It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by kevinunknown
ATS has a plethora of videos showing alleged police brutality and threads about the creation of a police state with sweeping generalisations that market the police as the henchmen of the evil government. In doing this however I think, we are ignoring the rights of the brave enforcers of the law as this thread will illustrate. This however is not a defence of the police, without doubt it has its bad apples just like any organisation but on the whole I think the way we talk about police officers on ATS is downright disrespectful to those who rottenly put themselves in harm’s way to protect us. We don’t tread our armed forces like this so why do we treat the police with such contempt.
I guess this hate must stem from a complete hatred of all authority, people are envious of the power a police officer has over them. The ability to punish you if you break the law, they can assault you if it is justifiable in a court of law, and do just about anything to prevent you from committing a crime or putting yourself and others in danger. When you think about it at first glance it appears to be allot of power for one group to have over everyone else in society. But it’s not, it’s not the police that have this power, it’s the law, its society itself that needs laws for without law there would be anarchy and we need people to enforce these laws, the police. That does not mean they are above the law only that they enforce it, if they break it they will be punished just like the rest of us.
Considering that they must follow the same laws as us you would think they would have the same basic human rights but it seems they do not. A riot is a perfect example, up to 100,000 angry protesters some of whom want to break the laws that govern society and perhaps only a few thousand police officers. Once the law breaking starts they have an obligation that has been bestowed upon them by societies need for law and order to intervene, often by putting themselves at risk. In the UK a popular method used by the police when there is a risk of this happening is “kettleing” surrounding a group of protesters by a ring of police to prevent them moving. This was done recently in the riots in London after the anarchists left the city looking like post-apocalyptic disaster and they were criticised for it. What was the alternative, just leave them to get on with their reign of terror of the country’s capital.
Then there is my favourite one, the videos of the police punching a law breaker in the face that get leaked onto YouTube and we all go on about what a disgrace it is. I can think of one example of this that really sticks out for me, about 8 or 10 police officers were surrounded in London by about a hundred “protesters” who were shouting various obscenities at them and throwing projectiles. During this incident a police women tried to grab a police officer, first time she was warned to back off, second time she got smashed hard in the face by a male police officers fist, breaking her nose. At the time this was like treated like a national embarrassment, the police were slaughtered for it in the press (and on ATS if I remember rightly). If that women had grabbed onto the police officer into that crowed he would have received a savage beating, so when does his right to self defence become obsolete to that woman’s right to “protest”, when in fact she and others were really just breaking the law. Yet we expect the police to forfeit their right to self defence so that others have the right to “protest” even when that “protest” has really became a “riot”.
I find it ironic when Americans start moaning about how awful this is that the police are defending themselves like this. I mean the second amendment allows you the right to self defence by owning a gun, yet you all get upset when you see a police officer defend himself with a weapon or otherwise.
Last time I was on a protest was a years ago, during the protest (and it was a peaceful protest not a anarchist riot) I asked a police officer if he agreed with the way the local council was cutting back on money for public services, his response was that during a protest he has to remain impartial and cannot publicly declare his stance on the contested issue to a protester. In other words during the protest he had to sacrifice his freedom of speech. Last time I saw a demonstration between the EDL (English defence league, essentially the racist scum of the earth) and the UAF (Unite Against fascism, a bunch of lazy pseudo –intellectual’s who hate the EDL), the UAF started to call the police Nazi’s because they were preventing the UAF mixing with the EDL. They called the police scum for not agreeing with them, implying that the police agreed with the scum of the EDL and they couldn’t say anything to convince them otherwise other than to day “they also have a right to protest”.
I could go on all day about this, here is another one. During the last protests in London the law breakers covered their faces in black balaclavas, one of them offered my younger brother a hammer and a mask so he could “protest”. My brother also saw these guys throwing fireworks with bags of coins at police and blocking the exhaust pipes of their cars. Now because they have their faces covered it is very hard for the police to identify who the law breakers are and as we know the law has to be enforced, its not safe to have men running around the capital with a hammer destroying anything they don’t like. With this in mind the home office is introducing measures to allow the police to remove anyone covering up their face and now we have cries of “police state”. I bet these people are the same people who advocated the banning of the Burqa, but they don’t advocate the banning of other garments that cover their face when out law breaking. The police need to see who is violently attacking them to protect themselves not because the government is creating a police state.
I would hate to be a police officer in this country, everyone just piss’s all over their rights believing that they are somehow a bunch of evil doers. When the opposite is true, this is brave men and women who are only doing a job, a job to protect the public and up hold law and order. They are still human and entailed to the same natural rights at the rest of us, bestowed upon us by our very humanity (even though I don’t really like human rights)
Originally posted by kevinunknown
I would hate to be a police officer in this country, everyone just piss’s all over their rights believing that they are somehow a bunch of evil doers.
Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by Tnewguy
Well under international law the only people who are not civilians are those who serve in the armed forces, therefore technically the police are still civilians.
and if its a drug raid they can’t exactly knock at the door because by the time you’ve waited for them to open the door the other guy in the house has the drugs down the toilet. And if you think there is a gun in the house, when the door opens there is very good change the police officer is going to get shot
edit on 2-4-2011 by kevinunknown because: (no reason given)