Two More NYC Cops shot

[FDNYIrish1]

^Now THAT is interesting.

The police are now refusing to act upon the enforcement of certain laws that get so many people in an uproar in the first place, and the reason they're doing it illustrates how it's all about the $$$$$.

EDIT: I'm aware that any minor citation is simply aimed to generate revenue; I'm just saying it's interesting that the potential hypocrisy is being put so clearly on display by the very agents of the questionable system.

I see this both ways. Many friends who are cops tell me about the summons quotas they must hit every month being a pain in the ass. If your command suddenly has a decrease, the CO gets called down to compstat and called on the carpet. Fail to reach the quota, and good luck getting a vacation pick or day off.
I think that broken windows is a good policy at its base. Criminals usually start small and progress to higher level crimes. It has turned into a money generator though no doubt.
What will be the outcome? I think we will find out soon enough. Will the lack of enforcement quell some of the anti police feeling, or will it lead to inevitable higher level, more violent crimes. I have my opinion, but I guess we will find out.

 

[FDNYIrish1]

This is not ironic.

Enforcing broken windows is what has caused the residents of these neighborhoods to dislike the police. It was this enforcement that led to the confirmation of Eric Garner. it was this enforcement that led to the mayor telling his son how to 'protect' himself from the police.

If enforcing broken windows is going to expose police to what recently transpired in NYC...why bother? It's what 'the people want' so give it to them. It's not worth the risk to police officers to try to enforce quality-of-life actions.

Be careful what you wish for.

This is my personal opinion as well. I suspect that it will not turn out the way people want to believe

 

[wizards8507]

EDIT: I'm aware that any minor citation is simply aimed to generate revenue; I'm just saying it's interesting that the potential hypocrisy is being put so clearly on display by the very agents of the questionable system.

See also: "Loosie" sales and NY cigarette taxes.

 

[IrishLion]

I see this both ways. Many friends who are cops tell me about the summons quotas they must hit every month being a pain in the ass. If your command suddenly has a decrease, the CO gets called down to compstat and called on the carpet. Fail to reach the quota, and good luck getting a vacation pick or day off.
I think that broken windows is a good policy at its base. Criminals usually start small and progress to higher level crimes. It has turned into a money generator though no doubt.
What will be the outcome? I think we will find out soon enough. Will the lack of enforcement quell some of the anti police feeling, or will it lead to inevitable higher level, more violent crimes. I have my opinion, but I guess we will find out.

Yes, I should have been a bit more inclusive in my response. I'm related to a police officer, so I'm very familiar with the idea of the quota. The number comes from higher up, and it's the job of the officer to meet that number, which means enforcing petty stuff that they might not enforce otherwise.

On one hand, I feel sympathy for officers who would love to give people breaks on minor stuff but simply can't do it because of that "quota" the big guys want... but on the other hand, that's a relatively well-known aspect of policing, so those guys go in knowing they will have to enforce some dumb, minor stuff at times.

And really it reflects the larger issues in policing in general. There are great cops, and there are bad cops, just like in every profession. And there are officers who love to give breaks, and some who love the power. There is danger in simply seeing one extreme or the other when talking about these issues.

For example, I had a friend that got a citation and a court date for peeing in an alley after we left the bar one night, and the cop was a prick from start to finish in the ordeal. He was enjoying his night, giving some young kids a hard time, threatening to arrest all of us when my friend tried to ask for some leniency for himself.

Another time, I had a friend that got caught by a nightly patrol while peeing behind some bushes at a different bar (my friends don't learn lessons from one another very well). Same agency, different officer. This cop laughed and said, "put the binoculars and tweezers away and to stop pissing in public," and then walked off.

 

[Rhode Irish]

The thing about broken windows is that it can be legitimately helpful to the community if it is approached in a cooperative way. That is just basic community policing. Where it becomes a problem is when police use the policy as a license to bully the citizens they are supposed to be protecting.

 

[wizards8507]

The thing about broken windows is that it can be legitimately helpful to the community if it is approached in a cooperative way. That is just basic community policing. Where it becomes a problem is when police use the policy as a license to bully the citizens they are supposed to be protecting.

Ignoring the like terms, there's no reason why "community policing" needs to be done by THE "police." Communities should "police" themselves when it comes to things like broken windows. You nailed it in your last statement. The police's job is to protect.

 

[pkt77242]

Bullsh*t!

The 'protesting' (read: looting and rioting) was done in Ferguson before even a grand jury was convened.

The fact that you suggest bringing a police officer, who was attacked and acted in self defense, to trial, let alone face a conviction, as a solution to the utter ignorance and misdirected rage of a community and race baiters is disgusting.

You want to know how Brown does not get killed? Here are some answers:

1 - He does not commit a strong armed robbery.
2 - He does not attack a police officer.

Brown is dead because of his own actions. Period.

First off Brown did not commit armed robbery (he was not armed), secondly Officer Wilson mentioned nothing about the robbery right after the shooting so he wasn't stopped for armed robbery(he was stopped for other reasons). Thirdly no one knows Brown's side of the story, maybe Wilson pulled the gun first and that led to Brown attacking him (not a brilliant strategy but defensible).

Having said that I don't think that what Wilson could ever have been convicted with the information was available.

On the other hand what happened with Garner was completely different. He was killed because of a "crime" the equivalent of speeding or jaywalking and he never got aggressive with the police officers nor was he a threat.

 

[pkt77242]

Two New York City police officers shot and wounded | Reuters

Since the leaders can't or are not motivated to end this...The realization that this thing is headed toward something that will irreparably divide NY, and this nation, is setting in for me...

Do you work for Fox News?

 

[dales5050]

First off Brown did not commit armed robbery (he was not armed).

Learn to read. I said strong-armed robbery.

adjective
1. using, involving, or threatening the use of physical force or violence to gain an objective:
strong-arm methods.
verb (used with object)
2. to use violent methods upon; assault.
3. to rob by force.
4.to coerce by threats or intimidation; bully:

secondly Officer Wilson mentioned nothing about the robbery right after the shooting so he wasn't stopped for armed robbery(he was stopped for other reasons). .

You're making assumptions. I never said Wilson stopped him for the robbery. I did make in inference that Brown acted the way he did because he assumed that is why he was being stopped. As in....If Brown did not commit a strong armed robbery...he would not have acted the same way when being stopped.

Thirdly no one knows Brown's side of the story, maybe Wilson pulled the gun first and that led to Brown attacking him (not a brilliant strategy but defensible).

Speculative at best and with ballistics unrealistic. There were of course people in the area but they decided to not take a stand and speak up regarding the event.

Having said that I don't think that what Wilson could ever have been convicted with the information was available. Well..except for this guy.

On the other hand what happened with Garner was completely different. He was killed because of a "crime" the equivalent of speeding or jaywalking and he never got aggressive with the police officers nor was he a threat.

So now it's OK to resist arrest but just as long as you don't become 'aggressive'....

How about police pass a note to people.

Hello Citizen,

We would like to arrest you.

Answer

____Y or ____N​

My lord some of you are comical.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Learn to read. I said strong-armed robbery.

That kind of introduction is truly going to help you convince people with the strength of your ideas.

EDIT: Also, if you meant "strong-armed," you left out the hyphen. It left the reader thinking that you meant an armed robbery that was strong. So...learn to write? (FYI...that last part is intended to be a good-natured jab, not a slam)

 

[dales5050]

That kind of introduction is truly going to help you convince people with the strength of your ideas.

So far I have shared my ideas only to be called ignorant, incoherent and illogical by posters in this thread who have yet to articulate a solid refutation to anything that I have said.

So following this when someone tries to correct me and in doing so is incorrect...that's how I respond. Words mean things.

I also notice how you did not say that you were incorrect.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

So far I have shared my ideas only to be called ignorant, incoherent and illogical by posters in this thread who have yet to articulate a solid refutation to anything that I have said.

