Originally posted by dadudemonpsych evals are you usually done when one 1st join many can lie themselves throw it and as we can see it isnt a guarantee.
Psych eval. The aind.
one of my favorite quotes and personal believes..
Malcolm X
It is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks.
anyways a lot of people have become so complacent that they think they dont have a right to defend themselves and even kill cops who are trying to do the same to them. many have forgotten the principles this country and its fore fathers based this government on.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
psych evals are you usually done when one 1st join many can lie themselves throw it and as we can see it isnt a guarantee.one of my favorite quotes and personal believes..
Malcolm X
It is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks.
anyways a lot of people have become so complacent that they think they dont have a right to defend themselves and even kill cops who are trying to do the same to them. many have forgotten the principles this country and its fore fathers based this government on.
That's almost completely irrelevant to my post. 😬
The burden of proof is on your to prove that:
1. Psych evals are given in such a way to be ineffective.
2. Psych evals occur on a infrequent basis.
3. The majority lie on their psych evals.
0. The most important one of all: you actually have to prove that police are, generally, controlling, egotistical, a**holes.
How are you going to do that with a lack of psych evals?
In other words, my point from the beginning, One Free Man's claims were completely baseless and are only immature rantings about "the man!" And it would appear that you're furthering his "point."
Originally posted by dadudemon
The burden of proof is on your to prove that:1. Psych evals are given in such a way to be ineffective.
2. Psych evals occur on a infrequent basis.
3. The majority lie on their psych evals.
I'm not sure how much it would matter if you lied on a psych evaluation. A lot of tests include, at least, a validity sub-test inside of them.
Originally posted by dadudemonWhere I live, it's hard to believe that portion exists.
That's only one portion.What about the portion that likes to serve people, save lives, protect the innocent, etc?
For instance: my grandma notices gangsters torching her neighbor's car across the street. She calls the cops, and they are apparently all "dispatched".
I drive around and spot ten a day on the freeway who are more than willing to pull me over if i'm talking on my cell, but people can be mugged right outside where I work every night and they won't send a cop to hang around that part of town.
Where I live, they are thugs hell-bent on taking your money and ignoring your needs.
When's the last time you were driving down the road and a cop pulled in behind you and you said, "Oh, good, I'm safe. Nothing bad will happen to me. I'm taken care of." Me? Never. My thoughts go like this: "Oh god, I'd better not make one single traffic mistake or it's going to cost me 3-11 hundred dollars."
the only thing i am trying to get across is if there is one corrupt Cop it stands to reason their may be more due to the corrupt cop's ability to have have lasted as long as he did, that or massively incompetent force members.
1. Psych evals are given in such a way to be ineffective.
2. Psych evals occur on a infrequent basis.
3. The majority lie on their psych evals.
1. the fact that there are corrupt cops shows that evals are not completely effective.
2. i am not aware of how often evals occur but i know that they can be done after a traumatic arrest..
3. i didnt say the majority lie, but i believe many have done so based on the amount of corrupt police that have bn arrested. also ones personality might be a large part in why they want to become a police officer and some key reasoning to be a police officer might also be shared by professional criminals or corrupt unethical ppl.
why do we need to prove anything? this is a forum debate if we dont have evidence we can still voice our opinion and use logic building to help support our position.
i dont know about all Police being @$$holes but the few run ins i had with police from asking for directions to simply standing around harassed or arrested have bn @$$holes. 7/10 of my experiences the police were pricks. the problem is many think that being unprofessional and disrespectful toward a citizen is okay when in fact it is not and in the military where i served as base security such behavior can get one in trouble and demoted. yet, police still continue to work with such attitude even after various complaints from citizens.
i cant prove that cops are egotistical but i an tell you by training that one has to portray a dominate commanding presence when engaging with a suspect that doesnt mean be a prick. that just means being firm, confident and decisive in ones actions and vocal commands.
something i see missing many times on videos. i have only seen one good proper behavior from an officer not saying it is a norm or not just saying it is a great example of an officer and professionalism that police and citizen should respect and try to adhere to.
BSbSF2Uxwc4&feature=related
Originally posted by dadudemon
If I were an alien, sent to earth to study humans, I'd be amazed at how stupid they were with their energy technology. I would be amazed at how retarded and damming corporations can be, but amazed at how much progress has come from those entities, at the same time.
That seems to be based on too many variables.
Originally posted by One Free Man
For instance: my grandma notices gangsters torching her neighbor's car across the street. She calls the cops, and they are apparently all "dispatched".
Sounds like the cops were actually doing their job in that case. Unless car touching is really high on your list of felonies.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
1. the fact that there are corrupt cops shows that evals are not completely effective.
Somehow I doubt that psychological evaluations are focused on detecting corruption let alone potential to become corrupt. It seems more likely that they would be trying to weed out people with defined disorders or a high probability of developing one.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
the only thing i am trying to get across is if there is one corrupt Cop it stands to reason their may be more due to the corrupt cop's ability to have have lasted as long as he did, that or massively incompetent force members.
I think you're confusing "corruption" with "overly violent, controlling, and arrogant."
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
1. the fact that there are corrupt cops shows that evals are not completely effective.
That might be a good point if you first proved that the psych evals were designed properly, were comprehensive, and/or if the evaluation results tolerated a degree of leeway.
They probably due "tolerate" a certain degree of ideal deviation a the probabilities would have to be accounted for because even a very "awesome" person would crack, given the right variables.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
2. i am not aware of how often evals occur but i know that they can be done after a traumatic arrest..
I can tell you that there isn't an official "national" eval. it varies from one municipality to the next.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
3. i didnt say the majority lie, but i believe many have done so based on the amount of corrupt police that have bn arrested. also ones personality might be a large part in why they want to become a police officer and some key reasoning to be a police officer might also be shared by professional criminals or corrupt unethical ppl.
You need to then prove that the total number of "corrupt" (this includes those police that were also part of foul play such as excessive force) police ousted and/or arrested have an occurrence greater than a per capita measure against the very population they police.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
why do we need to prove anything? this is a forum debate if we dont have evidence we can still voice our opinion and use logic building to help support our position.
You may not have to prove anything in a debate, with a kid, but with adults, facts and studies go a long way in a discussion. You and I literally cannot making claims and not expect someone to expect them to be backed up. It just doesn't work that way. Would you rather just have speculative discussions that lead to no meaningful conclusion or information? That seems rather ... restrictive.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i dont know about all Police being @$$holes but the few run ins i had with police from asking for directions to simply standing around harassed or arrested have bn @$$holes. 7/10 of my experiences the police were pricks. the problem is many think that being unprofessional and disrespectful toward a citizen is okay when in fact it is not and in the military where i served as base security such behavior can get one in trouble and demoted. yet, police still continue to work with such attitude even after various complaints from citizens.
Do you think it is proper to base your claims on your own anecdotal experience? How is that even close to being objective?
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i cant prove that cops are egotistical but i an tell you by training that one has to portray a dominate commanding presence when engaging with a suspect that doesnt mean be a prick. that just means being firm, confident and decisive in ones actions and vocal commands.
You're running in the fields of strawman, now. You've got to keep it more focused on what is in question.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
something i see missing many times on videos. i have only seen one good proper behavior from an officer not saying it is a norm or not just saying it is a great example of an officer and professionalism that police and citizen should respect and try to adhere to.BSbSF2Uxwc4&feature=related
I agree that two-way respect goes a long way. I also know that respect given, first, by yourself, will get you respect.
http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=266
here is a site with various collected reports of misconducts with other links leading to more. perhaps there is only 2:1 odds of corruption or 2 to 3% but when you look at the sheer amount of victims does it really matter?
is it really a valid argument to try to dismiss reports and incidents b/c they are low in number rather then to do a complete investigation?
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/bahhi
"I am sorry, but even when good cops turn a blind eye to the bad cops, they become bad cops. "
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=266here is a site with various collected reports of misconducts with other links leading to more. perhaps there is only 2:1 odds of corruption or 2 to 3% but when you look at the sheer amount of victims does it really matter?
is it really a valid argument to try to dismiss reports and incidents b/c they are low in number rather then to do a complete investigation?
facepalm
You ignored everything in my post and you are also missing a major point in your above statement:
I said:
"You need to then prove that the total number of "corrupt" (this includes those police that were also part of foul play such as excessive force) police ousted and/or arrested have an occurrence greater than a per capita measure against the very population they police."
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/bahhi
"I am sorry, but even when good cops turn a blind eye to the bad cops, they become bad cops. "
Though it is true, it is a strawman.
more use of excessive police violence..
police need to be better trained and these cops need to be released from the force and tried . zero tolerance should make officers think twice with the amount of force applied in subduing ppl. 😗
I can't understand how one can be detained by subversively making a non random check point and trying to get a person to admit or state their nationality.
i do not study law nor em i fully aware of any provision that would force or subversively make a person wave there 4th amendment rights which allows and entitles a citizen to refuse to answer any questions without a lawyer present and would give a law enforcement representative to continue asking questions after refusing to answer in the 1st place.
My understanding is in order to Stop question and search a person requires suspicion and exercising ones constitutional rights itself is not suspicious behavior but rather it is a Citizens right that should be allowed to be exercised without it being considered suspicious behavior.
does anybody know in what states these DHS checkpoints are still up and running and if any one has filed any violation of civil or constitutional rights?
I am embarrassed to have ever fought for this country if this is still happening they set up watch towers and base style camps something i would only have believed a military unit would do and never within US Borders other then a military base but not to be used on its own citizens.
More and more with Each day i am reminded of Thomas jefferson and his quotes:
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_jefferson.html
time and time i of have question my country from my return of service i didnt fight in overseas to see the federal government treat its citizens as if they were suspected terrorist this isnt iraq its citizens have the right to walk, drive freely within its borders without being routinely stopped without probable cause in a check point purposely set up to stop all civilians under the guise of being suspected immigrants and purposely making ppl declare their citizenship this is WW2 germany behavior. the supreme court aught to be ashamed of themselves for allowing it to happen.
It seems to me that this is some how an indoctrination to make citizens believe that this isnt wrong or unconstitutional, this just leaves the door wide open for future constitutional infractions on a person civil liberties and 4th amendment rights.
I am appalled to hear ppl say if they havent broken the law then they should allow themselves to be questioned and searched. by asking and allowing american Citizens to pass the check point after declaring their nationality is obviously a system of slow indoctrination where the american public will hopefully be persuaded to uncontest this behavior by making it seem it is for their own safety, in truth it is used to single out and give them an open invitation to violate civil laws at the smallest opportunities whether innocent or not soon it wont matter and it will no longer be a subversive tactic but a full violation of rights that are no longer protected by higher courts and will be believed to be the norm in the eyes of the public.
ppl are basically being desensitized and condition ppl with these new agencies who abuse violate civil liberties all under the guise of national security and they will hide behind it every chance they get.
it makes me so angry to also see that military personal are also being used to further help intimidate americans or non citizens in this country. it makes me angry because i know for a fact that it is illegal, no american military personal whether military police or not has any right outside the military base it violates a bunch of laws. yet, i dont hear civil rights ppl or anyone making an outrage and why is the supreme court not stopping this?
these are all horrible signs that many of us have studied and read about and other of us who have bn in the military or studied or lived in another oppressive nations can see where this is leading to.
whether a military is their for exercise or simply to observe will cause normal citizens whether criminal or not to fear their government when it is suppose to be the other way around those soldier who do not question their command and refuse to be a part of it should be more afraid of following an illegal order an punished then they should be of their superiors and the illegal command. those agents and their superiors giving orders to should all be more afraid of the citizen's outrage and being held accountable of violation of laws in a court house and saying i was just doing what i am told is not an excuse.
remember being a douche and standing up and asking the police the reason for detaining is not a crime. also refusing to answer under the 4th amendment is ur right.
4qhbB_DC59M&feature=related
and yes i am aware that the international checkpoints are allowed to search you when crossing boarders i know it extents within 100 miles this is not what i am pointing at.