Nah, you're looking too far into it. I didn't say anything about how the situation developed, what it developed into or how it was handled afterward.
All I was talking about is people who sit and wait for help and assume it will come.... get what they put into it.
(09-02-2010, 05:45 AM)pirateron Wrote: [ -> ] (09-01-2010, 01:00 PM)Nhrafan26 Wrote: [ -> ]Hmmm... someone remind me again, what happened in New Orleans in the past few years when people decided to "wait for help from local and national government"??
Oh, never mind, it's coming back to me now.
/sarcasm
I know, different situations but same basic concept.
Man, I see what you're saying, but comparing police not coming out to take a report after a non violent crime, and a natural disaster followed by killings by cops and a complete breakdown of society, ain't the same concept. It ain't even close. The New Orleans travesty started as a natural disaster THEN became a human disaster, Regardless of lack of, or due to, the govt interference.
(09-02-2010, 02:07 PM)Nhrafan26 Wrote: [ -> ]Nah, you're looking too far into it. I didn't say anything about how the situation developed, what it developed into or how it was handled afterward.
All I was talking about is people who sit and wait for help and assume it will come.... get what they put into it.
(09-02-2010, 05:45 AM)pirateron Wrote: [ -> ] (09-01-2010, 01:00 PM)Nhrafan26 Wrote: [ -> ]Hmmm... someone remind me again, what happened in New Orleans in the past few years when people decided to "wait for help from local and national government"??
Oh, never mind, it's coming back to me now.
/sarcasm
I know, different situations but same basic concept.
Man, I see what you're saying, but comparing police not coming out to take a report after a non violent crime, and a natural disaster followed by killings by cops and a complete breakdown of society, ain't the same concept. It ain't even close. The New Orleans travesty started as a natural disaster THEN became a human disaster, Regardless of lack of, or due to, the govt interference.
Yeah, I get what you're saying, the choice of comparisons didn't work for me, though. That's all.
I was just wondering....since these cops are no longer interested in dealing with "non-violent" crimes, are they going to cease speed trap operations as well? Motorists trying to get to work on time or late for an important date tend not to be violent offenders. I have a feeling however, that since traffic tickets make alot of money for municipalities, these non-violent offenders will continue to be pursued. Cop driving car to burglary scene, taking report, and all necessary resources to do so costs money, what do you get in return? One slightly more comfortable citizen and the knowledge that the duty of law enforcement was performed to the satisfaction of one taxpayer, for whom the department actually works (lets not forget that). Not to mention, possibly collecting information that may lead to the apprehension of said burglar, preventing future crimes being commited by the same offender, who just might be feeling a little more inclined to violent acts next time seeing as his last crime not only went unpunished but wasn't even investigated in the first place. However, cop sits in idling car with AC running all day, playing roadside parasite to the state and harrassing citizens who might actually have somewhere important to be that day. Well, that pays dividends so I'm willing to bet those efforts will be stepped up now that there will be more officers available to sit in cars reading magazines and eating pistachios. As far as investigating real crimes (which burglary apparently is not) and apprehending actual bad guys (which burglars apparently are not), not responding to crime scenes just because nothing violent took place when the crime was commited is a major dereliction of duty. If the department can't afford to pay it's officers, they might want to step up fund raising activities with their communities. They would probably be surprised at the support they would receive from people if said people felt the department and it's officers gave a shit about more than their paychecks. Once again, not saying all cops are bad, that's for sure. Just saying there's a reason that alot of the public's perceptions of the police force are so negative. Maybe they could address some of those reasons? Performing the duties we intrust to them and pay them to perform, regardless of imminent danger not being present at that particular time (again, let's not forget the increased potential for violence NEXT time the same offender commits the SAME crime, safe in the knowledge it won't even be investigated) would be a good start. Just my opinion in the matter.
I just thought of something. Dropping your pants and dropping a deuce on an unoccupied cop car's windshield isn't a violent crime.
If that cop car is occupied.....is it not still a non violent crime?
(09-08-2010, 07:29 AM)Nate Wrote: [ -> ]If that cop car is occupied.....is it not still a non violent crime?
No, then it's police brutality and a trip to the ER.
(08-25-2010, 05:50 PM)vjf915 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not terribly upset about this. This just gives citizens more of a responsibility to protect themselves. It also means that there will likely be less repercussions on those who protect their home. If its taken to court, the defense is "Well your honor, I couldnt call the police.....had to do something."
I really dont think this is HOW we should be moving responsibility onto the criminals for their actions, but in this case to me the ends DO justify the means.
It also means they're much more likely to be
targeted for these crimes since the bad guys know that there is no active responses to them. Again, active burglaries aside, it still paints a bigger target on these citizens and their possessions.
That's the problem I have with it.
(09-08-2010, 05:36 PM)Raistlin Wrote: [ -> ]It also means they're much more likely to be targeted for these crimes since the bad guys know that there is no active responses to them. Again, active burglaries aside, it still paints a bigger target on these citizens and their possessions.
That's the problem I have with it.
I totally agree.
It's basically like saying, "hey, we're going to stop locking the guard gate tonight because I'm tired of walking down there."
IF you're going to do it, shut your mouth and do what you have to, you DON'T announce it.
(09-08-2010, 04:25 PM)nepawolf Wrote: [ -> ] (09-08-2010, 07:29 AM)Nate Wrote: [ -> ]If that cop car is occupied.....is it not still a non violent crime?
No, then it's police brutality and a trip to the ER.
The price paid would indeed be a heavy one, but the act itself would be so sweet. Especially with a hidden camera on your ass so you could watch the cop's initial reaction again and again and again.....after getting home from the hospital of course.
If the cops aren't coming... Good I can kill the bastard are not worry bout going to jail or even being shot by a cop because "they feared for their life" so this is a win win.