Well, you didn't exactly have a different tack. Before anyone called you anything, you said:

Why is an honest conversation so difficult for people like you?

You also used lots of caps, which gives the impression that you're shouting.

I also notice how you did not say that you were incorrect.

I'm not sure what you mean. I'm just reading varied viewpoints to see what people think. I shared an article that I thought was interesting.

 

[Booslum31]

So far I have shared my ideas only to be called ignorant, incoherent and illogical by posters in this thread who have yet to articulate a solid refutation to anything that I have said.

So following this when someone tries to correct me and in doing so is incorrect...that's how I respond. Words mean things.

I also notice how you did not say that you were incorrect.

Dude, nobody ever wins these discussions nor do they ever serve to change someones mind. My suggestion is to move to a less polarizing thread and enjoy yourself.

 

[Grahambo]

First off Brown did not commit armed robbery (he was not armed), secondly Officer Wilson mentioned nothing about the robbery right after the shooting so he wasn't stopped for armed robbery(he was stopped for other reasons). Thirdly no one knows Brown's side of the story, maybe Wilson pulled the gun first and that led to Brown attacking him (not a brilliant strategy but defensible).

Having said that I don't think that what Wilson could ever have been convicted with the information was available.

On the other hand what happened with Garner was completely different. He was killed because of a "crime" the equivalent of speeding or jaywalking and he never got aggressive with the police officers nor was he a threat.

Your opinion is your opinion and I have no problem with people saying what they think but I am curious, what is your definition of aggressive? Also, have you ever attempted to arrest someone and they refused?

 

[pkt77242]

So now it's OK to resist arrest but just as long as you don't become 'aggressive'....

How about police pass a note to people.

Hello Citizen,

We would like to arrest you.

Answer

____Y or ____N​

My lord some of you are comical.

I laughed at this. So backing up saying don't arrest me makes it ok for the cops to tackle him and choke him (which killed him) because he was "resisting arrest"? You can only use appropriate force and there is no way that the amount of force they used (and the tactics that they used) were legitimately needed.

Also why the fuck are they trying to arrest someone for selling individual cigarettes? Why aren't they just giving him a ticket?

 

[palinurus]

Just curiously, what do people who think the cops were wrong in these two cases think the cops should have done instead of what they did?

Really, I'm curious, because, while I distrust people like Al Sharpton as dishonest shakedown artists, who are really just selfish manipulators, and I know the union presidents have to defend the cops, I know a number of black people, people I know and trust and think are honorable people of good will, are angry about these incidents, too, but not from a shakedown, always-ticked-off-regardless perspective. But when I ask what the cops should have done, I get a range of answers, which tells me that, while people don't like the result, maybe there isn't a simple and clear answer for what the cops SHOULD have done.

Again, leave out the Sharptons of the world and the police union presidents. Is there unanimity in what the cops should have done?

 

[pkt77242]

Your opinion is your opinion and I have no problem with people saying what they think but I am curious, what is your definition of aggressive? Also, have you ever attempted to arrest someone and they refused?

Backing away with their arms up saying don't arrest me doesn't count as "aggressive" to me. It is by no means violent and threatening (unless being big and black is threatening). Hitting, kicking, biting, and probably even running away (you would have to tackle them and that would require a level of physicalness) as well as other obvious things such as pulling a weapon.

I have never arrested anyone but I have previously worked at group homes where you have to be able to restrain and or take down people who don't want to be restrained (sometimes much larger then you). So I understand the difficulty involved in doing such things.

Putting something around someones neck is generally inappropriate unless they are being violent, and Garner was not violent and we have a recording to prove it (I agree that he wasn't cooperating very well though). I would admit that if I was being arrested for something just as trivial (lets say speeding) then I would have a similar reaction, to take a step or two away with raised hands (to show that I am not a threat) and to say don't arrest me. Sounds like a pretty human response to me.

 

[Grahambo]

Backing away with their arms up saying don't arrest me doesn't count as "aggressive" to me. It is by no means violent and threatening (unless being big and black is threatening). Hitting, kicking, biting, and probably even running away (you would have to tackle them and that would require a level of physicalness) as well as other obvious things such as pulling a weapon.

I have never arrested anyone but I have previously worked at group homes where you have to be able to restrain and or take down people who don't want to be restrained (sometimes much larger then you). So I understand the difficulty involved in doing such things.

Putting something around someones neck is generally inappropriate unless they are being violent, and Garner was not violent and we have a recording to prove it (I agree that he wasn't cooperating very well though). I would admit that if I was being arrested for something just as trivial (lets say speeding) then I would have a similar reaction, to take a step or two away with raised hands (to show that I am not a threat) and to say don't arrest me. Sounds like a pretty human response to me.

I appreciate the response. I ask because I am legitimately curious at how some people view his behavior.

From someone who has dealt with people just like Garner and has had to arrest people like him who 'disagreed' I would just say we simply disagree on that topic.

 

[kmoose]

I know it is difficult to make sense when you are emotional, so I'll ignore some of the more insane things you've said here.

The idea that a cop's life is more valuable than anyone else's is so infuriatingly stupid and abhorrent it is hard for me to calmly address it, but suffice it to say that that attitude is a major contributor to current problem between the police and the policed.

Pot, meet kettle.

Criminals shooting cops is as heartbreaking and as unhealthy for society as cops shooting unarmed citizens. But at this point, the latter is more of a trend than the former.

I know of only two cops shot in "retaliation" to this point, although maybe there is a less publicized incident or two somewhere out there.

Are you now changing the parameters of your claim, from just criminals shooting cops, to cops being shot in retribution? I just want to make sure that I don't assume something that isn't there.

 

[kmoose]

I laughed at this. So backing up saying don't arrest me makes it ok for the cops to tackle him and choke him (which killed him) because he was "resisting arrest"? You can only use appropriate force and there is no way that the amount of force they used (and the tactics that they used) were legitimately needed.

Also why the fuck are they trying to arrest someone for selling individual cigarettes? Why aren't they just giving him a ticket?

From what I gathered, they were not actually arresting him. They were merely handcuffing him for their own safety, while they investigated the complaint of Garner selling loose cigarettes.

 

[FDNYIrish1]

Ignoring the like terms, there's no reason why "community policing" needs to be done by THE "police." Communities should "police" themselves when it comes to things like broken windows. You nailed it in your last statement. The police's job is to protect.

Really? The police shouldn't police? Good luck getting the communities to police themselves. The more opinions I read, the more I think some people have very little actual life experience with the way the world really operates. It's Not this cut and dry.

 

[FDNYIrish1]

I laughed at this. So backing up saying don't arrest me makes it ok for the cops to tackle him and choke him (which killed him) because he was "resisting arrest"? You can only use appropriate force and there is no way that the amount of force they used (and the tactics that they used) were legitimately needed.

Also why the fuck are they trying to arrest someone for selling individual cigarettes? Why aren't they just giving him a ticket?

Because they were called there from complaints from the shop owners. How would you feel if someone was selling cigarettes illegally right in the doorway of the business where you sell cigarettes legally. This was a crackdown at the mayors request. The guy was arrested 32 times prior without violent incident. I still can't believe people see this guy as some martyr. His actions are directly tied to his fate. Horrible indeed, but certainly not criminal.

 

[Irish Insanity]

So is the new dude the opposite of NJNP? He seems angry but with the exact opposite view. Pls change your name to 'Justice No Peace'.

 

[dales5050]

Backing away with their arms up saying don't arrest me doesn't count as "aggressive" to me. It is by no means violent and threatening (unless being big and black is threatening).

Sorry but in a situation like this, any action that is not under the direct order of an officer should be considered an act of aggression.

Creating distance between yourself and an office is viewed as aggressive as it would give you the room to draw a weapon.

How naive are some of you people to think that just because someone says 'don't arrest me' that it means they are passive?

 

[pkt77242]

Because they were called there from complaints from the shop owners. How would you feel if someone was selling cigarettes illegally right in the doorway of the business where you sell cigarettes legally. This was a crackdown at the mayors request. The guy was arrested 32 times prior without violent incident. I still can't believe people see this guy as some martyr. His actions are directly tied to his fate. Horrible indeed, but certainly not criminal.

He was arrested many times before for minor offenses (just like this one), so if this had happened to someone with many previous speeding tickets would you say the same thing? Also no one is talking about the shop owner and if he did the right thing or not. Do you know what Garner was doing right before the cops approached him? Breaking up a fight, not selling cigarettes. Look was Garner an angel, hell no, but did he deserve what happened to him? Hell no as well.

 

[pkt77242]

Sorry but in a situation like this, any action that is not under the direct order of an officer should be considered an act of aggression.

Creating distance between yourself and an office is viewed as aggressive as it would give you the room to draw a weapon.

How naive are some of you people to think that just because someone says 'don't arrest me' that it means they are passive?

Shockingly there is something between passive and aggressive, no one has said that he wasn't passive just that he wasn't agressive. What Garner did was not aggressive behavior it is pretty damn normal. His hands were up, how the Hell was he going to draw a weapon. Can his dick pull the trigger or something?

Here is the definition of aggressive.

Adjective characterized by or tending toward unprovoked offensives, attacks, invasions, or the like; militantly forward or menacing:

That does not fit what Garner did, so how was he aggressive? or should I just take you word for it? Was he menacing? Was he attacking?

 

[pkt77242]

I appreciate the response. I ask because I am legitimately curious at how some people view his behavior.

From someone who has dealt with people just like Garner and has had to arrest people like him who 'disagreed' I would just say we simply disagree on that topic.

I understand that. I can appreciate that people can have different views on it.

 

[FDNYIrish1]

He was arrested many times before for minor offenses (just like this one), so if this had happened to someone with many previous speeding tickets would you say the same thing? Also no one is talking about the shop owner and if he did the right thing or not. Do you know what Garner was doing right before the cops approached him? Breaking up a fight, not selling cigarettes. Look was Garner an angel, hell no, but did he deserve what happened to him? Hell no as well.

Assault and grand larceny are minor offenses? Resisting arrest? And if someone that has too many speeding tickets resisted arrest, yes, I would feel the same way. And yes the shop owner is part of the equation, seeing that he was the one who called for this guy breaking the law right in front of his shop. I didn't see the tape of him breaking up a fight, I saw the tape of him telling the cops "this ends today".
It certainly didn't have to end that day. Did he deserve to die at the hospital? Not at all. But to disregard his actions and the consequences of them is wrong. I guess we will agree to disagree here.

 

[Rhode Irish]

So is the new dude the opposite of NJNP? He seems angry but with the exact opposite view. Pls change your name to 'Justice No Peace'.

Haha

 

[L-cart ND-ana]

Shockingly there is something between passive and aggressive, no one has said that he wasn't passive just that he wasn't agressive. What Garner did was not aggressive behavior it is pretty damn normal. His hands were up, how the Hell was he going to draw a weapon. Can his dick pull the trigger or something?

Here is the definition of aggressive.

Adjective characterized by or tending toward unprovoked offensives, attacks, invasions, or the like; militantly forward or menacing:

That does not fit what Garner did, so how was he aggressive? or should I just take you word for it? Was he menacing? Was he attacking?

I am not a police officer but I work in a locked facility... I work in a controlled environment where there are no guns (I hope) but there are other weapons.

Noncompliance is enough to go hands on, Especially out in the community where it is an uncontrolled environment. You never what can happen. If you are being noncompliant we see that as an act of agression and we are in a controlled environment unlike police officers. We are taught "proper" techniques but things rarely go how they go in the classroom, if it did we would not see these problems.