Thread: Differences Between Police Officers & Civilians

Originally Posted by crouton976

By the way, John, I'm only speaking from my insights on the law based on research I've done. I am not a lawyer, and don't claim to be. I definitely realize that officers are usually only trained so much, some more adequately than others, and are also not legal experts either. Most that I've ever dealt with are more than willing to hear what a citizen had to say about laws they have researched, and they will do their best to verify that while on scene.

These officers, in my limited opinion, handled things way wrong, as did the brothers, who should have just stayed calm, even if they were right.

Thank you for weighing in since you have firsthand knowledge and experience... I was hoping you would, as well as some of the other law enforcement members, current or former. You guys have a heck of a rough job, and sometimes folks don't make it any easier.

You were quit fortunate to meet officers on a scene that would entertain/listen to your interpretation of of how things should be done on that scene or how you interpret the laws. Most will not & should not. If an officer has to stop to verify a law that you have brought to his attention, then he(the officer) is unprepared & a real problem lies there.

I will speak for myself on this one; though I feel it applies to many officers. My job was not a "rough job" as you put it, nor a tough job. 95% of my job was being ready to respond to your problems, being available to assist you with something that has gotten out of your control. The difficult thing about this is staying alert. Everybody knows who the cop is, the cop is always playing catch-up with everyone around him, as to what is going on.

5% of the time, the job is a risk, mentally & physically.

A rough job is laying cinder blocks, hauling 2x4's, picking produce in the sun, hammering steel, standing on an assembly line all day, with a clock deciding when you can sit down for a moment, hunkered down on the other side of the world in a sand box while a group of people, who you will never meet, are thinking of the best ways to kill you. Those are rough jobs.

I used to be a Police officer, Granted here in UK, not always an easy job, and sometime you work with people who like to escalate situations rather than diffuse them. Its like retail some people do it with NO people skills and think thats ok, same goes for the police (Just because a person passes all the test's does not mean they will be good at there job.)
I worked with a few people and I know I would be in for rough day just because of there people skills.(Or rather lack of them)

This is a very interesting question. I offer some thoughts:

In Norway (as in many countries), during the second world war, police authority was seized by the invading forces. Norway did set up it's own police force, but it was effectively in exile. The police force that you practically would encounter were under the command of the oppressing forces.
In Syria today, there are police forces, serving the leadership, brutalizing the people.

We had a highly respected legal professor here in Norway, famous among other things for his efforts during the post-WW2 legal process, who later would advocate civil disobedience as a means of protest against unjust laws and regulations, stressing the non-violent aspects of such a disobedience.

To the OP's question "are you ever justified in fighting back against a police officer?"; I think there are situations where non-physical and non-violent disobediance might be justified. There are more ways to fight back than with fists and guns.

Originally Posted by str8fencer

This is a very interesting question. I offer some thoughts:

In Norway (as in many countries), during the second world war, police authority was seized by the invading forces. Norway did set up it's own police force, but it was effectively in exile. The police force that you practically would encounter were under the command of the oppressing forces.
In Syria today, there are police forces, serving the leadership, brutalizing the people.

We had a highly respected legal professor here in Norway, famous among other things for his efforts during the post-WW2 legal process, who later would advocate civil disobedience as a means of protest against unjust laws and regulations, stressing the non-violent aspects of such a disobedience.

To the OP's question "are you ever justified in fighting back against a police officer?"; I think there are situations where non-physical and non-violent disobediance might be justified. There are more ways to fight back than with fists and guns.

Oh, totally there are better ways to respond without violence or aggression. If anyone has any doubt about that, they need only to look at Ghandi's acts of non-compliance and non-cooperation. However, even Ghandi did advocate the use of force when necessary, though it was (and still is, in my opinion) very rare that the circumstances would be right for it.

It is a hard job to be sure, being an LEO. They are still "civilians" like the "rest of us", they punch a clock and do their job. I do think they are becoming too militarized though. What ever happened to the local cop working a zone and interfacing with the public? Got a buddy who's a local LEO that swings by every now and then. He was showing off some of his gear in the trunk and I was shocked. I asked him if he was some kind of a "gear queer" with all the junk he had back there. He told me it was just his gear up stuff. It was body armor, uniform, extra pistol etc. all in Multi Cam pattern. In addition to a Remington 700 PSS and an AR 15. Granted I dig all that stuff, but I wondered why on earth would a small towny cop need to be a rolling SWAT team?.....P.S. I think the cops from Detroit overstepped their authority in the video. I think they were pissed that the 2 black guys didn't roll over and take it and they lost their cool. The 2 black dudes wanted to know why the cops were so intent on questioning them and the cops did not like it at all! There is one thing cops don't like; when you call them out on their job and question THEM.

I'm not placing a judgment either way, but will share a reason why I never got into law enforcement. These guys deal with more bad and ugly stuff in a week than most of us will ever encounter in a lifetime. How do they not become judgmental? How do they not profile? How do they stay civilized? Think about it for a while & be honest with yourself. Could you/we do and see what they see on a daily basis and not have a "bad/off" day? I know I couldn't.

Now that I have commented, I will watch the video of this one happening.

Edit: Now that I have watched it, it really looks like the officers picked the fight. Key word, fight. Unfortunately, this is going to be more about the race-card than anything else & nothing good will come out of it.

In a lot of cases like these you don't have all the information and are trying to pass judgment with out all the facts.
There are wrongs and rights on both sides that you see in the video. What you don't have is all the audio, ie; what was said.
You don't have any information on what transpired prior to the video?
As far as rights, there are things covered under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 14th and 15th amendments that would cover the actions of both sides, wrong or right.
Just my two cents worth.

V/R
Tim

Originally Posted by oldblades

In a lot of cases like these you don't have all the information and are trying to pass judgment with out all the facts.
There are wrongs and rights on both sides that you see in the video. What you don't have is all the audio, ie; what was said.
You don't have any information on what transpired prior to the video?
As far as rights, there are things covered under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 14th and 15th amendments that would cover the actions of both sides, wrong or right.
Just my two cents worth.

V/R
Tim

Oh, I totally agree that I don't have all the facts, hence in post number 6 I made the statement about assuming what was seen in the video and what was reported were what actually happened.

Also, this instance is just an example of what I was really trying to have the topic of discussion be about in this thread... You know, the theory not the incident...

I also want to say great responses everybody! You've given me some good insights and things to ponder. It's absolutely fantastic that we can have discussions such as this and offer up so many points of view to each other. In my opinion, being able to do that gives us all a chance to grow intellectually, as I'm a firm believer in continually and routinely questioning one's beliefs and perceptions to be sure that they are still valid, and that we're not just blindly following the herd.

I know one big difference between Police officers and civilians. If some nut case starts blasting away with an AK-47 the civilians are the one running away while the police officers are the the ones running toward him to stop him. People make mistakes, but we would be in real trouble if we didn't have the police.

I didn't look at the video because I've seen enough like them.

To the title of the thread the answer is there is no difference between police and civilians. The receive a modicum of training and then are expected to go out on the street and exercise patience and understanding and be able to read minds and deal with all sorts of people. They simply are not trained for that and some are good at it and some are not. On top of that they have their bad and good days just that they are held accountable for whatever they do and in the end a team will examine their actions for weeks on end consulting experts while they had seconds at best to act in the field. Those cameras can be great and be a curse because you don't know what happened before they were rolling.

As far a fighting the police, unless you are in some situation where you feel your life is in jeopardy by some rogue individual you are never justified fighting them. If they are wrong you file on them and sue their employer. If you fight them, in the end you lose always.