Sunday Speed
Posted on April 26th, 2009 in Sunday Speed
More links for your Sunday reading:
- A cop shows his true colors. You might have to backtrack a bit to get the context for the story, but really, it’s just more of the same.
- An interesting story about a completely different aspect of dealing with police: the McDonald’s 911 woman, but with a different spin.
- How organic is your organic?
- Is rape ever funny? Maybe. Sarah Silverman’s got a great rape joke. This one, though, not so much.
- Do laws prevent crime? Not always. Here’s an examination called The Illusions of Control.
This post has 5 comments
April 28th, 2009
I guess I couldn’t backtrack far enough. What are his “true colors” and “more of the same” what?
April 28th, 2009
This is about the story of Ryan Frederick, who was recently convicted of manslaughter in the death of a police officer who was breaking into Frederick’s home to serve a warrant in the (at best) misguided and (at worst) evil drug war. The “more of the same” is the painful and violent results of putting one segment of our population at war with other segments of our population. A death sentence is not appropriate for drug crimes, but one cop died in this story, and a capital murder charge (which could lead to execution) was considered for Frederick.
And the cop showing his “true colors”? Did you read anything about this story and then read the cop’s comments? I suspect that you know exactly what I meant, and are just wanting to debate this more explicitly.
The cop calls Frederick a “cold blooded killer” and “cop killer”, illustrating the fetishization of the deaths of cops. He rails at the jury, who convicted Frederick of manslaughter, which could be 10 years in prison. 10 years in prison for shooting a man breaking down his door. This whiny cop calls them failures. Then he goes on to say, “The next time YOU need police, be sure to tell them you think that Frederick should have been let off for killing a cop.”
That’s his true colors right there. Petty, angry, and thinking that the world owes him something for being a cop. Thinking that you’re not allowed to get help from cops unless you think it’s okay for them to come into your home like an invading army because you’re growing weed.
Fuck that.
April 29th, 2009
actually, I didn’t know… my brain just has not been firing on all 4 cylinders lately and somehow I missed that the guy saying “next time you need police” was who you were talking about.
Although I will say that people say lots of stuff out of hurt or anger - cops included.
I’ll say in advance I didn’t finish the story, but until YOU (general you, not specific you) change the laws that say they can come into your home like an “invading army”, they CAN come into your home like an invading army. It’s the LAWS that are at fault.
I’ll take the time to email you a longer answer and then you can help me figure out how to give a response to this issue from a little better point of view. Oh, and I’ll finish the story. I think I’m more awake today
April 29th, 2009
I’ll say in advance I didn’t finish the story, but until YOU (general you, not specific you) change the laws that say they can come into your home like an “invading army”, they CAN come into your home like an invading army. It’s the LAWS that are at fault.
The basic guidelines for use of deadly force are defined by law. Laws are blunt instruments, and leave a lot up to interpretation. The finer points are worked out in the judicial system, in response to actual events. That’s just how our legal system works.
Never the less, I submit that the police in this case may not have been operating within the letter of the law. The police made violent entry into the home based on the testimony of one person who may or may not have been credible. A cop who gets a warrant has to state that… well, I don’t know the exact wording, but he or she has to say that he has reason to believe that a crime is being committed, or whatever. If the cop got the warrant based on insufficient evidence, then the whole raid was illegal.
Even if the raid was fully legal, I still have lots of criticism for the cops’ behavior. Why did they choose this method of arresting the guy, instead of another one that was equally legal, but less likely to result in injury? For example, they could have staked out his house, waited until he was driving to the grocery store, done a traffic stop, and arrested him then. Having the warrant, they could have waited until he was out of the house, kicked in his door, and searched his place when he wasn’t home. But they didn’t. They went in “hot”, and my belief is that they did it because they see themselves as soldiers in the “war on drugs”. Soldiers do not quietly arrest people in a grocery store. They go in, guns blazing, and defeat the enemy. Given that attitude, it’s no wonder that somebody got shot. The cops defined the attitude of the arrest, and that’s why I hold them ultimately responsible for its outcome.
April 29th, 2009
@Meadowlark -
people say lots of stuff out of hurt or anger - cops included.
This is true. If that cop were to say, “Look, my friend was dead and I wanted to lash out at people, and I’m sorry,” I would publicize that too, and I would believe him.
…until YOU (general you, not specific you) change the laws that say they can come into your home like an “invading army”, they CAN come into your home like an invading army. It’s the LAWS that are at fault.
I have two problems with this. One, I’m not sure that it’s true that the cops are merely following the letter of the law. There has been a lot of “creep” in the actions of police as they advance the war on drugs. As Joshua pointed out, cops make different choices when they think of themselves as AT WAR with the rest of the population.
Two, it is simply not possible to remove responsibility for these actions from the individual police officers. We (the voters and law passers) can be partially at fault, but responsibility MUST also fall to the person who is actually using their body and gun to terrorize people.
If you want to continue this conversation here or by email, either way is good with me.
Add a comment