I fucking hate cops/pigs
Page 2 of 3 Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
TheSaint
Dalai Lama



Posts: 6586
Location: Cook Islands
PostPosted: Thu, 4th Jan 2007 12:54    Post subject:
KnightRider2006 wrote:
X_Dror wrote:
I don't have problem with cops in general. Though I do have problems with female cops.
I haven't yet seen a female cop that wasn't a complete idiot.


X_Dror I didn't know that you hate women. Congrats on finally coming out of the closet on NForce.



Knightrider can you please stop being a total nitwit and make things up that arent there. Read properly for one second. You irritate me big time.
Back to top
oxyeL




Posts: 7152

PostPosted: Thu, 4th Jan 2007 13:14    Post subject:
KnightRider2006 wrote:
X_Dror wrote:
I don't have problem with cops in general. Though I do have problems with female cops.
I haven't yet seen a female cop that wasn't a complete idiot.


X_Dror I didn't know that you hate women. Congrats on finally coming out of the closet on NForce.

Got tired of your constant demon hunting. Fucking grow up.
Back to top
Thetempest
Banned



Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu, 4th Jan 2007 22:01    Post subject:
mark322 wrote:
KnightRider2006 wrote:
X_Dror wrote:
I don't have problem with cops in general. Though I do have problems with female cops.
I haven't yet seen a female cop that wasn't a complete idiot.


X_Dror I didn't know that you hate women. Congrats on finally coming out of the closet on NForce.

Got tired of your constant demon hunting. Fucking grow up.


You're the one who needs to grow up, everytime you see a Mutantius or CB3K post you go all offensive, try to learn something new besides your overused phrase "dhimmi", parrot.
Back to top
X_Dror




Posts: 4957
Location: Jerusalem, Israel
PostPosted: Thu, 4th Jan 2007 22:30    Post subject:
deelix wrote:
X_Dror wrote:
I will get a 50$ ticket if I won't put a "New Driver" sign on the back of my car.
HAHA Razz

and what is up with limit of people in the car when you're 18. The only thing when you're 18 in Norway is that its very expensive to have... because lots of 18-20 year olds crash :\


Yeah, we have this here as well. It's super dumb.
We can't have more than 2 passengers in the car (excluding the driver) until 3 years have passed since we got our license. Or until the age of 21 ( I think).

Because of this law, the number of cars that are being driven on the road by teenagers increases and with it the chance for car accidents. Stupid laws ftl.
Back to top
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member



Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
PostPosted: Thu, 4th Jan 2007 22:35    Post subject:
X_Dror wrote:
Because of this law, the number of cars that are being driven on the road by teenagers increases and with it the chance for car accidents. Stupid laws ftl.


maybe there are some instances of extra cars, but for most of the cases this keeps kids from jamming their friends into the car.

like this:

Quote:
Research in Ontario and other jurisdictions shows an increased collision risk for young novice drivers with two or more passengers. Ontario's graduated licensing system has certainly reduced the collision risk of young novice drivers, but more can be done.

An analysis of collision records in Ontario in 2002 shows that G2 drivers aged 19 and under who carry passengers aged 19 and under are about three times more likely to be involved in a fatal or injury collision than G2 drivers aged 19 and under who carry passengers aged 20 and over.

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/news/statements/stat040504.htm

so not really a stupid law Wink


asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
Back to top
X_Dror




Posts: 4957
Location: Jerusalem, Israel
PostPosted: Thu, 4th Jan 2007 22:41    Post subject:
Of course it all depends on the driver.
Some people are easily being driven to do all kind of stupid things by their friends. So I can understand that if the young driver can't control himself and be responsible he might cause some serious damage.
But I don't know from my experience I've only noticed that this rule is for the worse. I heard from my friends that guys who go hang out with 2 cars, sometimes try to race with each other, something that without 2 cars would have been impossible.
But I get the point, this law might have some sense in it but I don't know... I'm not so happy about it, it's really making some stuff really more difficult than they should be. I can't hang out with all of my friends because of this law since not everyone have a car and taking a taxi is annoying.
Back to top
oxyeL




Posts: 7152

PostPosted: Thu, 4th Jan 2007 23:01    Post subject:
Thetempest wrote:
mark322 wrote:
KnightRider2006 wrote:


X_Dror I didn't know that you hate women. Congrats on finally coming out of the closet on NForce.

Got tired of your constant demon hunting. Fucking grow up.


You're the one who needs to grow up, everytime you see a Mutantius or CB3K post you go all offensive, try to learn something new besides your overused phrase "dhimmi", parrot.

Response.
Back to top
gtspm10000




Posts: 39

PostPosted: Mon, 8th Jan 2007 10:39    Post subject:
Can somebody in Europe tell me what kinds of tests young people have to pass to get their license? My biggest beef with the system in the U.S. is that we don't teach young people how to drive- we teach them how to obey traffic laws, which is entirely different. The average driver in America has absolutely no idea what apexing a turn means let alone how to do so properly. Even on big sweeping highway interchanges people will accelerate until they can't turn sharply enough, then brake hard til they have control again, and accelerate again ad nauseum. I only consider myself slightly ahead of the curve just for comprehending these concepts even if everyday driving doesn't offer many opportunities to put them to use.
And common courtesy sucks of course. On I-15 and I-40 between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, two dipshits will pull alongside each other on the two lane highway and cause a traffic tie-up for miles by jacking each other off in parallel at a stately 60 MPH. I hear that hanging out in the fast lane like this is illegal in some countries?

I've heard that it's better overseas (Germany especially) and that that's the reason they can safely have higher speed limits.
Back to top
Parallax_
VIP Member



Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
PostPosted: Mon, 8th Jan 2007 11:13    Post subject:
It's been a while since I took my drivers license, but here in Norway we have the following system:

-Basic Course: This you have to take before you are even allowed to test drive. It gives the students a basic understanding of traffic and risk. You have to go through various theories, first-aid, driving in the dark, and stuff like that. The point is to bring to light attitudes and self-knowledge about traffical and social competense through dialogue.

-Test Drive: You can start to test-drive at 16 providing you have an adult/parent with you in the car (or test-drive teacher).

-Theory Course/Exam: A course to learn all the rules of the traffic and driving, road signs, etc.

-Driver's license: When you're 18 and have passed all the foregoing tests/exams.

Here in Norway young people drive like shit, like anywhere else I guess. But what you describe is not the common sight here, gtspm10000.

But it all depends on what country you live in, because in Portugal, which has the highest mortality rate in traffic accidents, they drive totally insane.


Upcoming PC games 2009 and onwards
Bravery is not a function of firepower.
Back to top
deelix
PDIP Member



Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
PostPosted: Mon, 8th Jan 2007 12:02    Post subject:
iv heard its allmost the same in Sweden too. Works great. So i got more XP than those who just get their licence when they're 18.

Anyway, damn miracle i haven't crashed my car yet Very Happy

Fake driting on ice ^^
Back to top
MAD_MAX333
Moderator



Posts: 7020
Location: Toronto, Canada...eh
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 14:44    Post subject:
EL OH EL AT THIS THREAD...

I love how everyone can easily generalize ALL cops because they were pulled over once or twice... EVEN if BOTH those times the cop was a complete and utter racist idiot on a power trip, it STILL doesn't give you any reason to generalize thousands of people for the actions of the few... If that was the appropriate thing to do, do you know how many ways I could generalize every member of the public I see? Sexually, color of skin, nationality, by their job and so on. It just doesn’t and shouldn’t work like that.

And if you have had THAT many contacts with the police to have that broad of an understanding, then I say you should rethink your life and the reasons why you are getting into so much crap.

In the end, answer to this thread is easy... can't take the heat? stay out of the kitchen... I received 3 tickets when I turned 17 or so, one was no seat belt while driving, one was speeding 15 over ( was doing 30 the cop gave me a break) and once I got a ticket for passing the yellow light(not the actual violation) on Christmas day for 380 dollars and 4 points...

I paid them all and took all the hits on my insurance... why? because if you can't do the time, then don't commit the crime... I KNEW I was speeding that time, I knew I didn't have my seat belt on and knew I passed the light, so I paid the fine and faced the music... and now years later I am a MUCH better driver for it, no more speeding, doing stupid shit and what not.

And just FYI, in Toronto at least, where we have one of the biggest police forces in Canada, we have NO TIME for small time crime, IE, speeding and crap, traffic units and OPP handle those… each division has what like 20 guys on a shift, 3 of them will be on VAC time (vacation) another one or 2 might be in court… that leaves you with 15 officers, now add in the HUGE volume of calls, and you have a recipe for CALL TO CALL TO CALL shifts where you have no time for anything except racing back and forth to calls.


I also find it funny how EVERYONE thinks they can become cops if they wanted to… because we are all lazy, fat stupid pigs…. Ahahahah NOT IN A MILLION years… 90% of residence of this forum ( no offence I love you all Smile )would never pass… beside having to be in tip top shape to make it through the training, you also have to do IQ tests that lawyers take before starting training… it might feel simple till you ACTUALLY have to tackle it. Even after that, driving record, credit record and criminal history (polygraph so no lying) will all factor into it. Even after all that, a lot of people can’t handle the job, the stress, the mental and physical fatigue and the fact that a lot of people you meet are the worst humanity has to offer and even the “normal” guys all love to pick apart EVERY aspect of your life as if you are superman. If you stop beside a timmies to go to washroom (yes, which is mostly the reason police go to coffee shops) they automatically assume you are slacking off and what not. As if that is POSSIBLE with GPS showing your position to the supervisors and your dispatch knowing exactly what call you are on and how long you been on it.


And that arrogant cocky feel cops have is usually part of the given training; remember that police training is mostly Para-military training. you are out there with limited or no back up in the immediate sense (in some areas back up are hours away) so you can’t portray yourself as a fuzzy bunny, you have to be tough, all business and completely intimidating. We are not here to make buddies, we are here to enforce the laws justly and fairly, that is all.


Lol sorry I always get so side tracked in these cop threads… and no worries, I will be marking down all the cop haters for later banning… Smile
Back to top
Praetori




Posts: 1221
Location: EU
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 15:27    Post subject:
MAD_MAX333 wrote:


I also find it funny how EVERYONE thinks they can become cops if they wanted to… because we are all lazy, fat stupid pigs…. Ahahahah NOT IN A MILLION years… 90% of residence of this forum ( no offence I love you all Smile )would never pass… beside having to be in tip top shape to make it through the training, you also have to do IQ tests that lawyers take before starting training… it might feel simple till you ACTUALLY have to tackle it. Even after that, driving record, credit record and criminal history (polygraph so no lying) will all factor into it. Even after all that, a lot of people can’t handle the job, the stress, the mental and physical fatigue and the fact that a lot of people you meet are the worst humanity has to offer and even the “normal” guys all love to pick apart EVERY aspect of your life as if you are superman.


If this was aimed at me - since I'm the only one here that mentioned wanting to be a police officer - I do think I can easily become one, except for perhaps my horrible eyesight, which I will get fixed if I get turned down. Yes, I'm willing to spend all my money simply to get laser surgery so I can join the police.
Back to top
MAD_MAX333
Moderator



Posts: 7020
Location: Toronto, Canada...eh
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 15:30    Post subject:
Praetori wrote:
MAD_MAX333 wrote:


I also find it funny how EVERYONE thinks they can become cops if they wanted to… because we are all lazy, fat stupid pigs…. Ahahahah NOT IN A MILLION years… 90% of residence of this forum ( no offence I love you all Smile )would never pass… beside having to be in tip top shape to make it through the training, you also have to do IQ tests that lawyers take before starting training… it might feel simple till you ACTUALLY have to tackle it. Even after that, driving record, credit record and criminal history (polygraph so no lying) will all factor into it. Even after all that, a lot of people can’t handle the job, the stress, the mental and physical fatigue and the fact that a lot of people you meet are the worst humanity has to offer and even the “normal” guys all love to pick apart EVERY aspect of your life as if you are superman.


If this was aimed at me - since I'm the only one here that mentioned wanting to be a police officer - I do think I can easily become one, except for perhaps my horrible eyesight, which I will get fixed if I get turned down. Yes, I'm willing to spend all my money simply to get laser surgery so I can join the police.


no it actually was directed towards everyone who calls cops stupid or useless... and i hope you do become a cop, but don't be cocky, train hard and aim for the top. but then again i don't know where you are from or how your training is.
Back to top
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member



Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 15:37    Post subject:
lol ... for the record, I never said 'fuck the police' once in this thread Wink

I don't see the point of hating cops for giving you a speeding ticket Wink Wink


asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
Back to top
MAD_MAX333
Moderator



