News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 650     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 581     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 724     2 

Policing Attitudes

The_Architect:

All you libertarian types wouldn't last 2 days without police.
Click to expand...

While I don't believe we are in a police state, it is pretty clear the various police forces in the country are having some not so minor issues around corruption, use of force and discipline. To just wave it all off isn't doing anyone a service - and whether one is a) libertarian and b) last 2 days without the police has no bearing on that matter.

AoD
 
The level of "corruption" within the police is greatly exaggerated and sensationalized by people who are obsessed with George Orwell and proving that we're living in a 1985 era. It gets tiresome. If there was anything serious to be worried about is a different story... or real proof instead of posters like neubilder saying "duuudee, we're like totally in a police state man, it's pretty much Toronto, Syria amirite?". As someone related to former OPP officers as well as a couple current OPP officers it's offensive claiming they're all corrupt scumbags who brutally beat some poor g20 pacifists who were just standing next to that broken window with a baseball bat peacefully or just lighting that molotov cocktail for warmth. I've completely stopped opening anything related to the g20 and the like as it is just too infuriating. People are spoiled and don't realize it.
 
Exaggerated or not, it is an issue - what's wrong with casting a public light onto it? I am not going to say every cop is a scumbag because that is clearly NOT an accurate statement - but at the same time, I think you are too willing to give a carte blanche and dismiss concerns around events that might very well be legitimate. Not opening anything G20 related and dismissing it by saying "people are spoiled" basically sounds like you have already made a judgement that none of the cases merits investigation - and that's really unfortunate.

AoD
 
Cases like the horrible thing that happened to Kelly Thomas are ones that merit investigation and should be brought into the public light, ones where a police officer got off of a 15 km/h over speeding ticket do not. A lot of the claims are like the latter. That's ignoring huge articles about a poor 26 year old being picked on just because he had a black bandana and an axe in his backpack or complaining about human rights issues because the food at the detention cells "wasn't very good" (which was an actual story!).
 
Sorry, you set the bar rather low - are we really not supposed to have any oversight unless someone get beaten up and dies? Just because there are "chaff" stories doesn't mean systematic misconducts involving obfustication, inappropriate use of authority and the like should not be looked into?

AoD
 
As someone related to former OPP officers as well as a couple current OPP officers it's offensive
Click to expand...

Thanks for revealing your bias.

I'm sorry that you're offended by posted opinions. You seem to be a little too delicate for this world.
 
ttk77 said:
Not related to G20, but an appropriate article considering the topic:
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/a...akes-heat-for-arresting-off-duty-officer?bn=1

An officer harassed by his colleagues for doing the right thing after arresting an off duty police officer for drunk driving. Another example of cops believing they're above the law that they're sworn to uphold.
Click to expand...

I think this story should be brought to the forefront and reviewed by the TPS ombudsperson or equivalent. Incidents like this are much too easy to sweep under the rug and enables this behaviour to be repeated and condoned.
 
doug said:
You're right, of course they're not biased in any way. my bad.
Click to expand...

Yup, I'm biased to the point of being offended when people say "we're in a police state" when a cop gets away with a speeding ticket... because it's stupid. But since you aren't related to any police officers, you clearly show your bias and prejudice against them. See, I can do it too.

AoD, of course I went to both extremes there, and yes of course in serious cases there should absolutely be an investigation (which does happen through IA), but people sensationalising it like what has been going on in this thread is just ridiculous. It seems like a lot of people, probably ones who have a chip on their shoulder from being thrown in a detention cell during a "peaceful protest", take the smallest thing and blow it completely out of proportion. If an ex-cop tries to get out of drunk driving, then yes that warrants an investigation, but the fact that other cops were sticking up for their buddy and co-worker in a job where you potentially risk your life every day does not mean we're being controlled by Big Brother and need to "wake up", which seems to be the predominant view here.

Personally, in a job where they potentially risk their life every day to keep the streets safe, if an ex cop gets out of a speeding ticket I really couldn't care less.

In the case of "police brutality", it depends on the context. With the G20, 1. It was absolutely exaggerated by a lot of people with the intention of getting those who ruined their riotey fun fired and 2. It was made necessary by those who decided to take advantage of the situation and use it as an excuse to destroy our city. I don't know why so many people are willing to let them go, or even treat them as heroes, but frankly those types of people deserve a baton to the head, and "innocent" "protestors" wouldn't have been rounded up like that if they didn't hide the lawbreakers.
 
Last edited:
If an ex-cop tries to get out of drunk driving, then yes that warrants an investigation, but the fact that other cops were sticking up for their buddy and co-worker in a job where you potentially risk your life every day does not mean we're being controlled by Big Brother and need to "wake up", which seems to be the predominant view here.
Click to expand...

Sorry, do not equate espirt de corps to intimidation and interference with due process. The willingness to engage in the latter cheapens the former - whether one potentially risk their lives has nothing to do with it.

Personally, in a job where they potentially risk their life every day to keep the streets safe, if an ex cop gets out of a speeding ticket I really couldn't care less.
Click to expand...

Speeding ticket, maybe - but drunk driving? At some point, a no is a no - regardless of who and what they risk their lives for. The police preach consequences for one's action - what message is one sending about one's conduct if they do not hold themselves to account on the same basis?

In the case of "police brutality", it depends on the context. With the G20, 1. It was absolutely exaggerated by a lot of people with the intention of getting those who ruined their riotey fun fired and 2. It was made necessary by those who decided to take advantage of the situation and use it as an excuse to destroy our city. I don't know why so many people are willing to let them go, or even treat them as heroes, but frankly those types of people deserve a baton to the head, and "innocent" "protestors" wouldn't have been rounded up like that if they didn't hide the lawbreakers.
Click to expand...

Just because there are riotious elements (which I don't feel people are treating as heroes on here) doesn't answer the numerous questions about police conduct. For example - kettling clearly peaceful protestors, some of which are underaged and in distress in the rain that are allowed out because of sympathy of certain officers? Really? The ends do not necessarily justify the means - and to allow that suggest serious lapses in ethics, which should be the highest value of any disciplinary force. What about the case of Brian Sonne? Officer Bubbles? Systematic missing name tags? Is discipline so tax that one can't even get officers to wear their ID? What's the intent behind that?

AoD
 
Last edited:
The rounding up of "peaceful protestors" was made necessary by their unwillingness to identify the lawbreakers, so the police had to assume they all were, else they end up unintentionally releasing someone who would later commit arson. They did go a bit over the line though in that case.

As for Brian Sonne, I'm not 100% familiar with the details of his case, but wasn't he the security guy who purchased bomb making materials with the intention of making them? If that is the case then yea I think abusing his civil rights a little to avoid a freaking bomb go off in downtown Toronto is justified. What would have happened if Montreal police had been tough with the FLQ threat before bombs started going off instead of being reactionary?
 
doug:

Just because someone is related to police officers does not automatically render them biased.
Click to expand...

Even when they admit to it?

Yup, I'm biased to the point of being offended when people say "we're in a police state" when a cop gets away with a speeding ticket
Click to expand...

Are you also ofended when a drunk cop hits and kills a pedestian and then flees from the scene of the crime?


I'm not 100% familiar with the details of his case, but wasn't he the security guy who purchased bomb making materials with the intention of making them?
Click to expand...

Clearly, you're not familiar, or interested in the facts....why bother to speculate?

The rounding up of "peaceful protestors" was made necessary by their unwillingness to identify the lawbreakers
Click to expand...

how do you feel about the cops who refuse to identify their 'brothers' who blatently broke the law?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top