• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police officer charged with two felonies

3step said:
Michigan Police Officer Caught In Violent Arrest Video Charged With Felonies

Here it goes again, police violence at its best. Racist or not doesn’t matter, the cam shot it so good that we can see clearly Melendez’s anger while he was punching Dent who didn’t fight back. I’m happy Mr.Dent is still alive.
Click to expand...

Do you say the same thing towards other (e.g. black on black) crime? Yes, a tiny minority of LEOs commit crime as does a tiny minority of the rest of the population. When a public servant commits crime it gains the appearance (to some) of being government sponsored even when it is clearly not, as in this case, where criminal charges result.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do you say the same thing towards other (e.g. black on black) crime? Yes, a tiny minority of LEOs commit crime as does a tiny minority of the rest of the population. When a public servant commits crime it gains the appearance (to some) of being government sponsored even when it is clearly not, as in this case, where criminal charges result.
Click to expand...
Government sponsored? "Government condoned" might be a better term. Historically, our justice system... which is part of the government... has done a pretty poor job of policing itself.

We do seem to be seeing more charges and prosecution of rogue police, but the increase seems to be in lockstep with the light of day afforded by video. Coincidence?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do you say the same thing towards other (e.g. black on black) crime? Yes, a tiny minority of LEOs commit crime as does a tiny minority of the rest of the population. When a public servant commits crime it gains the appearance (to some) of being government sponsored even when it is clearly not, as in this case, where criminal charges result.
Click to expand...
Correct, and the tiny minority of cops who do this sort of thing is giving the rest of the force a bad name.

Kind of like the tiny minority of any group who commits crimes gives the rest of the group a bad name.

and, of course it's not government sponsored, but unless it is prosecuted it appears to be government condoned.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do you say the same thing towards other (e.g. black on black) crime? Yes, a tiny minority of LEOs commit crime as does a tiny minority of the rest of the population. When a public servant commits crime it gains the appearance (to some) of being government sponsored even when it is clearly not, as in this case, where criminal charges result.
Click to expand...

You're correct. It's a tiny minority. But the police refusal to generally police their own and the fact that the SC has in many ways rigged the system so that the government generally and the police particularly get very wide latitude to violate citizens' rights and generally treat us like serfs doesn't help the situation. The game is rigged and we poor slobs are on the losing end.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do you say the same thing towards other (e.g. black on black) crime? Yes, a tiny minority of LEOs commit crime as does a tiny minority of the rest of the population. When a public servant commits crime it gains the appearance (to some) of being government sponsored even when it is clearly not, as in this case, where criminal charges result.
Click to expand...

It's obvious that he doesn't support any crime, but when someone in power abuses their position and poser, obviously it pisses people off that much more.
 
3step said:
Michigan Police Officer Caught In Violent Arrest Video Charged With Felonies

Here it goes again, police violence at its best. Racist or not doesn’t matter, the cam shot it so good that we can see clearly Melendez’s anger while he was punching Dent who didn’t fight back. I’m happy Mr.Dent is still alive.
Click to expand...

Well if there's a silver lining it's that we seem to be pushing for charges being brought against bad cops, so that's at least some progress. We'll see how far it makes it though.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Correct, and the tiny minority of cops who do this sort of thing is giving the rest of the force a bad name.

Kind of like the tiny minority of any group who commits crimes gives the rest of the group a bad name.

and, of course it's not government sponsored, but unless it is prosecuted it appears to be government condoned.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) assertion is, indeed, the crux of the matter. However, that also applies to government crime in general, since many abuses of power (we now seem to call them scandals) by other government officials go unprosecuted. What we have is a case of the fox guarding the hen house and a HUGE conflict of interest.

The remedy of crime (justice of 'just us') comes in two ways; financial compensation (restitution?) and/or incarceration for the offender(s). We generally have too much protection built into the law by and for government - it is nearly impossible to hold any particular civil servant personally responsible for their "on the job" gross negliugence. It is also not in the interest of the executive to place their budgeted appropriations up for grabs to the general public (to be paid out as damages) instead of funding its intended purposes (paying their own salaries and perks).

Since the prosecutors and the police both work for the same big boss (mayor, governor or president) there is (political?) pressure to make crimes (by their staff and on their watch) into mere scandals since ultimately they would (should?) suffer the blowback from the voters. Unlike for a private concern, say the captain of the Exxon Valdez. the public does not generally hold the CEO responsible and rarely wishes to hurt others in the organization by forcing layoffs (or reductions in other governement services) in order to get justice. Would you accept layoffs of good police officers to cover the damages paid to victims of police brutality?
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) assertion is, indeed, the crux of the matter. However, that also applies to government crime in general, since many abuses of power (we now seem to call them scandals) by other government officials go unprosecuted. What we have is a case of the fox guarding the hen house and a HUGE conflict of interest.

The remedy of crime (justice of 'just us') comes in two ways; financial compensation (restitution?) and/or incarceration for the offender(s). We generally have too much protection built into the law by and for government - it is nearly impossible to hold any particular civil servant personally responsible for their "on the job" gross negliugence. It is also not in the interest of the executive to place their budgeted appropriations up for grabs to the general public (to be paid out as damages) instead of funding its intended purposes (paying their own salaries and perks).

Since the prosecutors and the police both work for the same big boss (mayor, governor or president) there is (political?) pressure to make crimes (by their staff and on their watch) into mere scandals since ultimately they would (should?) suffer the blowback from the voters. Unlike for a private concern, say the captain of the Exxon Valdez. the public does not generally hold the CEO responsible and rarely wishes to hurt others in the organization by forcing layoffs (or reductions in other governement services) in order to get justice. Would you accept layoffs of good police officers to cover the damages paid to victims of police brutality?
Click to expand...

bolded: No.

It's up to us, the voters, to hold elected officials accountable. If they're getting away with "scandals", then we need to look no further than the nearest mirror for the culprit.

And it's up to the elected officials to hold non elected bureaucrats accountable. If they don't or won't, then we need to vote accordingly.
 
Dittohead not! said:
bolded: No.

It's up to us, the voters, to hold elected officials accountable. If they're getting away with "scandals", then we need to look no further than the nearest mirror for the culprit.

And it's up to the elected officials to hold non elected bureaucrats accountable. If they don't or won't, then we need to vote accordingly.
Click to expand...

I agree that is what SHOULD happen but realistically not nearly enough voters actually hold Obama (or any POTUS) responsible for the VA, IRS, Benghazi, Solyndra, GSA or fast & fuzzy "scandals" - that is exactly why it is politically "required" to keep those crimes being referred to as mere scandals (never actually prosecuted), blamed on bad prior administration policy or errors in judgement. Generally, all we seem to get is some stooge being "forced to resign" (retiring early or quietly getting a different government/contractor job).
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I agree that is what SHOULD happen but realistically not nearly enough voters actually hold Obama (or any POTUS) responsible for the VA, IRS, Benghazi, Solyndra, GSA or fast & fuzzy "scandals" - that is exactly why it is politically "required" to keep those crimes being referred to as mere scandals (never actually prosecuted), blamed on bad prior administration policy or errors in judgement. Generally, all we seem to get is some stooge being "forced to resign" (retiring early or quietly getting a different government/contractor job).
Click to expand...
and the same is true of mayors, governors, members of state legislatures, and, more especially, Congress.
 
Dittohead not! said:
and the same is true of mayors, governors, members of state legislatures, and, more especially, Congress.
Click to expand...

Our congress critters are not exactly in the same league since they generally have very small staffs. What we seem to have in the the Baltimore "case" is a group of (six?) officers that must either share the blame or pick a fall guy among them and then try to explain why that took so long. They seem to be counting on having each other's back since there is likely no other witness to what happened. Each of them is likely being told (by their council or the union) that saying nothing virtually guarantees "reasonable doubt" as to their personal criminal responsibility in the Baltimore matter. Which, if any, of the officers actually committed the crime and "must be" charged or would you go whole hog and charge them all as a conspiracy?
 
Glad the scum bag cop is being brought up on charges...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Our congress critters are not exactly in the same league since they generally have very small staffs. What we seem to have in the the Baltimore "case" is a group of (six?) officers that must either share the blame or pick a fall guy among them and then try to explain why that took so long. They seem to be counting on having each other's back since there is likely no other witness to what happened. Each of them is likely being told (by their council or the union) that saying nothing virtually guarantees "reasonable doubt" as to their personal criminal responsibility in the Baltimore matter. Which, if any, of the officers actually committed the crime and "must be" charged or would you go whole hog and charge them all as a conspiracy?
Click to expand...

There have been so many cases lately, I'm not even sure which one was the Balitmore one.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Oh, that one.
Indict them all. Let them start to squeal on each other, and then we'll know the truth. That's what cops do when they aren't sure just who did the crime and who just watched.
Click to expand...

Apparently not to other cops. Look for the union label. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nobody yet seems to be blaming the black, female and demorat mayor for the inaction of the prosecutor. I wonder why that is? ;).
Click to expand...

Black female Democrat mayor?

Are we back in Missouri now? I seem to have jet lag.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nope - Baltimore, MD.

Stephanie Rawlings-Blake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The mayor has been calling for an OUTSIDE investigation - WTF does she pay her INSIDE investigators to do?
Click to expand...

Oh, that mayor.

It seems to me that an outside investigation, as opposed to one done internally by the police themselves, is called for in this instance. Somehow, an internal investigation could wind up simply confirming what the police want the public to know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom