Serious question for LEOs
When I became an LEO I quickly learned that the only individuals who are on your side are fellow LEO's.
Trinity +++
This was posted on a recent thread, and my queltion is do you honestly believe that Fire and EMS are "on the other side"? Do you honestly believe that the US Armed forces are "on the other side?
I am USN (ret) with 23 years service. I have served in the past as a reserve LEO, as a volunteer EMT, and as the Chief of a volunteer fire department, but I am an enemy of LEOs because I am not one?
Would some of you please respond?
Thanks
Trinity +++
This was posted on a recent thread, and my queltion is do you honestly believe that Fire and EMS are "on the other side"? Do you honestly believe that the US Armed forces are "on the other side?
I am USN (ret) with 23 years service. I have served in the past as a reserve LEO, as a volunteer EMT, and as the Chief of a volunteer fire department, but I am an enemy of LEOs because I am not one?
Would some of you please respond?
Thanks
0
-
quote: When I became an LEO I quickly learned that the only individuals who are on your side are fellow LEO's.
If cops keep thinking that way they keep making a gap between themselves and others. I think that is a pile of huge horse pucky in my opinion.0 -
That's an easy trap for young pup LEO's to fall into and it's due to several things.
No one ever calls 911 to tell you how great things are going. It's also a learning experience when they begin to see how otherwise normal appearing people can be terribly screwed up. They come to actually expect dishonesty from people, because if you don't get lied to several times a day you must not be doing your job.
Due to a lack of perspective that will hopefully come through experience, they often react with overly cautious cynicism. They can easily cease to believe that the majority of people are basically good, but none are perfect. This includes their fellow LEO's.
I try to get across to these young folks that the best way to maintain a balanced outlook on the world is to NOT restrict your interaction to people you meet on the job and your fellow officers. I was told this same thing by the old heads, but couldn't really wrap my head around it at the time. I eventually learned it the hard way.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Old Fool
When I became an LEO I quickly learned that the only individuals who are on your side are fellow LEO's.
Would some of you please respond?
Thanks
Well, I am a former cop so here is my two cents. The cops who really feel like that, do not have any friends outside the job, do not have any hobbies outside the job, and do not have any interests outside the job and thus allow the job to take over their lives. And they are the ones who end up beating their wives and making news for police brutality, etc. We had an Sgt. like that, who eventually ate his gun after 6 months of hard drinking. He left behind a wonderful, beautiful wife that tried hard to get him to do things outside the job, and to talk to someone.
I and most people I know are very pro-police. We are however, concerned about the militarization of American police and the Law Enforcement vs Peace Officer mentality of some officers and depts. But I do not feel that is being anti-police, it is being pro-American values.0 -
my road partner was my Lt for 3 years after academy...listening to a FOG Leo and following his lead...you soon learn the ropes and learn that the world is not your enemy and you will not clean up the world full of crime by yourself overnight..you have many team member's in fire , medical and joe public..with out building trust with them and them with you then you are doing a diservice to your dept and to the public you serve... there are no sides...you have your job and they have their's ,side by side till the job is done...if that guy cannot be a team player and has issues with himself and other's he should find another career or a shrink 0 -
I'm not an LEO, but have several in the family. They all tell me the same thing. If you become and LEO and withdraw from society, then you will no longer be a part of society, much less a family man or a productive citizen.
I have some great friendships with non-related LEO's, and all they want is to be judged as a human being, not as a gun carrying gestapo. Though many here don't believe it, they are just like the rest of us when the badge is off. Hard to believe, isn't it?0 -
You can re-post your opinion when you can do so in a more civil manner. You can make an unpleasant statement without being unpleasant.
Thanks
nunn
========================
My response was about as civil as it gets when it comes to the local law enforcement.0 -
There are as many answers to this as there are LEOs and departments. Some LEOs (and some departments) have a really high degree of paranoia. Happily I live in a rural area, with deputies that are part of the community. Not just work, but shopping at the local grocery, getting a car worked on, in church, etc. At the same time, in this community, a deputy would get a backup from any legit member of the community in a heartbeat. Last year we lost a young deputy in a pursuit crash. The local folks started a fund for his wife and son, and his funeral had over 2,000 attendees- pretty impressive for a rural farming community. The folks that have fully developed the "us and them" mentality will find it is a self fulfilling prophecy. 0 -
I don't see that there are two sides, since I am a citizen first. Beyond that I am a husband, father etc then a Peace Officer, not a LEO. There is a big difference between the two mindsets. Open to discussing them if anyone wishes.
Those who believe they are in some "us -vs- them scenario are off base.0 -
The "blue wall of silence".
LEOs are on one side...everyone else is on the other.0 -
Thanks guys, that is how I thought is is (and our local deputies are great guys) but that statement really bothered me. It is nice to have you guys put a little perspective on it. 
0 -
I know several LEO's around here, and shoot with a couple of them.
Yesterday afternoon, I ran down to the store for some brewskies, and ran into one that I haven't seen for about a year.
He was in an unmarked, but asked me what I had bought firearm wise lately.
He got in my truck for a minute cause he wanted to see my Ruger KP-345,.......told him about my new AR, and invited him to go shooting with me sometime.
Exchanged numbers, and I told him I would call him when I could go when he was off.
I know there are bad ones out there,.......I just haven't run into the ones with the "us against them" attitude.
He DID laugh, and say, "I know you're gonna wait until you get home to pop one of those,....right?" Really nice guy.0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
I don't see that there are two sides, since I am a citizen first. Beyond that I am a husband, father etc then a Peace Officer, not a LEO. There is a big difference between the two mindsets. Open to discussing them if anyone wishes.
Those who believe they are in some "us -vs- them scenario are off base.
lt496,
IF LEO's (or peace officers) were as approachable as you were sir, the people wouldn't have quite the attitude about them that exists. I have been around quite a few in my life (LEO's and CO's). And I can honestly say every one has had an attitude. Allways suspicious you are/have done something wrong (I have never so much as had a ticket, completely clean records) and none have been friendly in the least. Heck I have tried starting conversations about their carry weapon, and none had the time of day for me.
Now, that is not to say I "think" they are ALL bad or some such line, but I have met none away from the CRT that are all that nice. To me, they go in the same group as the richy riches. They have no time for a peon like myself. Would I give one a hand if he/she asked for or needed it? Sure. Would I volenteer to help them? No. None yet have treated me like an equal, much less want to be "friends" or any such thing.0 -
quote:Originally posted by freemind
quote:Originally posted by lt496
I don't see that there are two sides, since I am a citizen first. Beyond that I am a husband, father etc then a Peace Officer, not a LEO. There is a big difference between the two mindsets. Open to discussing them if anyone wishes.
Those who believe they are in some "us -vs- them scenario are off base.
lt496,
IF LEO's (or peace officers) were as approachable as you were sir, the people wouldn't have quite the attitude about them that exists. I have been around quite a few in my life (LEO's and CO's). And I can honestly say every one has had an attitude. Allways suspicious you are/have done something wrong (I have never so much as had a ticket, completely clean records) and none have been friendly in the least. Heck I have tried starting conversations about their carry weapon, and none had the time of day for me.
Now, that is not to say I "think" they are ALL bad or some such line, but I have met none away from the CRT that are all that nice. To me, they go in the same group as the richy riches. They have no time for a peon like myself. Would I give one a hand if he/she asked for or needed it? Sure. Would I volenteer to help them? No. None yet have treated me like an equal, much less want to be "friends" or any such thing.
maybe its just you. i have leo's that i hunt with and they are normal people in the woods and as friends. but they are all seasoned and older. maybe thats the reason, the young ones do seem to have an attitude, so i don't invite them[;)]0 -
My previous and poorly written post:
"I don't see that there are two sides, since I am a citizen first. Beyond that I am a husband, father etc then a Peace Officer, not a LEO. There is a big difference between the two mindsets. Open to discussing them if anyone wishes.
Those who believe they are in some "us -vs- them" scenario are off base."
If I had not have been hurrying when I posted the above, I would have paid more attention to what I was writing.[:I]
The point I was feebly attempting to make, is that MY view on the issue is that cops who view themselves as LEO's rather than Peace Officers are the problem. That definition breeds the "us -vs- them" mentality from the get go.
I believe that there are NOT two societies, only one in which some of us are employed and empowered to act as Peace Officers. My comment on "those who believe they are in some "us -vs- them" scenario are off base" was directed at the LEO crowd, not the public at large.
