It’s Not a War on Cops


The Supreme Court is set to hear a case that could lead to liability for officers making false arrests. Naturally, police unions and their apologists in the media and in conservative circles aren’t happy about this. The NY Post called the case a “war on cops,” but I would argue it’s everything but that. The case revolves around some arrests for “disorderly conduct” of some citizens at a party. “Disorderly conduct” statutes are incredibly vague in many states and I’ve seen quite often cops using these laws against people for simply standing up for their rights or yelling at an officer. In Texas, we had numerous arrests of people lawfully carrying firearms because people were calling the police claiming to be “alarmed,” which is a trigger word in Texas law. Every case was dismissed and the arrests should have never happened. In many cases, the arrested gun owners even had copies of the law that the police refused to even look at when making the decision to effect an arrest. We are suing them.

Hopefully, SCOTUS recognizes the problem we have with modern day policing. Almost unanimously, I hear cops saying “the place to argue is in the courts” or “we’ll let the courts decide” whether an arrest is legal. There is no personal responsibility nor consequences for a cop throwing someone in jail unjustly. They process the person into jail and simply move to the next person. When charges are thrown out, there’s no consequences for the arresting officer or the department. No training; nothing.

Meanwhile, a person falsely arrested must spend hours (or days) in jail being treated like dirt by jailers and waiting to get bailed out, which costs hundreds or thousands of dollars. They are required to wear demeaning clothing, eat terrible food, and obey nonsense orders from power mad handlers (shut up, face that way, sit down, stand up, don’t look at me, stop smiling, etc – I personally heard them all). Then, the person must find an attorney to find the bogus charges to get them dropped. Once charges are dropped because no crime was committed, that person doesn’t get that money back he had to spend. Not even a formal apology from the officer(s) or department.

This isn’t a problem of “gray areas.” I’ve literally seen with my own eyes a person READING the law to a cop that makes perfectly clear they are well within the law only to hear the cops say “that’s for the courts to decide” despite the wording of said law being totally unambiguous.

We don’t expect cops to be perfect and understand that they will make mistakes, but those mistakes affect the lives of other people. Some lose jobs and others lose income. The arrest is kept in the system so next time they are treated worse because now they’re a “problem child.” If someone is falsely arrested twice (this is common for activists) the court will raise the bond even higher for a minor charge. At some point, cops need to have consequences for those mistakes just as we do when we make them. “Ignorance of the law is no excuse,” remember?

The problem goes beyond this. Police are killing so many people for simply moving their hands that they are putting out videos telling people how to avoid being shot by a trigger happy officer who sees everyone as a threat. How demeaning to have to put our hands outside of the window as if we’re some kind of criminal thug trying to prove we aren’t guilty of a crime. I remember when everyone was supposed to be treated with respect and as innocent. My position is if the police can’t approach a vehicle without thinking everyone is out to kill them, they really need to get another job. Granted, they should always be cautious, but not at the expense of citizen comfort. When did our safety become subordinate to theirs? This video teaches gun owners that they basically have no rights if a cop pulls them over. The fact is that someone who hands over their license to carry isn’t a threat to them and, therefore, cops have no right to disarm them. If anyone should be afraid, it should be the people. The Crime Prevention Research Center found that cops are ten times more likely to commit a crime than licensed gun owners and yet we are the ones being disarmed.

The Supreme Court needs to start protecting the constitution and the government.

4 Comments on “It’s Not a War on Cops

  1. This is much needed , the system is set up to incriminate all that carry because they refuse to be a victims and we all have to prove our innocense at your own expense, if some idiot says he or she is alarmed because they saw your gun. This really is so wrong when the police know you are perfectly legal.

  2. Im trying to get a message to a UK General Christopher Brown, his info had been hacked, was tried to be used on me but i shut it down .. its classic Catfishing” , General Brown’s Military History is on Google …

  3. Police reform must be nationally codified through legislation, especially regarding questions of an independent civilian oversight body via a Community Police Commission (CPC) — The most pressing questions relate largely to oversight and accountability. Right now, much of the disciplinary process is done internally with sworn officers. There must be more civilian involvement! One approach is to have a permanent chair outside the chief of polices control and chain of command and pull additional civilian citizen members as needed using the same list as the jury pool.

    A full board can be pulled together on an as needed basis for deadly force reviews and either semi annually or quarterly to review other use of force cases. Questions that must be addressed follow;

    Who should conduct each type of investigation and how is each vetted;

    When deadly force is used by officers, who conducts the investigation (recommend an external detective), who reviews the investigation (recommend department Cheif make a recommendation and then CPC reviews for all cases not immediately recommended by the Chief for prosecution and who decides whether the use was justified(Chief, CPC) or should be referred to criminal or other administrative proceedings.

    When officers use non deadly force such as sprays, Tazers, night sticks, ASPs or dogs how is that use of force reviewed and vetted? Every use of force must be reviewed to determine if the officer should be subject to administrative corrective action, permanently revocation of their license, or criminal charges. This review should also follow the investigate, chief review and recommendation and the CPC review.

    When complaints are filed against an officer who determines validity, corrective actions and trends either by an officer or department?

    When an officer screws up, how is the investigation handled and how should discipline be handed down?

    When trends are identified who determines the appropriate corrective action? Multiple investigations may indicate a department training shortfall or an area to focus patrols and other community involvement to reduce violent encounters.

    The blanket Qualified immunity government officials including police currently shields public officials from both criminal and civil liability so long as they did not violate an individual’s “clearly established” statutory or constitutional rights. The immunity is available to state or federal employees, including law enforcement officers, who are “acting under color of law.” However, officers abuse of their powers to arrest must be curtailed and when the charges are dropped, the judge throws out the case, or the plaintiff if found not guilty there needs to be avenues to address clearing the false police charges out of the automated systems, as well as reimbursement for lost wages, and publication in all local media an arrest was groundless or unfounded.

    In addition our national civil forfeiture program must be reformed! Currently there is federal and states who manage their own flavor of the program. Many abuses and fraud have and are occurring. Unfortunately today in much of the nation a police officer can simply seize property without due process and its up to the individual to prove in court at their own cost the seized property was lawfully their own, and even with a judgement in some parts of the country the police fail to return the assets (especially guns). Our law enforcement should not be motivated to seize any property not directly associated with a criminal charge and conviction. Currently there are widely different laws and applications of civil forfeiture around the country. We need a standard federal set of laws and procedures formally documenting when it is allowed, how to manage them, dispose of real property, firearms, and cash.

    First require all seizures to either accompany the serving of a warrant, processing a crime scene or be conducted in conjunction with an arrest.
    Second require either a trial to take place resulting in a conviction or in circumstances where no trial is possible (I.e. suspect is dead, doesn’t show for trial) a judge shall rule based on the states evidence and determine whether the seizure may stand without a trial and conviction and there is sufficient legal grounds for the seizure, otherwise the property must be returned to the owner at department cost. If cash was seized it shall include both the principle and interest earned.
    Third after either the judges ruling or suspects conviction require all goods seized (cars, houses, guns, knives, jewelry, etc.) are sold at open public auction with the entire proceeds being donated to national nonprofit charities with an overhead cost of less than 10 percent along with any seized cash and its interest.

    Keep in mind of course, that some suspects are not charged in which case any seized property from that individual must be returned!

    The FBI best practices lists good basics for having a program;
    https://leb.fbi.gov/2016/august/asset-seizure-and-forfeiture-a-basic-guide
    The FBI also discusses the ethics for having a program;
    https://leb.fbi.gov/2016/september/asset-seizure-and-forfeiture-ethical-issues

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *