Police Abuse

Legion of Armed, Upset Citizens Has a 'Surprise' Planned for Quentin Tarantino

Response to criticism of police misconduct is to give more reasons to be afraid.

|

About to get thrown into the briar patch?
Credit: Gage Skidmore / photo on flickr

The head of an organization that represents more than 300,000 armed men and women told The Hollywood Reporter it has a "surprise" in store for movie director Quentin Tarantino, whom has spoken critically about some of the organization's members.

If the organization in question were connected to the militia movement (by way of example) the outrage would be palpable. Is that a threat? Are they going to try to hurt Tarantino? He'd probably hire bodyguards (if he doesn't already have them). He might consider keeping a low profile for a while. There'd probably be a federal investigation to determine whether any actual violence was being planned.

It wasn't a militia movement leader, though. It was Jim Pasco, the executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police. From The Hollywood Reporter:

Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, would not go into any detail about what is being cooked up for the Hollywood director, but he did tell THR: "We'll be opportunistic."

"Tarantino has made a good living out of violence and surprise," says Pasco. "Our offices make a living trying to stop violence, but surprise is not out of the question."

The FOP, based in Washington, D.C., consists of more than 330,000 full-time, sworn officers. According to Pasco, the surprise in question is already "in the works," and will be in addition to the standing boycott of Tarantino's films, including his upcoming movie The Hateful Eight.

"Something is in the works, but the element of surprise is the most important element," says Pasco. "Something could happen anytime between now and [the premiere]. And a lot of it is going to be driven by Tarantino, who is nothing if not predictable.

As Ed Krayweski previously noted, the union is furious that Tarantino attended an anti-police-brutality rally and said, in fairly mild terms, that he was against people being murdered even when the person doing the killing is the police officer. Police unions have responded by calling for its members to boycott Tarantino's movies. Tarantino has subsequently refused to back down and said, "It's much easier to feign outrage and start arguments with celebrities than it is to deal with the fact that the citizenry has lost trust in [police]."

Does Pasco think threatening some sinister, unidentified surprise is going to restore our trust in the professionalism of law enforcement officers? Or more likely, does he just not care? After all, they're the ones with all the power.

I truly doubt the union's "surprise" is going to be anything actually dangerous or threatening and will probably be something kind of lame—inflatable giant rats or what have you. It'll be more of law enforcement people signaling solidarity with each other rather than addressing actual public concerns about conduct. Feel free to speculate what this "surprise" will be on your own.

Related, Tarantino's The Hateful Eight will be released on Christmas, meaning the fight is giving the director all sorts of free publicity. A new trailer dropped just yesterday. Watch below:

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

178 responses to “Legion of Armed, Upset Citizens Has a 'Surprise' Planned for Quentin Tarantino

  1. Yeah, don’t really give a shit what Tarantino thinks about anything, but generally love his movies. Django Unchained was way too long. Go to Nat Review for some nice butthurt. Here’s a link….

    And fuck tha police. Seriously. Fuck ’em.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/…..ing-movies

    1. Every once in a while NR publishes something that reminds me why I don’t read them anymore.

      1. Kevin Williamson is often worth reading, the rest-no.

        1. I can only take him in small doses. He can be kind of troll-y.

          That Cooke person who gets quoted here a lot seems good.

          1. Charles C.W. Cooke is great. Goldberg is hit or miss. Williamson can be awesome when he’s not saying every woman who gets an abortion should be publicly executed like he did that one time.

            1. Hey, you’re back! How was jail?

    2. Jesus, what a baby. For being a “serious” conservative outlet, NR hires a whole lot of petulant whiners.

  2. I looked into “Legion of Armed, Upset Citizens,” assuming LOAUC was a group I could join. I am mildly disapointed. Great article, though, and good for QT for giving them hell.

    1. For all intents and purposes, FOP is a militia.

      Shading towards brownshirts.

  3. “Our offices make a living trying to stop violence…

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    *takes breath*

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  4. Does Pasco think threatening some sinister, unidentified surprise is going to restore our trust in the professionalism of law enforcement officers? Or more likely, does he just not care?

    No. It’s bluster, designed to shut Tarantino up. Cops have gotten so used to being able to threaten people into compliance that they go to it automatically. It’s like a cop instantly threatening to arrest you because you didn’t step back from a scene fast enough, or because you refused to allow them to search your car. There’s no middle ground for them any more.

    Feel free to speculate what this “surprise” will be on your own.

    I really don’t think there is one. The cops are so used to being able to bully people and make them back down, that I think he just assumes Tarantino will buckle under and apologize, so no need for the “surprise”. That’s what most people who publicly criticize the police do, after all.

    1. They are going to roll a giant donut at him as he comes out of the premier?

      1. No, they’re just going to wait for the first furtive movement.

    2. It will be a SWATing as some “confidential informant” reports drugs in QT’s house.

  5. When union thuggery steps over the public fa?ade.

  6. What are they going to do? Nothing. As in if he calls them for some reason, like an intruder on his property, the cops will do nothing.

    1. Would the cops have actually done anything otherwise though? It’s not like they seem to care about investigating real crimes anyways.

      1. They are supposed to at least show up when they are called. Whether they actually do anything beyond that is another matter.

        1. They’ll show up an hour or so later and reluctantly give a report, which they promptly take back to the office and place in the circular file.

          1. Don’t forget their admonishing to move out of nigger neighborhoods after making them respond to a call.

            1. Wait, what?

              1. We were told often to not bother the police and instead to move out of our nigger neighborhood BY THE FUZZ themselves.

                1. Walking home late at night: “Don’t you have a job to go to in the morning, faggot? “

    2. And the intruder will be a cop in citizen gear.

    3. Somebody like Tarantino is going to already be using a private security company for things like intruders on his property. By the time police are called on something like that it’s going to be well documented enough that they would have to respond.

      The police got away with bad stuff for so long because they were wise enough to restrict all of it to powerless people. In the last decade or so they’ve lost their perspective. It’s not that police behavior has taken a turn for the worse, it’s just that they’ve started messing with people they previously left alone. But there’s a limit to how big you can go. Somebody like Tarantino is high profile enough, and wealthy enough, and has enough powerful friends that he’s probably pretty well protected from police malfeasance, and he knows it. The cops just don’t have the perspective to understand that.

    4. What are they going to do? Nothing.

      Unless they do something. Because the chance that Tarantino won’t do SOMETHING illegal, even as mild as drive 5 MPH over the posted speed limit, with cops everywhere diligently waiting for him to do so, seems unlikely.

      And once they have probable cause … they can do whatever the fuck they want to him.

  7. Police brutality is awful and definitely needs to be addressed. The thin blue line is total bullshit and the complete immunity that LEO’s enjoy is unconstitutional. All that being said I think I know what the FOP has in store-

    Quentin Tarantino called police on home intruder less than two weeks before anti-cop speech

    I’m not a cop defender by any means but not all of them are terrible and it is definitely ironic that a rich Hollywood director can plead for the cops to save them two weeks before denouncing everything they represent.

    1. Saying “don’t straight up murder people” = denouncing “everything [cops] represent”?

      1. Based on the stories I’ve read at H&R? Yes.

        1. Well, yeah, but the honesty is pretty shocking.

      2. Isn’t it very revealing that cops seem to think so?

    2. I fail to see the irony. He called the cops because there was an intruder, which is a perfectly normal thing to do. Then he said that he doesn’t stand with murderous cops. I think that is quite normal as well. What isn’t normal is to interpret the denouncement of murderous cops as an insult to all cops. Unless all cops consider themselves to be murderers.

      1. Money managers shouldn’t use their clients’ money to fund spontaneous trips to Vegas. Those who do should be prosecuted for embezzlement and whatever else obtains. That said, I’m certainly not going to trust myself to invest my money wisely.

        How is this general conceit suddenly so opaque when applied to police?

      2. I doubt that murderous cops have a large following anywhere. Now, if the idea is to get LEOs to actually do something about the thugs in their ranks, all well and good. But, yeah, there is often an undercurrent that implies the actions of the worst are the rule.

        1. Murderous cops have a large following among police officers. The cops who kill people are the envy of the department. Whether in defense or cold blood, the whole point of becoming a cop these days is to get away with murder. That’s why you have never seen cops themselves denouncing a fellow officer who commits murder. They’re going to support their hero.

          1. I don’t think that is true. Most cops don’t say anything because of some nonsensical code about not criticizing one’s own. THAT is where agencies deserve heat, for not doing something about the worst in their ranks. But the narrative here would have you believe all cops are thugs. If that’s the case, why would anyone – QT included – call them for any reason?

            1. I know I’ve told this story before, but one time a bunch of drunk cops took over the bar at this restaurant where I was working as a cook. As I sipped my shift drink after cleaning up the kitchen, I got to watch the antics. They drove off all the customers with their loud and threatening behavior. One of them kept going behind the bar and serving himself. But what was the bartender to do? Call the cops?

              Then there were the stories. Evil shit. One bragged about holding his pistol to a woman’s head until she pissed herself. A couple traded stories about how much pleasure they get from choking people. But what scared me the most was when one drunk cop complained that he’d never had a chance to kill someone, and his drunken buddies consoled him, assuring him that he’d get his chance. That’s when I left.

              1. so if that is the rule, why would anyone call the cops?

                1. so if that is the rule, why would anyone call the cops?