Sadly, many who are involved in "policing" have exactly the view that they are separate, apart and above the remainder of society. This is a huge problem that will never be corrected until the idea of a "Law Enforcement Officer" or LEO, is abolished and the concept of "Peace Officer" is promoted.
All laws do not deserve to be enforced. In fact many are outright wrong. It is encumbent on those of us who police society to understand this and understand what our proper role is in society. I submit that the role of a Peace Officer is NOT to be the "tip of the spear" for a predatory government preying upon the citizens.
The LEO will do what his/her self described title dictates....enforce the law because it is the law by God.
The Peace Officer understands his/her role in American Society. That being to keep the peace. Just and common sense laws certainly need to be applied as appropriate, but the Peace Officer takes a "situational" view of each individual circumstance and acts accordingly.
Hope that clears up my position.0 -
lt496, perfectly written. I like the idea of Peace Officer much better than Law Enforcement Officer. 0 -
It's a PITA how some folks here get hung up on whether someone uses the term LEO or Peace Officer to describe their occupation. I find it ironic how the same people who'll put down societal requirements to use silly-azz PC terms zero in on this just because it conjures up certain images to them. This is alot like minority groups demanding they be referred to by a certain term-of-the-day.
The reality is that the specific term used isn't necessarily an indicator of the poster's mindset or a clue as to how they approach their job. The simple fact is that it's easier to type LEO than Peace Officer, Police Officer, Deputy Sheriff, etc. As for abbreviating Peace Officer or Police Officer, this just seems wrong to cops because "PO" is their standard abbreviation for Parole Officer.
If someone wishes to refer to themselves or this occupation using a particular term because it somehow effects their thought processes or they want to come across as more acceptable to others, that's their business. It's the sum of all their other words that I'm paying attention to in order to form opinions of them.
No offense intended, but it's distracting when people try to appear insightful by trotting out semantics and all they really manage to do is muddy up the water.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Txs
It's a PITA how some folks here get hung up on whether someone uses the term LEO or Peace Officer to describe their occupation. I find it ironic how the same people who'll put down societal requirements to use silly-azz PC terms zero in on this just because it conjures up certain images to them. This is alot like minority groups demanding they be referred to by a certain term-of-the-day.
The reality is that the specific term used isn't necessarily an indicator of the poster's mindset or a clue as to how they approach their job. The simple fact is that it's easier to type LEO than Peace Officer, Police Officer, Deputy Sheriff, etc. As for abbreviating Peace Officer or Police Officer, this just seems wrong to cops because "PO" is their standard abbreviation for Parole Officer.
If someone wishes to refer to themselves or this occupation using a particular term because it somehow effects their thought processes or they want to come across as more acceptable to others, that's their business. It's the sum of all their other words that I'm paying attention to in order to form opinions of them.
No offense intended, but it's distracting when people try to appear insightful by trotting out semantics and all they really manage to do is muddy up the water.
It is not semantics and it isn't strictly about the term "LEO", but rather about the difference in mindsets within policing. The term is the perfect illustration of the difference.
Going "LEO" is a trend in a general sense and pointing out the difference in philosophy is not trying to appear insightful, it is simply about making an informed observation of an accelerating trend in policing.
May not apply to you, or some other people, but it applies, period.
Been in the business for 25 years and worked in every capacity from road dog, to detectives, to supervisor on patrol and in detectives, to captain rank managing a bureau of over 200 officers. I have watched it develop to the point it is at now.
It is what it is and this shouldn't "muddy up the water". It is meant to develop some clarity into the underlaying issue of militaristic policing for a predatory government -vs- keeping the peace in American society.
No offense intended either, but as to your underlined text above, it doesn't seem as if your own standard applied here.0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
It is not semantics and it isn't strictly about the term "LEO", but rather about the difference in mindsets within policing. The term is the perfect illustration of the difference.I'm referring to those who I see completely disregarding the train of thought in a post just because they got their panties in a wad over how a piece of keyboard shorthand makes them feel. THAT is a matter of semantics.
Same as having to use the listener's acceptable terms for different minority groups, I hate having to tap-dance due to other's running each word through their own little prism and possibly distorting my position. I prefer to take the totality of someone's statements into account and, barring any obvious slant being intended, could care less what terms they use.
In a common sense world, LEO is simply an acronym that refers to someone who, through their employment, holds the ability to enforce criminal and traffic laws. In other words, a cop of any sort. Any connotation of a non-Peace Officer mentality is a product of the reader's imagination.
In my state, the term "Peace Officer" can correctly refer to anyone from a fire department's arson investigator to someone employed by the State Board of Dental Examiners. For the record, when I use the term LEO I'm simply referring to what the world commonly thinks of as cops-nothing more specific.
BTW-I'm well aware of changes in mentality over the years. As bad as I hate to think about it, I've been in a position to observe this from the street level on up for about a decade longer than you. [:0]0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
I don't see that there are two sides, since I am a citizen first. Beyond that I am a husband, father etc then a Peace Officer, not a LEO. There is a big difference between the two mindsets. Open to discussing them if anyone wishes.
Those who believe they are in some "us -vs- them scenario are off base.
There is very little difference between the term Peace Officer and the acronym LEO. There IS a big differennce between both of those and the term COP. I think we all know what is meant when we hear the word cop, I know I do.
I raised my two children in Europe and it was very easy to teach them to respect and rely on the members of law enforcement. Over there, prospective officer candidates are ALL given psychological evaluations, and are then sent to schools or academies for comprehensive training before they are put in positions of authority. There is no 'on the job training' so prevelant here in the U. S.
My two children learned very quickly that a police officer here is a lot different from what they were used to in England and Belgium. Both incidents involved minor traffic violations; parking in a loading zone, and avoiding a traffic signal by crossing a parking lot; and both changed their attitudes toward cops forever. There was no way I could defend the policemans' actions as much as I wanted to. Sad, but true.
Clouder..0 -
Realize also that people LOVE to talk about how stressful / difficult / important / hazardous / confusing / etc. their jobs are, and how the only people who can understand how stressful / difficult / important / hazardous / confusing / etc. their jobs are are other people who have the same job.
I always laugh when I see someone write about how only Marines have a true understanding of duty and honor. Or, only the police know what it's like to deal with an angry public. Or, only Green Berets know the true meaning of stress and danger. Only SEALs know what it's like to work incredibly long hours under stressful conditions.
Bull. Emotions are universal.0 -
I know how stressful / difficult / important / hazardous / confusing / etc. retirement is. Plumb wears me out.
[:D]
Clouder..0 -
Incidents like this don't help:
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/13482372/detail.html?subid=10100241
A Detroit police commander gets drunk and crashes his department-issue vehicle into a utility pole. A second Detroit police commander responds to the scene and attempts to cover for the first guy by removing empty bottles of booze from the car. Of course he got caught, and now he is facing a felony charge for misconduct in office.0 -
I know how stressful / difficult / important / hazardous / confusing / etc. retirement is. Plumb wears me out.
Clouder..
Now that, sir, is damn funny!0 -
quote:Originally posted by warriorsfan
Incidents like this don't help:
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/13482372/detail.html?subid=10100241
A Detroit police commander gets drunk and crashes his department-issue vehicle into a utility pole. A second Detroit police commander responds to the scene and attempts to cover for the first guy by removing empty bottles of booze from the car. Of course he got caught, and now he is facing a felony charge for misconduct in office.
Do you sometimes stop and think for a moment......WTH ????? Detroit add in NO. There has to be a common factor there has to be a reason......... What is the common factor.... some (shame on you) say BLACKS....
Nope; it is the acceptance of corruption and less than legal systems of business as usual as a way of life. The color of the nar-do-well is irrelevant.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Txs
quote:Originally posted by lt496
It is not semantics and it isn't strictly about the term "LEO", but rather about the difference in mindsets within policing. The term is the perfect illustration of the difference.I'm referring to those who I see completely disregarding the train of thought in a post just because they got their panties in a wad over how a piece of keyboard shorthand makes them feel. THAT is a matter of semantics.
Same as having to use the listener's acceptable terms for different minority groups, I hate having to tap-dance due to other's running each word through their own little prism and possibly distorting my position. I prefer to take the totality of someone's statements into account and, barring any obvious slant being intended, could care less what terms they use.
