On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 19:46:41 +0000, Lew Hodgett wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):
> The cop in Dallas.
>
> Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been white?
>
> Lew
>
>
What's all this about then?
Didn't see/hear anything relevant on BBC news....
gotta link?
Thanks for the links, y'all.
Well.. I'm stunned.
I was waiting for the part where Moats is called "boy," gets pistol whipped
and gets a fiery cross on his front lawn but I guess they actually turn the
cameras off for anything the officers might consider a bit "dodgy."
As everyone seems to have said, the fundamental problem isn't Powell's
action. It's Powell's perception that he's not doing anything reprehensible.
I doubt that that can be fixed.. so what's to be done?
<breathe in>
Issues :
What is the purpose of a police force?
To whom is a police force accountable?
What perpetuates the idea that a police force is a legislative controlling
body rather than a, er, _policing_ controlling body - i.e. how come policemen
often see themselves as arbiters of reward and punishment rather than
upholders of a social ethic, whether legislated or not?
There's a soggy midfield between politically-correct bureaucratic
procedure-bound inflexibility and the fly by seat of the pants maverick
make-it-up-on-the-spot traditionalism where everything is based on the
subjectively assessed individual merits of an event within a bigger picture,
The latter depends entirely on the personal integrity of its enforcers which
is usually unrewarded and has vast potential for corruption while the former
is driven by perceived "results" which are usually political instruments
rather than anything to do with the public good.
Somewhere in between is the best and the worst of both worlds. Good men can
make great things happen with a lousy system - and vice versa.
What we seem to have ended up with, (free)worldwide, is a police system where
arrests and convictions are seen as 'positive" while preventative,
make-the-world-safer policing has no statistical or political merit. This
engenders the recruiting and promoting of.. well, frankly, idiots by....
idiots.. There are a lot of good coppers out there but that is in spite of,
not because of the system in which they operate.
The world is not getting any safer - and it could do, but not employing the
current socio-political and career models. It would be quite difficult to
determine the effectiveness of a system, in terms of the wafffly statistics
that currently demonstrate success if one set about employing staff of
integrity, and freed them from the "motivation" of generating irrelevant
statistics because they are not micro-managed by accountants and empire
builders,
When the pressure to demonstrate "success" has been replaced by the drive to
produce safer communities, then maybe that will happen but it won't and can't
while ever police forces are made up of Officer Powells and the stupids who
employ them and encourage them to flourish.
</and breathe out>
Oh yeah - and that Powell bloke is just a shit and would be in ANY
occupation. Roadsweeper, ice-cream vendor, accountant, suicide counsellor,
air-traffic controller, The Pope.... whatever. If he got a job as a shit he'd
probably be too unpleasant to hold it down. HOWEVER...... Someone thought he
was ideal material to give a gun to to go out and add author-it-eye to his
shit-ness. All hail the chiefs!
written from Engand where ofcxourse there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with our
way of doing things.
</irony> see previous rants.
"J. Clarke" wrote
> Morris Dovey wrote:
>> Tim Daneliuk wrote:
>>
>>> 4) The cop makes a call - a wrong one as it turns out - but how
>>> is the officer in question supposed to be able to make the call,
>>> clairvoyance?
>>
>> I don't think so - my expectation is that (especially) metro police
>> officers receive training at public expense to make the right /kinds/
>> of decisions, so that they can respond appropriately in even the most
>> difficult situations.
>>
>> One of the obvious choices available was to verify that the driver was
>> telling the truth by holding the driver's license and accompanying him
>> (and his wife) into the hospital.
>>
>> If he'd done just that much, there'd have been no incident. He could
>> have written a ticket for failing to come to a complete stop just as
>> easily inside the hospital as outside and left the issue of
>> extenuating circumstances to a judge.
>>
>> We require that those in a positions of public trust exercise good
>> judgment in the performance of their duties and simply put, those who
>> cannot or will not exercise that good judgment are unfit to serve.
>>
>>> 5) The local police officials hang the officer out to dry the moment
>>> race is mentioned making all the right noises to cover their own
>>> butts.
>>
>> They /haven't/ covered their butts on the question of how they armed
>> and sent a person out on patrol who was unfit (either inadequately
>> trained or psychologically unsuited) to serve as a police officer.
>>
>>> This is simply a tragic story from any viewpoint, the driver or the
>>> officer in question. But we imperil a civil society if we assume that
>>> cops are always suspect.
>>
>> That's very true, and your statement underlines the importance of
>> every decision made by every single police officer, because the
>> quasi-anonymity of the police uniform works both ways.
>
> Perhaps the police need to be taught a "reasonable man" procedure, to wit
> "will what I am doing make me look like a jackass to the reasonable man?"
Or in these digital times, "What will this look like on Youtube?"
"J. Clarke" wrote
>
> Google "moats powell" and you'll find quite a lot including several links
> to the police video of the stop.
>
> Basically Officer Powell is badly in need of an attitude adjustment.
===================
I was unaware of that story. Unbelievable!
What I find troubling about it most of all is simply that an otherwise
reasonably good police department could be tarnished by this bozo's actions.
I kept thinking over and over again, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!,
LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!,
LAWSUIT!!
This moron is so clueless that he did this on camera. Did he really think
that his actions could be justified in any way? And since those videos are
public records, there is no question as to what actually happened. He
obviously did not think that he did anything wrong. He even bragged on
camera afterwards of falsifying a report on a chase because it was done in
violation of department guidelines.
Anybody that stupid and clueless is an incredible liability to any police
department. His law enforcement career is over. And the Dallas PD is on the
hook for a big settlement. The city attorneys must be having nightmares
now.
Ryan Moats and his wife will be on Good Morning America on monday morning.
This young man is the poster boy for hard work, study and strong suppoerter
of his community and schools. He deserved better.
--
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 10:06:10 -0500, "Upscale" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> During training and evaluation by the Dallas PD, what part of the
>> psychological evaluation process failed to reveal Powell's weakness's
>> and their resultant affect on his ability to perform the assigned
>> task.
>
>And another question. Why or how was the video released? In the US, does the
>public at large automatically have access to all such recorded material?
>You'd figure that anything sensitive or perhaps waiting to go before the
>courts would be screened before it was released for access.
Depending on the state, such material is considered public records,
and as such, must be made available on request. Any federal material
like that is covered by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and is
simlilarly available on request so long as it doesn't compromise
national security (a sometimes loosely applied condition for either
refusing a request or the forwarding of a highly redacted version of a
record).
>A video like that would be highly unlikely to see the light of day in
>Canada. Maybe that's a fault in the Canadian justice system, but that's not
>the question in this case.
The dynamic between your police and citizenry is quite different from
ours and is widely acknowledged. That doesn't mean you're immune to
rogue, power corrupted, asshole police officers, and the phenomenon
doesn't directly relate to your comment, either, I suppose, but it is
worth noting.
As a side note, the more I think about this incident, the madder I
get. Throw out all the arguments (however valid or not) about whether
it was a legitimate stop, whether race might or might not have been
involved, whether impending death of a parent constitutes an exigency
rising to the level to permit the transgression of law, or even the
confirming reports by hospital personnel about the M-i-L's condition.
Once Powell completed the paper work, he didn't just turn Moats loose
to attend to his family--in the height of irony he wasted even more
time to lecture him on attitude.
If there's someone out there who doesn't get what was wrong in thiis
whole thing and who wants to leap to the defense of Powell, all you
need to consider is that final "lecture." That was for Powell, not
Moats. That was the boot to the throat.
Although I sort of doubt Powell is capable of such introspection, I
sincerely hope the memory of that particular act in light of Moats'
lost opportunity to say goodbye burns with him for the rest of his
life.
Someone else said it, but I think it's true--his apology was likely
not based on that he did it, but that he got caught.
--
LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com
Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997
email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.
"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > DAGS
>
> Over my head.
Do a Google Search
http://www.google.ca/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=moats+%2B+powell&meta=lr%3D
On Apr 3, 7:23=A0pm, Tim Daneliuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> -MIKE- wrote:
> > Robatoy wrote:
> >> So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
> >> think odds are good that a white man would have received different
> >> treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
> >> fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
> >> has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
> >> observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
>
> > Oh, my bad.
> > I didn't realize you've had personal interaction with the man.
>
> Knowing Robatoy, this no doubt involved midgets and rich Corinthian leath=
er ...
You forgot the multi-coloured pipe cleaners.
On Apr 3, 7:18=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
> > think odds are good that a white man would have received different
> > treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
> > fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
> > has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
> > observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
>
> Oh, my bad.
> I didn't realize you've had personal interaction with the man.
>
Your first clue was correct. I didn't have personal reaction with that
man. Heard what he had to say though. I also heard what Churchill had
to say.
On Apr 3, 12:28=A0pm, LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> If there's someone out there who doesn't get what was wrong in thiis
> whole thing and who wants to leap to the defense of Powell, all you
> need to consider is that final "lecture." That was for Powell, not
> Moats. That was the boot to the throat.
>
> Although I sort of doubt Powell is capable of such introspection, I
> sincerely hope the memory of that particular act in light of Moats'
> lost opportunity to say goodbye burns with him for the rest of his
> life.
>
My guess would be that in Powell's mind, such as it is, he lost his
job because of a black man.
That makes him even more dangerous.
"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
> being a racist without ever having spoken with him.
You're right, but after listening and watching the whole affair on video,
there's the immediate tendency one has to vilify Powell. And, considering
the responses so far, most everybody expects the worst from the man. If not
having any racist tendencies, then at the very best, he was unfeeling and a
poor role model for a police officer. (former police officer)
On Apr 3, 6:06=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Apr 3, 12:28 pm, LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> If there's someone out there who doesn't get what was wrong in thiis
> >> whole thing and who wants to leap to the defense of Powell, all you
> >> need to consider is that final "lecture." That was for Powell, not
> >> Moats. That was the boot to the throat.
>
> >> Although I sort of doubt Powell is capable of such introspection, I
> >> sincerely hope the memory of that particular act in light of Moats'
> >> lost opportunity to say goodbye burns with him for the rest of his
> >> life.
>
> > My guess would be that in Powell's mind, such as it is, he lost his
> > job because of a black man.
> > That makes him even more dangerous.
>
> There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
> being a racist without ever having spoken with him.
>
So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
think odds are good that a white man would have received different
treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
On Apr 3, 11:42=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Apr 3, 7:18 pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Robatoy wrote:
> >>> So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
> >>> think odds are good that a white man would have received different
> >>> treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
> >>> fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist=
"
> >>> has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
> >>> observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
> >> Oh, my bad.
> >> I didn't realize you've had personal interaction with the man.
>
> > Your first clue was correct. I didn't have personal reaction with that
> > man. Heard what he had to say though. I also heard what Churchill had
> > to say.
>
> Do you have a link where I could hear/read it?
>
DAGS
Robatoy wrote:
> On Apr 3, 12:28 pm, LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If there's someone out there who doesn't get what was wrong in thiis
>> whole thing and who wants to leap to the defense of Powell, all you
>> need to consider is that final "lecture." That was for Powell, not
>> Moats. That was the boot to the throat.
>>
>> Although I sort of doubt Powell is capable of such introspection, I
>> sincerely hope the memory of that particular act in light of Moats'
>> lost opportunity to say goodbye burns with him for the rest of his
>> life.
>>
>
> My guess would be that in Powell's mind, such as it is, he lost his
> job because of a black man.
> That makes him even more dangerous.
>
There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
being a racist without ever having spoken with him.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Robatoy wrote:
> So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
> think odds are good that a white man would have received different
> treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
> fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
> has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
> observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
>
Oh, my bad.
I didn't realize you've had personal interaction with the man.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
>> There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
>> being a racist without ever having spoken with him.
>>
> So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
> think odds are good that a white man would have received different
> treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
> fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
> has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
> observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
>
> ======
> One man's rabid racist is another's right thinking man. What do you
> think of them apples? Nobody I know admits to the any of the
> whatever-ist labels we throw about so carelessly.
>
> (Sometimes, I just like playing with flammable fluids. ;)
>
The only point I'm trying to make is that there is nothing in the video
to warrant the race card.
Are there racist cops? Of course there are, there racist people
everywhere.
If you videotaped a few of my interactions with the police, they would
play almost identically to what you see on that tape... and even worse.
White cops, white me.
Were the cops racist? How should I know. Were the cops on a power
trip? Yes.
All I saw on that tape as a cop on a power trip.
I hate racism. I've quit jobs because of it. I'm the first to defend
victims of racism.
I'm the first to throw the race card... when warranted.
I'm also VERY careful with it.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Robatoy wrote:
> On Apr 3, 7:18 pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
>>> think odds are good that a white man would have received different
>>> treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
>>> fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
>>> has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
>>> observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
>> Oh, my bad.
>> I didn't realize you've had personal interaction with the man.
>>
> Your first clue was correct. I didn't have personal reaction with that
> man. Heard what he had to say though. I also heard what Churchill had
> to say.
>
Do you have a link where I could hear/read it?
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Robatoy wrote:
> On Apr 3, 11:42 pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Apr 3, 7:18 pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Robatoy wrote:
>>>>> So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
>>>>> think odds are good that a white man would have received different
>>>>> treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
>>>>> fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
>>>>> has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
>>>>> observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
>>>> Oh, my bad.
>>>> I didn't realize you've had personal interaction with the man.
>>> Your first clue was correct. I didn't have personal reaction with that
>>> man. Heard what he had to say though. I also heard what Churchill had
>>> to say.
>> Do you have a link where I could hear/read it?
>>
>
> DAGS
>
Over my head.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
-MIKE- wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
>> So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
>> think odds are good that a white man would have received different
>> treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
>> fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
>> has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
>> observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
>>
>
> Oh, my bad.
> I didn't realize you've had personal interaction with the man.
>
>
Knowing Robatoy, this no doubt involved midgets and rich Corinthian leather ...
"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:9b85a712-72b0-4f28-9ecd-d3afdf591bea@c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 3, 6:06 pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Apr 3, 12:28 pm, LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> If there's someone out there who doesn't get what was wrong in thiis
> >> whole thing and who wants to leap to the defense of Powell, all you
> >> need to consider is that final "lecture." That was for Powell, not
> >> Moats. That was the boot to the throat.
>
> >> Although I sort of doubt Powell is capable of such introspection, I
> >> sincerely hope the memory of that particular act in light of Moats'
> >> lost opportunity to say goodbye burns with him for the rest of his
> >> life.
>
> > My guess would be that in Powell's mind, such as it is, he lost his
> > job because of a black man.
> > That makes him even more dangerous.
>
> There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
> being a racist without ever having spoken with him.
>
So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
think odds are good that a white man would have received different
treatment from that cop. And that little pearl of wisdom "There's a
fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of being a racist"
has no foundation whatsoever in relation to my person or personal
observations. Don't go moving that line, bro'.
======
One man's rabid racist is another's right thinking man. What do you think of
them apples? Nobody I know admits to the any of the whatever-ist labels we
throw about so carelessly.
(Sometimes, I just like playing with flammable fluids. ;)
"Lew Hodgett" wrote
>
> "Dave in Houston" wrote:
>
>> The Houston Chronicle reported in today's issue that Officer Powell
>> has resigned from the Dallas Police Department.
>
> Powell's resignation was, IMHO, a foregone conclusion; however, a much
> larger question remains unanswered.
>
> During training and evaluation by the Dallas PD, what part of the
> psychological evaluation process failed to reveal Powell's weakness's and
> their resultant affect on his ability to perform the assigned task.
>
-------------------
In other words, why didn't they notice he was a bully?
I have had some interactions with the police where I called something in and
gave them the necessary information. And they still felt compelled to bully
me around. I thought I was back in grade school dealing with a schoolyard
bully. The demenor, the voice, the body language. it was all there. I kept
thinking, if the good guys get treated this way, what happens to the poor
bastards who actually did something wrong.
Upscale wrote:
> "Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> I hope it is wrong, because his attitude is one that should be
>> strongly discouraged, to the point of elimination, in any police force.
>
> I'm guessing that Powell was legally allowed to do what he did, but morally
> and humanely, he showed incredibly poor judgement. Even if he's not fired,
> any career ambitions he might have had have likely hit an immovable
> roadblock. At most, I'd say the rest of his days will be spent as record
> keeper in some evidence locker.
>
>
Nah. The a** hole read the tea leaves and quit. I just hope that he
doesn't get on another department.
"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> I hope it is wrong, because his attitude is one that should be
> strongly discouraged, to the point of elimination, in any police force.
I'm guessing that Powell was legally allowed to do what he did, but morally
and humanely, he showed incredibly poor judgement. Even if he's not fired,
any career ambitions he might have had have likely hit an immovable
roadblock. At most, I'd say the rest of his days will be spent as record
keeper in some evidence locker.
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "HeyBub" wrote:
>
>> Dallas PD is SEVEN HUNDRED officers below their authorized strength.
>> The city is even paying a $10,000 signing bonus to police recruits.
>
> Apparently, that is a wide spread problem.
>
> Trying to attract qualified candidates for a tough job that also
> carries a lot of potential baggage into the personal life is proving
> to be difficult here in SoCal.
>
That, and knowing that every decision you make, even in a split-second life
or death moment is going to be scrutinized, analyzed, and criticized to the
n'th degree, possibly resulting in loss of reputation, legal liability, and
loss of job is a pretty big deterrent to good candidates.
> Coming up with the money to pay them is another issue.
>
One would think that this would be the number one priority of
governments -- alas, there are other priorities that get them more votes.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
Bored Borg wrote:
> Thanks for the links, y'all.
>
> Well.. I'm stunned.
>
Yeah, the officer's behavior was reprehensible from a simple human
compassion standpoint. That phrase on police cars "To Serve and Protect"
is supposed to mean something. A more reasonable, but realistic, officer,
after having obtained the story from the people in the car would have a)
expressed concern and urged the family to continue into the emergency room,
and b) made the statement, "I'm going to accompany you sir, to assure that
all is right". This would allow the officer to verify, diplomatically,
that he was not being scammed while performing his duty. There was nothing
wrong with drawing his gun as he saw the car being emptied, but after he
ascertained that no threat was impending, he should have switched to
compassionate mode.
> I was waiting for the part where Moats is called "boy," gets pistol
> whipped and gets a fiery cross on his front lawn but I guess they actually
> turn the cameras off for anything the officers might consider a bit
> "dodgy."
>
> As everyone seems to have said, the fundamental problem isn't Powell's
> action. It's Powell's perception that he's not doing anything
> reprehensible. I doubt that that can be fixed.. so what's to be done?
>
>
Please don't judge all of our police officers by one pretty obviously bad
apple. We have a number of police and sheriff officers who attend our
church, not one of them holds such racist views and would come down hard
upon any of theirs who exhibited such views.
... snip
>
>
> written from Engand where ofcxourse there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with
> our way of doing things.
>
>
> </irony> see previous rants.
Yep, I get the irony.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
Bored Borg wrote:
> As everyone seems to have said, the fundamental problem isn't Powell's
> action. It's Powell's perception that he's not doing anything reprehensible.
> I doubt that that can be fixed.. so what's to be done?
Pour encourager les autres:
One lash for each second the daughter was delayed plus one lash for each
minute the son-in-law was delayed followed by dishonorable dismissal
strikes me as appropriate. If I weren't such a gentle person, I might
also suggest that medical treatment to ease the pain of the lashes be
delayed for as long as the delay he caused...
We (hopefully) learn from our mistakes. The current methodology seems to
be one of pulling the weeds only when they become too obvious to be
overlooked.
A more effective employment screening would reduce (but probably not
eliminate) this kind of problem.
It'll be interesting to see if the good folks of Dallas are and remain
sufficiently engaged to demand of their elected officials that action be
taken to ensure that this kind of scenario is /never/ repeated.
Sadly, I think the whole story will blow over and be forgotten until the
/next/ time.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
> 4) The cop makes a call - a wrong one as it turns out - but how
> is the officer in question supposed to be able to make the call,
> clairvoyance?
I don't think so - my expectation is that (especially) metro police
officers receive training at public expense to make the right /kinds/ of
decisions, so that they can respond appropriately in even the most
difficult situations.
One of the obvious choices available was to verify that the driver was
telling the truth by holding the driver's license and accompanying him
(and his wife) into the hospital.
If he'd done just that much, there'd have been no incident. He could
have written a ticket for failing to come to a complete stop just as
easily inside the hospital as outside and left the issue of extenuating
circumstances to a judge.
We require that those in a positions of public trust exercise good
judgment in the performance of their duties and simply put, those who
cannot or will not exercise that good judgment are unfit to serve.
> 5) The local police officials hang the officer out to dry the moment
> race is mentioned making all the right noises to cover their own
> butts.
They /haven't/ covered their butts on the question of how they armed and
sent a person out on patrol who was unfit (either inadequately trained
or psychologically unsuited) to serve as a police officer.
> This is simply a tragic story from any viewpoint, the driver or the
> officer in question. But we imperil a civil society if we assume that
> cops are always suspect.
That's very true, and your statement underlines the importance of every
decision made by every single police officer, because the
quasi-anonymity of the police uniform works both ways.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
On Mar 28, 6:24=A0pm, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Lew Hodgett" =A0wrote
>
> > "Swingman" wrote:
>
> >> With the Rambo cops of this generation, raised in a zero tolerance
> >> environment throughout school, to offset the rampant stupidity of the
> >> administrators, and with no compassion taught on video games or TV,
> >> probably the same thing.
>
> > "Rambo" says it all.
>
> Train a police force like you do the military and they will quickly look =
for
> an excuse to revert to military operations to put that training into
> practice ... problem is, the "enemy" is the population. Look at what IRS
> swat teams have perpetrated in the past.
>
> I'm far past being na=EFve enough to believe that this is simply a by-pro=
duct
> of providing them sufficient fire power to equal the gangster element.
>
> --www.e-woodshop.net
> Last update: 10/22/08
> KarlC@ (the obvious)
There's some kind of odd mindset, for sure. It reminds me of a group
of para-Marines, Recon guys who went a step further.
Biggest scare I ever got in the Corps was landing at Pearl Harbor, and
hearing our unit assignments called out. They called the unit assigned
first, Recon, etc. During the Recon roll call, I heard Self! It turned
out to be a buck sergeant name Roy Self, whom I never did meet.
On Mar 29, 1:44=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> MikeWhy wrote:
> > "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> That is pertaining to law enforcement breaking their own rules.
> >> I took what you wrote to mean there are laws which allow citizens to
> >> ignore traffic laws in an emergency.
>
> > The laws as written don't just "allow", Mike, but compels you to act
> > even if doing so contravenes those lesser laws, in the case of a life
> > emergency. In all cases, possibly even including California, the laws
> > place the value of human life far above the more trivial traffic or
> > property laws. With that said, getting to the bedside of a dying family
> > member doesn't qualify as a life emergency. The real trouble here was
> > the demonstrated lack of human compassion. The fear, outrage, and
> > concern is in deputizing, arming, and putting into a position of
> > authority a provable psychopath.
>
> I wasn't taking sides or opining in any way.
>
> I was just questioning the existence of any law on the books that
> allows drivers to ignore traffic laws do to "exigent circumstances."
>
> --
Maybe. Maybe not.
But I'd bet that rolling through a stop sign, if not totally ignored
in a white driver, would have been dropped on the instantt with the
explanation Moats gave.
I live in a semi-rural county, but, even here, if the various cops
didn't ignore drivers rolling through stop signs, they'd do little
else all day but write tickets that would be tossed out in court.
They'll grab someone when it is an obvious traffic hazard, but
otherwise, 99.5% of the time, no.
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> During training and evaluation by the Dallas PD, what part of the
> psychological evaluation process failed to reveal Powell's weakness's
> and their resultant affect on his ability to perform the assigned
> task.
And another question. Why or how was the video released? In the US, does the
public at large automatically have access to all such recorded material?
You'd figure that anything sensitive or perhaps waiting to go before the
courts would be screened before it was released for access.
A video like that would be highly unlikely to see the light of day in
Canada. Maybe that's a fault in the Canadian justice system, but that's not
the question in this case.
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
> MikeWhy wrote:
>> "jtpryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> In reading through this thread, the bulk of which I agree with having
>> very rarely had a positive police experience, a thought (devils
>> advocate) came to mind. How would this story had played out if our
>> young running back and gone throught the light, hit a car (or been
>> hit) and killed a child?
>>
>> =======
>> Yeah. Be mindful of the children.
>>
>> How do you think it would have played out, running back or not, police
>> presence or not. As though it never happens. But just suppose it
>> happened that way just this once. What if? Would it hold your attention
>> longer than the half minute it takes for the news spot to run?
>>
>>
>
> There's an elephant in the room here. The moment this piece ran
> there was this vast societal screech instantly blaming the cop
> for lousy judgment at the very least and outright racism at worst.
> But consider:
>
> 1) It's nightime and dark.
> 2) A driver violates a fairly basic rule of the road.
> 3) The driver claims imminent exigency, but the cop has probably
> heard a hundred similar excuses.
> 4) The cop makes a call - a wrong one as it turns out - but how
> is the officer in question supposed to be able to make the call,
> clairvoyance?
Given the way the incident was reported, the officer could have done both
things here: 1) been compassionate, and 2) verified that the story he was
being told was true. Since they were in the hospital parking lot, when he
ascertained that this was not an imminent threat to himself and he heard
the story, he could have told the woman to go into the hospital and offered
to accompany the driver to ensure that they were able to get to the room in
time. This would have been a win-win: if the story is true, he comes
across as compassionate and boosts the image of the police force -- if the
story is false, he has verified it and can come down the full force of the
law on the perpetrator.
At a minimum, this officer exhibited extremely poor judgment given the
situation as reported. The caveat here of course is that one must trust
that the reporting of the incident was accurate -- this is somewhat born
out by the video.
... snip
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
On Mar 29, 3:27=A0pm, Morris Dovey <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bored Borg wrote:
> > As everyone seems to have said, the fundamental problem isn't Powell's
> > action. It's Powell's perception that he's not doing anything reprehens=
ible.
> > I doubt that that can be fixed.. so what's to be done?
>
> Pour encourager les autres:
> One lash for each second the daughter was delayed plus one lash for each
> minute the son-in-law was delayed followed by dishonorable dismissal
> strikes me as appropriate. If I weren't such a gentle person, I might
> also suggest that medical treatment to ease the pain of the lashes be
> delayed for as long as the delay he caused...
>
> We (hopefully) learn from our mistakes. The current methodology seems to
> be one of pulling the weeds only when they become too obvious to be
> overlooked.
>
> A more effective employment screening would reduce (but probably not
> eliminate) this kind of problem.
Therein lies the problem, me thinks. It is the Powells hiring the
Powells which lies beneath one of the problems. It is a self-
perpetuating problem. Powell left his cam running, bragging, because
he felt his actions were 'pleasing the fellow assholes'.
This just in from the BOTD department (Benefit Of The Doubt)... how
many times has Powell been bullshat by people who were trying to evade
getting busted, tickets, arrested?
I obviously don't know the guy, but could there be a back-story? A
really good friend of mine is a retired Deputy Chief of Police. (He
photographed Angela's and my wedding...that is a joke all in itself
(chalk-lines etc.)) In his youth, he struggled having to make a choice
between joining the priesthood or to help the community by becoming a
cop. This guy cared a lot about his community, and still does. Some of
the fellow officers? Not so much. The whole force changed, as the
assholes climbed up the ladder and hired more assholes.
I have some compassion for a cop who has had enough and takes it out
on the next successful african american in the big-buck SUV who talks
down to him.
Like I said, I don't know the cop, but if he's an asshole to the core?
Hang the prick.
If he's buckling under the pressure of a job he's not cut-out to do
properly but blindly follows department policy? Hang the prick's
boss....and the prick.
>
> It'll be interesting to see if the good folks of Dallas are and remain
> sufficiently engaged to demand of their elected officials that action be
> taken to ensure that this kind of scenario is /never/ repeated.
>
> Sadly, I think the whole story will blow over and be forgotten until the
> /next/ time.
>
> --
> Morris Dovey
> DeSoto Solar
> DeSoto, Iowa USAhttp://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > Nah. The a** hole read the tea leaves and quit. I just hope that he
> > doesn't get on another department.
>
> I see "Rent-a-Cop" in his future.
Unfortunately, the fact that he "quit", whether it was orchestrated or not,
may mean that he could go work for another police force at some time in the
future. No one knows or at least, no one has stated what exactly is on his
employment record and I don't know if that's publicly accessible information
or not.
On Mar 29, 3:42=A0am, "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]>
wrote:
> "J. Clarke" =A0wrote
>
> > Google "moats powell" and you'll find quite a lot including several lin=
ks
> > to the police video of the stop.
>
> > Basically Officer Powell is badly in need of an attitude adjustment.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> I was unaware of that story. Unbelievable!
>
> What I find troubling about it most of all is simply that an otherwise
> reasonably good police department could be tarnished by this bozo's actio=
ns.
> I kept thinking over and over again, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!,
> LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT!!, LAWSUIT=
!!,
> LAWSUIT!!
>
> This moron is so clueless that he did this on camera. =A0Did he really th=
ink
> that his actions could be justified in any way? =A0And since those videos=
are
> public records, there is no question as to what actually happened. =A0He
> obviously did not think that he did anything wrong. =A0He even bragged on
> camera afterwards of falsifying a report on a chase because it was done i=
n
> violation of department guidelines.
>
> Anybody that stupid and clueless is an incredible liability to any police
> department. His law enforcement career is over. =A0And the Dallas PD is o=
n the
> hook for a big settlement. =A0The city attorneys must be having nightmare=
s
> now.
>
> Ryan Moats and his wife will be on Good Morning America on monday morning=
.
> This young man is the poster boy for hard work, study and strong suppoert=
er
> of his community and schools. =A0He deserved better.
>
> --
On another forum, I read that other cops on the force are angry at the
chief for apologizing, and feel the cop did the right thing. No cite
that I could find.
I hope it is wrong, because his attitude is one that should be
strongly discouraged, to the point of elimination, in any police force.
On Mar 28, 3:46=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> The cop in Dallas.
>
> Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been white?
>
> Lew
Link to TFA?
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> The cop in Dallas.
>
> Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been white?
>
> Lew
>
>
He would have been playing for the Canadian Football League.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
MikeWhy wrote:
> "HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Dallas PD is SEVEN HUNDRED officers below their authorized strength.
>> The city is even paying a $10,000 signing bonus to police recruits.
>
> There's a problem that's self induced, thankfully with a blessedly
> simple solution. I once lived in a neighborhood so free of crime,
> apparently, the cops had nothing to do at night but ticket cars
> parked in their owners' driveways for not displaying a village
> sticker. 700 more cops in that podunk backwater amounts to an
> occupation army.
If you mean Dallas, that's hardly Podunk redux. Still, I, too, question the
need for more cops in Dallas if the current crop has nothing better to do
that ticket people who roll through red lights at 2:00 a.m.
The problem driver is NOT the one who knowingly runs a stop sign or red
light. He's almost always taking extra care about the situation. The driver
you want to sanction severely is the one who didn't SEE the red light or
stop sign. Those cats are the real hazard!
"Lew Hodgett" wrote
> The cop in Dallas.
>
> Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been white?
You can bet that card will be played if it hadn't already. With the Rambo
cops of this generation, raised in a zero tolerance environment throughout
school, to offset the rampant stupidity of the administrators, and with no
compassion taught on video games or TV, probably the same thing.
In the old days in this state an immediate escort would have been provided
to the hospital regardless of race, I've seen it happen firsthand ... this
cop should be fired on the spot, regardless.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
"Dave in Houston" wrote:
> The Houston Chronicle reported in today's issue that Officer
> Powell has resigned from the Dallas Police Department.
Powell's resignation was, IMHO, a foregone conclusion; however, a much
larger question remains unanswered.
During training and evaluation by the Dallas PD, what part of the
psychological evaluation process failed to reveal Powell's weakness's
and their resultant affect on his ability to perform the assigned
task.
Lew
.
"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> That is pertaining to law enforcement breaking their own rules.
> I took what you wrote to mean there are laws which allow citizens to
> ignore traffic laws in an emergency.
The laws as written don't just "allow", Mike, but compels you to act even if
doing so contravenes those lesser laws, in the case of a life emergency. In
all cases, possibly even including California, the laws place the value of
human life far above the more trivial traffic or property laws. With that
said, getting to the bedside of a dying family member doesn't qualify as a
life emergency. The real trouble here was the demonstrated lack of human
compassion. The fear, outrage, and concern is in deputizing, arming, and
putting into a position of authority a provable psychopath.
"Bored Borg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 19:46:41 +0000, Lew Hodgett wrote
> (in article <[email protected]>):
>
>> The cop in Dallas.
>>
>> Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been white?
>>
>> Lew
>>
>>
>
> What's all this about then?
>
> Didn't see/hear anything relevant on BBC news....
> gotta link?
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/032609dnmetcopstop.3e9c080.html
>
-MIKE- wrote:
> HeyBub wrote:
>> First, the cop sure is no physical match for an NFL running back
>> (5'10", 230 lbs).
>
> That's Moat's size, right, not the cop's?
>
>>
>> The cop should have known that traffic laws are trumped by "exigent
>> circumstances" and certainly a mission of mercy would qualify.
>>
>
> Really? I don't think that law is on the book in any state. :-)
The law IS on the books in every state and the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure. It has been upheld in every federal circuit and by the Supreme
Court. Generally it is used to sanction some police action for which a delay
would be fatal, such as the time taken to obtain a search warrant.
Definition:
Generally, an emergency, a pressing necessity, or a set of circumstances
requiring immediate attention or swift action. In the criminal procedure
context, exigent circumstances means:
"An emergency situation requiring swift action to prevent imminent danger to
life or serious damage to property, or to forestall the imminent escape of a
suspect, or destruction of evidence. There is no ready litmus test for
determining whether such circumstances exist, and in each case the
extraordinary situation must be measured by the facts known by officials."
People v. Ramey, 545 P.2d 1333,1341 (Cal. 1976).
"Swingman" wrote:
> With the Rambo cops of this generation, raised in a zero tolerance
> environment throughout school, to offset the rampant stupidity of
> the administrators, and with no compassion taught on video games or
> TV, probably the same thing.
"Rambo" says it all.
Cop's mug shot speaks volumes.
> In the old days in this state an immediate escort would have been
> provided to the hospital regardless of race, I've seen it happen
> firsthand ...
Can't say the same about Cleveland.
About '57-'58 time frame, my future brother-in-law was taking night
school classes and I was at his house.
Phone call came in he had been hit by a car while crossing the street
and taken to the hospital.
Get there as quick as you can.
No other info available.
I was the most rational and elected to drive.
Got stopped for speeding on way to hospital.
Explained the situation and asked for an escort.
No deal, got a ticket and a warning.
Would have been okay except was driving during a 30 day suspension.
Eventually, everything worked out.
> this cop should be fired on the spot, regardless.
Yep.
Lew
"Mark & Juanita" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Given the way the incident was reported, the officer could have done both
> things here: 1) been compassionate, and 2) verified that the story he was
> being told was true. Since they were in the hospital parking lot, when he
> ascertained that this was not an imminent threat to himself and he heard
> the story, he could have told the woman to go into the hospital and
> offered
> to accompany the driver to ensure that they were able to get to the room
> in
> time. This would have been a win-win: if the story is true, he comes
> across as compassionate and boosts the image of the police force -- if the
> story is false, he has verified it and can come down the full force of the
> law on the perpetrator.
>
> At a minimum, this officer exhibited extremely poor judgment given the
> situation as reported. The caveat here of course is that one must trust
> that the reporting of the incident was accurate -- this is somewhat born
> out by the video.
The Houston Chronicle reported in today's issue that Officer Powell has
resigned from the Dallas Police Department.
Dave in Houston
On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 07:16:01 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>I was just agreeing with the OP. Post # 1. But I suppose that OP had
>nothing to do with racism.
>
>In general, an asshole cop will be one regardless of the 'perp's'
>colour. That much I agree with. I love that we're all 'perps' now.
>In this news group, when somebody comments how awful it was that some
>white guy dragged some black guy behind his pick-up truck, along a
>country road, till the black man dies, and then I suggest it could
>have been racially motivated (Duhhh), that somehow makes me eligible
>as a racist as well...by 'some standard'? That's more than just a
>little too screwed up for my tastes.
>I just love it when people spray the country-side with sanctimonious
>self-righteousness.
Yeah - I love the perps thing too. Everyone is a threat now. Handcuff
'em, man-handle them, bark at them, et. al. I understand the whole
thing about a cop getting shot during what seemed like a routine
traffic stop, but there also seems to be a Rambo affect at work too.
The whole racist thing has been taken to the limit. It's become too
easy of a card to throw down as a substitute for a good argument. Oh
well...
-Mike-
[email protected]
Robatoy wrote:
>
> Therein lies the problem, me thinks. It is the Powells hiring the
> Powells which lies beneath one of the problems. It is a self-
> perpetuating problem. Powell left his cam running, bragging, because
> he felt his actions were 'pleasing the fellow assholes'.
>
There are other factor in play. It's not so much the pathological hiring the
pathological as it is hiring anybody who can stand up, hear thunder, and see
lightning.
Dallas PD is SEVEN HUNDRED officers below their authorized strength. The
city is even paying a $10,000 signing bonus to police recruits.
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> The cop in Dallas.
>
> Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been white?
>
Who knows? This episode has been discussed on the "tx.guns" newsgroup.
My view is that Moats should simply have said "Screw you, John Law" and
walked off. Almost anything the cop does at that point would have guaranteed
him a career making Slurpees at the Stop-N-Rob.
First, the cop sure is no physical match for an NFL running back (5'10", 230
lbs). Second, if the cop decided to deploy his Taser or pistol, the mayors
of both Dallas and Plano, along with the police chiefs, would have been on
the scene within the hour. The governor of Texas would be holding a press
conference before dawn.
Remember, Moat's wife was told, at gunpoint, to get back in the car. She
said "Not by the hair of my chinney-chin-chin" and went on into the
hospital. I think Moats should have done the same and left the cop in the
empty parking lot with his ticket book.
The cop should have known that traffic laws are trumped by "exigent
circumstances" and certainly a mission of mercy would qualify.
Upscale wrote:
> "Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> I hope it is wrong, because his attitude is one that should be
>> strongly discouraged, to the point of elimination, in any police
>> force.
>
> I'm guessing that Powell was legally allowed to do what he did, but
> morally and humanely, he showed incredibly poor judgement. Even if
> he's not fired, any career ambitions he might have had have likely
> hit an immovable roadblock. At most, I'd say the rest of his days
> will be spent as record keeper in some evidence locker.
Where he will have plenty of time to study for the sergeant's exam. Upon
passing that exam with the highest possible marks, he will be assigned to
the Police Academy where he will diligently apply himself to studying for
the Lieutenant's exam. Upon scoring stratospheric grades on the Lieutenant's
exam, he'll be placed in charge of a shift in the identification division.
Delegating all his duties to subordinates, he bone up on the captain's test.
When he becomes a captain, he'll no doubt be placed in either Internal
Affairs or Public Relations until he becomes a deputy chief. After a couple
of years as deputy chief in Dallas, some smaller town, possibly yours, will
hire him as Chief of Police.
You may have recognized the Peter Principle.
"HeyBub" wrote:
> Dallas PD is SEVEN HUNDRED officers below their authorized strength.
> The city is even paying a $10,000 signing bonus to police recruits.
Apparently, that is a wide spread problem.
Trying to attract qualified candidates for a tough job that also
carries a lot of potential baggage into the personal life is proving
to be difficult here in SoCal.
Coming up with the money to pay them is another issue.
The job of policeman carries with it the not so flattering function of
serving as the human garbage collectors for society.
It certainly is not a job I would want.
Lew
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "HeyBub" wrote:
>
>> Dallas PD is SEVEN HUNDRED officers below their authorized strength.
>> The city is even paying a $10,000 signing bonus to police recruits.
>
> Apparently, that is a wide spread problem.
>
> Trying to attract qualified candidates for a tough job that also
> carries a lot of potential baggage into the personal life is proving
> to be difficult here in SoCal.
>
> Coming up with the money to pay them is another issue.
>
> The job of policeman carries with it the not so flattering function of
> serving as the human garbage collectors for society.
>
> It certainly is not a job I would want.
>
I was a cop for eight years, and it's not as bad as is made out. In real
life, cops seldom see the perpetrators, but always see the victims. Their
major job is to help the put-upon deal with their loss. If a cop takes one
residence burglary report, he's taken them all. They're boring. But to the
homeowner, a burglary can be a life-changing event. In many ways, being a
cop is like being a super boy-scout. If you're a good cop, that is.
On the bright side, people are funny. Stress 'em a bit and they often get
hilarious. Ask any paramedic, cop, emergency room worker, fireman, and
they'll tell you stories that border on the unbelievable. Things like:
Dispatcher: "352, check a report of a nude, black female running across the
Highway 90 bridge at this time"
Unit 352: "Clear. Enroute."
(two minutes pass)
Dispatcher: "352, have additional information on your nude, black female
subject. She is reportedly being pursued by another black female with a
knife. Handle Code 3"
Unit 352: "Code 3. Clear."
or this
Me: "Mister, don't you know it is extremely dangerous to drive that close to
the car in front of you?"
Driver: (shuffle, shuffle) "Man, I didn't know you was the fuzz. I though
you was just a couple of ordinary turds."
or this
Dispatcher: "1350. Fight in progress. Joe's Joint. 11350 West Hardy.
Reportedly two white females with chain saws involved.
Unit 1350: (??) "Say again..."
Dispatcher: "Two white females with chain saws, 1350!"
Unit 1350: "Uh, clear. Enroute."
I, personally, put a lot of people in jail but they were all my friends by
the time to go came around. I never got in a fight, never fired my weapon.
Then there were cops that got in a shit-storm every time they hit the
street.
I call it bad luck.
"Lew Hodgett" wrote
> "Swingman" wrote:
>
>> With the Rambo cops of this generation, raised in a zero tolerance
>> environment throughout school, to offset the rampant stupidity of the
>> administrators, and with no compassion taught on video games or TV,
>> probably the same thing.
>
> "Rambo" says it all.
Train a police force like you do the military and they will quickly look for
an excuse to revert to military operations to put that training into
practice ... problem is, the "enemy" is the population. Look at what IRS
swat teams have perpetrated in the past.
I'm far past being naïve enough to believe that this is simply a by-product
of providing them sufficient fire power to equal the gangster element.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
"Tim Daneliuk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> MikeWhy wrote:
>> "jtpryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> In reading through this thread, the bulk of which I agree with having
>> very rarely had a positive police experience, a thought (devils
>> advocate) came to mind. How would this story had played out if our
>> young running back and gone throught the light, hit a car (or been
>> hit) and killed a child?
>>
>> =======
>> Yeah. Be mindful of the children.
>>
>> How do you think it would have played out, running back or not, police
>> presence or not. As though it never happens. But just suppose it
>> happened that way just this once. What if? Would it hold your attention
>> longer than the half minute it takes for the news spot to run?
>>
>>
>
> There's an elephant in the room here. The moment this piece ran
> there was this vast societal screech instantly blaming the cop
> for lousy judgment at the very least and outright racism at worst.
> But consider:
>
> 1) It's nightime and dark.
> 2) A driver violates a fairly basic rule of the road.
> 3) The driver claims imminent exigency, but the cop has probably
> heard a hundred similar excuses.
> 4) The cop makes a call - a wrong one as it turns out - but how
> is the officer in question supposed to be able to make the call,
> clairvoyance?
> 5) The local police officials hang the officer out to dry the moment
> race is mentioned making all the right noises to cover their own
> butts.
>
> This is simply a tragic story from any viewpoint, the driver or the
> officer in question. But we imperil a civil society if we assume that
> cops are always suspect. In many of the big cities in the US, we're
> seeing a very tired police force quietly giving up any hope of
> maintaining civil behavior because the public blames them for doing
> their jobs, their bosses are political hacks that do not stand by
> them, and a good many citizens want to law applied vigorously to
> everyone except themselves. Look at the inner cities of LA, Chicago,
> Detroit, NYC, and so on and you see the bitter fruit of what happens
> when you give police an impossible mission without the resources,
> support, and good will it takes for them to be effective.
>
> Human history is fairly clear in this matter. Societies are not
> murdered, they commit suicide. When the rule-of-law is ignored or
> suborned, whether by individual citizens, officers of the court, or
> politicians, society inevitably collapses. If, for instance, the laws
> that govern, say, legal immigration are ignored, why should any other
> law be particularly binding? If politicians don't have to pay their
> taxes and can still sit in the highest Federal offices of power, why
> should anyone pay their taxes? If a serial pederast gets probation (as
> happened in VT a couple years ago) why should any sexual predator
> worry about it? Telling the cops to make it up as they go along is the
> worst possible solution. The whole point of having a bureaucracy and a
> body of law is to have a rule set that works the same way for
> everyone. Do we really want cops to decide just who is- and who is not
> to be held to the code of law?
All of us here have exceeded the speed limit, safely and without dire
consequences. None of us rape the neighbor's children, nor would we sit
quietly while it happens.
In a democracy, the laws are by and of the people. We, the people, did not
ask to be governed by an underclass of armed and hooded thugs. We expect
those entrusted to make and enforce our laws to share our values, to be one
of us. There is no higher "rule of law" to appeal. Running a stop sign isn't
about to bring about the collapse of civilization. If you also can't make
that distinction, I don't want you wearing a badge or having any part in
making or enforcing our laws.
On Apr 1, 3:54=A0pm, "Bill Hall" <[email protected]> wrote:
> That "foolish" young man made a good decision this morning ( with a littl=
e
> push from the Chief, I'm sure), he has resigned!!
>
> =A0Bill in Plano"Ed Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> >> This moron is so clueless that he did this on camera. =A0Did he really
> >> think that his actions could be justified in any way? =A0And since tho=
se
> >> videos are public records, there is no question as to what actually
> >> happened. =A0He obviously did not think that he did anything wrong. =
=A0He
> >> even bragged on camera afterwards of falsifying a report on a chase
> >> because it was done in violation of department guidelines.
>
> > He probably thought he'd take the video back to the station and show hi=
s
> > fellow officers how he took care of that (fill in ethnic slur here) and
> > wrote him up. They'd all have a good laugh and pat him on the back.- Hi=
de quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
In reading through this thread, the bulk of which I agree with having
very rarely had a positive police experience, a thought (devils
advocate) came to mind. How would this story had played out if our
young running back and gone throught the light, hit a car (or been
hit) and killed a child?
While I don't agree with the officers behavior, I don't agree with the
idea that it is OK to endanger the lives of other just because you
percieve something as an emergency, accurate or not.
-Jim
"Tim Daneliuk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There's an elephant in the room here. The moment this piece ran
> there was this vast societal screech instantly blaming the cop
> for lousy judgment at the very least and outright racism at worst.
> But consider:
>
> 1) It's nightime and dark.
> 2) A driver violates a fairly basic rule of the road.
> 3) The driver claims imminent exigency, but the cop has probably
> heard a hundred similar excuses.
> 4) The cop makes a call - a wrong one as it turns out - but how
> is the officer in question supposed to be able to make the call,
> clairvoyance?
> 5) The local police officials hang the officer out to dry the moment
> race is mentioned making all the right noises to cover their own
> butts.
I don't agree with any race related implications - at least not without some
other background information that I've not seen.
>
> This is simply a tragic story from any viewpoint,
This is not a tragedy.
>
> Human history is fairly clear in this matter. Societies are not
> murdered, they commit suicide. When the rule-of-law is ignored or
> suborned, whether by individual citizens, officers of the court, or
> politicians, society inevitably collapses.
Ummmmm.... not such a very historical reflection.
> If, for instance, the laws
> that govern, say, legal immigration are ignored, why should any other
> law be particularly binding? If politicians don't have to pay their
> taxes and can still sit in the highest Federal offices of power, why
> should anyone pay their taxes? If a serial pederast gets probation (as
> happened in VT a couple years ago) why should any sexual predator
> worry about it? Telling the cops to make it up as they go along is the
> worst possible solution. The whole point of having a bureaucracy and a
> body of law is to have a rule set that works the same way for
> everyone. Do we really want cops to decide just who is- and who is not
> to be held to the code of law?
A fundamental aspect of law enforcement is the discretion of the officer.
Risky - sure, but society does not expect, nor does the law absolutely
require that an officer "enforce the law" in the strictest possible
interpretation. To some extent, indeed the officer is always expected to
make the determination who is and who is not going to be held to the "code
of the law" as you put it.
>
> It is ironic that the villagers with pitchforks and torches who hung
> this officer out to dry demand a level of understanding an flexibility
> for the driver that they are *unwilling to extend to the cop*.
You don't really see a difference here?
> Sometimes there is no obvious right or wrong. Sometimes, there are
> just lousy circumstances where no good call is possible. My heart goes
> out to the driver but so too it goes out to the arresting officer.
> Neither of them was doing anything evil. Both were motivated by doing
> the "right thing". In this case, it was a double tragedy.
Again - this is not a tragedy. Not a single tragedy, and not a double
tragedy.
> But in our
> vile culture of political correctness, disdain for law, and feel good
> Monday morning quarterbacking, only one victim of this tragedy gets
> identified while the other - also very much a victim - gets crucified.
>
Ugh... the "v" word...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> This moron is so clueless that he did this on camera. Did he really think
> that his actions could be justified in any way? And since those videos
> are public records, there is no question as to what actually happened. He
> obviously did not think that he did anything wrong. He even bragged on
> camera afterwards of falsifying a report on a chase because it was done in
> violation of department guidelines.
He probably thought he'd take the video back to the station and show his
fellow officers how he took care of that (fill in ethnic slur here) and
wrote him up. They'd all have a good laugh and pat him on the back.
"jtpryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In reading through this thread, the bulk of which I agree with having
very rarely had a positive police experience, a thought (devils
advocate) came to mind. How would this story had played out if our
young running back and gone throught the light, hit a car (or been
hit) and killed a child?
While I don't agree with the officers behavior, I don't agree with the
idea that it is OK to endanger the lives of other just because you
percieve something as an emergency, accurate or not.
-Jim
**********************************************************************************
Well - you can "what-if" anything, to any extent you want, and sooner or
later you can what-if something to a point where you can create a scenario
that can only be answered the way you wish it to. The problem with your
what-if is that it does not apply to the situation at hand. The fellow
stopped at the light, checked for traffic, and then blew the light when it
was clear that no one was coming. Hell - what-if he had stayed at the
light, and got rear-ended by a car being driven by a drunken child?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"Tim Daneliuk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Monday morning quarterbacking, only one victim of this tragedy gets
> identified while the other - also very much a victim - gets crucified.