                  Because they don’t know any better. Except if I had a dead body and a good explanation, or needed a form for insurance purposes, I can’t think of any reason to call the cops. I have before, and regretted it every time. All they did was run me for warrants, and when that didn’t give them an excuse to arrest me they asked if they could search me and my property for something they could arrest me for. When I declined they left. Fuck cops.

              2. I’ve always wondered where your attitude toward cops comes from. Everyone here has a problem with them, but you have taken it to the next level.

                Thats not a criticism by the way, just something I’ve noticed posting here.

              3. I know I’ve told this story before…

                Well, given your unsubstantiated anecdote…how could anyone possibly deny that all cops are murderous thugs?

            2. Wareagle has a point. Anyone who has ever worked in government union job will tell you they learned two things real quick.

              1. Protect your ass
              2. Don’t rat

              In my work people are very careful in how they word incidence reports etc to avoid anything that looks or sounds wrong, and nobody rats on anyone.

              I imagine the same problem exists in police forces.

            3. But the narrative here would have you believe all cops are thugs.

              They are literally enforcers for a large protection racket that has garnered surprisingly good PR.

              That job description seems to at least partially match my definition of “thug”, even if the thugs think their actions are noble and laudable.

              1. Thugs employ violence to get their way. That makes cops thugs. By definition.

          2. Murderous cops have a large following among police officers. The cops who kill people are the envy of the department. Whether in defense or cold blood, the whole point of becoming a cop these days is to get away with murder.

            Oh, for fuck’s sake. Are you bucking for a job at Salon.com or something?

        2. I suggest you look up some of the articles written by Serpico. His fellow cops tried to murder him and get him killed. They are still cops, he is retired.

      3. What isn’t normal is to interpret the denouncement of murderous cops as an insult to all cops.

        They are very thin-skinned. Also, they deny the existence of any such thing as a “murderous cop”.

    3. So murdering people is “everything [cops] represent”?

      1. It does bear repeating.

      2. It’s just blacks & maybe some smart-mouth white teens…so, okay right?

      3. Ducking accountability is everything police represent. That doesn’t normally include brazen murders, but it is a habit of mind acculturated by decades of growing social influence and union lobbying. And it certainly makes pinning crimes on cops difficult if not impossible.

        1. That doesn’t normally include brazen murders

          You’re kidding right? When have you ever seen cops denounce a fellow cop who committed murder? I never have. The rank and file circles the wagons while the bosses and court system work furiously to justify the unjustifiable. Being a cop means you can do anything you want, including murder. After all, who’s going to stop you? The cops?

          1. Well they do try to muddy the waters a bit so that the murders don’t appear so brazen.

          2. “PROCEDURES WERE FOLLOWED. IT WAS A GOOD SHOOT SELF-DEFENSE ACTION BY OFFICER FRIENDLY.”

          3. The brazen, obvious murders legitimized by nothing more than wielding a badge and claiming to fear for their safety are rare relative to the many abuses police perpetrate on a daily basis: roughing up suspects unnecessarily, illegitimate arrests, confiscating property, harassing citizens. Cops aren’t motivated by murder, and nobody is suggesting that (whatever the goons with FOP claim). But they *do* operate under the incentives of a largely insular community with little oversight or accountability, and they work to maintain their immunity. The lack of accountability is the problem, not some inherent murderous tendency.

            1. Don’t forget the incentives of civil asset forfeiture. Robbery under color of law is something pretty much every cop can get behind.

      4. The Cops have a job and some (% may vary) of them do it very poorly resulting in dead citizens. Their entire job is to “serve and protect” the citizenry. When Tarantino calls them murderers (correctly, I might add) he is denouncing all that they supposedly stand for.

        So yes, it is ironic that he would denounce all that they stand for yet still ask them to come save him when he has an intruder in his house. If he thinks cops are murderers why would he call them for help? Not sure what’s so confusing about this.

        He has since walked back his statement considerably, but that is probably due to the fact that he doesn’t believe that all cops are murderers, despite the rhetoric he tosses around.

        1. I assume you haven’t read his comments. He didn’t call anyone a murderer. Arguing about strawmen is unsatisfying. Know what you’re talking about, then proceed, please.

          1. This is what he said-

            “When I see murders, I do not stand by,” Tarantino told a group of protesters in Washington Square Park, right outside of the NYU campus. “I have to call a murder a murder and I have to call the murderers the murderers? I’m a human being with a conscience. And if you believe there’s murder going on then you need to rise up and stand up against it. I’m here to say I’m on the side of the murdered.”

            I actually agree with him, but the point stands.

            1. He’s saying that some cops are murderers. I don’t know how that makes it ironic that he would call the cops when he is the victim of a crime. Some refrigerator repair men are murderers too. You still call one when you need one.

        2. So yes, it is ironic that he would denounce all that they stand for yet still ask them to come save him when he has an intruder in his house.

          Shooting an intruder is right up their alley, no?

        3. Their entire job is to “serve and protect” the citizenry.

          Yes. To serve and protect anyone except you. They’ve got better things to do than investigate crimes against someone like you. They’re too busy servin’ and protectin’.

          1. At least that’s what they told me when my drunk neighbor punched me in the face and broke my glasses. And that’s what they told me when I was robbed at gunpoint. And that’s what they told me when my apartment was burglarized. Well, they told me that after they ran me for warrants and asked for permission to search for contraband. Servin’ and protectin’ means looking for an excuse to arrest someone who asks for their help, and then leaving disappointed when they can’t find one.

            And people wonder why I hate cops.

          1. Good for him.

    4. it is definitely ironic that a rich Hollywood director can plead for the cops to save them two weeks before denouncing everything they represent

      Yeah…how dare he expect them to do the job they contracted for without throwing flash-bangs into baby’s cribs.

      Tarantino is an ironic monster.

      1. Not only to do their jobs, but a job he has already paid them to do through his tax dollars. It’s not like the police are a private entity where you can choose to pay for their services or not.

        1. Right. Imagine if it were the fire department.

          QT has a fire at his house, so he calls the department.

          Weeks later, QT denounces an Oklahoma City department for beating a murdering a young man that was suspected of lighting a dangerous camp fire.

          National Fire fighters union tells him that QT can expect a “surprise.” And now everyone is up in arms because he called the FD about a fire?

    5. First of all, he called the cops for them to do their fucking job. He doesn’t need to be thankful or super grateful, just like you’re probably not all that grateful when the mailman delivers your mail.

      Secondly, maybe the cops shouldn’t represent so much terrible shit if they don’t want to get denounced?

      1. so they do their fucking job and terrible shit at the same time, each and every one. How is that different from the justification behind stop-and-frisk or allegations of profiling against Muslims?

        Cops do stupid things as Reason chronicles and agencies are too often lax in prosecuting their own. But the broad brush approach does not always hold up.

        1. Every time someone trots out that excuse, one has to ask: where are the good cops? Why do no cops ever stop or arrest fellow cops?

          It doesn’t matter if only a proportion of cops are bad. First of all, if you have even a slightly high proportion of bad cops, that’s already an indictment of cop culture as a whole. Secondly, if “good” cops tolerate bad ones in their midst, to the point of letting them get away with illegal and immoral actions, can you really call them “good” cops?

          The broad brush here–that cop culture is out of control and dangerous and murderous–is perfectly applicable. Because it’s true. Not all cops are murderous and dangerous. But far, far too many are, and even worse, no matter what, any of them can get away with it. That’s all sorts of fucked up.

          1. Ever notice how “A few bad apples” never seems to apply to criminals and the general public?

          2. It doesn’t matter if only a proportion of cops are bad.

            Excellent point. I have to remember that.

          3. Why do no cops ever stop or arrest fellow cops?

            Except that they do. There is one on trial in Alabama right now, another in SC was arrested almost immediately after shooting down a man and charged with murder.

            A proportion of any profession is going to have bad actors but the narrative here ignores both points you make and jumps to the conclusion that every LEO is a killer-in-waiting. Them getting away with bad behavior is a bona fide concern, one worthy of pursuing. But that gets lost in the usual white noise associated with this topic.

            1. There is one on trial in Alabama right now, another in SC was arrested almost immediately after shooting down a man and charged with murder.

              Only because citizen video was too damning to cover up. Had there been no video nothing else would have happened.

              1. so cheer for the damn video as a step in the right direction. And for the push for cameras which, as best I can tell, comes from those prone to supporting cops just as much as those who don’t much like them.

                This is where the tribe here often loses me – this quest for the perfect that is ever-ready to damn the good. Perfect ain’t happening; steps in the right direction are and can continue.

              2. You don’t know that, and it is an Obama-level fallacy. “Well, it would have been worse!” doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny.

            2. There is one on trial in Alabama right now, another in SC was arrested almost immediately after shooting down a man and charged with murder.

              Doesn’t this statement sorta back up Tarantino’s statement about “standing with the murdered”? If there are bona-fide cops being arrested for murder, doesn’t that give the cop union a pretty solid “out” to say “hey, we’re against that bad stuff, too” instead of being at least vaguely threatening to the guy?

              1. Thugs gonna thug.

                Can’t help it.

          4. The so-called “good cops” who cover for their buddies are nothing more than accomplices in their crimes. Being that cops who do not cover for their buddies are not welcome on any police force, that makes them all either criminals or accomplices.