Posts: 7020
Location: Toronto, Canada...eh
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 16:05    Post subject:
nouseforaname wrote:
lol ... for the record, I never said 'fuck the police' once in this thread Wink

I don't see the point of hating cops for giving you a speeding ticket Wink Wink


good point, leave the hate for when he shows up for court last minute.
Back to top
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member



Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 16:50    Post subject:
MAD_MAX333 wrote:
nouseforaname wrote:
lol ... for the record, I never said 'fuck the police' once in this thread Wink

I don't see the point of hating cops for giving you a speeding ticket Wink Wink


good point, leave the hate for when he shows up for court last minute.


lol ... I've only had one speeding ticket, and I paid it in full Wink


asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
Back to top
Bigperm




Posts: 1908
Location: Alberta,Canada
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 19:29    Post subject:
Heres a good example.

Last week i was pulled over on the way to work. I was going 72 in a 50 zone, but i wasnt really paying attention.

So heres the conversation

officer - you were going a little fast, i clocked you at 72 in a 50 zone for about 3 blocks.

Me- Honestly officer, i wasnt really paying attention to my speed

Officer - It happens, licence, registation and proof of insurance.

me- Here is my licence and registation, but i dont have my insurance with me.

Officer - Wy not? How am i supposed to know you have insurance.

me- i just changed my address, and my new insurance is sitting on my table at home. I lease all my vehicles officers, so i have to have full coverage.

officer- This is your vehicle correct

Me-Yes sir

Officer leaves; So i wait about 5 minutes; he comes back

officer - well i got some good news and some bad. The good news is im not going to give you a failuer to provide insurance ticket, ($200) but make sure you get it in your vehiclle ASAP. Other traffic officers will not be so nice. But i do have to give you a speeding ticket.

Me- i understand, i was speeding and honestly i am late for work.

officer - i know, it happens. Take care and watch you speed.

Me- Thank you officer, have a nice day.


If everyone show a little respect like i did. And i was completely honest with him. Maybe you will get treated like i was, with respect. I could have walked away with close to $500 worth of fines, and worse case, he could have towed and impounded my vehicle. Instead i walk away with a $120 fine, didnt get all stressed, and it didnt ruin my day.


Jenni wrote:
I drunk. I don't fucking care!
Back to top
Reg67




Posts: 5432

PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 19:39    Post subject:
To be honest what ive never understood is why most people think speeding is a trivial offence? You are in control of a potentially lethal vehicle.. All it takes is a kid to run out in front of you. if you are doing 72 in a 50 zone then the chance of you stopping in time is minimal.. even a dog or cat could run out .. the majority of people will swerve to avoid an animal, obviously increasing your chance of hitting another vehicle.

As i said before in this thread it depends where you speed.. motorways or dual carriageways etc is not so bad, But imo speed 'excessively' in an area with houses ie: built up.. then you deserve to lose your licsence immediately.. no questions asked.
Back to top
Bigperm




Posts: 1908
Location: Alberta,Canada
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 19:44    Post subject:
Reg67 wrote:
To be honest what ive never understood is why most people think speeding is a trivial offence? You are in control of a potentially lethal vehicle.. All it takes is a kid to run out in front of you. if you are doing 72 in a 50 zone then the chance of you stopping in time is minimal.. even a dog or cat could run out .. the majority of people will swerve to avoid an animal, obviously increasing your chance of hitting another vehicle.

As i said before in this thread it depends where you speed.. motorways or dual carriageways etc is not so bad, But imo speed 'excessively' in an area with houses ie: built up.. then you deserve to lose your licsence immediately.. no questions asked.


Of course anyone who speeds in a rural area should be ticket more. I was in an indutrial area on the way downtown. I dont condone my speeding at all, but dont act like your an angel. And i dont speed intentially, if i could show you my driving record, you would see that.


Jenni wrote:
I drunk. I don't fucking care!
Back to top
Reg67




Posts: 5432

PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 19:47    Post subject:
@Bigperm, I wasnt having a dig at you mate, im just always surprised how most people think speeding is so trivial.. as i said in a non residential area its not so bad..
Back to top
JeanPerrier




Posts: 3247

PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 19:47    Post subject:
for me its not about driving (i cant and dont) and beeing stopped. its about their mentality, always with their head in the clouds. its belgian police im talking about btw


Back to top
MAD_MAX333
Moderator



Posts: 7020
Location: Toronto, Canada...eh
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 19:58    Post subject:
Bigperm wrote:
Heres a good example.

