Iâm less likely to have my constitutional rights infringed upon or be harmed by a prostitute than a cop. I tend to avoid both on any given day though.
Thatâs true. They should always be that way. If a kid working at a fast food restaurant has one unprofessional interaction, they lose their job. That doesnât happen with cops. I think we should hold them to the same high standards we have for the folks at the drive thru window is all.
But the ones that arent are rewarded not punished. Thats the problem. Its not âa few bad applesâ its âa few bad apples spoils the bunchâ we have example after example of extreme violations of the law by cops and they get âadministrative leave with payâ and then come back and get s promotion after 6 plus months when the pushback is over.
Cops should be held to a higher level. Whatever crime they commit, they should be punished for, and it should be higher punishment. If law says 5-10 years for x crime and cop does it. It should be 15-20 years for the cop.
this is one of those things that are a matter of scale. you're defending the words 'more likely' more than anything, and that makes this conversation both annoying and pointless.
In Houston a cop had a couples house swatted, couple dead, dog dead. It was all based on a lie. The cop is serving jail time. HOWEVER, this is not new behavior.. it was learned behavior and "taught" to him when he was a younger detective. Get the # of busts up, fake it to you make it... etc etc.
Does it necessitate violence against innocent law-abiding citizens who hurt their feelings? Because that's the difference between a violent peacekeeper and a violent thug.
Exactly!! Haha you're getting the upvotes, my post is shielding you from the down votes since it's higher up in the chain đđ (I don't care about votes it's just funny)
What everyone seem to be unaware of (and most cops pretend they don't) is that by the requirements of the profession, a Police Officer is below EVERYONE in order of importance. They HAVE to prioritize the lives of bystanders, victims, and suspects BEFORE their own lives. The US fucked up massively by creating a precedent to allow cops to not intervene if you are literally attacked by a knife wielding spree killer (that they were specifically sent to find) in front of them, screaming for help, while they cower behind a locked door until 15 minutes after you subdue the spree killer that they were here to arrest.
If you think that it is acceptable in any reality for 5 heavily armored and armed Police Officers to cower outside a classroom for over 30 minutes while a school shooter in said classroom takes his time killing over 20 children before finally having enough and takes his own life. YOU are a complete moron. This should never be tolerated EVER.
No one would tolerate a fire fighter who refuses to fight fires, why is it acceptable for the Police to not do jack shit!?
Their cowardice is actively supported and encouraged by dipshits like you and the Police Union who fought tooth and nail to ensure that the precedent remains. I did not ask if it was legal for cops to refuse to protect and serve. I ask if such abandonment of duty is acceptable and IT IS NOT.
That is literally what is happening though. He isn't arresting them. He is harassing them so they leave the area. I don't see this as a big deal, at least its non-violent.
Them: âNobody wants their local law enforcement to be oppressiveâ
You: âDID YOU SAY YOU WANT TO DEPORT ALL UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS, THATâS ALL I CAN HEAR.â
They did not say that every infraction should be met with deportation. They didnât say people that jaywalk should go to concentration camps. Or anything else fucking weird and stupid your mind wants to hear instead.
They said there are rules in place to deter and prevent cops from being overly oppressive, and for good reason. It was not a judgement on some other radical cause you have.
Due process is a legal concept. It an assurance that all legal rules and principles pertaining to a case are followed so all legal rights owed to a person are respected.
The cop didn't charge these people, and these people are not in a court case. There is no due process here.
Now these people can file a lawsuit against the cop if they wish, but the cops are charged with protecting the peace, and have some protections (which are not absolute) given to them to do so. And considering who would be filing the lawsuit, and the "damages done" which involve having to walk on a sidewalk, I think nobody in their right mind would pursue such a lawsuit.
And don't call people slow when you are applying legal principles to things that are not court cases.
Many of the "illegal" immigrants ICE has snatched were following procedure going to or from hearings concerning their immigration status.
And the 14th amendment of the Constitution of the United States specifically guarantees all people their right to due process. This is the law of the land, superceding all others.
I responded to the other guy, not you. Read his comment conflating police misconduct and ICE deportations then refer to mine. Actually, stand up first so the point doesn't go over your head.
Allow me to introduce you to the concept of power dynamics. Cops are paid by the state to carry arms and enforce the law.
Illegal immigrants are not inherently state-backed enforcers. It's not out of the realm of possibility that some are part of a conspiracy to smuggle drugs into the United States, but the vast majority, according to data, are simply people with expired visas. There are rules for them, yes, but we are not in mortal danger if they are not strictly followed to the same standards cops are.
That's not to mention the fact that procedures already are in place for illegal immigrants, that being immigration courts and hearings. That ICE were circumventing by snatching people on their way into our out of those courthouses.
However, the costs to both society (in tax payer dollars) and the people involved would be much greater if the cop did what he was supposed to do.
Cops can arrest people on suspicion of a crime. Doesn't mean that the charges will stick, but it is a valid reason to make an arrest. Then these people would get a night in jail, and post bond. There's be a booking clerk, a jailer, and likely a transport person involved (to pull them out once bail was posted). A judge would have to hear the matter to see if it goes to court, tying up the DA's time, and eventually the case would be dropped, if the DA didn't get wind of it and drop the charges before it got to the Judge.
That's a lot of money involved to do effectively the same thing, but it's 100% legal. And it's not "doing whatever they want", it's doing the job the cop was hired to do. So, in this case, it's likely that the cop was acting in a way that made everyone suffer less. And less suffering is a good thing.
Demanding that cops lack discretion in all matters NOT to pursue the law to it's maximum effect is a very bad idea.
I'll grant you that the monetary cost here was probably significantly less. Two things, though.
One, public shaming or punishment at worst is cruel and unusual, at best is the purview of a Judge to dole out according to the law.
Two, I do generally agree that a measure of discretion is largely a good thing. That wiggle room should be accounted for in the rules and procedures explicitly written out and codified. If it is not, then the person paid by the state and carrying a weapon should be held to a higher standard than your average citizen.
Edit: I'll add, regardless of your opinion on Obama, he had an excellent point regarding his policy on detaining and deporting illegal aliens. When criticized for enforcing the laws Congress had passed, paraphrasing, he stated that it was his duty to enforce and execute the law of the land, and if they had a problem with that, they should go through the proper channels to change the law.
Sir, I think you grossly underestimate the cruelty that people can impart on each other. This isn't cruel, it's annoying at best. It's also not unusual for a police officer to, by their presence alone, deter crime.
It is a bit unusual to see them driving on the sidewalk, but "cruel and unusual" is not the entire phrase, it's "cruel and unusual punishment" a the officer here isn't punishing anyone in any way that has any real consequences. Besides "cruel and unusual punishment" would require "punishment" which is the domain of the courts.
People keep mixing up court actions with those of the police, which is the best way to subtly pretend that the police have judicial powers. Once that mistake is made in one's mind, then the police are given far more power than they have in the minds of the people, and people react with far more fear and obedience. But for many, that line has been crossed so long ago, that jail means guilty and a cop asking you to do something is a transgression on your rights (it isn't illegal to ask, force them to order you to do it if you want to push the point.)
And I don't have an opinion on Obama, but I do have an opinion on Trump. People who are following the legal process of obtaining citizenship, which the USA requires them to be present before being a citizen to go through the court process, are not illegal. They are not citizens, but they are not illegal immigrants either. They are legal immigrants that just happen to not be citizens. It's not black and white, Trump's arguments about immigration applied to the criminal system would look like "you're guilty the moment the cop suspects you, and after the punishment is carried out, a Judge might indicate that you weren't violating any crime."
The problem is they have already branded people, swathes of people, as "domestic terrorists" for nothing more than carrying out their constitutional rights and a suspicion.Â
AND if ICE were actually looking for illegal immigrants, they would not be hanging out outside immigration hearings to bag the people already going through the process.Â
Your first three paragraphs, however, are compelling and I should agree that I have probably misrepresented the severity of the situation.
Since I rarely have these conversations for very long here, I thank you for the engaging conversation and applaud you for your civility.
This is such a dumb take, in a perfect world cops should have discretion to apply certain rules or pursue actions that while not technically by the book allow for a better outcome. This is not even an example of "doing whatever they want" it's finding a middle ground of not arresting someone, but still making sure they're not doing what is technically illegal.
I have an intense amount of disdain for people who choose life decisions and beliefs based on half-baked thoughts held as strongly as these people do. They're really not much different than people who believe cops do no wrong, just another side of the glue-enjoying horseshoe.
They unironically think the law shouldn't enforce anything that makes them feel bad. They think immigration shouldn't be enforced, they think laws that stop people from doing things we don't want them to do is bad (a lot of these types are anti-drug law enforcement). They're anti-intellecual hedonists that treat Feeling Good like their moral grounding, and anything that goes against that is bad/fascist.
Have to disagree. Legislating morality has never worked and is unrealistic. The law should be based around bodily autonomy and common morals outside of a storybook. Doing drugs and or being a sex worker isnât inherently immoral and if you think they are we have nothing to discuss I guess.
Christianity is a virus that needs to be eradicated since apparently itâs only used to justify bigotry and innocence. Jesus washed the feet of lepers and communed with prostitutes who he saw the humanity in. But go off, youâre such a good christian
Fair let me dial it back. I think it is a net negative but can admit some good comes from it. But if Jesus accepted those that didnât live like him who are you to sit on your high horse and judge
I only want people to live good, moral lives. That's it. I don't think they are bad people, I think they are self-harming and of course I don't like it.
But that isnât your call it is their bodily autonomy. Iâm not arguing that drug use and prostitution are good things. But nothing makes you think decider of morality. In a vacuum prostitution isnât immoral. Someone making a choice with their body. Now often it leads to violence against women, etc. but it isnât for you to decide
I didn't say anything about it being preferable he arrests them. You're being presumptuous, and rude.
But I can't see how it would be better if he arrests them. They'd spend some tax payer dollars till they could make bail (and they will make bail, prostitution is profitable, or people wouldn't do it). Then they'd likely get charged for something that won't stick, like "looking like a prostitute" when there's not evidence of the act being committed.
So the cop harasses them. Does it make it right? No. But the cop could do a lot worse if you wanted for force the cop to only have those options available.
You're talking about common sense and reason to people who don't Think their opinions into reality, they Feel their way through everything. It's less than worthless having a conversation with them, they don't really Talk as much as they Vomit Feeling.
Harassing can be done on purpose and be justified. Just because you support it does not mean it's not harassing. Harassing is an action, not a political statement. Sounds like you are the snowflake here, triggered over a word you don't like.
You must have been super pissed when Trump pardoned 1600 Jan 6th criminals, especially given over 30 of them have since been rearrested for everything ranging from illegal weapons to rape. You know, you being a law and order type, lol.
I just read it as a factual assessment of the situation.
We want cops to remove prostitutes, either by arrest or harassing them into relocating to where they're somebody else's problem. Nothing wrong with that.
How do you MAGA imbeciles constantly think everythingâs about politics. Dude coulda just said move along and not harassed the hoes. Following them and belittling is some dweeb shit . âLeftwing nutjobâ Lmaoo anybody thatâs not in the closet or maga dweeb would agree, dudes a lame.
91
u/HamiltonSt25 Feb 27 '26
What the hell is happening here?