Cop Talk

What happens when the boys in blue get too close to their keyboards.

Eve Tushnet | November 9, 2007

"I crushed a dude's eye socket from repeatedly punching him in it and then I charged him with menacing and harassment (of me)."

"Seeing someone get Tasered is second only to pulling the trigger. That is money-puts a smile on your face."

Those are two of the statements posted by corrections deputy David B. Thompson of Multnomah County, Oregon to an Internet chat room. The inflammatory rhetoric sparked an ongoing investigation by the county sheriff's office, as well as reporting by the Portland Tribune and other local news outlets.

Thompson may also have filed a false police report to hide the eye-socket incident he brags about in his post. Although the sheriff's department can't comment on the investigation while it's still underway, he could be fired and prosecuted if he's found guilty.

Many police departments across the country have experienced similar bulletin board crises over the last few years, putting police officers' freedom of speech in conflict with the public's need to be protected from, well, cops who get off on using Tasers.

This March, the New York Observer reported that commenters on the "NYPD Rant" site were posting pictures of local bicycle activists from the group Transportation Alternatives with comments like, "These lawbreaking cycle pirates must be stopped!!" and "Someone please hammer these 2 turds this weekend" (at a Critical Mass event).

In June, St. George, MO resident Brett Darrow incurred online cop hostility when he posted a video of a disputed traffic stop. According to TheNewspaper.com, one poster at St. Louis CopTalk wrote, "I'm going to his house to check for parking violations." Another, using the pseudonym "STL_finest," went further: "I hope this little POS punk bastard tries his little video stunt with me when I pull him over alone-and I WILL pull him over-because I will see 'his gun' and place a hunk of hot lead right where it belongs."

Those posts were deleted, and discussion of Darrow has been banned from the boards. But these online threats have been accompanied by face-to-face death and arrest threats made at Darrow, including a second videotaped encounter with an officer who screamed at Darrow in a parking lot.

In September, a Columbus, OH officer resigned after the Columbus Dispatch revealed that she
and her sister had posted videos on YouTube blaming Jews, blacks, and immigrants for the country's
problems. Susan L. Purtee was neither on duty nor in uniform when she said Jews "started to tell us—the gentiles—how to live, because if we did, they'd make a lot of money" and black people use "mangled English, dirty and filthy"; but neither was she entirely anonymous, since the sisters' website
revealed that she was a law-enforcement officer. Purtee was reassigned to a desk job, and then
resigned.

Unsurprisingly, many of these conflicts have a racial component. In 2006, the Montgomery County, MD police chief got into a highly-publicized battle with the county's branch of the Fraternal Order of Police over postings on the police union's online forums. Some pseudonymous postings referred to Hispanic immigrants as "beaners," insulted another officer and threatened her husband—posting the officer's name, badge number, and station, and, in one case, threatening to attack her husband if he "scream[ed] profiling" after a traffic stop. The county responded by blocking access to the forums from county-owned computers.

"It was basically perceived as an attack from outside," says Walte Bader, who was the Montgomery County FOP president during the controversy. Bader adds that the union was working on civility rules
for the forum when the controversy went public, but "when the government, the police department, tried to interfere we saw that as a totally different matter of government interference with First Amendment rights. We would not shut that website down on the basis of [the government] calling for it or the Washington Post calling for it."

Bader has a point. "Courts have said that there are limits on what public employees can say because of the nature of their responsibilities. You could say that the government has more leeway to clamp down on the speech of employees to the extent that it's inconsistent with their duties," explains Paul Alan Levy, an attorney with the Public Citizen Litigation Group and a specialist on Internet speech and anonymity. But Levy notes that the Internet offers ways to "separate the position from the identity of the person" in a way that may allow government employees more room to rant.

Levy suggests that the Internet, with its possibilities of total anonymity, is an especially valuable free-speech forum: "People ought to be able to blow off steam. It's the marketplace of ideas—people ought to get it out there."

John Gilmore's classic line about the Internet is that it "interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it." The Montgomery County FOP boards, for example, were shut down during the comments controversy, but a number of other boards maintained by individual cops sprung up to take their place.

Levy adds that the specifics of each case matter a lot: Personal threats can be treated differently from more general ugly comments. "Is it a true threat?" he asks. "The courts distinguish between vague 'this is outrageous, people ought to be up in arms' and 'watch out, I know where you live, this is your address, I'm coming to get you.' There's a continuum."

Comments

|11.9.07 @ 3:16PM|#

After that headline reference video, I have to leave work early. That really shattered my psyche. Why did that police officer start singing that awful song?

|11.9.07 @ 3:16PM|#

I had to write it, sorry ...

EVE TUSHNET? Isn't that a porno site?

Episiarch|11.9.07 @ 3:17PM|#

The more we learn what cops really think the better. I have a suspicion that it is far worse than most people imagine. My personal experience supports that.

|11.9.07 @ 3:20PM|#

Eve has it all wrong, there is no downside to allowing cops to "get real." I believe it is important to understand exactly what cops think.

Simply put, cops have an attitude that they are above the law. This was and is plainly visible at the website, copswritingcops.com These websites simply bring to light common attitudes among law enforcement officers.

Should cops get in trouble for what they write? The not so simple answer is that it depends, if a police officer makes a threat or commits libel or slander than they should be subject to the same laws as other citizens.

Regards

Joe Dokes

|11.9.07 @ 3:26PM|#

I was out smoking a cig a month ago in my company's parking lot, when a cop approached me and said, "Give me your ID."
I said, "Why?"
He said, "Give me your ID."
I said, "I don't have to give you my ID."
He said, "... if you want to go to jail ..."
I said, "Why do you want my ID?"
He said, "Because you're with HIM."
He pointed to a guy 30 feet away from me, who was illegally changing his oil in the parking lot.
I said, "No I'm not, I work here and I'm taking a smoke break."
He said, "Give me your ID."
I said, "OK, but I'm letting you know that I don't HAVE to."
He spent the next 20 minutes with my driver's license, calling in for warrants before telling me, "OK, you're free to go."
I said, "Gee, thanks for wasting 20 minutes of my work day."
He glared.
I went to my car, got my camera and started shooting photos of him harassing this Indian guy who was changing his oil.
He turned toward me and started walking toward me.
I ran inside the building.
What an uber-masculine, fat-headed dick he was.

Episiarch|11.9.07 @ 3:30PM|#

Jamie, if I am not driving I always say "I don't have ID, my wallet is..." and depending on the situation, I say something plausible.

Works pretty well. I figure lying to pigs is my duty.

|11.9.07 @ 3:35PM|#

As someone who harbors deep distrust of the law enforcement community and an almost religious reference for freedom of speech, this post raises questions that I don't have all the answers to.

Is a cops freedom of expression, as it relates to his job, restricted? Some of the cited posts are, IMO, criminal and should be investigated and prosecuted. Others, for example racist comments, seem to be inside the boundaries of constitutionally protected free speech. It's going to get sorted out in the courts and any legislation will most likely be counter productive.

Anonimity is nothing new in publicizing your opinions and you might think that people are aware that the internet is not an unbreahable barrier in determining the ID of a content originator, but many aren't. A few more prosecutions will likely dispel that myth.

There's much to mull over here, but I'm expecting simplistic solutions to a complex problem will be forthcoming, if they didn't already beat this post in..

|11.9.07 @ 3:36PM|#

Espisiarch,

If the cop then points to your wallet in your pocket, and asks what that is, you should accuse him of coming on to you.

That, also, is your duty.

- Gavin

Episiarch|11.9.07 @ 3:39PM|#

If the cop then points to your wallet in your pocket, and asks what that is, you should accuse him of coming on to you.

I could do a citizen's arrest, sort of a reverse Larry Craig.

|11.9.07 @ 3:41PM|#

Is a cops freedom of expression, as it relates to his job, restricted?

The government can't and shouldn't stop him from saying anything, even the most vile racist stuff, but that doesn't mean it can't hold him accountable as far as his employment is concerned. If someone takes away your paycheck because of your beliefs, that doesn't violate your freedom of speech.
I'm a private citizen, and as such I'm free to be politically active. However, I'm also a journalist, and my employer makes it quite clear that I am NOT to be politically active. For instance, I can't even have a political bumper sticker on my car.
I have no problem with that. It's a condition of my employment.

|11.9.07 @ 3:47PM|#

Jamie,

The Hibel v. Nevada case says your wrong. Although I don't agree with the way the cop treated you, you are legally obligated to provided ID when asked by a peace officer.

Now, once you began to photograph the cop you were certainly entitled to do that. I love how cops get all worried about THEIR PRIVACY, when they are in PUBLIC harrasing people.

One of the great things about the internet is that everyone is a reporter, and thus, when cops act stupid there just might be someone their with a camera.

The great thing that people forget about the internet is that it is one of the most NON PRIVATE forms of communication ever, and that what they say can and will come back to haunt them.

Regards

Joe Dokes

Reinmoose|11.9.07 @ 3:59PM|#

I agree with Jaime Kelly.

IMO, the "as a condition of employment" viewpoint is the correct one. If you hire someone as a keeper of laws, someone who's frequently taken at his word, that person must have the utmost ability to seperate any prejudices he might have from his job performance. If nothing else, comments like these warrent a thorough investigation of the officer and cases he has been involved with.

I once had a policeman outright lie in court against me (traffic court, but I digress). I believe they should have to earn their trust, not have it given to them.

Daniel|11.9.07 @ 4:02PM|#

The Hibel case says you have to provide your name when asked. You are not required to provide written identification or answer any other questions beyond "What's your name boy" (exact police version of course varies by dialect).

I'm not saying the ruling doesn't blow, but it's not the "Your papers" requirement you make it sound like.

Daniel

|11.9.07 @ 4:06PM|#

I'm a private citizen, and as such I'm free to be politically active. However, I'm also a journalist, and my employer makes it quite clear that I am NOT to be politically active. For instance, I can't even have a political bumper sticker on my car.
I have no problem with that. It's a condition of my employment.

In the case of an LEO the "employer" is the government. I have a big problem with the government restricting speech. Since it is generally accepted that the constitution applies to all levels of government, e.g. Detroit can't make The Church of the Black Madonna the city religion, governmental threats on your employment seem to this legally untrained lad as "abridging the freedom of speech". All that I'm saying is that sticky wickets abound here.

Reinmoose|11.9.07 @ 4:14PM|#

In the case of an LEO the "employer" is the government. I have a big problem with the government restricting speech.

The issue here is that, by accepting the role of "employer" the government has obligated itself to operate both as a governing body and as a private employer.

Reinmoose|11.9.07 @ 4:15PM|#

Oh, and also. Nobody said that the gov would restrict their speech. They would just use it as a basis for whether or not the person is qualified to be a LEO

|11.9.07 @ 4:24PM|#

I'll agree that it's tricky, as it may be difficult to determine what is political speech and what is bias that would prevent someone from effectively doing their job.

On the other hand, it's pretty easy in cases like the first quote from the article, where an officer is admitting to a crime. You can say "I shattered a guy's eyes a sockets then charged him with a false crime" and hide behind the first amendment when you get prosecuted.

|11.9.07 @ 4:29PM|#

I assume by cops "getting real" you mean "going broadway" and using "jazz hands."

Dan|11.9.07 @ 4:34PM|#

Speaking from the viewpoint of a person who knows a few cops, I can attest that most of them are decent and law-abiding.

However, while I am not willing to hazard a guess as to percentages, there are far too many that are in the line of work to feed their ever-hungry egos, and this ultimately leads to abuse of power. They are in every department in every city in America and unfortunately they make the good guys look bad along with them.

Simply put, the administrators and local city councils need to police their own, so to speak. All local accountability has disappeared, and this only feeds the problem. It makes it terribly easy for dickheads to get in the uniform and act like, well, dickheads.

|11.9.07 @ 4:36PM|#

Some cop | November 9, 2007, 4:36pm | #

I think nigger's are all scum and wish they we should ship them all back to Africa. I still treat them equally on the job.

What about a post like that? Governmental employment termination? What other PC things is he not allowed to say. Do we enact a speech code like the universities?

Did I mention my reverence for free speech?

|11.9.07 @ 4:37PM|#

"and wish they we should ship them"

You really nail the details!!

|11.9.07 @ 4:43PM|#

Jamie,

The Hibel v. Nevada case says your wrong. . . . [Y]ou are legally obligated to provided ID when asked by a peace officer.

Not quite that simple Joe-Dokes. Under Hibel the police still need "reasonable suspicion" to stop you and ask for ID. I think Jamie could make a good case that simply standing smoking a cigarette in a parking lot nowhere near the apparent offender, does not provide the cop with reasonable suspicion. Second, the state must have a "stop and identify" statute. I believe only 21 have such a statue, so depending on where this occurred, Jamie may have had no such obligation to comply.

|11.9.07 @ 4:46PM|#

Lamar, thanks for covering my sloppy ass.

|11.9.07 @ 4:48PM|#

Daniel,

I have the hiibel (first spelling was incorrect) on my desk and took a read, you are correct. I person must give an officer an "credible and reliable" identification. Which the court took to mean that the officer could ask for a person's name.

That being said, the cop who harrassed Jamie would simply have argued that his stating his name was not "credible."

I think the bigger issue is one that was touched on yesterday with the taser incident, the Police simply feel that they can do what ever they want, and therein lies the problem.

Regards

Joe Dokes

|11.9.07 @ 4:49PM|#

Gosh, let's pick nits. You are legally obligated to ID yourself. Not present an ID card. I'm Joe Shit and this is my address is sufficient.

|11.9.07 @ 4:51PM|#

Speaking from the viewpoint of a person who knows a few cops, I can attest that most of them are decent and law-abiding.

Really? Then why is there almost never one of these so-called "good" cops that come forward and rat out the bad ones who lie about evidence, etc. rather routinely. We've seen story after story after story of bad police behavior, which must certainly be even more widely known to the other cops who work around these guys, but you never find out about it from them. Even when one is investigated there is, at best, a deafening silence from the rest of the police, and at worst, active resistance to the investigation. Cops are notorious for protecting their own so I'd say that automatically disqualifies almost all of them from "good cop" status. When I see one come out and publicize the wrong-doing he has witnessed then maybe I'll believe your assertion. Until then, "good cops" are like any mythical creature people claim to have seen but for which little tangible evidence exists.

Episiarch|11.9.07 @ 4:55PM|#

Cops are notorious for protecting their own so I'd say that automatically disqualifies almost all of them from "good cop" status.

Bingo. You don't qualify as "good" if you refrain from taking bribes/abusing your power/doing totally illegal shit a la The Shield, while not arresting other cops who do. Giving other cops a pass on illegal activities is inherently corrupt. Which basically makes 99.9% of cops (except Serpico) corrupt.

douglas Gray|11.9.07 @ 5:00PM|#

The real issue is what the consequences should be for that officer. If the consequences of a private citizen crushing someone else's eye socket is jail time, his jail time should be ten times that, as he has, in addition to assault and battery, abused his position.

|11.9.07 @ 5:09PM|#

Really? Then why is there almost never one of these so-called "good" cops that come forward and rat out the bad ones who lie about evidence, etc. rather routinely.

I thought the same thing at first.

But then I thought that the "good cops" are going to need the "bad cops" to back them up in a shitstorm at some point. I don't think yuour gonna get too much back-up by going around and outing the "bad" apples.

|11.9.07 @ 5:21PM|#

Any cop who hasn't been shot by bad cops is a bad cop.

Dave Woycechowsky|11.9.07 @ 5:29PM|#

Maricopa County Medical Examiner has today reported that Carol Anne Gotbaum's death in custody was an accident.

|11.9.07 @ 5:29PM|#

Great work Eve!
It's kinda scary to think that Reno 9/11 is closer to how cops really are then a lot of people think...

|11.9.07 @ 5:30PM|#

Jeez, this has degenerated into a cop hate fest. I'd normally join in, but the issue is free speech versus law enforcemnt employment.

|11.9.07 @ 5:30PM|#

When I see one come out and publicize the wrong-doing he has witnessed then maybe I'll believe your assertion.

There are protocols for addressing misconduct in all organizations...publicity is seldom a requirement for good people doing the right thing.

|11.9.07 @ 5:42PM|#

"Even when one is investigated there is, at best, a deafening silence from the rest of the police, and at worst, active resistance to the investigation."

I am with you here, but your "at worst" scenario doesn't even touch some of the strategies cops routinely deploy to defeat investigations into their criminal conduct. All of this has been documented by Radly ad nauseum. Try, "at worst, aggressive efforts to undermine, slander, physically threaten or assault their victims when they bring suits..." something along those lines.

Oh, and that video link made me sick to my stomach. When that sensation passed, I wanted to kill someone. In a just world, that dipshit cop would be repeatedly kicked in the teeth with steeltoed boots next time he took it upon himself to abuse his position thusly.

|11.9.07 @ 5:45PM|#

I don't think yuour gonna get too much back-up by going around and outing the "bad" apples.

Chicago Tom,

You may be right, but so what? That doesn't make them "good cops" because they might want the protection of the bad cops someday. I'll stand by my assertion that if they know of illegal behavior and not only don't arrest the offending cops but help cover it up, either silently or actively, they are in know way "good" cops.

There are protocols for addressing misconduct in all organizations...publicity is seldom a requirement for good people doing the right thing.

gaijin,

Oh please. Yeah, police internal affairs bureaus get all kinds of cooperation from cops willing to stand up to the "bad apples" huh? Are you really saying the behind the scenes cops are routinely calling out other cops bad/illegal behavior and helping in the investigation? Like I said, cops are notorious for protecting their own publicly or privately. The fact is they should be arresting the bad cops when the see illegal activity just like they would anyone else - isn't that their obligation?

|11.9.07 @ 5:46PM|#

"Jeez, this has degenerated into a cop hate fest."

Sorry for contributing to this hate fest. Guess I got too hung up on the actual evidence, and I saw red.

|11.9.07 @ 5:47PM|#

Try, "at worst, aggressive efforts to undermine, slander, physically threaten or assault their victims when they bring suits..." something along those lines.

pinko,

Yes, I was probably being far to generous in my assessment. I agree and your correction is duly noted.

|11.9.07 @ 5:49PM|#

ahhh, as much as I hate posted "corrections" some are just to embarrassing not to acknowledge, so I can't let my egregious error stand - NO, not know, obviously. Somebody slap me for that.

duster|11.9.07 @ 6:13PM|#

There is no issue here. Racist cops of the USA, speak your true feelings online! Come clean! We know you're out there. Come out of the closet.

antagonist|11.9.07 @ 6:18PM|#

Brian Courts

**SLAP**

It's also "too embarrassing" & "too generous" not "to" and, furthermore, it's "they are in NO way.." not "they are in KNOW way.." You cop hating dumb ass.

**SLAP**

|11.9.07 @ 6:28PM|#

In some good news, a Seattle man was vindicated (and paid 8 grand) in his case of being arrested for taking pictures of cops while they were busting a couple of guys on a public street:

Busted for photgraphing cops

sigfried|11.9.07 @ 7:04PM|#

Somewhat on topic-back in the BBS days, pre-internet, I joined a bulletin board that had several law-enforcement message areas. Several officers agreed, in anonymous postings, that all "drug-sniffing" dogs are trained to go nuts when told to "find the drugs", to give the cops a "reason" for search.

hammered turd|11.9.07 @ 7:19PM|#

As one of the those two turd bicycle pirates mentioned in the NY Observer article, I didn't get overly concerned about the ranting until they put my photo online and had a huge back log of information on me that the average LEO would not have access to. Our lawyer posted a very nicely and sternly worded response to the board (via an intermediary LEO who was kind enough to do so) that cooled heads a bit. They never went so far as to put my phone or address up.

All the hullabaloo was about he website www.uncivilservants.org, which T.A. put together to monitor abuse of official parking permits, which is rampant in NYC. Check out the campaign and you'll get a better sense of the dynamic there.

We were actually spared harassment that a CBS reporter got who covered this issue for the network 11 times in successive stories. His address, phone number, etc were posted to the board and his wife got menacing calls, as reported in NY Daily News

Mark Bahner|11.9.07 @ 7:25PM|#

Many police departments across the country have experienced similar bulletin board crises over the last few years, putting police officers' freedom of speech in conflict with the public's need to be protected from, well, cops who get off on using Tasers.

Their "freedom of speech" to admit to crimes?

Sam Grove|11.9.07 @ 8:33PM|#

It's called socialization.

That, combined with being a government employee, produces arrogance and certain similarities to the criminal class, such as attitudes towards snitching on one's fellows.

|11.9.07 @ 9:31PM|#

RECORD EVERYTHING

Small voice-activated recorders are cheap and easy to start and conceal through a suprise event.

Disposable still picture cameras along with video are a possibility but likely to get knocked out of your hand unless on the premises with remote start.

There's an ACLU video on YouTube with detailed instructions on exactly how to handle overbearing, arrogant police who try to abuse their authority.

For example, when stopped and asked to exit the vehicle, you can lock the car and without probable cause or search warrant, they cannot make you open it (except illegally).

Most people have been cowed in today's environment not to question police authority. Meanwhile, cops are usually more concerned about doing too much paperwork than they are protecting your rights or catching criminals.

Most important, cops are getting more like criminals every day in too many ways. That fellow in the recent article who tripped his own home alarm was stupid to come anywhere near letting that happen.

Most cops are already on edge (for the wrong reasons), and wasting their time with a false alarm just enrages them more while reducing police access by others who really need them.

Something is dramatically wrong with the recruiting and hiring system that cannot screen out way too many bad apples. In addition, the entire incentive structure needs an overhaul.

One solution should be "citizen stings", like the undercover agents do at airports to check the efficacy of weapons getting through the checkpoints.

An internal agency should send trained people out to intentionally break the law and get arrested as part of the quality control process to catch these perverts red-handed on tape.

Finally, the ID thing is strange indeed, confirming the permanent status of forcing one to "OPT IN" by having an ID with one all the time.

Technically, it seems no one is required to have ANY ID ON THEIR PERSON if not driving. The burden of proof is on the officer, not the person. In the extreme, it's like "rank, name and serial number" - that's all they get, and not from documents on one's person either - all by word of mouth.

It may be worth it to run down each state's detailed laws on these things - which is always amusing because most police themselves don't even know what they are.

What a change. It wasn't that long ago that the police were giving public lectures teaching citizens on what they did NOT have to provide to police.

M|11.9.07 @ 9:34PM|#

For the minimally literate loose cannon, in w.w.w.ino* veritas.

*rhymes with beano

|11.9.07 @ 9:48PM|#

There's a man in this town, a now ex-policeman, who "everybody knows" twenty years ago killed his pregnant girl-friend (a police dispatcher). They just couldn't seem to get any evidence against him.

|11.9.07 @ 10:12PM|#

Brian Courts--
Are you really saying the behind the scenes cops are routinely calling out other cops bad/illegal behavior and helping in the investigation? Like I said, cops are notorious for protecting their own publicly or privately.

No, I'm saying that, unless you are in law enforcement, then neither you nor I have anything but our prejudices about cops and what we read in the 'publicity' to which we are exposed...this blog included...surely you can appreciate that simplistic stereotypes of gender, age, race...and occupation...only serve ignorance. The original comment to which I responded appeared to be defining all cops as bad by citing a lack of publicized whistleblowing cops.

But I've never been brutalized by a cop, so who knows, maybe I am just naive :-)

penxv|11.9.07 @ 10:59PM|#

I have had cops punch me before (DC police are worse than most)... But they hit like women so it wasn't much of a thing.

One of my teammates is a cop and I have overheard some distressing stories about abuses of power by some of his colleagues... e.g. a guy who had stopped running got tasered because one of the policemen hadn't seen someone get tasered before.

And it wasn't a violent crime... it was drugs.

The serious BS happens a lot more than you would think. And most of it happens to black men.

|11.9.07 @ 11:12PM|#

It's also "too embarrassing" & "too generous" not "to" and, furthermore, it's "they are in NO way.." not "they are in KNOW way.." You cop hating dumb ass. [sic]*

Heh. Well duh, don't I feel stupid now... hmmm... no, actually I don't. Good catch though... well except the know/no mistake is the one I was pointing out myself. But hey, if it makes you feel better to get credit for that one TOO, knock yourself out, big-guy. You're obviously a pretty sharp fellow there.

As embarrassing as these silly mistakes are, though, they are pretty irrelevant to most people with something substantive to say. Eh, so big deal, I had a bad day trying to do too many things at once and trying to type fast, which I really can't do. Jeez, find a cop to shoot me or something, why don't ya? But anyway, smarty (I bet you got a lot of stars from your teachers, huh?), something tells me I'll have very little to fear from putting my IQ up against yours.

I must say, however, I admit to taking just a little satisfaction from helping a smug pedant get his necessary daily dose of feeling superior by giving him some meaningless typos to catch. No, no, please don't thank me; just consider it my little gift to the intellectually less-fortunate.

Now, since you've obviously got the whole, rather teenage-sounding, trivial-grammarian thing down, perhaps next time you might try stepping out of adolescence and into adulthood by making a point about something of substance (you do know what that means, right?).

I certainly wish you the nicest of evenings, you authority-loving, boot-licking genius. Cheers!