            1. so what would have done, sarc? Seriously. It’s not like law enforcement is going to shut down. What is a reasonable means of re-establishing some truth to protect and serve?

              1. I don’t know. I don’t have a solution. Well, nothing that will ever happen. If I was king I’d start by ending immunity for anyone, and abolishing all public unions. But I’m not king, and never will be.

                1. and you would get quite a bit of support for abolishing public unions, albeit from those icky Repub types who are fashionable to critique in these parts. It is worth remembering that even FDR and George Meaney were against public unions, and both Franklin and the AFL/CIO are as engrained in proggy lore as can be.

              2. so what would have done, sarc? Seriously. It’s not like law enforcement is going to shut down. What is a reasonable means of re-establishing some truth to protect and serve?

                With enough public ridicule, they will change.

                The military was highly ridiculed during/after Vietnam for covering up atrocities. Since, they cleaned up their shit, by and large. You break the law, you go to jail. Shitbags among the ranks are not tolerated…

                Why? Because they rightly realized the organization loses more credibility and respect when they are perceived as putting themselves above the law.

        2. From personal experience, you’re underestimating the problem, wareagle.

          1. I’m not a huge fan of cops and do my best to avoid them. But I can’t live in fear of their existence, either. Be nice if agencies took greater steps against the goons in their ranks but targeting the entire profession seems an odd approach.

            1. I don’t live in fear of the cops. I just recognize that they are dangerous and predictable animals, and treat them as such.

              That said, I will never help a cop, never cooperate with a cop beyond what is required by law, and most importantly I will never trust a cop or believe anything they say other than threats of violence.

        3. “But the broad brush approach does not always hold up.”

          Exactly. Somebody needs to tell the FOP that, since they’re the ones who seem to think that murderous cops represent ALL cops.

    6. Yes, terribly ironic to expect them to do their jobs and not be whiny bitches when he says something that should be completely uncontroversial to any decent person.

      1. It’s pretty sad that saying “Hey, cops. Could you please stop murdering people?” is considered to be hate speech.

        1. Well it is hate speech. I saw no mention of the LGBQT nor a trigger warning thus it is hate speech.

        2. Well it is hate speech. I saw no mention of the LGBQT nor a trigger warning thus it is hate speech.

          1. I saw no mention

            And now there are two.

            1. We can never have enough trigger warnings !

              1. We need trigger warnings for trigger warnings!!

    7. Hey Tulpa.

  8. Exercise your inalienable right to criticize police…

    Get targeted by police.

    Why do you hate the constitution po po? Oh, because it bounds your claim to unlimited power.

    A Republic…if you can keep it.

    1. …if you can keep it.

      Spoiler alert: nope!

  9. They should boycott all movies so us “citizens” can go to the movies without any thug pigs around.

    1. BREAKING NEWS!

      Movie theaters become the safest places in America!

    2. They’ll probably hang around the parking lot and start giving random sobriety tests to people as they exit the movie. With lots of dogs so they can throw in some car searches as well.

  10. Eh, considering the emotional age of the typical cop it’ll probably look something like this.

    1. But then they’ll hit him with a code violation for having trash in his yard.

      1. and then confiscate, you know, everything. Because Forfeiture. Everyone knows that everyone in film does drugs, so everything in his home, including his home, now belong to the police.

  11. Another thing about cops is that they are utterly delusional about how they appear to the general public. This is why they do shit like threaten someone who criticizes them. They operate in such a different world that this seems just hunky dory to them. We see this all the time, like statements given by the chief of police after one of their officers murders someone, or does something else egregious. And when you combine the union element into it, where the people running the union are even more exaggeratedly delusional, it just goes off the charts.

    The thing is, shit like this always continues to escalate. At some point I think the cops are in for a big fucking surprise of their own when they finally become so delusional that they do/say something that even a cowed populace won’t tolerate. Obviously, the tolerance is very high, but there will always be a limit.

    1. Cops don’t care if people obey them out of fear or out of respect, as long as they are obeyed. It’s all the same to them.

      1. That is true of government in general. Cops are just their enforcers.

        1. For example, the IRS, which is, essentially, the NerdPolice. They KNOW people hate them, and could care less.

    2. Which is what I’d expect from a cop hater like you, Epi. You’re just mad that WE ARE WINNING! #BOOYAH!

      hth

      /derpfee

      1. He actually showed up in the AM lynx yesterday, several hours after everyone else had stopped posting, to pat himself on the back.

        1. wow – I don’t miss him at all.

          Now [HERCULE] Tri[athlon] Sauvignen, on [the] OTHER hand….

          1. HERC ! HERC ! HERC ! HERC !

          2. wow – I don’t miss him at all.

            Don’t scroll down, then. Or read any other comments sections today.