Last week i was pulled over on the way to work. I was going 72 in a 50 zone, but i wasnt really paying attention.

So heres the conversation

officer - you were going a little fast, i clocked you at 72 in a 50 zone for about 3 blocks.

Me- Honestly officer, i wasnt really paying attention to my speed

Officer - It happens, licence, registation and proof of insurance.

me- Here is my licence and registation, but i dont have my insurance with me.

Officer - Wy not? How am i supposed to know you have insurance.

me- i just changed my address, and my new insurance is sitting on my table at home. I lease all my vehicles officers, so i have to have full coverage.

officer- This is your vehicle correct

Me-Yes sir

Officer leaves; So i wait about 5 minutes; he comes back

officer - well i got some good news and some bad. The good news is im not going to give you a failuer to provide insurance ticket, ($200) but make sure you get it in your vehiclle ASAP. Other traffic officers will not be so nice. But i do have to give you a speeding ticket.

Me- i understand, i was speeding and honestly i am late for work.

officer - i know, it happens. Take care and watch you speed.

Me- Thank you officer, have a nice day.


If everyone show a little respect like i did. And i was completely honest with him. Maybe you will get treated like i was, with respect. I could have walked away with close to $500 worth of fines, and worse case, he could have towed and impounded my vehicle. Instead i walk away with a $120 fine, didnt get all stressed, and it didnt ruin my day.



What speeding ticket did he give you? 15 over or more? cause more is point and points=bad

where as insurance slip is a mere 100 and change tickets and not important in the eys of the insurance company... i would rather issue that to give the person a break than the speeding one.

but i completely agree, when walking uip to a car you always wonder if the guy is going to fail the attitude test or not.
Back to top
Bigperm




Posts: 1908
Location: Alberta,Canada
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 20:51    Post subject:
MAD_MAX333 wrote:
Bigperm wrote:
Heres a good example.

Last week i was pulled over on the way to work. I was going 72 in a 50 zone, but i wasnt really paying attention.

So heres the conversation

officer - you were going a little fast, i clocked you at 72 in a 50 zone for about 3 blocks.

Me- Honestly officer, i wasnt really paying attention to my speed

Officer - It happens, licence, registation and proof of insurance.

me- Here is my licence and registation, but i dont have my insurance with me.

Officer - Wy not? How am i supposed to know you have insurance.

me- i just changed my address, and my new insurance is sitting on my table at home. I lease all my vehicles officers, so i have to have full coverage.

officer- This is your vehicle correct

Me-Yes sir

Officer leaves; So i wait about 5 minutes; he comes back

officer - well i got some good news and some bad. The good news is im not going to give you a failuer to provide insurance ticket, ($200) but make sure you get it in your vehiclle ASAP. Other traffic officers will not be so nice. But i do have to give you a speeding ticket.

Me- i understand, i was speeding and honestly i am late for work.

officer - i know, it happens. Take care and watch you speed.

Me- Thank you officer, have a nice day.


If everyone show a little respect like i did. And i was completely honest with him. Maybe you will get treated like i was, with respect. I could have walked away with close to $500 worth of fines, and worse case, he could have towed and impounded my vehicle. Instead i walk away with a $120 fine, didnt get all stressed, and it didnt ruin my day.



What speeding ticket did he give you? 15 over or more? cause more is point and points=bad

where as insurance slip is a mere 100 and change tickets and not important in the eys of the insurance company... i would rather issue that to give the person a break than the speeding one.

but i completely agree, when walking uip to a car you always wonder if the guy is going to fail the attitude test or not.


He gave me a under 15 over ticket, forgot about that part. Which is 2 demerits (Minimum i think in Alberta for a speeding offence) . I know insurance isnt worth points, but i was in the wrong for speeding, and i accept that, but i do have full coverage insurance. Also if he really wanted to, i could have had a 10,000 ticket (Sure, once i prove insurance its nothing, but still a pain in the ass) and towed my vehicle.


