re: St. John Deputy kills off-duty St. John Deputy in domestic dispute

quote:

---

And why is that? I am just pandering to all of the "police militarization" fanatics of the OT. Or is it only OK when it fits their version of events? I am so confused

---

The fact that people have very real concerns that this weaponry could be turned against citizens and in fact already has is a valid concern. The fact that you are "pandering" is Jackassery at it's finest. Anyone applauding you for this can be counted as a jackass too.

quote:

---

Good time to remember that per the national average - cops have higher rates of domestic abuse... and the NFL has lower rates than the national average.

---

There are approx 1695 nfl players compared to approx 1.5 mil law enforcement officers. Surely you realize those are two very different sized sample groups.

quote:

---

No shite, that's why he was talking about RATES, not total numbers

---

Rates are meaningless when the sample group is that small. Surely you are not too dense to understand that.

Here is an example for you as it relates to the often discussed officer fatality rate in comparison to other fields.

LINK

Again you show yourself to be an a-hole

quote:

---

Rates are meaningless when the sample group is that small. Surely you are not too dense to understand that.

---

What's funny is you are literally the definition of dense right now - good word choice. Allow me to explain: (I'll try to do it slowly so you can follow)

You take the national average for domestic abuse:
-NFL players fall below that average.
-Cops are way ahead of that average.

You then steamrolled in with an argument that there aren't enough NFL players to have an adequate sample size when what you're really angry about is that I gave a damning FACT for police officers. I would hope you're not too 'dense' as to realize that cops are still above the average and the national sample size should be sufficient to have gathered enough data (you can ignore the NFL if you like.)

I'm still curious who I should tell little Johnny to look up to:
a) The "hero" cop
b) A guy who can run really fast

Who should we hold to a higher level of morality? The guy we give a gun and authority to? Or the guy who can run fast and catch a ball?

My original argument was: If we're going to damn the NFL for all the domestic abuse, we better damn sure turn around and look at ourselves, and in particular the people who will be throwing them in jail for it, and figure out where the true societal issues are, if we're ever going to make a difference.

quote:

---

I'm still curious who I should tell little Johnny to look up to:
a) The "hero" cop
b) A guy who can run really fast

---

Neither!! Few cops do anything to qualify as a "hero". If an athlete does anything to qualify it won't be on the field of play. You want to show Johnny a hero? Show him a medal of honor winner, a cop that broke out a window of a burning car and pulled someone to safety, a fireman that ran into one of the towers before it collapsed, ... I pointed to there grandpa (my dad) that fought in WWII. The average cop, athlete, and especially, actor, need not apply.

quote:

---

So then athletes should be role models because of how much they get paid? I'm confused because...

---

I'm not sure why someone decided that we should compare cops to athletes. One gets relatively low pay to work a job that they can get shot just because they are cops. I can't remember the last NFL player that got murdered on the field. Since the comparison is stupid I thought I'd introduce the idea of elevating the kind of LEO we have by raising the pay to whatever level, NFL in this case, we want them to perform up to. In this fantasy world we would have cops that didn't shoot dogs, beat up people they stop, beat their wives only 55.4% as compared to the general public (currently 40% of LEO beats their wives as compared to 25% of general population), did I mention they wouldn't shoot rover?

The overriding point here is you get what you pay for. Currently, we are paying for street level thugs that will wear a uniform and enforce laws some of the time (my apologies to those that do a good job foe us), look for opportunities to shoot dogs, and beat up their old ladies to show the world just how badass they are.

Maybe comparing LEO's jobs to burger flippers would be a little better.

quote:

---

Who should we hold more accountable, to a higher level of morality, and trust to do the right thing:
a) Cops
b) Athletes

---

We can take it that route too but again, I think it unreal to compare 2 totally different professions. Maybe cops vs UPS workers. At least we would have another profession where the worker has been shot on the job.

BUT back to your question, personally, I've been amused by this whole NFL thing. If the league decides it wants to hold their people to a certain level of accountability, morality, and trust I am all for it. One problem I see though is their deciding guilt before a serious case goes to court.

LEO is a completely different job. The requirements can't be compared on any level. That job can't be compared to any other job that I can think of. Accountability is as diverse and random as the number of departments. They should be accountable to the tax payers but that is the very people they have to deal with. I could go on but to cut to the chase, there is no organization to oversee the LEOs. The pay is too low for the top cops to hire people that will be accountable to NFL level or moral to that level or that they can trust to do the right thing to that level.

We, the tax payers, aren't paying enough to hire pro-level cops.

Did I answer your question? No. Under current conditions there is no answer to that question.

Question: Have you ever bought a Saints or any other NFL team shirt. Maybe one with a player's name and number on it? Have you seen them around? Part B to this question: have you ever bought a shirt with LSP or other police department shirt? Ever see people wearing them?

Whew! I'm exhausted after all of that.

quote:

---

Weirdly, we're not arguing something very far apart.

---

That's what I thought. It's kinda hard to get thoughts explained in writing.

quote:

---

I agree with this but it doesn't justify their actions based on wage.

---

Yeah, I'm o.k. with this. They signed up to do a job. They should do that job. In the end I suppose their only accountability is to the employer and court system. LEO doesn't have an NFL type of a commission to answer to. Maybe they should ... but we may have to pay more in taxes for this.

quote:

---

Doesn't matter who you compare them to. Since they're well above the national average for domestic abuse,

---

I really don't think you can compare them to any other profession. The mindset of the average LEO is different from the rest of us Far too many are lured to the job because they are the kind of person that enjoys physical confrontations. I look at it this way, they were domestic abusers before they became cops.

A point to consider concerning pay, look at the pay for cops in a small town. Then look at the pay for state police. Look at the hiring requirements. Then the training of each. As of about 10 years ago I know LSP made more money, was harder to get into and was better trained. My personal experiences ( too many) indicated a much higher level of professionalism. HOWEVER I don't know if their domestic abuse was lower.

quote:

---

I have seen plenty of people wearing NYPD hats.

---

Shirts too. NYPD is a fad. NYFD too but that has more to do with 9/11. Nobody goes all rah rah over cops, burger flippers, UPS drivers, etc. Mostly just a point about the chosen comparison. No other group compares to NFL stars although basketball comes very close.