          3. HERC lives on. Trapped in some weird little chat room thing.

    3. Better check your assumptions.
      A endorsement from the local police organization is a big boost for politicians.
      That just doesn’t square with your delusion that they appear to the general public in any way similar to how they are thought of by the anarchists in the libertine-arian party.
      REASON commenters are, far and away, the vast minority in the country.
      But, by all means, stay secure in your bubble.

  12. Cops vs Tarantino – It’s like the Iraq-Iran War

  13. I wasn’t planning to go see this in the theater, but now I think I will. Just to support QT.

    1. ^^ this 🙂

    2. Why wouldn’t you see it in the theater? He shot it in 70mm. I doubt your TV at home is awesome enough to capture the full effect of that.

      1. He shot it in 70mm

        All we’re asking for is common-sense film control.

        1. Nobody needs more than 35 millimeters.

  14. Kurt Russell – the grizzled old guy in the trailer – was also the lead in the new horror-western Bone Tomahawk. Real cool film (I dig horror-westerns). Gruesome body atrocities in it for the gore hounds out there.

  15. “Something is in the works, but the element of surprise is the most important element,”

    Cool story, bro.

    Union thug is gonna thug. It’s all they know.

  16. Their pissed because of three things,the internet,cams on cell phones and the 24-7 news.All of the behavior people have accused some (many ) cops of is coming to light,in peoples lap tops,phones and TV’s.There is no stopping it.Life in the shadows ,as they knew it,is over.

  17. The left HATES when cops use boycott and other lefty-loved strategies

    As to ‘restoring trust’

    I have cited over a dozen times, overwhelming survey/poll evidence that the American public already has a huge amount of trust, respect, admiration for cops

    It’s simply a fact. A very loud MINORITY of wankers doesn’t Change this irrefutable fact

    Even Tarantino’s dad came out against him on the cop’s side

    Reason again begs the question with their false assumption that trust in the police has been LOST

    actual DATA does not support this

    Again every poll I have seen shows those who have the highest cop respect outnumber those who have the least by 3:1

    Year after year

    The FACT that all
    The Ferguson hoopla turned out to be nonsense and the shooting was obviously self defence supported by an ‘orgy of evidence’ helps a lot

    If Reason was honest, they would post actual evidence that public trust in cops has been lost

    The most recent polls I have seen are about 18 months old and they still show cops as being overwhelmingly admired vs reviled

    1. Even Tarantino’s dad came out against him on the cop’s side

      Welp, as we all know, our parents are always right.

      1. What we do now – based on a trillion ‘he was a good boy. He was turning his life around ‘ interviews – parents are biased towards their kids

        I am, as are the overwhelming bulldog parents

        So when Tarantino’s dad comes out (vs remaining in the background as he has historically preferred to do) to side with cops against his son – it matters

        Any dispassionate observer would admit that

        Tarantino isn’t being slammed for criticising police brutality

        Every cop I know does that

        He’s being criticised for referring to specific police killings as MURDER

        Hillary did the same thing with Diallo btw

        1. Tarantino isn’t being slammed for criticising police brutality

          Every cop I know does that

          He’s being criticised for referring to specific police killings as MURDER

          Well, when the jackboot fits…

        2. You can’t spell “The artist known Dunphy” without “we shit on truth”.

        3. What we do now – based on a trillion ‘he was a good boy. He was turning his life around ‘ interviews – parents are biased towards their kids

          I am, as are the overwhelming bulldog parents

          So when Tarantino’s dad comes out (vs remaining in the background as he has historically preferred to do) to side with cops against his son – it matters

          Any dispassionate observer would admit that

          That right there may be the most non-sensical thing you’ve ever said here, Dunphy. And that… really says a whole lot.

          1. Nothing non-sensical about it.
            Parents, almost always defend their children.
            For one to denounce their’s, is rare.

        4. The fact that Diallo’s murderers got away with it doesn’t mean it wasn’t murder.

        5. Well, sometimes they are MURDER.

          Anyway, the main point here is that the police are being whiny little shits and making threats against someone for exercising his right to free speech. Tarantino is a loud mouthed entertainer. I find what he said to be very reasonable. But even if some police disagree, they are being childish assholes here and what Tarantino’s dad thinks is entirely irrelevant.

        6. Tarantino isn’t being slammed for criticising police brutality

          Every cop I know does that

          I think we need no more evidence that either Dunphy is a mendacious liar, or he isn’t a cop. Okay, both cases reduce to mendacious liar.

    2. I have cited over a dozen times, overwhelming survey/poll evidence that the American public already has a huge amount of trust, respect, admiration for cops

      That may be overstated a tad.

      1. Odd, they stopped at 1993. I’m guessing they are cherry picking. I’ll bet that from 1960-90 people disliked the cops significantly more than they do today. Americans were not always the cock-gobbling statists they are of late.

      2. Yep.

        This 2015 article describes a poll finding confidence in cops at a 22 year low.

        And, if you read the numbers carefully, you find that the cops’ greatest support comes from suburban whites… a cohort which statistically interacts with police at a far lower rate than other cohorts.

        Interesting how the people who actually see cops doing their jobs are the ones who have little trust for cops.

        1. Oops… just realizing I linked to the same poll Gene found.

          Pretty easy, though to find poll numbers which cast doubt on Dunph’s “DATA”

      3. From the link:
        Although confidence in police is at its low point, the majority of Americans remain confident in this institution and have more faith in it than in most other institutions.

    3. For Shackford to be credible in a statement like “restore our trust in the professionalism of law enforcement officers” he would have had to have had “trust in the professionalism of law enforcement officers”, at some point, to begin with.
      That’s where his credibility ended, if he had any in the first place.

  18. I don’t really follow Hollywood, so I have no idea what Tarantino’s politics are – I suspect leftist, but I don’t know.

    Not to wish any harm on him, but it would be delicious if one of those ‘Respect mah athoritah!’ cops were to pull him over, go apeshit and get caught on camera.

    The shitstorm would be popcorn-worthy.

    1. Over and over, as in the leftist journalism professor in Texas, the overwhelming bulk of bodycams and dashcam videos are serving to vitiate bogus claims of rude, disparate, racially tinged treatment

      Students already calling for her ouster for blatantly lying

      We have seen it with Hollywood starlets, NAACP officers, firefighters,, city council members etc etc over and over where dash and body cam evidence has made their false complaints look foolish

      Sure, an awesome benefit is cams catching cops doing bad shit, but the bulk of videos a as even some of the harsher cop critics are admitting are showing cops doing the right thing contrary to false claims

      Mark my words and every time I’ve said that here I’ve been right – 5 yrs from now when bodycams are ubiquitous, public respect and admiration for cops as proved by actual polling data, will remain sky high

      It remains so now – outside the rarefied climate of cop hate. There are about 3:1 ratio of strong supporters of cops vs strong critics

      It will remain so

      1. You can’t spell “The artist known Dunphy” without “we shit on truth”.

      2. The ratio of people here who would like you to go away rather than keep commenting is probably a lot higher than 3:1. Where’s your respect for majority rule?

      3. Great. That doesn’t mean that cops don’t sometimes get away with murder.

      4. Even if we assume that most police are, in fact, good cops doing the best they can, it still doesn’t change some basic facts. Police generally appear after a crime has been committed, and file a report. If it’s not obvious who the suspect is, the chances of catching the criminal are pretty slim. The FBI’s own statistics on the “clearance” rates on crimes give an idea on how many crimes remain unsolved.

        The idea that the existence of police is in itself enough to dissuade potential criminals from crime is at best an unjustified theory, and at worst, wishful thinking.

        All of which indicates it’s time to start thinking outside the “government/LEO” box. Oh wait, there are already more private security guards than police, and a variety of things from fences, locks, dogs and guns home and business security alarm systems. So it’s really time to start thinking exactly what value do the police provide to society. I’m not saying that they don’t provide any value, but I’m not really sure how much value they provide.

        1. But don’t resort to any of that in Oklahoma. If the cops can’t break in, that’s a felony.

  19. I especially adore the utter absurdity of Reason, a mag that supposedly adores the concept of armed defence and fights against antigunner ignorance, sounding like Mother Jones in their referral to cops as a legion of ‘ARMED upset’ citizens

    It’s antigunner scare tactics mirroring shit the left pulled towards tea party etc in referencing then being ARMED as somehow discrediting them and trying to make them look like bullys

    Oh NOES! They are ARMED and upset as if that has ANY relevance

    1. Dunphy Misses Point, Film at 11

    2. And still ,video’s keep coming evey week showing abuse by cops,even against children.I understand ,from people here ,your a fake too. Too many examples of government abuse for you to denie ,and yes,cops are the hammer of the pols.

    3. And still ,video’s keep coming evey week showing abuse by cops,even against children.I understand ,from people here ,your a fake too. Too many examples of government abuse for you to denie ,and yes,cops are the hammer of the pols.

    4. RTFA – “If the organization in question were connected to the militia movement (by way of example) the outrage would be palpable.”

      But it is crude union threat by the unaccountable and legally immune, so no worries, eh?

    5. You can’t spell “The artist known Dunphy” without “we shit on truth”.

    6. I especially adore the utter absurdity of Reason, a mag that supposedly adores the concept of armed defence and fights against antigunner ignorance, sounding like Mother Jones in their referral to cops as a legion of ‘ARMED upset’ citizens

      Well, when those armed individuals can kill without fear of punishment, I think that classification is appropriate.

