and steal the cop way tag respectful honor brave (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment