autox
[Top] [All Lists]

was-Re: Maps and window decals-now law enforcement

To: psosborn@gte.net
Subject: was-Re: Maps and window decals-now law enforcement
From: jon e prevo <tcbracer@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:21:40 -0500
I will preface this post with a warning that there is no autocross
content.  And for the many new members who may get the wrong impression,
Let me say that Phil Osbourne is in my opinion the finest of autocross
personalities and my disagreement is in no way intended as an attack on
his character.  If you have not met Phil, you are missing one of the
great experiences to be had in autocross.  I have missed his presence
since he left Texas region and it is a joy to be able to converse on the
'net.

On Thu, 6 Jul 2000 21:30:31 -0400 "Phillip S. Osborne" <psosborn@gte.net>
writes:
> I have been out of town for a couple of weeks, away from email, and 
> am just
> now catching up.....
> 

I was wondering why you never seemed to have an opinion, especially with
your background.

 Just because you have been harrassed, with 
> questionable
> reason, does not necessarily mean that all those fitting your 
> description
> are harrassed. 

My comment, and the subsequent comments of several other t.n members was
that __many__ of us are.  There is an inherent distrust among us that can
not be measured by research, and that distrust stems from abuse and
suspicion of abuse, on a larger scale than you want to recognize.

 Have you done research to prove that the majority of 
> cops
> abuse the system? 

Again, my comment does not implicate the "majority."  Just a much larger
demographic than law enforcement wants to admit.  And why not?  That
would be an admission of criminal activity and I will admit that we
(society) cannot afford for half our local law enforcement agencies to be
shut down due to widespread class-action suits.  

 Most cops will not waste time with 
> petty
> traffic citations just to make numbers. 
> And,
> although some departments may establish quotas where traffic 
> citations are
> concerned, the great majority do not. 

I will disagree with you, respectfully but vehemently, on this point. 
And now I will pass the onus to you.  Prove to me by research that there
are not blatant traffic quotas in the _wide_ majority of departments,
large and small.  They _are_ there and that is not my opinion, that is
from the mouths of multiple officers who are friends of mine and others
who are acquaintences of people who are my friends.  This is no "urban
legend."
 ... traffic tickets mean money in the city coffers.  Why 
> else
> would a city of less than 200 people require a police department of 
> multiple
> officers on duty at any one time?  But even at that, you can't blame 
> the
> officers if he is in fact only doing his job

I do not blame any single officer for his department's illegitimate
policies.  I do, however, wonder sometimes, and have asked officers
sometimes, how they can sleep at night knowing that their bosses require
them to piss all over the various codes of ethics and legal statutes day
in and day out, in the pursuit of municiple profits.


...legislating city 
> police
> courts out of business.  Most states have a district court system 
> that does
> not allow local governments to reap the profits of multiple traffic
> citations... 

An excellent idea, and one which should be adopted by Texas.  

 
> Admittedly, there are a few who find power of the badge too much to 
> resist
> the temptation to play God, but those are far and few between. 

Once again, disagreed.  I believe the police departments do a poor job of
controlling their officers, and this is where the larger problem arises. 
To cover for inept management, and to avoid repercussions, inapropriate
behavior is ignored and denied as a matter of course.  Allow me to
illustrate.  Several years ago, there was a shop here in Fort Worth which
mainly dealt in auto service, with a retail firearms showroom in the
office.  This business gained a reputation as "the tire shop that sells
guns."  The owner's son-in-law managed the auto service business while
the owner spent most of his time managing the office.  It was decided
that it would be advantageous to create a "safety net" type security
perimeter and as a portion of that plan the son-in-law began carrying a
sidearm in the course of his daily work.  Texas statute plainly states
that the person who is owner or charged with control of a property may
legally carry a handgun in plain view on the property.  Over a period of
a couple of years this security tactic was questioned multiple times by
younger, inexperienced officers with a less than adequate knowledge of
the statute, but the situation was always explained satisfactorily and no
incidents or arrests were forthcoming.  Until one day a tough-guy cop
shows up, refusing to listen to reason, insisting on making an arrest,
arrests the son-in-law and then goes inside store and assaults the owner
while he is talking to a 911 operator, requesting help from a superior
officer.  The unlawful-carry charges were dismissed, the officer was
relocated to another station but _not_ reprimanded, the innocent
oppressed businessmen were out 3000.00 plus the trauma of the situation
and the police department didn't even offer an apology.  Nothing wrong
happenned.  No false arrest took place.  No officer overstepped his
authority.  Now, that officer is on the street in Fort Worth with the
tacit approval of his behavior from the local force.  Do you think he
will even think twice the next time a subject tells him he is making a
mistake?

 As for the "great blue 
> wall,"
> without it our society would be subject to a hell of a lot more 
> harrassment
> than from a few bad cops.  Think about it the next time you need 
> one...
> 
I am reminded of the soliloquy delivered by Jack Nicholson's character at
the end of "A Few Good Men".  Phil, excusing poor coduct by certain
members of law enforcement because across the board society is greatly
benefitted by it's presence is similar to saying that child abuse is
acceptable occasionally if it is intended to teach the child self
discipline.  The abuse, by one man or by several small podunk towns in
Texas, is unacceptable and should be corrected or at least acknowledged,
not minimalized and portrayed as insignificant.  If a man spends years
giving to the poor, then goes out and steals a car, is he less guilty of
theft than someone who has led a life of self gratification?  
And I _have_ needed my local police for about 2 years now and they are
continuing to fail to serve me and my neighborhood because the city
government has more important issues than drug sales, minors drinking and
public nuisance.  Things like making sure all garage sales are permitted
and that the city gets a better cable-service contract.

In sincerity, not in judgement.
Jon FP 73

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>