As usual, your tunnel vision blinds you to the obvious. Everything you've
said was correct, up until your #4 comment and then your argument takes a
nose dive.
And, that point was where the hospital staff came out and told the officer
what was happening. Everything was crystal clear at that point. Someone was
dying in the hospital and it was obvious why Moats ran the stop sign. That
was the point where Powell could issue a ticket or not ~ his choice. But,
there certainly wasn't any reason for the lecture or anything even close to
it. At all times, Moats was non-threatening, respectful and used the word
"Sir" frequently.
That's it, Powell needed to know nothing further. Anything after that was
simply Powell abusing his position of power and in effect, making the police
service look bad.
No argument, the police have a very difficult and demanding job and one that
demands a lot of common sense as well as maintaining control of a situation.
Powell failed miserably at the common sense part of it and as such had to
pay the price for his lack of humanity in this situation.
On Mar 28, 5:19=A0pm, Tim Daneliuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
> > The cop in Dallas.
>
> > Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been white?
>
> > Lew
>
> He would have been playing for the Canadian Football League.
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-- -
> Tim Daneliuk =A0 =A0 [email protected]
> PGP Key: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
You mean the run, pass, punt-league?
MikeWhy wrote:
> "jtpryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> In reading through this thread, the bulk of which I agree with having
> very rarely had a positive police experience, a thought (devils
> advocate) came to mind. How would this story had played out if our
> young running back and gone throught the light, hit a car (or been
> hit) and killed a child?
>
> =======
> Yeah. Be mindful of the children.
>
> How do you think it would have played out, running back or not, police
> presence or not. As though it never happens. But just suppose it
> happened that way just this once. What if? Would it hold your attention
> longer than the half minute it takes for the news spot to run?
>
>
There's an elephant in the room here. The moment this piece ran
there was this vast societal screech instantly blaming the cop
for lousy judgment at the very least and outright racism at worst.
But consider:
1) It's nightime and dark.
2) A driver violates a fairly basic rule of the road.
3) The driver claims imminent exigency, but the cop has probably
heard a hundred similar excuses.
4) The cop makes a call - a wrong one as it turns out - but how
is the officer in question supposed to be able to make the call,
clairvoyance?
5) The local police officials hang the officer out to dry the moment
race is mentioned making all the right noises to cover their own
butts.
This is simply a tragic story from any viewpoint, the driver or the
officer in question. But we imperil a civil society if we assume that
cops are always suspect. In many of the big cities in the US, we're
seeing a very tired police force quietly giving up any hope of
maintaining civil behavior because the public blames them for doing
their jobs, their bosses are political hacks that do not stand by
them, and a good many citizens want to law applied vigorously to
everyone except themselves. Look at the inner cities of LA, Chicago,
Detroit, NYC, and so on and you see the bitter fruit of what happens
when you give police an impossible mission without the resources,
support, and good will it takes for them to be effective.
Human history is fairly clear in this matter. Societies are not
murdered, they commit suicide. When the rule-of-law is ignored or
suborned, whether by individual citizens, officers of the court, or
politicians, society inevitably collapses. If, for instance, the laws
that govern, say, legal immigration are ignored, why should any other
law be particularly binding? If politicians don't have to pay their
taxes and can still sit in the highest Federal offices of power, why
should anyone pay their taxes? If a serial pederast gets probation (as
happened in VT a couple years ago) why should any sexual predator
worry about it? Telling the cops to make it up as they go along is the
worst possible solution. The whole point of having a bureaucracy and a
body of law is to have a rule set that works the same way for
everyone. Do we really want cops to decide just who is- and who is not
to be held to the code of law?
It is ironic that the villagers with pitchforks and torches who hung
this officer out to dry demand a level of understanding an flexibility
for the driver that they are *unwilling to extend to the cop*.
Sometimes there is no obvious right or wrong. Sometimes, there are
just lousy circumstances where no good call is possible. My heart goes
out to the driver but so too it goes out to the arresting officer.
Neither of them was doing anything evil. Both were motivated by doing
the "right thing". In this case, it was a double tragedy. But in our
vile culture of political correctness, disdain for law, and feel good
Monday morning quarterbacking, only one victim of this tragedy gets
identified while the other - also very much a victim - gets crucified.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
On Apr 4, 7:56=A0am, Mike Marlow <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 15:25:42 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
> >think odds are good that a white man would have received different
> >treatment from that cop.
>
> Oh man - do I ever disagree with that statement. =A0My personal
> observations, both from being stopped by a cop, and from watching them
> deal with other people, is that color is of no consequence. =A0There is
> a certain power trip thing that seems to be at work, and the lectures
> and the posture of presiding over the individual seems to be standard
> form for cops.
>
> -Mike-
> [email protected]
I was just agreeing with the OP. Post # 1. But I suppose that OP had
nothing to do with racism.
In general, an asshole cop will be one regardless of the 'perp's'
colour. That much I agree with. I love that we're all 'perps' now.
In this news group, when somebody comments how awful it was that some
white guy dragged some black guy behind his pick-up truck, along a
country road, till the black man dies, and then I suggest it could
have been racially motivated (Duhhh), that somehow makes me eligible
as a racist as well...by 'some standard'? That's more than just a
little too screwed up for my tastes.
I just love it when people spray the country-side with sanctimonious
self-righteousness.
On Apr 4, 1:12=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > In general, an asshole cop will be one regardless of the 'perp's'
> > colour. That much I agree with. I love that we're all 'perps' now.
> > In this news group, when somebody comments how awful it was that some
> > white guy dragged some black guy behind his pick-up truck, along a
> > country road, till the black man dies, and then I suggest it could
> > have been racially motivated (Duhhh), that somehow makes me eligible
> > as a racist as well...by 'some standard'? That's more than just a
> > little too screwed up for my tastes.
> > I just love it when people spray the country-side with sanctimonious
> > self-righteousness.
>
> I'm sorry, I missed the part about the guy getting beat up behind a
> pick-up truck.
> I though you were talking about the cop and football player.
>
I'll try it one more time after you explain what it is you mean by:
"There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
being a racist without ever having spoken with him. "
On Apr 4, 10:53=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > So, I ask you: how the hell does that make me racist?
>
> Where did accuse or even insinuate you of racism?
> That's right, I didn't.
>
> > And please, don't lecture me bout how wrong racism is as your
> > condescending tone is not appreciated.
>
> Oh cry about it.
>
LOL. Hardly. But you do talk out of both corners of your mouth. Pretty
much textbook, if you ask me.
End of discussion.
On Apr 4, 8:36=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
>
> > I'll try it one more time after you explain what it is you mean by:
> > "There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
> > being a racist without ever having spoken with him. "
>
> I thought I did explain it. =A0There was nothing on the tape to make
> anyone without presupposition, to think the cop was being racist.
>
> Racism is hating a race of people simply because of their race.
> In essence, the racist is believing something negative or derogatory
> about people without having any evidence to support it.
>
> Calling someone a racist without evidence is the same thing. One is
> believing something negative or derogatory about the person without
> having any evidence to support it.
>
> You tell me to google something you read about this cop, instead of
> simply providing a link. That makes me think you don't really have any
> other information on the man. I honestly hope you do and I'm not
> dealing with someone who throws the race card at the drop of a hat.
>
> --
>
> =A0 -MIKE-
>
> =A0 "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
> =A0 =A0 =A0--Elvin Jones =A0(1927-2004)
> =A0 --
> =A0http://mikedrums.com
> =A0 [email protected]
> =A0 ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Did you even read the OP and the subsequent reply?
Did you see the word 'guess' in the following (mine) statement?:
"My guess would be that in Powell's mind, such as it is, he lost his
job because of a black man.
That makes him even more dangerous."
I still think there is a probability that my 'guess' might be right.
The fact that I am aware that racism still exists amongst power-
tripping Texas cops makes it quite possible that this cop would have
behaved differently had the 'perp' been white. Others here have stated
same, and I agree.
So, I ask you: how the hell does that make me racist?
And please, don't lecture me bout how wrong racism is as your
condescending tone is not appreciated.
-MIKE- wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
>>>
>> I'll try it one more time after you explain what it is you mean by:
>> "There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
>> being a racist without ever having spoken with him. "
>>
>
> I thought I did explain it. There was nothing on the tape to make
> anyone without presupposition, to think the cop was being racist.
>
> Racism is hating a race of people simply because of their race.
> In essence, the racist is believing something negative or derogatory
> about people without having any evidence to support it.
>
> Calling someone a racist without evidence is the same thing. One is
> believing something negative or derogatory about the person without
> having any evidence to support it.
>
How about calling someone a racist when he makes a comment about a member of
a race or the race itself that IS the truth? For example, the sports person
who said (paraphrasing) "For 300 years blacks have been bred for strength
and stamina. That's one reason they excel at sports." He was run out of town
on a rail.
How about the Imus comment: "They look like nappy-headed 'ho's" Well, they
did.
No, observations, even if true, that are race specific are evidence of
racism to some.
And the thought doesn't have to be derogatory to brand the thinker as a
racists. Limiting Jews from Ivy League colleges in years past or Orientals
today from top-flight colleges in California is similarily thought to be
racist.
Statistical evidence can be used to establish racism. If the percentage of
"X" in your organization does not match the percentage of "X" in the general
population, that is often sufficient to establish racism in your selection
or promotion protocols.
"Upscale" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> You tell me to google something you read about this cop, instead of
>> simply providing a link. That makes me think you don't really have any
>> other information on the man. I honestly hope you do and I'm not
>> dealing with someone who throws the race card at the drop of a hat.
>
> Or, it might simply be that you couldn't be bothered to a type those few
> words into the Google search engine yourself. Why should he extend time
> and
> effort (as minimal as it would have been) on your behalf when it would
> have
> been so very easy for you to do?
>
He claims he has evidence but he wants someone else to look for it.
Kind of like a lawyer that, when asked by the judge if he has any evidence,
says "sure I do and if you want to know then go out and look for it".
"-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> You tell me to google something you read about this cop, instead of
> simply providing a link. That makes me think you don't really have any
> other information on the man. I honestly hope you do and I'm not
> dealing with someone who throws the race card at the drop of a hat.
Or, it might simply be that you couldn't be bothered to a type those few
words into the Google search engine yourself. Why should he extend time and
effort (as minimal as it would have been) on your behalf when it would have
been so very easy for you to do?
You've accused Robatoy of presupposing about Powell and then you go and do
the exact same thing to him. Presupposing works both ways Mike.
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 15:25:42 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>So far Powell has done all the talking I want to hear from him. I
>think odds are good that a white man would have received different
>treatment from that cop.
Oh man - do I ever disagree with that statement. My personal
observations, both from being stopped by a cop, and from watching them
deal with other people, is that color is of no consequence. There is
a certain power trip thing that seems to be at work, and the lectures
and the posture of presiding over the individual seems to be standard
form for cops.
-Mike-
[email protected]
Robatoy wrote:
> In general, an asshole cop will be one regardless of the 'perp's'
> colour. That much I agree with. I love that we're all 'perps' now.
> In this news group, when somebody comments how awful it was that some
> white guy dragged some black guy behind his pick-up truck, along a
> country road, till the black man dies, and then I suggest it could
> have been racially motivated (Duhhh), that somehow makes me eligible
> as a racist as well...by 'some standard'? That's more than just a
> little too screwed up for my tastes.
> I just love it when people spray the country-side with sanctimonious
> self-righteousness.
I'm sorry, I missed the part about the guy getting beat up behind a
pick-up truck.
I though you were talking about the cop and football player.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Robatoy wrote:
>>
> I'll try it one more time after you explain what it is you mean by:
> "There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
> being a racist without ever having spoken with him. "
>
I thought I did explain it. There was nothing on the tape to make
anyone without presupposition, to think the cop was being racist.
Racism is hating a race of people simply because of their race.
In essence, the racist is believing something negative or derogatory
about people without having any evidence to support it.
Calling someone a racist without evidence is the same thing. One is
believing something negative or derogatory about the person without
having any evidence to support it.
You tell me to google something you read about this cop, instead of
simply providing a link. That makes me think you don't really have any
other information on the man. I honestly hope you do and I'm not
dealing with someone who throws the race card at the drop of a hat.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Upscale wrote:
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> You tell me to google something you read about this cop, instead of
>> simply providing a link. That makes me think you don't really have any
>> other information on the man. I honestly hope you do and I'm not
>> dealing with someone who throws the race card at the drop of a hat.
>
> Or, it might simply be that you couldn't be bothered to a type those few
> words into the Google search engine yourself. Why should he extend time and
> effort (as minimal as it would have been) on your behalf when it would have
> been so very easy for you to do?
>
> You've accused Robatoy of presupposing about Powell and then you go and do
> the exact same thing to him. Presupposing works both ways Mike.
>
Nice circular logic, there. I'm not the one making accusations.
I haven't accused Robatoy of anything.
I was careful to word my writing so I wouldn't.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Robatoy wrote:
> So, I ask you: how the hell does that make me racist?
>
Where did accuse or even insinuate you of racism?
That's right, I didn't.
> And please, don't lecture me bout how wrong racism is as your
> condescending tone is not appreciated.
Oh cry about it.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Robatoy wrote:
> Did you even read the OP and the subsequent reply?
>
> Did you see the word 'guess' in the following (mine) statement?:
> "My guess would be that in Powell's mind, such as it is, he lost his
> job because of a black man.
> That makes him even more dangerous."
> I still think there is a probability that my 'guess' might be right.
>
And by the way, a guess is speculation, even if you "think" it's
probable.
> The fact that I am aware that racism still exists amongst power-
> tripping Texas cops makes it quite possible that this cop would have
> behaved differently had the 'perp' been white. Others here have stated
> same, and I agree.
More unfounded speculation.
Using your same rules of logic, you could replace "would have" with
"wouldn't have" and have just as valid an argument.
I did google it and still can't find any evidence that the guy is
racist. I see a lot of people who never met the guy (sounds familiar)
throwing the race card around on blogs and commentaries. But nothing
from him or from anyone who's had dealings with him providing any
evidence of racism. As much press as this is getting, you think there
would be someone, somewhere just chomping at the bit to provide a
"Furman tape."
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
HeyBub wrote:
> -MIKE- wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>>>
>>> I'll try it one more time after you explain what it is you mean by:
>>> "There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
>>> being a racist without ever having spoken with him. "
>>>
>>
>> I thought I did explain it. There was nothing on the tape to make
>> anyone without presupposition, to think the cop was being racist.
>>
>> Racism is hating a race of people simply because of their race.
>> In essence, the racist is believing something negative or derogatory
>> about people without having any evidence to support it.
>>
>> Calling someone a racist without evidence is the same thing. One is
>> believing something negative or derogatory about the person without
>> having any evidence to support it.
>>
>
> How about calling someone a racist when he makes a comment about a
> member of a race or the race itself that IS the truth? For example,
> the sports person who said (paraphrasing) "For 300 years blacks have
> been bred for strength and stamina. That's one reason they excel at
> sports." He was run out of town on a rail.
>
> How about the Imus comment: "They look like nappy-headed 'ho's" Well,
> they did.
>
> No, observations, even if true, that are race specific are evidence of
> racism to some.
>
> And the thought doesn't have to be derogatory to brand the thinker as
> a racists. Limiting Jews from Ivy League colleges in years past or
> Orientals today from top-flight colleges in California is similarily
> thought to be racist.
>
> Statistical evidence can be used to establish racism. If the
> percentage of "X" in your organization does not match the percentage
> of "X" in the general population, that is often sufficient to
> establish racism in your selection or promotion protocols.
So is the "limiting of Orientals" intended to reduce enrollments below the
level one would expect based on their percentage in the general population,
or is the problem they are addressing that if they did not limit enrollments
then their student body would be almost entirely Oriental?
"HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> -MIKE- wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>>>
>>> I'll try it one more time after you explain what it is you mean by:
>>> "There's a fine line between being a racist and accusing a man of
>>> being a racist without ever having spoken with him. "
>>>
>>
>> I thought I did explain it. There was nothing on the tape to make
>> anyone without presupposition, to think the cop was being racist.
>>
>> Racism is hating a race of people simply because of their race.
>> In essence, the racist is believing something negative or derogatory
>> about people without having any evidence to support it.
>>
>> Calling someone a racist without evidence is the same thing. One is
>> believing something negative or derogatory about the person without
>> having any evidence to support it.
>>
>
> How about calling someone a racist when he makes a comment about a member
> of a race or the race itself that IS the truth? For example, the sports
> person who said (paraphrasing) "For 300 years blacks have been bred for
> strength and stamina. That's one reason they excel at sports." He was run
> out of town on a rail.
>
> How about the Imus comment: "They look like nappy-headed 'ho's" Well, they
> did.
>
> No, observations, even if true, that are race specific are evidence of
> racism to some.
>
> And the thought doesn't have to be derogatory to brand the thinker as a
> racists. Limiting Jews from Ivy League colleges in years past or Orientals
> today from top-flight colleges in California is similarily thought to be
> racist.
>
> Statistical evidence can be used to establish racism. If the percentage of
> "X" in your organization does not match the percentage of "X" in the
> general population, that is often sufficient to establish racism in your
> selection or promotion protocols.
And, of course, there are the racist'ists. Moral high ground is damned
dangerous real estate.
HeyBub wrote:
> First, the cop sure is no physical match for an NFL running back (5'10", 230
> lbs).
That's Moat's size, right, not the cop's?
>
> The cop should have known that traffic laws are trumped by "exigent
> circumstances" and certainly a mission of mercy would qualify.
>
Really? I don't think that law is on the book in any state. :-)
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Bored Borg wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 19:46:41 +0000, Lew Hodgett wrote
> (in article <[email protected]>):
>
>> The cop in Dallas.
>>
>> Wonder what would have happened if the football player had been
>> white?
>>
>> Lew
>>
>>
>
> What's all this about then?
>
> Didn't see/hear anything relevant on BBC news....
> gotta link?
Google "moats powell" and you'll find quite a lot including several links to
the police video of the stop.
Basically Officer Powell is badly in need of an attitude adjustment.
HeyBub wrote:
> -MIKE- wrote:
>> HeyBub wrote:
>>> First, the cop sure is no physical match for an NFL running back
>>> (5'10", 230 lbs).
>> That's Moat's size, right, not the cop's?
>>
>>> The cop should have known that traffic laws are trumped by "exigent
>>> circumstances" and certainly a mission of mercy would qualify.
>>>
>> Really? I don't think that law is on the book in any state. :-)
>
> The law IS on the books in every state and the Federal Rules of Criminal
> Procedure. It has been upheld in every federal circuit and by the Supreme
> Court. Generally it is used to sanction some police action for which a delay
> would be fatal, such as the time taken to obtain a search warrant.
>
> Definition:
> Generally, an emergency, a pressing necessity, or a set of circumstances
> requiring immediate attention or swift action. In the criminal procedure
> context, exigent circumstances means:
>
> "An emergency situation requiring swift action to prevent imminent danger to
> life or serious damage to property, or to forestall the imminent escape of a
> suspect, or destruction of evidence. There is no ready litmus test for
> determining whether such circumstances exist, and in each case the
> extraordinary situation must be measured by the facts known by officials."
> People v. Ramey, 545 P.2d 1333,1341 (Cal. 1976).
>
That is pertaining to law enforcement breaking their own rules.
I took what you wrote to mean there are laws which allow citizens to
ignore traffic laws in an emergency.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
MikeWhy wrote:
> "-MIKE-" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> That is pertaining to law enforcement breaking their own rules.
>> I took what you wrote to mean there are laws which allow citizens to
>> ignore traffic laws in an emergency.
>
> The laws as written don't just "allow", Mike, but compels you to act
> even if doing so contravenes those lesser laws, in the case of a life
> emergency. In all cases, possibly even including California, the laws
> place the value of human life far above the more trivial traffic or
> property laws. With that said, getting to the bedside of a dying family
> member doesn't qualify as a life emergency. The real trouble here was
> the demonstrated lack of human compassion. The fear, outrage, and
> concern is in deputizing, arming, and putting into a position of
> authority a provable psychopath.
>
I wasn't taking sides or opining in any way.
I was just questioning the existence of any law on the books that
allows drivers to ignore traffic laws do to "exigent circumstances."
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
"HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
> > "HeyBub" wrote:
> >
> >> Dallas PD is SEVEN HUNDRED officers below their authorized =
strength.
> >> The city is even paying a $10,000 signing bonus to police recruits.