Jenni wrote:
I drunk. I don't fucking care!
Back to top
MAD_MAX333
Moderator



Posts: 7020
Location: Toronto, Canada...eh
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 20:55    Post subject:
Bigperm wrote:
MAD_MAX333 wrote:
Bigperm wrote:
Heres a good example.

Last week i was pulled over on the way to work. I was going 72 in a 50 zone, but i wasnt really paying attention.

So heres the conversation

officer - you were going a little fast, i clocked you at 72 in a 50 zone for about 3 blocks.

Me- Honestly officer, i wasnt really paying attention to my speed

Officer - It happens, licence, registation and proof of insurance.

me- Here is my licence and registation, but i dont have my insurance with me.

Officer - Wy not? How am i supposed to know you have insurance.

me- i just changed my address, and my new insurance is sitting on my table at home. I lease all my vehicles officers, so i have to have full coverage.

officer- This is your vehicle correct

Me-Yes sir

Officer leaves; So i wait about 5 minutes; he comes back

officer - well i got some good news and some bad. The good news is im not going to give you a failuer to provide insurance ticket, ($200) but make sure you get it in your vehiclle ASAP. Other traffic officers will not be so nice. But i do have to give you a speeding ticket.

Me- i understand, i was speeding and honestly i am late for work.

officer - i know, it happens. Take care and watch you speed.

Me- Thank you officer, have a nice day.


If everyone show a little respect like i did. And i was completely honest with him. Maybe you will get treated like i was, with respect. I could have walked away with close to $500 worth of fines, and worse case, he could have towed and impounded my vehicle. Instead i walk away with a $120 fine, didnt get all stressed, and it didnt ruin my day.



What speeding ticket did he give you? 15 over or more? cause more is point and points=bad

where as insurance slip is a mere 100 and change tickets and not important in the eys of the insurance company... i would rather issue that to give the person a break than the speeding one.

but i completely agree, when walking uip to a car you always wonder if the guy is going to fail the attitude test or not.


He gave me a under 15 over ticket, forgot about that part. Which is 2 demerits (Minimum i think in Alberta for a speeding offence) . I know insurance isnt worth points, but i was in the wrong for speeding, and i accept that, but i do have full coverage insurance. Also if he really wanted to, i could have had a 10,000 ticket (Sure, once i prove insurance its nothing, but still a pain in the ass) and towed my vehicle.


2 points for under 15? WOWWWWW that sucks...

and no he wouldn't tow you for not having insurance on you, all he would do is get your info and call the insurance company reps and they would say what you have and what not.

but 2 points for under 15... jeez
Back to top
gtspm10000




Posts: 39

PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 22:28    Post subject:
Here's a article that goes into just how rare the really bad apples are: http://www.gladwell.com/2006/2006_02_13_a_murray.html

The main subject of the article is actually about homelessness statistics, but he uses the Christopher Commision report on the LAPD starting in section 2 to provide a parallel.

The main implication is that although abusive officers are extremely rare, they are not vigorously disciplined enough by their peers or command structure when they go off the reservation. I'm sure it's now a point of emphasis to federal agencies and any large local departments. When I was a college hire at the US Secret Service, I remember that they placed a big emphasis on motivations. The SAiC visibly relaxed when I told him that my main interest was in finding a physically active job that didn't require sitting behind a desk 24/7 for the next 40 years. I suspect that had my answer been- 'to beat up bad guys and give them what they deserve', I wouldn't have lasted a day.
Back to top
deelix
PDIP Member



Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 23:02    Post subject:
So there is finally snow in the south of Norway. I would lost my licence if police saw me today - no doubt. So fun to use handbreak at these conditions ^^
Back to top
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member



Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
PostPosted: Thu, 11th Jan 2007 23:16    Post subject:
gtspm10000 wrote:
Here's a article that goes into just how rare the really bad apples are: http://www.gladwell.com/2006/2006_02_13_a_murray.html

The main subject of the article is actually about homelessness statistics, but he uses the Christopher Commision report on the LAPD starting in section 2 to provide a parallel.

The main implication is that although abusive officers are extremely rare, they are not vigorously disciplined enough by their peers or command structure when they go off the reservation. I'm sure it's now a point of emphasis to federal agencies and any large local departments. When I was a college hire at the US Secret Service, I remember that they placed a big emphasis on motivations. The SAiC visibly relaxed when I told him that my main interest was in finding a physically active job that didn't require sitting behind a desk 24/7 for the next 40 years. I suspect that had my answer been- 'to beat up bad guys and give them what they deserve', I wouldn't have lasted a day.


