Special Treatment?

Sorry, but this really bugs me I feel the need to share with everyone. I will let everyone make up their own mind on this one. :O•-:

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=13002437

YUP, if that was you or me we would have been charged!

That is the 'good ol' boy network' at it's finest (or ugliest). That chief will probably resign with this story coming to light and I wouldn't be suprised to see a shakeup withing the agencies investigating this either. Utah county law enforcement has not been doing themselves any favors in the media lately. I am very pro law enforcement and have worked for a local sheriff's office as a correctional officer for nearly 10 years now and this type of stuff pisses me off. We call it 'tarnishing the badge'. Things are getting better year by year especially in larger counties and cities.

Earlier in my career it was not uncommon to hear about an officer or deputy getting a ride home and a call to their commander in leau of a DUI, but that is no longer the case. My agency has a zero tolerance for dui, domestic violence, theft, and sexual misconduct and we lose a few officers every year over such things. Our undersheriff was fired back in 2002 after a poaching incident, so rank does not protect one from getting the boot. Looks like the good ol boy network is still alive and well though in some areas and that is a damn shame. There has been troubles in millard county as well which even involve the late Deputy Fox, who was gunned down last January: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/50500751-78/kimball-fox-county-deputy.html.csp

Again, I predict this cheif will resign in the next week. Wait for it....

FTP. Police officers are the tools politicians use to push their marxist beliefs down the peoples throat. I love my country but despise my government and all her agents. That is all I got tosay about that. WAKE UP AMERICA thats what Earl Pitts would say.

So are you an anarchist that does not believe in the rule of law? Tell me what you think our communities would look like without a mode of law enforcement? I have my own issues with the war on drugs and the furthering of the nanny state, but a banket statement like yours is incredibly ignorant. There is and will always be a criminal element in our society that has no qualms about taking whatever they want. They have disorders and impulses that allow them to steal, rape, and murder without feeling or remorse. A trained group of professionals that serve with oversight from the people they serve has proven to be the best method of keeping this criminal element in check.

2 churches and a home are set on fire and the police have a suspect and confession within 2 days. FTP indeed...

ScottyP wrote:

2 churches and a home are set on fire and the police have a suspect and confession within 2 days. FTP indeed...

A lynch mob would have taken 1 day and cost much less.

ScottyP wrote:

So are you an anarchist that does not believe in the rule of law? Tell me what you think our communities would look like without a mode of law enforcement? I have my own issues with the war on drugs and the furthering of the nanny state, but a banket statement like yours is incredibly ignorant. There is and will always be a criminal element in our society that has no qualms about taking whatever they want. They have disorders and impulses that allow them to steal, rape, and murder without feeling or remorse. A trained group of professionals that serve with oversight from the people they serve has proven to be the best method of keeping this criminal element in check.

Nope not an anarchist just a rugged individualist that believes the judicial system in this country has been manipulated to a point of discombobulation similar to the political process. Vigilante justice is a much better deterrent and is more cost effective as well. I do not and will not call the police for any reason. Someone commits a crime against me or mine I will mete out what I believe to be justice.

ScottyP wrote:

2 churches and a home are set on fire and the police have a suspect and confession within 2 days. FTP indeed...

They caught a break check out all the unsolved cases and then tout their grandiosity not to mention the innocents that have been convicted. So yes indeedy FTP!

luv2fsh&hnt wrote:

Nope not an anarchist just a rugged individualist that believes the judicial system in this country has been manipulated to a point of discombobulation similar to the political process. Vigilante justice is a much better deterrent and is more cost effective as well. I do not and will not call the police for any reason. Someone commits a crime against me or mine I will mete out what I believe to be justice.

No reason at all? So out of the following scenarios what would you do instead of calling the police?

1) You are involved in a auto accident that is not your fault and there is significant damage to your vehicle.

2) You see 3 males force entry into your neighbors home at 0230 hours.

3) You come out of the grocery store and your car has vanished.

4) A neighbor is having a loud party. You see a female stagger to her vehicle and drive erratically down the street.

5) You are driving behind another car and see the driver (male) screaming at his passenger (female). You then see him punch her several times while continuing to drive down the road.

These are quick examples off the top of my head, but these types of incidents happen every day here in Utah. Police don't just get lucky and stumble into bad guys. Responsible and observant citizens reporting suspicious activity are their greatest tool. And if anything, I don't know how the hell you file an insurance claim on a stolen vehicle without involving the police. But you could stick with your 'vigilante' mindset and just handle your own business. Worked out great for that guy in bluffdale who shot the neighbor who was following his daughter. Oh wait, he is in the utah state prison now and his daughter has no daddy to look out for her anymore.

If you guys want to blame somebody for the police chief getting away with theft. Don't blame the Provo PD they were just going off the evidence that Loss Prevention gave them. Blame the Loss Prevention at the store, they did a horrible job. I am a Loss Prevention Agent with a national retailer, and there are a few rules you have to follow to have a shoplifting rap stick. First of all you have to maintain visual contact the whole time, even if you lose visual contact for a second, you can't apprehend someone. Second you can't apprehend someone until they have passed all points of sale (usually they are outside of the store by the time you catch up to them) and made no effort to pay for their merchandise they have. From what I can see in the video he never passed any points of purchase.

You might say "well he was stuffing clothes in bags, and acting like he was going to steal it." It don't matter he can stuff all the stuff he wants into bags, put the clothes on and wear them, stuff things in his pockets, but if he is still walking around the store then you can't apprehend him, until he walks past a point of sale, and made no effort to pay for his merchandise. Bottom line is Loss Prevention handled it very poorly and could open up the store for a lawsuit.

Luv2huntfish don't try and police officer, you should never intervene when someone else is in a vehicle beating someone else up. You have no idea what they have with them, what just happened to them. Bottom line you aren't trained to deal with those scenarios, you just end getting hurt or killed. The police have tons of training to help them survive those types of confrontations. Bottom line the police are needed whether you like it or not. Not to mention they will be there to save your ass when you need them, regardless of what you say about them. To me that is a true human being.

luv2fsh&hnt wrote:

I would probly follow and make sure he didn't hurt her too bad if he got carried away I would intervene. Most broads in those situations don't have any desire to leave or get out. Unlike the majority of males in todays society I have not been emasculated and I have not allowed myself to be neutered. I handle my own shit my own way and don't need a facsist agent of the gov't to protect me or mine. Anyone that believes the police can protect them is indeed a naive little sheeple.

So I get that you are a 'rugged individualist' or whatever, but what about people who are not capable of providing for their own protection? Most career criminals have a finely tuned method of victim selection. They prey on the weak, young, elderly, female, etc. Police do in fact protect members of the community every day and the aforementioned groups are the ones who rely on them the most. They are not 'sheeple', they just are not capable of protecting themselves from an attacker. If an elderly woman is being burglarized and shouts to the intruder 'get out of my house or I'll hurt you' or 'I've called 911 and the police are on the way' which statement is more likely to cause the intruder to flee?

I interact with police and criminals every day. I have experience working with sex offenders, criminals facing capital charges, mentally ill offenders, and every other level of criminal and unstable personality imaginable. If there were no law enforcement entities to hold the line, society as we know it would degenerate into a 'survival of the fittest' scenario where the weak, meek, and mild would be preyed on by the cunning, selfish, and immoral without fear.

One only has to look back a little more than a hundred years to see that in the absence of organized law enforcement, criminal gangs like the wild bunch were able to rob banks and trains all over the west and normal citizen posses were no match for them. The criminals were better equipped that the citizen groups who pursued them. The bloody prohibition era is another example. The gangs were several steps ahead of the local cops until the FBI was formed. Vigilantism will never hold a candle to a professional law enforcement entity because they lack the structure, resources, training, and oversight that police have.

One last thing to consider, if you really responded to some of the scenarios I posed in the manner you said you would, you would be charged criminally, have your legal right to posess firearms revoked, and probably do jail time. So call us regular citizens 'sheeple' all you want, but I'll be damned if I do some stupid shit to get my guns taken from me and me taken from my loved ones in the name of being an individualist.

huntingbuddy wrote:

If you guys want to blame somebody for the police chief getting away with theft. Don't blame the Provo PD they were just going off the evidence that Loss Prevention gave them. Blame the Loss Prevention at the store, they did a horrible job. I am a Loss Prevention Agent with a national retailer, and there are a few rules you have to follow to have a shoplifting rap stick. First of all you have to maintain visual contact the whole time, even if you lose visual contact for a second, you can't apprehend someone. Second you can't apprehend someone until they have passed all points of sale (usually they are outside of the store by the time you catch up to them) and made no effort to pay for their merchandise they have. From what I can see in the video he never passed any points of purchase.

You might say "well he was stuffing clothes in bags, and acting like he was going to steal it." It don't matter he can stuff all the stuff he wants into bags, put the clothes on and wear them, stuff things in his pockets, but if he is still walking around the store then you can't apprehend him, until he walks past a point of sale, and made no effort to pay for his merchandise. Bottom line is Loss Prevention handled it very poorly and could open up the store for a lawsuit.

Luv2huntfish don't try and police officer, you should never intervene when someone else is in a vehicle beating someone else up. You have no idea what they have with them, what just happened to them. Bottom line you aren't trained to deal with those scenarios, you just end getting hurt or killed. The police have tons of training to help them survive those types of confrontations. Bottom line the police are needed whether you like it or not. Not to mention they will be there to save your ass when you need them, regardless of what you say about them. To me that is a true human being.

Police are for the most part reactionary. In other words they clean up the mess after the fact. They prevent very few crimes they are not and cannot effecticively prevent crimes. Don't confuse my disdain for LE as an institution as a disdain for the individual officers.I know some folks that work in LE and they are upstanding individuals. Only victims call 911 and I refuse to be a victim. I should have phrased my statement differently I should have said I am loathe to call or deal with LE but may be forced to interact with them occasionally but that interaction will be minimal at best. Police only provide a false sense of security for insecure sheeple.

ScottyP wrote:

luv2fsh&hnt wrote:

I would probly follow and make sure he didn't hurt her too bad if he got carried away I would intervene. Most broads in those situations don't have any desire to leave or get out. Unlike the majority of males in todays society I have not been emasculated and I have not allowed myself to be neutered. I handle my own shit my own way and don't need a facsist agent of the gov't to protect me or mine. Anyone that believes the police can protect them is indeed a naive little sheeple.

So I get that you are a 'rugged individualist' or whatever, but what about people who are not capable of providing for their own protection? Most career criminals have a finely tuned method of victim selection. They prey on the weak, young, elderly, female, etc. Police do in fact protect members of the community every day and the aforementioned groups are the ones who rely on them the most. They are not 'sheeple', they just are not capable of protecting themselves from an attacker. If an elderly woman is being burglarized and shouts to the intruder 'get out of my house or I'll hurt you' or 'I've called 911 and the police are on the way' which statement is more likely to cause the intruder to flee?

I interact with police and criminals every day. I have experience working with sex offenders, criminals facing capital charges, mentally ill offenders, and every other level of criminal and unstable personality imaginable. If there were no law enforcement entities to hold the line, society as we know it would degenerate into a 'survival of the fittest' scenario where the weak, meek, and mild would be preyed on by the cunning, selfish, and immoral without fear.

One only has to look back a little more than a hundred years to see that in the absence of organized law enforcement, criminal gangs like the wild bunch were able to rob banks and trains all over the west and normal citizen posses were no match for them. The criminals were better equipped that the citizen groups who pursued them. The bloody prohibition era is another example. The gangs were several steps ahead of the local cops until the FBI was formed. Vigilantism will never hold a candle to a professional law enforcement entity because they lack the structure, resources, training, and oversight that police have.

One last thing to consider, if you really responded to some of the scenarios I posed in the manner you said you would, you would be charged criminally, have your legal right to posess firearms revoked, and probably do jail time. So call us regular citizens 'sheeple' all you want, but I'll be damned if I do some stupid shit to get my guns taken from me and me taken from my loved ones in the name of being an individualist.

I am guessing you work in corrections. Not only would I react the way I said I have been in a couple of the scenarios you mentioned. Like I said the judicial system is a joke. An individual is victimised by a maggot then calls police and is victimised again by the system that is supposed to protect the victims because the scumbag maggots have more rights than their victims.