There are way, way more good cops than bad cops. It probably is far more than 100 to one.
Many have wives and children to love and protect, just like you and me. But, unlike you and me, they wake up in the morning, not knowing whether they will be attacked, shot, or otherwise brutalized by really bad people — and it’s all to save our lives.
Sure, there are bad apples among the cops. Of course, there are. There are bad apples in every human group. We all know that. It’s part of life.
But cops are not all that well paid for the danger they face, and hey, if you don’t like the police, next time you have trouble, call your dopey neighbor instead. That ought to work. Right?
That said, there are three groups of people, who pretend to represent the police, but based on history seem to be the cops’ worst enemies: Police chiefs, mayors, and unions.
Police Refuse to Release Video of Officers Killing Unarmed Mentally Ill Man”
Shortly after her mentally ill brother was killed by police, a San Diego resident was recorded on a cellphone video asking officers why they killed her unarmed brother.
Despite the fact that a witness captured the shooting on a cellphone and gave the video to El Cajon police, Chief Davis only presented one screenshot depicting Olango with his hands extended forward and aimed at a nearby officer.
Ignoring calls from the community for total transparency, Davis refuses to release the cellphone video to the public.
Although officers discovered that (her brother) had been unarmed, Davis also would not reveal what the mentally ill man had been holding in his hands moments before the fatal shooting.
Olango’s sister can be heard telling officers in the video. “I called police to help him, not to kill him.”
Here is what the police chief could have done: He could have stated emphatically that there will be no cover-ups and then released the video. No excuses about waiting for it to be analyzed, or waiting for trial, or other mentions of “procedure.”
The chief, and his boss, the mayor, know that the video will have to be released. So don’t look like your trying to cover-up. Don’t wait until you’re forced kicking and screaming, and are made to release it as rioters burn your city.
Just release the damn thing. Look like a hero. Look like you won’t cover up anything.
But no, despite ample histgorical evidence, the leaders never seem to learn. It always goes like this:
- A video exists of an unarmed black man being shot.
- The mayor and the police chief refuse to reveal the video.
- The people riot, burn and loot.
- The innocent police, the good guys, are blamed for everything.
- The police union immediately claims the police are innocent, and does its best to sabotage any investigation.
- By now the black people not only are spitting mad at the police, they also are angry at all white people, who in turn are angry at the black people for rioting instead of peacefully protesting (though peaceful protests don’t work).
- The entire community is damaged on many levels: Bigotry, hatred of police, economic damage, the reputation of the city.
- Finally, way too late, the video reluctantly is released, and the public is outraged, because it no longer is a “bad apple” situation — it’s a bad police, bad mayor, bad union situation. To the rioters, everyone is bad, including any “good” police.
Had the chief, the mayor, and the union been proactively transparent, the public would have understood that there will be a fair investigation, a fair evaluation, a fair trial, and if a cop is at fault, the bad apple will be fairly punished.
People can live with that.
But no. Stupidity reigns, and the good cops — the vast majority — are vilified. And not just vilified, but attacked, shot at, spit at and put in greater danger than before.
The chiefs, the mayors, and the unions all seem to conspire against the good cops, but there is one other group that deserves blame: The good cops who, out of misplaced loyalties, refuse to testify against the bad apples.
Note to chiefs, mayors, unions and good cops. Your loyalty should be to the community, not to the bad apples.
Don’t believe me? O.K., watch your community burn. Just know it’s your fault.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty
=================================================================================================================================================================
Mitchell’s laws:
•Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes..
•No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.
•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.
•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
•Deficit spending grows the supply of money
•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
•The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.
•Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
•The single most important problem in economics is the Gap between rich and the rest.
•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between rich and poor.
•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..
MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 
“and it’s all to save our lives”
I agree with you in the main, and I have great respect for the police who do put their lives on the line, but this is just hyperbole. Actually it is much more about protecting property than it is about saving lives, and about punishing wrongdoers, more than about preventing crime (saving lives). Sure some lives are “saved” by the police. Many more, I expect, by the fire department. The sad truth is that, the more property one owns, the more service one gets from the police.
LikeLike
Interesting view.
Actually, isn’t it the fire department that is more responsible for protecting property? Just asking.
The police save lives by arresting bad guys, many of whom carry guns and violently resist being arrested.
These days, with the law allowing every damn fool to carry a gun, the police never know whether the next traffic stop will kill them. Guns, in the hands of dopey citizens, kill, though the American public has not figured that out, yet.
But yes, the more property one owns, the more service one can command from all branches of government — police, fire, street repair, sewer repair, libraries, schools, etc., etc., etc.
It’s what is known as the Gap, about which I have written endlessly.
Meanwhile, never slam the service of a guy who is willing to risk his life to protect you.
Or, if you don’t appreciate what the police do, call the fire department for help when a murdering rapist is on the prowl in your area.
LikeLike
Examples of bad apples being protected:
Moral to the story: If you don’t want to be considered a bad apple, stop protecting bad apples.
It’s that simple.
LikeLike