:thumbsup: Thanks for answering. I'm guessing that this would be what happens most of the time rather than everyone closing ranks.
Police are obviously not going to have a loud argument in public but I bet a lot of quiet words are exchanged.
I'd ask him WTF he was doing and tell him to let him go. There's other ways to handle these types of conflicts between departments, mainly by reporting it to the supervisor so the upper chains of commands can get together and discuss the issue.
This happens all the time with jurisdictional issues between city and county departments. At least where I'm at.
Firefighters should have sprayed the cops.
It would have cooled the altercation.
You resist them and they escalate to deadly force. The opposite of cooling altercations I'd say.
No, the same would not be true of ANY citizen. If I, Joe Citizen, obstruct traffic for one reason or another, I do not have the authority to do that long term. As soon as an officer tells me to move, I should do so because I am obstructing traffic. I have no legal grounds to disobey his order.
A firefighter on the other hand, has certain orders or guidelines to follow. He has the authority to do this due to his involvement with the City fire department.
So again, Joe Citizen should not obstruct traffic, Mr. Firefighter absolutely can when the situation warrants it. Now granted, Joe Citizen may temporarily do so until an authority figure shows up, but when he is told to move by said authority figure, he should move. A firefighter, on the other hand, may have a set of orders to follow.
I assume you're just being difficult, but the fact of the matter is, certain individuals are the authority figures in certain situations. A civilian is generally not an authority figure during an accident. A firefighter can be, as can a police officer. Stop acting like this is rocket science.
I'm not being difficult, at least not in the way you may be referring to. I'm asking you to question the status quo, and why certain people have authority over others. You've been conditioned to "respect" and OBEY the badge.
because some jobs need that authority over others.
A FF has to have Authority on scene of a accident or fire. why? lives are at stake. not just the victims but the FF themselves.
A Police officer has Authority (within reason and law). That's part of his job.
the issue (and i agree) is that far to many are conditioned to give ultimate respect to the point that police are commiting crimes and getting away with it.
So then if i was walking down the street minding my own business and asked me to come over and talk to you for whatever reason (ano calls or complaints and you didn't witness anything) and i just kept walking and ignored your request, you would not initiate force against me? You would just let me keep walking?
Or would you confront me even though i had done nothing wrong (other than ignore you, assuming that's unlawful ) and restrain me against my will?
I think it's the latter. you cannot. . . CANNOT take no for an answer(at least from a REGULAR CIVILIAN ). Either training or ego . . .
I don't quite understand the rabble rousing against police lately. Are there bad apples? Hell yah. Are some areas worse with what I call "pigs" than other areas? Hell yah.
There really should be a zero tolerance to those "bad apples" though.
Everyone, public and members of the force themselves, should do everything to root them out.
You have to be one of the bigger retards on this board.
See what people do not understand though is that the majority of us (officers) want the bad apples gone as much as anyone else. Unfortunately, the nature of the job makes alot of us work solo most of the time. We simply do not see much of the corruption that takes place. Not because we turn a blind eye, but because we aren't around to see it. Abuse of authority can take place when alone.
There are a ton of bad apples in my profession. I have no problem admitting it. I see one officer now that just started working at my department that has an attitude problem and can easily go down that path. I've already thrown him under the bus but my supervisors want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Until he gets fired or quits, he will continue to give the good cops a bad name with the way he handles himself. And the scary part is he sees nothing wrong with the way he acts despite being talked to by 5-6 different officers about it.
Honestly, some of the root of corruption starts with the administration of many departments. It's a numbers game to them. More tickets/arrests leads to a better review that they give themselves to whoever their boss is, whether it be city hall, village managers or mayor. My chief can easily walk into the mayors office and say "Ofc. Fallenhero had 78 arrests last year and wrote 300 tickets. See how I inspire him?" As opposed to "Ofc. Fallenhero had only 15 arrests and wrote 100 tickets, but was able to successfully mediate numerous domestic disputes. We haven't recieved a second call from those addresses. He also stopped at numerous lemonade stands and made a childs day as well as walked through the downtown businesses to deter crime and speak with business owners about any problems they see."
Which one of those do you think the mayor wants to hear that he can easily report to the public and run on in the next election? 300 tickets and 78 arrests or a cop that gets out of his car and into his community? Which one of those do you think gets me an average review as opposed to being pulled into the office and talked to about my lack of productivity?
Lazy driving habits? As long as you're paying attention and not causing accidents. . . .who cares?
Do you know how speed limits are decided? They're calculated at something like the 80th percentile of the safety for the given road in normal conditions. . . people naturally would want to go faster, and as i said if nobody is hurt, then there is no crime. If you hurt someone and speed is a factor, punish the individual - harshly. Nobody *needs* to go outside of their house at all or <insert pretty much any non-essencial task>. . . . but so long nobody is harmed by it. . . . why restrict/regulate/legislate it?
Sure, there is a need for law enforcement and it's a net gain to society as a whole to have someone prevent agression and the initiation of force against others. giving more slack for "bad behavior" ? that is hard to define, no? is drinking bad behavior? smoking bad behavior? eating too much salt bad behavior? who gets to decide what's right for me? apparently it's 535 people in wahington dc, or in my case 120 state congresmen. . .
no victim, no crime.
so you admitted that we can't be good, yet we put others (who also can't be trusted to be good) in a position of power over us?
Lets walk through a simple example I heard on a youtube video a while back:
Do you have the right to punch someone? kidnap them? shoot them? take their money? Use ANY force against someone other than in self defense? <I'll give you a hint, the answer is no>
Can you delegate to another a right that you don't have? As in I don't like you and i don't have the right to kill you, but i can for some reason authorize my neighbor to do it for me? <I'll give you a hint, the answer is no>
Can me and all of my neighbors get together and COLLECTIVELY vote (delegate to another) to kill you so long as we get a majority? <I'll give you a hint, the answer is no, again>
Then how then does Congress get its' power? How do they authorize the use of force against others? and no, i didn't sign the social contract
You're an LEO? Answer the question?
Can you EVER take 'no' for an answer to a request? EVER?
I assumed this also. Obviously this news is supposed to shock us at what a pig the officer is, and maybe he is a pig, but maybe the other engines had already moved, this guy wasn't doing crap, and the cop wanted one lane opened so that cars could start moving past at a reasonable speed.while i think the cop was a bit wrong in this(as we know so far), what if he was asking a FF that wasnt directly involved in the rescue scene to move the truck enough to allow the back up of traffic to get by a bit, relieving a bunch of stress on people sitting there waiting? rescue is the FF focus, traffic safety and control is the cops focus. maybe a little tolerance on both sides would have kept the whole shabang from ending like this?
Happens all the time. From being let in on a noise complaint to consent searches. True question is are you willing to accept that as the answer or are you that close minded in your belief that all LEOs are the same?
That's fine, as I said, i've never personally had a bad experience with a cop, so i do believe that there are decent ones out there, or at the very least ones capable of acting decently at least part of the time. Does it hurt your feelings to be told no? Do you get all huffy and puffy about it? Try and inconvenience the CRIMINAL? I'm just going off of anecdotal stories i've heard online of cops not taking it very gracefully at all...
It's a case by case basis with a bunch of factors involved. I can't make a blanket statement/answer that will cover all situations I've been told no in.
So then there ARE cases where you take the 'no' personally? How does that make you feel? Angry? Sad? Can you give an example or two of when you didn't get your way and you had to use force to get what you wanted? Did it feel better to have 'won'?
Do you see the world as Us vs Them?
Look at your sig FFS
How LEO see people: Not as civilians, but as criminals who haven't been arrested yet.
An example where no hasn't worked:
Local bar wanted a guy to leave. Guy refused so owner called police. Police show up and tell him he has to leave multiple times. Says no. Police go hands on and escort him off property. Still refuses to listen and goes back inside the bar. Gets arrested for trespassing after owner signs complaints.
His actions frustrate me yes because a simple solution to a problem didn't work because of his unwillingness to listen/cooperate. I don't take it personally with the exception that it has now given me more paperwork to do than if he simply left when asked.
Another example:
Woman calls because of a domestic violence incident where she was attacked by husband. Arrive and hear people arguing inside. Knock on the door and it hardly opens with the male subject present. The guy has blood on him. After explaining why police are present we ask to come inside. He says no and slams the door. After numerous attempts to get him to open the door, it gets kicked in.
This situation "no" gets to me personally because I'm trying to help. It gets to me because I don't know what's behind that door. I don't know if someone is seriously hurt or waiting on the other side with a weapon or what the circumstances are.
It doesn't make me "feel good" as you put it to resort to those options but they are done out of necessity. If anything it aggravates me that it got to that point. It's not a win or lose situation with the only exception being I "win" since I am able to go home at the end of my shift. Which really is the only "win" my family and I care about.
I'm not being difficult, at least not in the way you may be referring to. I'm asking you to question the status quo, and why certain people have authority over others. You've been conditioned to "respect" and OBEY the badge.
No, I don't see it as us vs. them. I actually oppose that viewpoint as I find it counter productive to what the police are supposed to represent and do. I find the rise of the militant cop to be somewhat disturbing, although I do see a point in becoming better armed and trained so that certain violent crimes can be immediately dealt with. It is a fine line, but one that does exist.
BTW, the quote in my sig is from Warhammer 40K, a setting in which I enjoy. I found humor in the quote, which is why it is in my sig. The fact you are grasping at straws in order to paint every LEO in the same picture speaks volumes about both your level of intelligence and maturity.