* Oh, just as an aside (though quite frankly I couldn't care less how you spell it, I just know this kind of stuff is of great importance to you), I thought I'd let you know the correct spelling is either dumb-ass or dumbass.

|11.9.07 @ 11:31PM|#

Oh look, in my haste I appear to have forgotten to add to my aside that your usage of cop-hating needs to be hyphenated. That is all.

libertreee|11.10.07 @ 10:23AM|#

In addition, the entire incentive structure needs an overhaul.

The incentive structure is based on the fact that the police have a monopoly on the "legitimate" use of force as an enforcement branch of the state.

There has been a lot of pie in the sky suggestions here about how the police could better police themselves. Just like there are a lot of pie in the sky suggestions about improving the monopoly public school system, etc.

But, the unvarnished truth is that until the monopoly power of the state is broken, there will be only minor "reforms" at best.

Only a free market in security will do the trick.

|11.10.07 @ 12:49PM|#

No, I'm saying that, unless you are in law enforcement,

No, I'm saying that, unless you are in law enforcement, the military, the medical profession, interior decoratoring, the prostitution business, et al, then neither you nor I have anything but our prejudices about cops and what we read in the 'publicity' to which we are exposed...

So?

|11.10.07 @ 12:51PM|#

Trying again.

No, I'm saying that, unless you are in law enforcement, the military, the medical profession, interior decoratoring, the prostitution business, et al, then neither you nor I have anything but our prejudices about cops, soldies, doctors and nurses, interior decorators, whores, et al, and what we read in the 'publicity' to which we are exposed...

So?

|11.11.07 @ 9:10AM|#

It sounds to me like the "eye socket crusher" is headed to jail, and rightly so. Hopefully for a long time.

|11.11.07 @ 5:41PM|#

You folks act like this is out of the ordinary or a bi surprise. The is the everyday M.O. of cops. They lie, period, and thay are bad bad people or else they could not be cops. I have seen it with my own eyes what happened to me and to another person in the jail who is paralyzed from them. Where is his justice (or mine for that matter) But no one has stepped up for him, i wrote a letter to an attorney, but can't contact him (he's in prison in a wheelchair now) or I go to prison (association)No one is helping, it's great to see these "exposes" but they go nowhere....

|11.11.07 @ 5:55PM|#

Excuse my bad grammar. i didn't preview. I was a English professor before the cops ruined my life. I have to laugh at the naivete of ppl who think the cop will go to jail? You are incredibly naive at best.
Cops ARE the criminals now, certainly more so than ANYONE i saw in La Plata County jail. nd they twist your arm past breaking to gangrene-you're gonna lose it. But "you ppl. " who have never had injustice on them can smugly say "things like that only happen to criminals" ppl "not like us."That's why the US leads the world far and away in incarceration rates. because there are many like me that were railroaded by lies, harassment and torture and nothing else. I still suffer PTSD and will ever get my life back.Ever if the guy who they put in a wheelchair for life committed a crime, that's pretty harsh. All you who believe the propaganda about the system being about justice and prisons being a slacker place are so wrong and stupid.

John Amendall|11.13.07 @ 4:27AM|#

Isn't it about time to start shooting the b@st@rds? Past time, really.

Kill a cop today for a better tomorrow.

Jeff Neely|11.18.07 @ 2:31PM|#

"The serious BS happens a lot more than you would think. And most of it happens to black men."

Are you nuts? That is almost as ignorant as saying that almost all pretty girls who are kidnapped are white.

Missing white girls sell news.

Cops beating up on black folk sells news.

Noone cares about missing black girls or cops beating up on white people.

I am a comic and spend a lot of time on the road in the Texas desert. I've been pulled over more times than I can count for nothing more than to satisfy the cops very late night boredom. (Once I got pulled over two times in the same spot about ten minutes apart at one in the morning AFTER helping out the retarded cop that initially pulled me over by giving his retarded ass a ride to the cop shop AFTER he locked his keys in his car when he got out to harass me for doing two miles an hour over the speed limit. The second idiot pulled a gun on me and put it in my face because I tried to show him the warning from the first retard. I knocked him out and cuffed him to his car and dared him to report me and let it be clear I would kill him if he ever pulled a gun on me again. I've never heard a thing about it, but I've never gone back through Fredericksberg, Texas again either.)

Point is, cops don't give a shit what color your skin is. If you ain't a cop you're a nigger to them.

Don't forget, you don't matter shit to them and you'll be ok.

Until some other time...