<embed src='http://cnettv.cnet.com/av/video/cbsnews/atlantis2/player-dest.swf' FlashVars='linkUrl=http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5245595n&tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea.1&releaseURL=http://cnettv.cnet.com/av/video/cbsnews/atlantis2/player-dest.swf&videoId=50075762&partner=news&vert=News&autoPlayVid=false&name=cbsPlayer&allowScriptAccess=always&wmode=transparent&embedded=y&scale=noscale&rv=n&salign=tl' allowFullScreen='true' width='425' height='324' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed><br/><a href='http://www.cbs.com'>Watch CBS Videos Online</a>
Full Video
Full Video
As a whole, most certainly not.
My father was a lifetime police officer in a major metropolitan area and was in the highest ranks for the last 30 years of his career. (Both an attorney for the PD and also did time as detective and street cop)
Though this past January I finally stepped down from a couple of jobs I had working for non-profits (since 1999), I did spend the last four working directly with police officers and criminal justice professionals from across North America.
I have the highest respect for police officers who do their jobs while themselves respecting the public for whom they work. That respect is only diminished by the minority of police who actively promote and/or perpetuate the most destructive social policy in our nation since Jim Crow - that being 21st century Prohibition. And to only a slightly lesser degree, that respect is diminished by police who - either due to ignorance or due to outright apathy - fail to respect the clearly defined civil rights of civilians.
More often than not, the cops actively engaged in promoting Prohibition are the also ones most likely to disrespect civil rights of civilians.
No other social policy in my lifetime has contributed as much to police corruption, police dishonesty and outright law breaking by police than has the policy of drug Prohibition.
Therefore I - in tandem with the aforementioned police and criminal justice professionals that I worked with during the first eight years of this century - continue to persistently shine as much light as possible on police who bring shame to the otherwise respectable and honorable profession of police officers.
I live in a county next to PG County and followed the story from the first day. Barman got the story right from the start. Wasn't just that the police gunned down the house owner's dogs; the shocking part was that the home owner was the freaking mayor of the town. If you don't understand the danger of military/cop power being turned against the citizens that pay for and support their employment then you are braindead . Enfuego goes to the goes to the patriotism-community card with the question "Barman, do you dislike police officers?" suggesting that Barman or any concerned citizen who questions any instance of possible police brutality 'dislikes police officers'. This case parallels the Gates case. The President of the US was lowered to a beerfest for touching the cop/military third rail. Put your dogs in the back room and be silent.
That link a few posts back to the Washington Post editorial that ran about six months after the killing of the Mayor's dogs is as much a jaw-dropper as any I've read (and I've read oh so many "drug war" related stories over past ten years in my work) in almost a decade of tracking such items not only in North America but internationally.
The chief of police calls the scene and on the spot the lead narc blatantly lies about the why and how they killed the dogs. And yet even afterwards when the chief gets the full forensics and witness statements that confirm the lies, there is no in-house finding of wrongdoing by any officers involved.
The chief of police calls the scene and on the spot the lead narc blatantly lies about the why and how they killed the dogs. And yet even afterwards when the chief gets the full forensics and witness statements that confirm the lies, there is no in-house finding of wrongdoing by any officers involved.
HIPock, I appreciate the personal testimonial from your location near the cited storyline. But I'll intercede just a tad and state that I've not found Enfuego's inquiries to be unduly presumptous. The questions he poses (in various threads) to me are usually fairly direct and sincere.
Please don't guess as to what I do or do not suggest. You are not me and don't know what my thoughts are or what my interaction has been with Barman in the past and what we've discussed on this board. To make an assumption based on my question to Barman is not the right thing to do.
And thank you for the compliment Barman. You are right on the mark however the Beatles are still better than the Stones.