In a common sense world, LEO is simply an acronym that refers to someone who, through their employment, holds the ability to enforce criminal and traffic laws. In other words, a cop of any sort. Any connotation of a non-Peace Officer mentality is a product of the reader's imagination.
In my state, the term "Peace Officer" can correctly refer to anyone from a fire department's arson investigator to someone employed by the State Board of Dental Examiners. For the record, when I use the term LEO I'm simply referring to what the world commonly thinks of as cops-nothing more specific.
BTW-I'm well aware of changes in mentality over the years. As bad as I hate to think about it, I've been in a position to observe this from the street level on up for about a decade longer than you. [:0]
Damn Txs, you are an old bustard aren't you.[:o)]
I get your meaning and understand completely, no sweat here. I was trying to define to others, the general change in mindset/application of laws that seems to be more and more strictly "enforcement" oriented.0 -
quote:There is very little difference between the term Peace Officer and the acronym LEO. There IS a big differennce between both of those and the term COP. I think we all know what is meant when we hear the word cop, I know I do.
So, when you address me, or one of the other police officers on this forum, and call us "cop," that is an insult? I will try to remember that. Thanks.
quote:I raised my two children in Europe and it was very easy to teach them to respect and rely on the members of law enforcement. Over there, prospective officer candidates are ALL given psychological evaluations, and are then sent to schools or academies for comprehensive training before they are put in positions of authority. There is no 'on the job training' so prevelant here in the U. S.
Hmmm. Sounds very much like the way things are done here. Before a candidate is ever hired he undergoes a careful background exam, contacting many of his friends, relatives, and acquaintances, then a physical exam, a psychological exam, and a polygraph exam. Then there is an evaluation using something called a B-PAD. Then there is an intensive interview by a panel of officers. The panel makes a recommendation to the Chief, who has the final say. If the candidate is hired, he then has to attend an academy that lasts about 5 months. If he makes it through that, there is about 4 months of field training. I guess this is where the "on-the-job" training comes in. The FTO and the recruit maintain a workbook, in which they document every part of the recruit's training, when a certain part of the job is explained, when it is demonstrated, and when it is performed.
Question: Do all the police in all the countries in Europe do things the same way?
quote:My two children learned very quickly that a police officer here is a lot different from what they were used to in England and Belgium. Both incidents involved minor traffic violations; parking in a loading zone, and avoiding a traffic signal by crossing a parking lot; and both changed their attitudes toward cops forever. There was no way I could defend the policemans' actions as much as I wanted to. Sad, but true.
Come on now. Your children came to "(change) their attitudes toward cops forever" because they got tickets? Now, that's funny right there. Heck, I have gotten more tickets than both your kids (and you) put together. Some I had coming and some I didn't. I didn't let any of them color my opinion of an entire segment of the population.
What is it called when one lumps all of a certain kind of people together and makes assumptions, usually negative, about them?
Bigotry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.
The origin of the word bigot in English dates back to at least 1598, via Middle French, and started with the sense of "religious hypocrite", especially a woman. Bigot is often used as a pejorative term against a person who is obstinately devoted to prejudices even when these views are challenged or proven to be false.
Forms of bigotry may have a related ideology or world views.0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
Damn Txs, you are an old bustard aren't you.[:o)]I can do everything I used to do, some things just take me longer....such as recovering. [;)]0 -
I'm older. Not by much, but older. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Txs
quote:Originally posted by lt496
Damn Txs, you are an old bustard aren't you.[:o)]I can do everything I used to do, some things just take me longer....such as recovering. [;)]
I am with you there Txs.[:I]0 -
quote:Originally posted by nunn
[br
quote:My two children learned very quickly that a police officer here is a lot different from what they were used to in England and Belgium. Both incidents involved minor traffic violations; parking in a loading zone, and avoiding a traffic signal by crossing a parking lot; and both changed their attitudes toward cops forever. There was no way I could defend the policemans' actions as much as I wanted to. Sad, but true.
Come on now. Your children came to "(change) their attitudes toward cops forever" because they got tickets? Now, that's funny right there. Heck, I have gotten more tickets than both your kids (and you) put together. Some I had coming and some I didn't. I didn't let any of them color my opinion of an entire segment of the population.
Stupidity is not a virtue, mr. nunn.
Clouder..
PS, This is the post I thought you'd deleted. I'm glad you didn't.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
33 comments