Kinda off topic, but I've read about million dollar Murray before.

It's actually kind of sad that the only way to convince a conservative to help someone in need is to convince them it will cost them more not to help them Sad


asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
Back to top
gtspm10000




Posts: 39

PostPosted: Fri, 12th Jan 2007 07:35    Post subject:
nouseforaname wrote:
Kinda off topic, but I've read about million dollar Murray before.

It's actually kind of sad that the only way to convince a conservative to help someone in need is to convince them it will cost them more not to help them Sad


It's not a question of spending or not. It's a question of most effectively utilizing the funds that do go toward social welfare programs. If anything, that article is about the reluctance of self-described liberal politicians who otherwise support welfare to embrace these programs that are most effective at helping the chronically homeless. The concept of giving a homeless person some limited resources to keep them from dying in the streets is universally accepted by all but the most extreme libertarians. However, not just conservatives, but most moderates, and even some liberals would be turned off by the concept of providing resources in excess of what many working class people make in a year to a select group of homeless people. It's a classic case of disincentivizing hard work and other socially desireable traits.

Malcolm Gladwell is fairly good at portraying his arguments in a politically even-handed way. Whatever liberal/conservative picture you assign to this story is entirely in your own head.
Back to top
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member



Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
PostPosted: Fri, 12th Jan 2007 08:11    Post subject:
gtspm10000 wrote:
The concept of giving a homeless person some limited resources to keep them from dying in the streets is universally accepted by all but the most extreme libertarians


what actually constitutes "limited resources" is debatable to a lot of people. there is no way an underfunded system can ever truly work. plus, there are much better and more efficient solutions to help people before they become like Murray

gtspm10000 wrote:
Malcolm Gladwell is fairly good at portraying his arguments in a politically even-handed way. Whatever liberal/conservative picture you assign to this story is entirely in your own head.


My comment wasn't directed at the author (nor you for that matter) Wink I don't think the article is biased either. In fact, I found it to be an interesting read the first time I saw it Smile


asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
Back to top
gtspm10000




Posts: 39

PostPosted: Sat, 13th Jan 2007 01:27    Post subject:
nouseforaname wrote:
what actually constitutes "limited resources" is debatable to a lot of people. there is no way an underfunded system can ever truly work. plus, there are much better and more efficient solutions to help people before they become like Murray


I thought the evidence he presented was fairly persuasive that for the majority of homeless people, limited assistance does work. Perhaps even a level of assistance that many consider underfunded. People use that small help to get back up on their feet and avoid entering a cycle of dependance. If you eliminate the chronic hard cases like Murray who use a level of resources totally out of proportion to their numbers, the demands on the homeless welfare system would be significantly, if not overwhelmingly, relieved.

And of course the term "underfunded" itself is in the eye of the beholder. Is the goal to help the majority of homeless who spend only a year or two in the system? Is the goal to help every single person in the way that Murray was given a free apartment and small group counseling? A strict libertarian might argue that the goal should just be to avoid the negative external effects of homelessness that harm other citizens.

I would agree that with 20/20 hindsight, quite a few of the long term homeless could have been helped along the way at far lesser expense if the appropriate support or nudge in the right direction had been provided at the right moment in their lives; though the same could be said of almost anyone. The real trick is of course to figure out a practical way to identify likely early causes of homelessness and ameliorate those effects without becoming "Big Brother" in the process. Should the government have the right to tell Murray that he can't drink because it's bad for him? Perhaps the consensus in Canada is different, but in America, any program that attempts to institue government oversight of private citizens' actions (when the stakes are anything less than national security) is usually met with defiance- regardless of good intentions.

nouseforaname wrote:
My comment wasn't directed at the author (nor you for that matter) I don't think the article is biased either. In fact, I found it to be an interesting read the first time I saw it


Cool Smile . It's sometimes hard to assume that politically involved discussions wont devolve into asinine fingerpointing at some point. The level of dialogue that most people of any strong ideology display is frighteningly juvenile nowadays. Especially online.
Back to top
Page 2 of 3 All times are GMT + 1 Hour
NFOHump.com Forum Index - The Bitching Session Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)  


Display posts from previous:   

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group