Ask A Cop *The Video Series*

Originally posted by Bobbox1980

A job is not an excuse, we all have jobs to do. You are using the Yuppie Nuremberg defense as if it is an actual valid defense rather than being the "I was just following orders" rationalization that it is.

You are right, it is not an excuse. it is a fact.His job is to uphold the law... If he does not uphold the law then we have problems... The point is , the responsibility to stand up and change a law you do not like, lies squarely on you. If you do not agree with the law, go out and do the work to get it changed. If you only sit there and complain, the law will stay the same.

I am working on trying to amass enough money to start my own sea stead, and therefore my own country, as I have no faith in my fellow citizens or humanity as a whole to do the right thing on this little issue we call freedom.

... I wish you all the luck in the word on that.


[edit on 21-12-2009 by gimme_some_truth]

reply to post by Bobbox1980


Good luck to you. However, I still stand by what I say; cops are sworn to uphold the law like it or not. They don't make them; you however as a voter have the right and indeed the obligation to make the changes you deem necessary and right. Currently all I'm hearing from you are complaints.

reply to post by gallopinghordes


Hey, I do vote, I call out local politicians who should be voted out of office and support the ones I think should be there amongst my friends and associates. What else can I reasonably do?

Let's face facts, public policy is for sale and I don't have nearly enough money to buy in. I could go door to door trying to win election, many have, and it wouldn't amount to jack squat without enough money for tv ads. Even if I could get elected I would be 1 among many.

I think the average libertarian has a far better chance at obtaining real freedom in his lifetime by investing his time in building a sea stead. The movement has already started it is unfortunately moving very slowly and probably won't cost much less than it would cost to win an election. That said, winning an election doesn't change the law, owning a sea stead does.



This is an entirely separate issue from what I was taking this thread's author to task on. We need to face facts here as well, there is a reason humanity fails the test in the Milgram experiments. 2 out of 3 people in the role of the "teacher" fail that test and continue to shock the "learner" after the learner asks for the test to end. These "teachers" only finally stop when the doctor administering the test ends it.

2 out of 3 people will do what an authority figure tells them to even if it is directly torturing someone else. Not taking responsibility for one's actions and deferring it onto authority figures is exactly what semperfortis did just like those who fail the Milgram experiments.

For those who don't know, the Milgram experiments were created in an effort to understand why Nazi Germany soldiers were willing to commit such barbaric acts on a nationwide scale. It is as simple as the low level grunts going through mental gymnastics resulting in these low level grunts sincerely believing that they are not responsible for their actions when they are following orders, that instead the responsibility lies with the policy makers.

These were the issues I was raising on this ask a cop thread.

Doing a job, swearing to uphold the law, taking an oath: none of these things are a legitimate defense to hurting people.

reply to post by Bobbox1980

I am sure most of the Nazi Police officers who rounded up Jews to put on trains or to kill did not feel guilty about it anymore than you don't feel guilty about busting consensual criminals.

I am sure the Taliban feel the same way about the police as you do. Does that make you a terrorist?

No, it does not. Your premise for comparison is faulty. The difference is that under Hitler, there were no freedoms such as we have.

They would have said to take it up with the nazi regime, with hitler, cause they were just doing their jobs just like you said you were just doing your job and to take up consensual crime laws with the legislature.

Here, you have someone to take it up with: you have legislators whose job relies on enough people casting a vote for them to be elected. You have channels of command which you can go through. You have courts that can hear your complaints.

Who was there to listen under Hitler? No one.

On the one hand you say if you were asked to do something unethical you would quit. Yet you uphold laws that make slaves of all of us, laws that make the state owners of us, laws that let the state decide what consenting adults can do with their own bodies. Make no mistake, that is slavery.

Firstly, semperfortis is speaking of his morals. You are addressing yours. Are you somehow of the opinion that everyone's morals must fall in line with yours for them to be considered moral?

According to my morals and ethics, you, sir, are immoral for attacking someone whose job it is to make sure that those around you cannot kill, maim, or rob you without facing at least the possibility of arrest and imprisonment. So should I consider you immoral or unethical?

Of course I don't consider you such. And I doubt (although I cannot speak for him) that semperfortis considers you such. There lies the difference. There lies the distinction between you and me. I can accept that I am not the only person in the world and that others have rights as well; you apparently cannot.

You did not accept responsibility for your role in the process. All the people rotting in prison for violating consensual crime laws were first brought there by police officers like and including you, not the legislature.

Are you aware, sir, that those laws used to put those poor souls in prison are the result of your inability to prevent them? You have as much right and freedom to push for better laws as anyone else. Why have you not changed them? Why do you accept these nonconsentual laws? Why are you oppressing those poor souls by your lack of ability to support the laws you would like to see in place?

Semperfortis just said he would quit his job, and end his career, if not doing so would cause him to violate his ethics. Would you even go so far as to pass out flyers to garner public opposition to the laws you consider unjust? Would you bother calling or writing to your elected officials to express to them how you feel? Would you sacrifice a few moments to keep abreast of what laws are being proposed?

If the answer to any of those are "no", then you have no one to blame except for, as the late Michael Jackson put it, "the man in the mirror".

(Sorry semperfortis; I know this is your thread, but some things cannot pass my eye without a rebuke.)

TheRedneck

I always liked your comments around here semperfortis, you always seemed like one of the real "to protect and serve" policemen for the people.

I have been in service very short myself but seen too many corruption in a short while.

The pay here is just a bit above minimum wage for a normal street cop.

But I guess that's the whole point, why you do what you do, like a doctor wanting to heal people instead of getting rich.

What do you think could be done about corruption?

Thanks for your time.

GM

ATTENTION

The topic is "ASK A COP". It's not, "Diss a cop". It's not, "Back up the cop".

Can we get back to asking semper questions and stop the bickering?

OK, since the redneck is out from behind the barn... I have a few questions for our esteemed officer.

These are hard questions, I know. But they are, in my personal opinion, apt. So let me preface with a hearty thank you for all you do for society in general. Now, to hit you with my best shot...

1. Occasionally I will watch the TV series "Cops", which is billed to be a reality-based show. Is it such, and in what ways is it or is it not accurate?
   
   
2. One particular thing about that show that bothers me is when I see a SWAT team breaking down a door as they yell "Police!". Now, when I consider that
   • It is entirely possible for them to somehow, even with multiple verifications, to occasionally have the wrong address.
     
   • I also know that, at least in my area of the country, it is not uncommon for people to sleep with loaded guns beside their bed.
   • Considering these facts and the fact that when rudely awakened by a crashing door some people will not immediately have the presence of mind to realize what is happening...
   ... is this not an inherently dangerous act, both to the occupants as well as to the policemen? Have you ever been involved with such a 'surprise invasion', and if so, were you concerned about this possibility?
   
   
3. The US Constitution clearly states that citizens' property cannot be forfeited except under 'due process'. Yet there are many laws that allow for police confiscation of property before a guilty verdict or even an indictment is presented. How do you justify this, or do you also see it as unconstitutional?

Sorry, my friend, but you asked for the hard questions...

TheRedneck

reply to post by semperfortis


I would like to respond to Bobbox1980 here with my opinion on an officer upholding the laws he/she may not consider fair. First off, Intent is to be considered. Were you doing 90 mph on the freeway to get to your mothers bedside in ICU because she is dying or are you doing 90 mph because you are in a hurry to just be someplace? Every officer has the option of exacting the letter of the law or the spirit of the law. While doing 90 on the freeway is clearly breaking the law, intent does matter and with it would be prior convictions etc. Laws are laws but are in fact bendable with extenuating circumstances. Some laws are not bendable. Some laws need to be changed. First off when you complain, know the law. Then if you think its unfair, lobby to get it changed. Honest and manners will get you farther than you think as well. Every once in a while you will run across a yahoo barney fife cop who doesnt know what hes doing. Example: issueing a ticket for out of state handicap tags. But for the most part, cops have a degree in criminal justice and have training in not only the laws but also social and psychological training that would boggle your mind. Most cops know your intent. You have to remember that cops deal with the scum of the earth on a daily basis as well as law abiding citizens. Seeing a lot of scum can toughen you after a while. A cop has to assume you are going to blow him away somewhere in his mind to keep himself safe for his wife and kids. So if cops "seem" like a prick maybe they are toughened by street scum or being cautious. Thanks for listening to my 2 cents worth. Remember that the same cops who "hassel you" are the same cops who take the rapist off the streets to protect your wife and daughter.

reply to post by Letmypeoplego

When would it be ok for citizens to intervene on an officer who is violently abusing the rights of a person who didn't deserve it? Lets say its one of those bad cops there are so few of...and to what extent do you think would be ok?

THAT is a great question Letmypeoplego. Semperfortis, I really hope you answer Letmypeoplego's question. I have no further question in this post. I only relay an incident I witnessed years ago.

I know not all cops are bad, and I'm not here to use this as an opportunity to cast about anti-cop sentiment. I see the police as human beings, some are very good. Some are not.

But sadly, I know this goes on, because I've seen it with my own two eyes and it was one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen in my life. Your question really triggered a memory there Letmypeoplego, and I can see it like it was yesterday. It was 1982 or so.

I'm not going to go into details, I have twice and both times I just deleted it all. But I really vented on the old keyboard today over this.

The cops really did a number on this kid. I say kid, he was about 20 I'd say. He was in an adult jail, as was I. There was about five of the police offenders. They beat this kid to a literal pulp for something he said. I didn't quite understand what it was, but he really shouldn't have said it, because it set those cops off on him big time. It was unjust, it was wrong, there is no possible justification of it. Maybe this kid was guilty of something truly hideous, but the judge is supposed to decide the punishment, not the police.

So, I look forward to Semperfort's reply to this question. Not what I saw way back when, just Letmypeoplego's question as he wrote it.

Thanks again for asking the question and thanks for letting us ask questions Semperfortis.

To quell any curiosity, I was there for a DUI on my beautiful old 1973 CB750 Honda. I'd like to have that bike again.

Semper, there are no questions in this post but I really want you to read it at some point, of course, you can skip this post for the purposes of the videos.

Semper,
I sincerely thank you for everything you are doing with this thread.
I commend you for your decency & have growing admiration for you as a person. I wish I knew more police officers that like yourself, I would be proud to call a friend.

You have opened my eyes to my own ignorant generalisations, the same behaviour I abhor in others, I found myself to be guilty of.
It was a shameful realisation.

I am good at reading people (particularly voices) and its obvious to me you are a very good person regardless of what life you may have taken or saved, and I think maybe your career choices helped you to not hold yourself back in any way from your full potential for doing good, to fully realise who you are & always have been.

You have an incredible vibe about you in those videos that I did not expect by a long shot & was pleasantly surprised by, it is difficult to explain tho. You did mention that you 'suck' at pronunciation, whereas personally my vocabulary is one of my strong points. What I want to convey is that you have an eloquent soul, regardless of the words you use. The voice carries more information about the words then the words themselves, always, and you sir, have nothing to hide whatsoever, intent is clear, emotional content is clear, message is carried regardless of the words & carried well. In other words, I find it hard to imagine anyone misunderstanding something you've said in those videos & you open yourself up to connect with each and every one of the questioners.

I apologise for the length/complexity of my question posts, I am using a 'turtle speed' dial up internet connection at the moment and it took me roughly 10 hours to finally be able to view all 4 videos, after watching just one of them, I wished I had changed my approach in asking questions.

Your reply to the text quoted text regarding the function of the police -

thank you for your opinion on the quote, clearing things up for me as to what was accurate info and what was not, and thank you for answering a question that you had for all intents and purposes answered already, if I'd been able to view the already available videos before asking, I would not have asked that particular question at all.

Your reply to SWAT questions -

Glad you got a chuckle out of that, and I was blown away by the open & honest answer, you told me far more about yourself then you had to & I appreciate that you firstly understood my intent to understand your perspective as a human being, and secondly to attempt to show that perspective to me. I think I 'get it' and that's the best of what I could have hoped to gain

Your reply to sniper questions -
I feel I was a bit offensive in my approach and for that I apologise, thank you for the answer, but as with all your videos, you've given me much to think about and I will definitely be asking some more questions about this, I will however be a lot more careful to figure out just what it is I'm asking you and will send the questions as a U2U.

Your reply to '___' question (without breaking T&C

Was just wondering what the Legislation and Laws say about hunting Trolls Semper. Do I need a permit for it? Will I get charged if the Troll is undersized????? Do you personally have any problems with Trolls being hunted????


Sorry dude, just had to make a crack at all the trolling going on here. Seriously thought it was a re-enactment of the story Billy Goats Gruff or something.

Semper,
there are quite a few questions here,
but they have been written in a way that should make them a bit easier to answer

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.Do you think that the general public are mostly unaware of the specifics of laws, and usually find out only after being caught committing that crime?

