Cops Duty- Law First or People First?

[Jason Tandro]

I realize the police force is different in each country (hell in each state/province of the country) but I was wondering whether you believe a police officers first duty should be to the law or to people?

I believe the way it is, an officer's first duty is to uphold the law, and while cops should definitely care about people to the point where he won't gun down 12 bystanders to shoot a criminal, if he makes too many allowances than each person becomes a law unto themselves and that bypasses the whole point of the police force.

[Edit: Same rule with judges, even moreseo. I don't care if your dad just died, you lost your job and your wife divorced you, if you break a law you should be punished for it.]

[tay120n64]

I would normally say protecting the people, but having read your comment, I must agree.

It's not a policeman's job to wield sympathy, it's his job to carry out the law. If the people don't want to deal with the consequences of their actions, they should be more wise in their discretion.

[Freedan]

tay120n64 wrote:

It's not a policeman's job to wield sympathy, it's his job to carry out the law. If the people don't want to deal with the consequences of their actions, they should be more wise in their discretion.

Just a hypothetical:

Suppose you're a cop, and you see a naked dude walking down the street carrying a cell phone. If you're upholding the law, you would arrest him for public indecency, wouldn't you?

But what if he's the victim of a crime? Do you uphold the law, or protect him? He's still breaking the law, but the circumstances are different.

I think a cop should set the following priorities:

- Protect the people.

- Secure order in the area.

- Then uphold the law.

- Finally, provide non-emergency assistance.

[Jason Tandro]

Your hypothetical seems well-reasoned excepting the given flaw that the key to crime is intent.

The man being the victim of a crime that has left him nude (say rape or assault) did not will himself to be naked.

True ignorance to the law is no excuse, but in that instance it's not an ignorance to the law its the lack of criminal intent.

If the man was nude first and then got attacked, arrest both criminals for each crime.

[Freedan]

Ok, suppose another hypothetical involving intent.

A man is speeding through a residential area at high speeds. Do you uphold the law and pursue, or back off?

As far as I'm aware, standard procedure is to stay back. The chances of injuring someone in an area like that is too high to pursue someone. Which makes sense, I'd say.

[Jason Tandro]

That is an incident where upholding the law is likely to result in the death of innocents, and is an extenuating circumstance. But while cop cars won't pursue, you better believe there will be aircav and cop cars waiting for him as soon as he gets out of the residential area.

[inferiare]

Freedan, the Dark Knight wrote:

Ok, suppose another hypothetical involving intent. A man is speeding through a residential area at high speeds. Do you uphold the law and pursue, or back off? As far as I'm aware, standard procedure is to stay back. The chances of injuring someone in an area like that is too high to pursue someone. Which makes sense, I'd say.

This is reminding me of a story I read where a cop nearly shot someone (who was a football player, but that has no bearing on the actual story) who was rushing to the hospital because his mother was dying and she didn't have much time left to live. The hospital called said star to let he and his wife and father-in-law know, and they went speeding to the hospital. He slowed down briefly to make sure that no one was at a red light, and passed through.

Do note that this was later at night, and stop lights can be really retarded at night., in the vein of "We're not going to change over despite there being no cross traffic and there hasn't been any cross traffic for nearly three hours now!" sort of stupid. :/

Anyway. Cop saw them go through, and if I remember correctly, they weren't far from the hospital. They figured "If this cop sees we're rushing to the hospital, we probably won't be off the hook, but they'll be more understanding." Most cops are. Either a: your wife is in labor, b: you didn't have time to wait for an ambulance and so you took it upon yourself to just get yourself or a loved one to a hospital because it's an emergency, or c: someone you know is dying and you need to get there quick. As I said, most cops are pretty understanding about this.

NOT THIS GUY. Once they got out of the car and started to rush into the hospital, this cop actually had the balls to tell this guy and his wife that if they didn't stop right there, he would book them, because they were resisting the law and didn't pull over for him when he turned on his sirens and lights. He also pulled his gun on them, and didn't re-holster it once he found they weren't a threat.

Even trying to explain to this guy "HEY MY MOM IS ON HER DEATHBED, YOU CAN GIVE US THE TICKET AFTER I TELL MY MOTHER GOODBYE" wasn't good enough. No, he wanted them to go through the entire process. (the entire story is here, found it: click me.)

In my opinion, there has to be a balance between upholding the law and keeping the people safe, or at least being understanding in extenuating circumstances. Yes, the police need to uphold the law. But they also need to protect those who cannot protect themselves, and do it without getting a power trip or just being an asshole about it.

[Freedan]

Stories like that are why I have so little faith in police.

Deep down, I know that officers like that are the minority. But I see something like that, and I see every last one of them as corrupt assholes on a power trip. Every time I hear about a cop harassing an innocent person, shooting someone with a taser unnecessarily, or flat out breaking the law themselves, it makes me sick.

A cop could do anything... anything... and very rarely face any consequences. Did anything ever happen to this officer? All they mentioned was he was on temporary leave. With pay.

A paid vacation for making someone miss a relative's death? I wish I could receive a punishment like that for being a contemptible asshole. But the police look out for each other, so I wouldn't expect any real discipline.

Wow, that was an unexpected rant...

[inferiare]

Freedan, the Dark Knight wrote:

Stories like that are why I have so little faith in police. Deep down, I know that officers like that are the minority. But I see something like that, and I see every last one of them as corrupt assholes on a power trip. Every time I hear about a cop harassing an innocent person, shooting someone with a taser unnecessarily, or flat out breaking the law themselves, it makes me sick. A cop could do anything... anything... and very rarely face any consequences. Did anything ever happen to this officer? All they mentioned was he was on temporary leave. With pay. A paid vacation for making someone miss a relative's death? I wish I could receive a punishment like that for being a contemptible asshole. But the police look out for each other, so I wouldn't expect any real discipline. Wow, that was an unexpected rant...

When I looked up the story on google, I saw a few news stories that the guy resigned from the force for this not long after the incident. But the "lol paid leave" thing made me pretty sick too. When I read the story on Something Awful (yes, shut up, I'm a goon. >() back in March, I think at least 98% of the posters who were discussing the story went "Wait, this asshole is getting a paid leave for what he did? What."

[Jason Tandro]

@Raini: Well there are always incidents like that, and that son-of-a-bitch deserves to be fired, and to never be allowed to hold any position of power. I still think that overall a police officers duty should be to the law.

[inferiare]

Jason Tandro wrote:

@Raini: Well there are always incidents like that, and that son-of-a-bitch deserves to be fired, and to never be allowed to hold any position of power. I still think that overall a police officers duty should be to the law.

Like I said, there needs to be a balance. There's a lot of level-headed cops out there that know that while yes, the law needs to be upheld, there's always circumstances that will call for other methods to be taken where their first priority will not be upholding the law.

[EverPhoenix]

that story is just bad. that cop, although he was doing his job, was an insensitive asshole.

and as for the debate at hand, i think it is subject to circumstance. in the case of the news story, the cop should have let them go for a while - waiting outside the hospital room or whatever - and then given them the ticket.

im some cases, the law should come as an absolute first. in others, i think that there are other ways to deal with things, instead of immediately rushing to arrest someone. namely, get their details and then leave them be. you can hunt them down later

[psychokind]

first he should uphold the law, and then the people.

we have the opposite problem with our cops as you have: ours are just too nice. and if they're violent, they are against average drunk germans, and not against violent russians or turks.