  20. I would expect the legion oh yea buts

    It’s typical of the double standard from cop critics who truly believe they are above all those emotional arguers on the left and right

    It’s sensationalist scare tactics to criticise a cop boycott by sensationalising the protesters as ARMED and upset

    It was stupid when the left used ‘armed’ as a pejorative towards TP’ers and it’s dumb when Reason does it towards cops

    The status of a person as armed or not is completely irrelevant as to the legitimacy of the cause and or using it as a tactic to discredit them or trying to paint them as tone deaf bullies

    Boycott is the time honoured tradition and doesn’t take away anybody’s choice and I have yet to see police unions advocating censorship they are not trying to say Tarantino doesn’t have the legal right to say what he says or doesn’t have the right to distribute his movie but they are saying that they hope people will stand with them in choosing not to use their speech (money as a form of speech) to support him

    I’ve seen every Tarantino flick, but I’ll skip this one

    Fwiw, I almost never carry off duty, although they should be irrelevant

    1. Go away cop sucking troll,we know your fake

    2. You can’t spell “The artist known Dunphy” without “we shit on truth”.

      1. You keep saying this…

        But you also can’t spell “The artist known Dunphy” without:

        Hyenas Third Putt

        Thursday Tenth Pi

        And Hitter Typhus

        Ad Tintype Thrush

        You seem to think that “shit” and “truth” being within your name means anything. Mostly, it means you are stupid.

    3. It’s sensationalist scare tactics to criticise a cop boycott by sensationalising the protesters as ARMED and upset

      Man, fucking Alanis Morrisette has a better grasp of irony than you do.

      1. I dunno. The fact that nothing in her song was an actual instance of irony is pretty ironic. Don’t ya think?

        1. I refuse to accept that Alanis Morrisette operates on such a meta level.

  21. Lets check out Reason’s Facebook post for this story, shall we?

    Trent Alkek Don’t wring your hands too much, Reason. There is a legion of armed and upset citizens that is much larger than all the police forces combined… and I’m betting they think Tarantino is a douche too.

    Joe Garza what a stupid, poorly thought out article. This asswipe called law enforcement officers murderers and supports those who would kill them, and your objection is that they object?

    Jason McNab Reason is full of leftist morons and demoralized libturdarians dripping in relativism.

    This moron said too many white people is the problem with America and cops are executing black men. Both lies.

    Hands up don’t shoot never happened.

    Chad Finch I hope you are all held hostage by bank robbers than rescued by police

    Brian Ginett You fucktards are tools. You have never stood for anything in your life. You sit here on your phone and think you are making a difference. Meanwhile while real men and women are out the protecting you, you sit here and bash them. If you don’t like what the police or military are doing why don’t you join and be a better example? That’s right you are to scared to actually do anything.

    There’s more, but I can’t bring myself to keep reading.

    1. Wonder which one is Dunphy.

      1. All of them? I mean they’re probably some kind of hivemind.

    2. So….you subjected yourself to Derpbook…voluntarily?

      *squints and peers at JB*

      1. Every time I try to deactivate my account my wife yells at me. And then I can’t stop going back. It’s a sickness. 🙁

      2. Well, since Facecrack is largely populated by commies, these comments seem to indicate even those so inclined support the police.
        Guess they’re more popular than the average REASON commenter thinks.
        Whooda thunk?

  22. It’s unfortunate that Hollywood movies don’t show police accurately.

    They portray them as having a relatively high degree of restraint, and doesn’t portray them as using SWAT for every warrant arrest.

  23. OK, since this FOP remark is totally legal and non-threatening, which of you “civilians” is prepared to respond with a statement that “while I’m not threatening violence, I have a surprise in store for Jim Pasco. It will be opportunistic.”

    Be sure to draw up your will first.

    1. What good does a will do when all of your assets are seized?

    2. But I like my dog.

  24. is it just me, or is Samuel L Jackson as stuck on Quentin Tarantino’s teat as Helena Bonham Carter and Johhny Depp are on Tim Burton’s?

    1. Well if you like get nominated for awards and making huge amounts of money, it makes sense to pick a team that can win. Tarantino knows that employing Sam Jackson is a good way to garner awards and money, and Sam Jackson knows that being employed by Tarantino is a good way to garner awards and money. Actors don’t like to star in a 35mm turd. And film producers and directors don’t like to squander their investment on actors that can’t deliver.

      I see your point, but it makes sense all the way around.

  25. “It wasn’t a militia movement leader, though. It was Jim Pasco, the executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police.”

    You say tomato…I say to-MAH-to.

    I bet the “surprise” will be a SWATing. Even money if QT gets shot dead. Anyone want to cover me?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.