I was reading a news story recently about an undercover officer being beaten to death which eventually led me to an LEO board discussing the incident.
I couldn't help to see the similarities of when police beating (citizens) videos make it on ATS.
It was met with disgust, and general ramblings of how they wanted this guy to dangle from his testicles and of course apathy towards the system on how
he would probably receive special treatment.
Graphic warning.
Article.
The similarities are uncanny.
Now, whether or not you have had a negative run in with police, this kind of thing should be condemned. The incident apparently happened at a night
club and continued on miles away to the confrontation. Most LEO leaning arguments disregard anything that happened up to the incident.
Which is ironic, because a pro LEO argument during a police/civilian beating is going to ask that all the information leading up to an officer using
force be accounted for.
I guess my point though is that there is bias on both pro or anti police stance. At the end of the day, police are just the same as everyone else.
There are good and bad police officers. Just as I imagine there are good and bad criminals. Criminality is often described as a very black and white
line drawn in the sand. Although if we learn anything from law & order, or crime & punishment, it is very far from the truth.
It's a little hard to find statistics on charges against police but New Zealand for example, looks to have had around 20 in a force made up of
11,000.
**
The catch 22 here is that would a fellow officer arrest them if they have known them to do something illegal? The
blue shield or blue code of silence seems to indicate it's not always the case.
I can imagine a good many of officers ask themselves, "But why would a citizen hate me I put my life on the line dealing with scum." And the truth
is, yes, they do. But, citizens plainly see/witness, aggressive police provoke or attack citizens, and then claim assaulting an officer, resist
arrest, etc. Further compounded by
any lie told in the courtroom.
This kind of thing needs to be rejected and deplored in every policing unit in the world. As soon as this kind of behaviour is overlooked just one
time, it makes any good deed questionable.
It is no different than any other industry or organization. When deplorable actions are not dealt with within an organization it breeds bad faith.
Just as the financial industry is supposed to have certain controls to prevent insider trading, if the public catches wind of this kind of thing still
happening, finance and its people become persona non grata.
So why do I say the two sides should spend more time together. Well, I imagine bridging gaps is the best policy. For both sides to know they are
dealing with real people. To know that both experience the exact same emotions.
The primary difference being that the citizen (or criminal) does not get the benefit of the doubt.
"I am dismayed that we still have this problem where police officers are unwilling to speak truthfully and honestly when tragedies like this happen
... Every objective person who looks at this video, says 'Oh my gosh, this is unbelievable.' And (the police chief) will sit there and say, 'I
stand by my officers.'" Bonjean said. "To me, I'm not surprised, it happens all the time, but it's still shocking and it's truly
disappointing."
www.cnn.com...
That's a pretty heavy dose of reality to deal with. That someone can come up and bring you to the ground, strike you in the face, beat you, and in
turn you get charged with aggravated assault, resisting arrest, etc.
Now imagine there was a super police force, that got to go around rounding up regular LEOs, and they treated them this way?
There have been many campaigns of "stop no snitching", where law enforcement and government plea to the public to ignore "no snitching" rules that
are prevalent in some areas of society, yet the same should be applicable in reverse. If everyone could see just how similar they are to one another,
they might realize that no one should have absolute authority over one another. Or that when tragedy strikes,
it happens on both sides of the
law.