2.Do you think there is any real efforts made during school years to inform students of the rules they MUST live according to, leading up to their graduation? - (at which point they will be an active ‘adult’ member of society like the rest of us)

3.Do you think if the public were properly informed of the laws as part of the (public) school curriculum's: So there was no confusion about the laws, that there would therefore be less crime committed or at least no excuse?

4.Based on the above, are you of the opinion that there may be people out there in positions of control & power, that are not interested in crime prevention, and as such oppose implementing some kind of mandatory legal studies in the public high school education system (age group:12/13 to 17/18)?

5.This information may be available to those who study it at a university, but would you agree it should be something known by all members of society, and made available (essentially) for free, and promoted/encouraged?

Even if for no other reason than that it is easier for anyone make a real choice, if it is an educated one.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.Do you agree that environmental expectations (ghetto for e.g) play a role in moulding criminals?

2.Do you think more can be done to show people growing up in these areas, that they are capable of exceeding the expectations & becoming decent law abiding citizens?

4.Have you ever been surprised to see someone you didn’t expect to break out of their environmental mould, become an admirable member of society?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.Do you see evidence that suggests the people in charge of prisoners & prisons, do not genuinely desire the successful rehabilitation of people who've served their time and are now leaving jail to return to the outside world, or at least the system is not designed for that purpose?

2.Is it self sustaining by doing this, in a way attempting to ensure that a criminal will re-offend?

3.If so, surely this reality must be frustrating to work with as a police officer, and obviously counter productive to the work the officers are doing?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.Can you see the benefit in a system in which all members of the public would be allowed to vote on proposed changes to existing laws (like an election but without the corruption), rather than the reality that one must be in the government, or the president even, to be able to bring about change in the laws?

Because If petitions do any good in this context, I have yet to witness it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.Do you know how easy the police officers in Amsterdam have it?

2.would you agree that if cannabis is legalised, the best system by which to do this, is the one implemented in Amsterdam currently, and that the systems other countries adopt (hopefully soon), should be modelled on the Amsterdam system as it works so damn well? (which it does IMHO)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That’s it for the moment,

Thank you for your time & I hope these were interesting questions.

kind regards,
- Bob.

P.S) maritime vs. civil question to come, but after this post, I'll wait a while, give some other people a chance

[edit on 22/12/09 by B.Morrison]

1. Going to try and get at least two more videos up tonight and address as many of your questions as I can.

2. Try and keep your questions direct and to the point. Long rambling posts take too long to read "on air" and I am afraid I will have to skip some that have been posted. (I only have so much time on camera to keep it within the size guidelines.)

3. If within all the conversation going on, I miss your question; please U2U Me and I will try and get to them.

4. Please try and remain at least professional. I will never ask you to like me, nor like what I do, but we can at least remain professional and intelligent.

Semper

reply to post by semperfortis


Would it help to put the questions in bold?

reply to post by intrepid


Couldn't hurt

Thanks for waiting all

Here you go







Thanks everyone for the questions and the interest....

Semper

[edit on 12/23/2009 by semperfortis]

reply to post by semperfortis


O boy, o boy, o boy!! and no I am not a catholic priest, haha jk. Can't wait to watch them!

reply to post by semperfortis


I was so touched by your question reguarding the homeless......what can we do? I challenge every ATS member to run out to wallmart or somewhere and buy a sleeping bag. Give it to a cop for distribution on Christmas to a homeless person. You will have given the greatest gift and you will sleep better knowing that somewhere someone is warm because you cared. Merry Christmas and Semperfortis forgive me for using your thread for my challenge. Magantice

edited for spelling,,hey its 5am here

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Magantice]

Great thread so far. Thanks for answering that last question of mine.

I know you are tired.... Go get some sleep, you deserve it...

I can't wait to see your next video. I hope you get to answer some of my other questions... Although I think some of them have already been addressed...

Thanks for taking the time to answer peoples questions. I don't usually post on this message board, i spend most of my time just reading.

My question is this:

First Part:
Say your in car as a passenger and the cops pull the driver over are you required to give them any info or show them your drivers license as a passenger.

Second Part:
Sitting in a car at night with a friend just bsing (in your driveway) and a cop pulls up and shines his light on the car and comes up to see what's going on. are you required to give him any info being the passenger.