She:

1) Did not honor the ‘Thin Blue Line’.
2) She activated her video recording device which should ONLY be used to show citizens in a bad light, not police.
3) She did not beat, electrocute or shoot the ‘bad guy’…which makes other cops nervous to be around her.
4) She attempted to stop the beating… this further makes other cops nervous to be around her and, just as importantly, caused the 2 other cops on the scene to not be able to get out their aggresions on the ‘bad guy’. Cops should always be allowed to get out their aggresions on members of the public; otherwise they bring them home and beat their wives, girlfriends and children.

Consequently, I fully support the ouster of this ‘rogue’ element – she does not have the proper psychosis to be a member of the FOP.

Very disturbing. And, as others have alluded to, very Stalinist. Officer Tasca should be the model for a new kind of policing that intervenes to stop violence, not matter who is being violent. Instead, she gets labeled “unstable.”

Not to long ago, I finally decided–after much soul searching and research–that I am also too “unstable” to be a police officer. Exhibit A: I believe the drug war is insane. Thus, I must be a degenerate doper. Exhibit B: I am uncomfortable with ticket quotas and the push to turn police into big time revenue producers for the states. Thus, I must want people to die in motor vehicle crashes. Exhibit C: I do take the use of force lightly. It should not be used to teach people a lesson for not respecting my authoritah. Thus, I must be a pussy.

So I voluntarily withdraw my interest in policing. Now everyone can rest a little easier.

Pretty clear statement of expectations of cop behavior.

Willingness to be violent = sane

Restraining violence = insane

Can’t get much clearer, and it’s their words. Case closed. ALL COPS ARE EVIL.

http://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/2011/09/23/epilogue/

It all boils down to the narrative. The whistle blower being “troubled” or some such is a much more agreeable narrative than the alternatives, which might mean that everyone in authority, including (God forbid) judges, have a little soul searching to do. And maybe even some work.

Some people wonder why the “good” cops or the “good” lawyers or the “good” judges don’t do anything to stop the rogues. I don’t.

Used to be that land line phones came with those little stickers for putting in the numbers of the Ambulance, Fire, and Police. Some European countries have separate short numbers for each service and if you need an ambulance you call the ambulance number and get an ambulance. During the call itself questions are asked to see if you also require the services of the police but they are not assumed and not sent automatically unless the dispatcher judges something more is going on.

Every time I read about a case like this, when bored cops chase fire truck/ambulance calls just to cause trouble I realize how important it is to keep these services separate. Thugs assume that every 911 call must involve criminals and that every personal and private situation needs to have their “sign off”. They don’t care if it’s an attempted suicide, a bad night drinking, or a diabetic seizure, they’ll beat the crap out of you anyways, just to show you who’s boss.

It was covered on this blog, I believe:

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/

That was an Austin Texas cop with a Spanish last name. I remember it too but I don’t know exactly where to find it.

This could be a litmus test for the real values of police unions. Police unions often stand up for sworn cretins on the alleged basis that the cretins are labor and the commanders who would discipline them are management, but which side are they on in this case? Management is trying to stick it to labor again, this time to a good specimen of labor, so where’s the union?

I have no problem with public sector unions in principle, but this case is starting to look like “On the Waterfront.”

The LAPD may be turning into the agency that you propose. There have been a lot of stories lately about the LA Sheriff’s Department hiring LAPD rejects, and Charlie Beck seems to be one of the most responsible police chiefs in the country. So was Bill Bratton. Between the two of them, the LAPD has had close to a decade of unusually solid leadership.

At least that’s my take on it. Maybe I’ll be accused of being too kind or of glossing over their mistakes, but I will say this: I’ll be amazed if anyone can provide evidence that either Beck or Bratton is a fuck-up in a class with Daryl Gates or Bernard Parks.

As a side note, I’ve long held Antonio Villaraigosa to be a pompous windbag and a loose cannon, but he’s also deceptively competent. It’s to his great credit that he has retained good police chiefs and then left them pretty much alone to do their jobs. Giuliani, on the other hand, was a meddlesome, petty shit who fired Bratton over a pissing match and replaced him with a succession of thuggish courtiers. I’m not a betting man, but I’d consider putting money on Bratton having nicer things to say about Villaraigosa than about Giuliani.

Doug Casey made a number of good points in that essay, but I found his smugness about personal wealth rather off-putting. This smugness is a recurrent flaw in Casey’s argumentation. I subscribe to his mass e-mails, which often contain suggestions that the wealthy all got that way by having superior virtue, broad-brush smears of government, and similar apologia for moneyed interests.

Maybe he’s just pandering to his audience, but it’s unseemly in any event. It verges on Social Darwinism. The essay about sociopaths abetted wealthy Americans to abandon their country and their fellow citizens. Emigration probably makes great sense for certain individuals and families, but the snobbish tone with which Casey introduced the argument, implying that those without the wherewithal or financial means to emigrate don’t matter and should be ignored, was odious. The use of the term “international man” didn’t help, either. The essay made these supposedly virtuous “international men” sound awfully like the sociopaths that it encouraged them to escape–more forthright, perhaps, but barely any less selfish.

Doug Casey isn’t the only libertarian who studiously ignores the ways in which American policy is set up to soak the poor, and like many Republicans, he actively opposes countervailing policies to protect the poor from predation by resorting to hyperbole, e.g., conflating normal powers of taxation with totalitarianism. At the risk of beating a dead horse, as I’ve mentioned before, this is dubious company for civil libertarians to keep. It makes us look like we’re shills for money.

If everyone protested on their property tax payments for paying for police dept. and refused to pay that part and take it to court.. if that would have any effects ? Just a thought of how to back door the bright line idiots.

This notion that there are bad cops and good ones is just simply not true.