> >
> > Apparently, that is a wide spread problem.
> >
> > Trying to attract qualified candidates for a tough job that also
> > carries a lot of potential baggage into the personal life is proving
> > to be difficult here in SoCal.
> >
> > Coming up with the money to pay them is another issue.
> >
> > The job of policeman carries with it the not so flattering function =
of
> > serving as the human garbage collectors for society.
> >
> > It certainly is not a job I would want.
> >
>=20
> I was a cop for eight years, and it's not as bad as is made out. In =
real=20
> life, cops seldom see the perpetrators, but always see the victims. =
Their=20
> major job is to help the put-upon deal with their loss. If a cop takes =
one=20
> residence burglary report, he's taken them all. They're boring. But to =
the=20
> homeowner, a burglary can be a life-changing event. In many ways, =
being a=20
> cop is like being a super boy-scout. If you're a good cop, that is.
>=20
> On the bright side, people are funny. Stress 'em a bit and they often =
get=20
> hilarious. Ask any paramedic, cop, emergency room worker, fireman, and =
> they'll tell you stories that border on the unbelievable. Things like:
>=20
> Dispatcher: "352, check a report of a nude, black female running =
across the=20
> Highway 90 bridge at this time"
> Unit 352: "Clear. Enroute."
> (two minutes pass)
> Dispatcher: "352, have additional information on your nude, black =
female=20
> subject. She is reportedly being pursued by another black female with =
a=20
> knife. Handle Code 3"
> Unit 352: "Code 3. Clear."
>=20
> or this
>=20
> Me: "Mister, don't you know it is extremely dangerous to drive that =
close to=20
> the car in front of you?"
> Driver: (shuffle, shuffle) "Man, I didn't know you was the fuzz. I =
though=20
> you was just a couple of ordinary turds."
>=20
> or this
>=20
> Dispatcher: "1350. Fight in progress. Joe's Joint. 11350 West Hardy.=20
> Reportedly two white females with chain saws involved.
> Unit 1350: (??) "Say again..."
> Dispatcher: "Two white females with chain saws, 1350!"
> Unit 1350: "Uh, clear. Enroute."
>=20
> I, personally, put a lot of people in jail but they were all my =
friends by=20
> the time to go came around. I never got in a fight, never fired my =
weapon.=20
> Then there were cops that got in a shit-storm every time they hit the=20
> street.
>=20
> I call it bad luck.=20
>=20
>=20
Funny thing you should mention.
Spent a little time there myself. =20
I found it was usually the ones looking for a fight that found one.
In my time I never got into an argument where I couldn't talk my way =
out.
There were other cops who always seemed to get into beefs=20
but I never saw one who accidentally got into a scrap.
Must be all that "in your face" army style training that causes the =
problems.
I am thankful that my time predated the "Saturday night special" crowd.
P D Q
Morris Dovey wrote:
> Tim Daneliuk wrote:
>
>> 4) The cop makes a call - a wrong one as it turns out - but how
>> is the officer in question supposed to be able to make the call,
>> clairvoyance?
>
> I don't think so - my expectation is that (especially) metro police
> officers receive training at public expense to make the right /kinds/
> of decisions, so that they can respond appropriately in even the most
> difficult situations.
>
> One of the obvious choices available was to verify that the driver was
> telling the truth by holding the driver's license and accompanying him
> (and his wife) into the hospital.
>
> If he'd done just that much, there'd have been no incident. He could
> have written a ticket for failing to come to a complete stop just as
> easily inside the hospital as outside and left the issue of
> extenuating circumstances to a judge.
>
> We require that those in a positions of public trust exercise good
> judgment in the performance of their duties and simply put, those who
> cannot or will not exercise that good judgment are unfit to serve.
>
>> 5) The local police officials hang the officer out to dry the moment
>> race is mentioned making all the right noises to cover their own
>> butts.
>
> They /haven't/ covered their butts on the question of how they armed
> and sent a person out on patrol who was unfit (either inadequately
> trained or psychologically unsuited) to serve as a police officer.
>
>> This is simply a tragic story from any viewpoint, the driver or the
>> officer in question. But we imperil a civil society if we assume that
>> cops are always suspect.
>
> That's very true, and your statement underlines the importance of
> every decision made by every single police officer, because the
> quasi-anonymity of the police uniform works both ways.
Perhaps the police need to be taught a "reasonable man" procedure, to wit
"will what I am doing make me look like a jackass to the reasonable man?"
"jtpryan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In reading through this thread, the bulk of which I agree with having
very rarely had a positive police experience, a thought (devils
advocate) came to mind. How would this story had played out if our
young running back and gone throught the light, hit a car (or been
hit) and killed a child?
=======
Yeah. Be mindful of the children.
How do you think it would have played out, running back or not, police
presence or not. As though it never happens. But just suppose it happened
that way just this once. What if? Would it hold your attention longer than
the half minute it takes for the news spot to run?
Mark & Juanita wrote:
>
> Yeah, the officer's behavior was reprehensible from a simple human
> compassion standpoint. That phrase on police cars "To Serve and
> Protect" is supposed to mean something. A more reasonable, but
> realistic, officer, after having obtained the story from the people
> in the car would have a) expressed concern and urged the family to
> continue into the emergency room, and b) made the statement, "I'm
> going to accompany you sir, to assure that all is right". This would
> allow the officer to verify, diplomatically, that he was not being
> scammed while performing his duty. There was nothing wrong with
> drawing his gun as he saw the car being emptied, but after he
> ascertained that no threat was impending, he should have switched to
> compassionate mode.
>
You'll notice in the video that Moats was accosted in the Emergency Room
parking lot! He was already at his destination. Apparently the red light he
violated was very close to the hospital.
Let me give you an example of PROPER judgement.
I, as a deputy sheriff, took an out-of-county officer to the airport one
evening. On the way back to the courthouse, at 2:00 a.m. on the freeway, a
new Pontiac passes me like I'm sitting still. Wow! About five seconds later,
a Houston PD car zooms passed, trying to catch-up to the Pontiac.
Hmm. Interesting. So I turn on my grill lights and step on the gas. The
speedometer jumps up to 80+.
About a mile up the road, the Houston PD car turns on his lights and the
Pontiac immediately pulls to the side of the deserted freeway. I pull up
behind.
Out of the Pontiac steps one of the biggest black men I've ever seen.
Dressed casually, but man, was he big! He must have been a linebacker for
the Houston Oilers.
So, the first Houston PD officer says: "Why are you in such a hurry, sir?"
"Pussy, man!" says the driver.
The two HPD officers look at each other....
The driver pleadingly explained: "My ol' lady just called. Said she was in
the mood and to get my black ass over there. Officers, she ain't in the mood
all that often!"
The two HPD officers looked at each other again.
"Can't give a man a ticket for that. Wouldn't be right," one officer said.
"Go on, get outta here, but be careful."
" 'preciate it officers. I really do." Zoom
All us cops returned to our assigned duties with a smile and knowledge that
we had made the world just a little bit better.
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 13:36:30 -0700 (PDT), jtpryan <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Apr 1, 3:54 pm, "Bill Hall" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> That "foolish" young man made a good decision this morning ( with a little
>> push from the Chief, I'm sure), he has resigned!!
>>
>> Bill in Plano"Ed Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> >> This moron is so clueless that he did this on camera. Did he really
>> >> think that his actions could be justified in any way? And since those
>> >> videos are public records, there is no question as to what actually
>> >> happened. He obviously did not think that he did anything wrong. He
>> >> even bragged on camera afterwards of falsifying a report on a chase
>> >> because it was done in violation of department guidelines.
>>
>> > He probably thought he'd take the video back to the station and show his
>> > fellow officers how he took care of that (fill in ethnic slur here) and
>> > wrote him up. They'd all have a good laugh and pat him on the back.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>In reading through this thread, the bulk of which I agree with having
>very rarely had a positive police experience, a thought (devils
>advocate) came to mind. How would this story had played out if our
>young running back and gone throught the light, hit a car (or been
>hit) and killed a child?
>
>While I don't agree with the officers behavior, I don't agree with the
>idea that it is OK to endanger the lives of other just because you
>percieve something as an emergency, accurate or not.
I would agree with you had he careened through the light with wild and
reckless abandon, but it's pretty clear from the dialogue that he was
taking great care, not even speeding (note that speeding was never
even mentioned). He rolled through the intersection after insuring
that there wasn't any traffic and therefore, no lives to endanger. I'd
say the cop put more liives in danger with his high speed pursuit for
a rolling stop violation (lights notwithstanding--every cop will tell
you those lights render their cruiser invisible) than Moats did.
--
LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com
Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997
email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.
"HeyBub" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dallas PD is SEVEN HUNDRED officers below their authorized strength. The
> city is even paying a $10,000 signing bonus to police recruits.
There's a problem that's self induced, thankfully with a blessedly simple
solution. I once lived in a neighborhood so free of crime, apparently, the
cops had nothing to do at night but ticket cars parked in their owners'
driveways for not displaying a village sticker. 700 more cops in that podunk
backwater amounts to an occupation army.
That "foolish" young man made a good decision this morning ( with a little
push from the Chief, I'm sure), he has resigned!!
Bill in Plano
"Ed Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>
>> This moron is so clueless that he did this on camera. Did he really
>> think that his actions could be justified in any way? And since those
>> videos are public records, there is no question as to what actually
>> happened. He obviously did not think that he did anything wrong. He
>> even bragged on camera afterwards of falsifying a report on a chase
>> because it was done in violation of department guidelines.
>
> He probably thought he'd take the video back to the station and show his
> fellow officers how he took care of that (fill in ethnic slur here) and
> wrote him up. They'd all have a good laugh and pat him on the back.
>
"David G. Nagel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Upscale wrote:
>> "Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> I hope it is wrong, because his attitude is one that should be
>>> strongly discouraged, to the point of elimination, in any police force.
>>
>> I'm guessing that Powell was legally allowed to do what he did, but
>> morally
>> and humanely, he showed incredibly poor judgement. Even if he's not
>> fired,
>> any career ambitions he might have had have likely hit an immovable
>> roadblock. At most, I'd say the rest of his days will be spent as record
>> keeper in some evidence locker.
>>
>>
>
> Nah. The a** hole read the tea leaves and quit. I just hope that he
> doesn't get on another department.
I see "Rent-a-Cop" in his future.