Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

National News
See other National News Articles

Title: New York Police Declare Their Own Safety ‘Top Priority’
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://news.antiwar.com/2014/12/21/ ... their-own-safety-top-priority/
Published: Dec 22, 2014
Author: Jason Ditz
Post Date: 2014-12-22 04:58:57 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 528
Comments: 77

NYPD Turns on Mayor, Union Pushes Action Against 'Enemies' in City Hall

A Saturday incident in which a gunmen killed a pair of NYPD officers in Brooklyn has sent the department, the nation’s largest into a flurry of panic and outrage, and has police union leaders turning up the rhetoric on anybody and everybody the police don’t like.

The biggest target appears to be Mayor Bill de Blasio, who ran for office on a platform of ending police racial profiling, and was critical of police in recent slayings. Police are now blaming him for the “anti-police” sentiment that led to the weekend shootings.

Police made a point of publicly turning their backs on de Blasio during his statement over the shootings, and union leaders urged police to use “extreme discretion” in acting against enemies in City Hall.

The police seem to be moving away from the traditional city-run law enforcement branch and toward an independent, and heavily-armed, faction which feels it can unilaterally act, or refuse to act, as it sees fit.

To that end, police leaders are telling police that their top priority is “to ensure the safety of yourselves and your officers,” and that they should avoid making arrests “unless absolutely necessary.”

The detectives’ union is urging police to travel in threes, and to wear bulletproof vests at all times, while other police union leaders are talking up the idea that they are a “wartime” police department on a military footing.

The “enemy” in this war is clearly the public protesters critical of past police killings of unarmed civilians, and police demanded that all protests against them be halted for the time being.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 20.

#1. To: Ada (#0) (Edited)

To that end, police leaders are telling police that their top priority is “to ensure the safety of yourselves and your officers,” and that they should avoid making arrests “unless absolutely necessary.”

WTF does that mean? What, now they're just going to continue executing people whenever they feel like it any morality be damned?

Here's a neat idea, how about not acting like a bunch of crybaby psychotic assholes thinking that the world is out to get you for a change.

For every one of these instances where the cops just happen to be right there are a hundred instances where they just feel like killing someone's dog and family in a "wrong-door-knock" or arbitrarily knocking over a cyclist or just shooting someone to death or beating and tazering them because their soft feelings got hurt and someone didn't comply with every word coming out of the douche bag's mouth.

It's a real shame the number of people I know personally that say that they warn their kids never to approach police. That really says it all.

Just a thought.

Katniss  posted on  2014-12-22   22:08:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Katniss (#1)

Whatever ones emotion or opinion, we have to remember, all of these people are hired by us, paid by us. None of them are rogue enforcers, all can be fired.

There is always some elected person or group in charge.

Cynicom  posted on  2014-12-23   10:29:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Cynicom (#3)

I have a more positive outlook if the police choose to avoid unnecessary arrests.

In NYC police are required to fill a quota of arrests which is why they go for the junk like arresting for selling loose cigarettes. Alas, sometimes these junk arrests turn deadly. If the police only arrest for real crime, they and we would be much better off.

Agreed. But until that time, and as of now that looks as if it's never going to happen since this is all sponsored by the establishment and those that own/control it, it won't happen. So file under it's nice and fun to think about but never really going to happen, eh.

Whatever ones emotion or opinion, we have to remember, all of these people are hired by us, paid by us. None of them are rogue enforcers, all can be fired.

We also have to remember that except for in the most egregious cases that become of the highest profile, that there is no enforcement within the enforcement community and that few if any will ever be fired. About the worst that ever happens is that they get paid vacation, literally except for the verbage which reads "administrative leave," and that any settlements otherwise never come out of the pockets of the perps, at any level, themselves.

That's a lose-lose for everyone.

I'd say slowly, but the reality is that rapidly the ranks of LEOs are becoming like gang members that can do whatever they want almost whenever they want to, lie thru their teeth about it and get instant credibility in the media and in the courts because they're all cut from the same cloth, and rarely if ever have any consequences associated with their own illegal, unconstitutional, immoral, and anti-Christian behavior.

Katniss  posted on  2014-12-24   11:55:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Katniss (#16)

I have a general disdain for LEO as a whole unit, but do try to give individuals room to operate.

Five days a week, for a lifetime of putting your own life on the line, has to be a burden for all.

Cynicom  posted on  2014-12-25   7:54:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Cynicom (#17) (Edited)

Five days a week, for a lifetime of putting your own life on the line, has to be a burden for all.

With faulty premises it's easy to come to faulty conclusions.

That right there is an oft-stated untruth. In fact, LEO's have nowhere near the top in dangerous professions, yet, we don't even come close to giving those that do the same type of reverence and consideration in society.

The fact is that of the dangers that are there, many bring them on themselves and as a whole they produce more such situations than they succumb to otherwise.

Then there's the whole "Serpico" thing generally speaking, who set him up? Hint: It wasn't the "bad guys." Again, generally speaking since that's the hidden culture that's really responsible.

I see absolutely nothing dangerous or anyone putting their lives on the line with 20+ LEOs in armored riot gear and automatic weaponry including an armored vehicle storming a house owned by a middle-aged couple that aren't even armed, and a dog.

Nor do I see any danger in the same storming a house in the middle of the night with the element of surprise while conducting a "wrong door knock" which happens all too often. Even if it's the right house, there's still far less danger than there is in many other professions. Otherwise we'd be reading about far more cops being dead daily than the thousands, mostly relatively innocents, that they themselves kill throughout each year, an ever-growing number.

Also, if it were really that dangerous, then I don't think that so many would be clammoring to get into their ranks and many more would be leaving them.

Katniss  posted on  2014-12-27   12:08:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Katniss, 4 (#18)

Then there's the whole "Serpico" thing generally speaking, who set him up? Hint: It wasn't the "bad guys." Again, generally speaking since that's the hidden culture that's really responsible.

About Serpico, our career paths crossed and for him to claim he went into plainclothes in 1963 and didn't realize there was a monthly pad until 1967 is complete fiction. We all claim to understand the propaganda coming at us via the MSM, yet it's clear to me most don't (and I include myself here at times). Bottom line on Frank Serpico; he got shortchanged, became angry and then found religion. Anyone believing the Pacino Hollywood version has been duped.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2014-12-27   12:43:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 20.

#21. To: Jethro Tull (#20)

So Frank found his monthly nut somewhat light?

Huh. Believable though.

Lod  posted on  2014-12-27 12:54:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Jethro Tull (#20)

About Serpico, our career paths crossed and for him to claim he went into plainclothes in 1963 and didn't realize there was a monthly pad until 1967 is complete fiction. We all claim to understand the propaganda coming at us via the MSM, yet it's clear to me most don't (and I include myself here at times). Bottom line on Frank Serpico; he got shortchanged, became angry and then found religion. Anyone believing the Pacino Hollywood version has been duped.

That's fine but the greater point still stands.

There's more than enough corruption and internal cover-up to go around and has been for decades.

Katniss  posted on  2014-12-27 15:59:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: Jethro Tull (#20)

About Serpico, our career paths crossed and for him to claim he went into plainclothes in 1963 and didn't realize there was a monthly pad until 1967 is complete fiction.

Claiming that Serpico knew nothing about payoffs until 1967 is fiction...1967 was when he had enough of corrupt cops...

But thanks for underscoring my statement that cops refuse to police themselves and are thus responsible for their own problems...especially PR...

war  posted on  2014-12-29 07:42:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 20.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest