Let the Cop Hate Flow

cvr

Justifying Anti-Cop Sentiments with Blatant Lies and Half Truths

Some things just make my head want to explode, and some people who shall remain unnamed (cough, Jason, cough) enjoy sending me links knowing they are going to make my blood pressure rise.  Take for instance this steaming pile of anti-cop thoughts that appears to have been assembled by a delusional pre-teen, which was then proudly published by Slate.  This, dare I even call it an “article,” was so difficult to read due to the factual inaccuracies that it took me several efforts just to get through the first two paragraphs.  I’m not even sure I ever actually read the whole thing.

So, why do I say the “author” is delusional?  Well, the very first sentence displays a complete and total disconnect from reality.

“Baltimore’s streets are quiet again.”

Quiet?  Really?  Homicides have skyrocketed (up 40%), non-fatal shootings have skyrocketed (up 60%), crime in general has skyrocketed, and arrests are down (down 32%).   In fact, just this month, May 2015, there have been 35 homicides in Baltimore.  Yep, sounds real quiet to me.  Quick question, on what planet does that sort of violence equal “quiet?”

As for the pre-teen part, I say that due to the immature and uneducated manner in which the author (I use that term very loosely) constructs…  wait, bad choice of words, assembles….  nope, not quite, compiles… still not right, I will go with throws together his attempt at a logical argument.

“She (Mosby) will also have to overcome a number of deep-seated structural impediments to convicting police officers of crimes—no matter how guilty they are.

It’s hard to prosecute cops. There are two main reasons for this: The first is the special deference that jurors, judges, and prosecutors show officers thanks to the widespread perception that they are heroic public figures valiantly trying to protect us. The second is the bevy of special laws around the country that are designed to shield police officers from the very tactics the police regularly use on ordinary suspects.”

I’m just going to ignore the fact that the author has already determined the six officers are guilty, and address these “deep-seated structural impediments” that he seems to think exist.  I’m not going to address his first reason, because in my opinion it is just silly, and shows that he has a deep seated dislike for the cops.  As for the “special laws” he refers to, let’s take a closer look.

“For example, in most states, law enforcement officers cannot be questioned until they have been given a few days to get their stories straight”

While that may be true in some areas (the author fails to elaborate what states comprise the “most states”), what the author fails to acknowledge is that absolutely everyone accused of a crime, everyone, cannot be compelled to make a statement.  It is that that whole silly 5th Amendment thingy.

However, unlike regular citizens accused of a crime, officers can in fact be compelled to make a statement during the initial administrative investigation (Garrity v. New Jersey).  Cops do not have the option of “pleading the fifth,” unless it is clearly a criminal investigation.  Although if we are in fact compelled under Garrity, that statement is not allowed to be used in a criminal prosecution.

“And many states have passed laws—such as Section 50-a of New York’s Civil Rights Law—that are specifically designed to make it almost impossible to obtain or use at trial records of a police officer’s prior brutality or misconduct.”

Uh, would that be because past actions are not an indicator of guilt and would be likely to taint a jury?  You know, the SAME EXACT REASON a person’s prior criminal history is not allowed to be presented in a criminal trial for the average citizen.  The only time that information is allowed is at sentencing, unless of course the accused gets on the stand and states that he is a good guy who never did anything wrong.  Past convictions/probation/parole status would then be allowed in order to disprove his lies.

Since the “author” was a public defender for 15 years, he damn well knows all of the above, yet he has elected to completely ignore that in order to try and push his anti-cop opinion.

01

But hey, why should the cops be held to the same standards in court as the rest of the population?

After that two paragraph (ridiculously poor) effort at providing justification for his dislike of cops, he swerves off into a several paragraph rant about how cops are not heroes, because he says so, and then even defends the actions of a 3rd grade teacher who had her students write get well cards to a convicted cop killer.  And then he goes there, the often cited “most dangerous jobs” study that Cop Blockers love to quote.

“The hero cop narrative is also belied by the facts. According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, police work does not crack the top-10 list of most dangerous jobs.”

Now, I will be the first to grant you that more people in other lines of work die while working than happens in law enforcement.  BUT, and this is a big but, NONE of those other lines of work are dangerous because people are killing them intentionally.  Those other careers are dangerous due to accidents, mistakes and through the actions of Mother Nature.  In fact, in many of those other professions, it is the deceased person’s own mistake, or the mistake of a coworker, that lead to their death.

My intention here is not to downplay their loss, but to compare accidental deaths to violent assaults is really apples to oranges.   Loggers are not shot dead while sitting down to have lunch.  Fishermen are not shot or stabbed by the fish they are hauling onto the boat.  Garbage collectors are not ambushed while stopping to pick up a trash can.  Cop haters like to cite this study all the time, yet they completely ignore the fact that cops are feloniously killed more than any other profession.

The last stupid argument offered in his effort to prove cops are not heroes is the cost of providing law enforcement:

“Moreover, we pay our police officers handsomely in New York City. It costs taxpayers more than $8.5 billion a year to pay for the NYPD, and between salary, overtime, and the value of their benefits, the average beat cop costs the taxpayers more than $150,000 per year.”

02Holy cow!  NYPD makes $150k a year?  That is smoking!  Where do I sign up?  Wait, according to my research, the starting pay for an NYPD cop is $44,744.  What happened to the other $100+k?  Oh wait, you mean that is not what they make, but rather the total cost incurred by the city, which includes benefits and equipment?

Just for comparison sake, seeing as this “author” went there, what does a garbage collector in NYC make?  Starting salary for a garbage collector in the city of New York, according to my research, is $43,762.  I was 03unable to find any information on the total cost to the city to put a garbage collector on the streets, but just like with cops, there are many other costs which include healthcare, retirement, vacation coverage, equipment (garbage trucks cost significantly more than a cop car), safety gear, uniforms, etc.  All the same costs that go into the total cost of putting a cop on the street apply to every other public sector job.

Me thinks this author is being somewhat intentionally deceitful…  (or he is just really stupid)

Good old David Feige, the “author” of this typewritten pile of mental vomit, is absolutely free to think that cops are not heroes.  He can hate the cops all he likes. People can think whatever they like, but to try and use this loose assemblage of incorrect assertions and random hateful thoughts to justify that belief is just plain weak sauce.

I was extremely surprised to find, even there on Slate, that the top rated comments were actually in opposition of this pile of trash.  Maybe there is hope after all.

Matt on sabyoutubeMatt on sabtwitterMatt on sabinstagramMatt on sabfacebook
Matt
Deputy Sheriff at California
Matt is a full time Deputy Sheriff that has been on the job since 1996. During his time as a LEO he's attended countless training classes and is a court recognized firearms expert. Matt brings a unique perspective to discussion regarding the second amendment given his LEO experience and life time appreciation of firearms and our 2nd Amendment rights.