Bullying is nothing new in elementary and middle schools worldwide. But in Mexico, that bullying is starting to take on a different face in some places, resembling less like the playground taunts ...
Share ideas that matter on the social web and experience
the benefits of curating the world's best content.
I don't have a Facebook, a Twitter or a LinkedIn account
Your new post is loading...
Seth Dinkel's comment,
May 24, 10:37 PM
It sounds like the FBI agent followed the correct procedure in protecting himself from an armed assailant. However, it is regrettable that the suspect was killed before they learned more about his involvement with the Tsarnaev brothers. Ibragim Todashev’s past aggressive behavior indicates that it would not be unusual for him to attack an FBI agent.
Rob Duke's comment,
May 24, 11:54 PM
It's interesting how the Miranda vs. Arizona case influences police behavior. Prior to 1968, this man would have been "taken downtown", but I'm assuming (that's dangerous) that he was interviewed in his home in order to avoid the appearance that he was under arrest. This, in turn, avoided the Miranda warning. This is a good example of how institutional rules (case law here) influence organizational policy and practice.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Maximillian Anderson's comment,
May 24, 9:06 PM
It is unfortunate that an elderly black man was put on the spot by an officer. I hope that the officer had more of a description to go off of than a "black male." I feel that profiling is okay as long as it is specific. For example, a victim describes the suspect a thin hispanic with a white shirt and blue shoes on and the officers stop and question any people in the area that fit that specific description. But a vague description of a "mexican guy" or something is not an adequate reason to stop all hispanic people. If the officer's inquiry was in fact without basis, I hope that he is made to apologize to the old man.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Seth Dinkel's comment,
May 24, 10:38 PM
Waite verbalized after the fact that she was reaching for the door. However, in many ways it appeared that she could have been reaching for the gun on the belt of the State Trooper. Waite was acting abusively to the Trooper who appeared to be doing his job to the best of his ability. The possession of marijuana by one of the occupants of the household is a strong indicator for the family’s outright disrespect of the law. Better parenting could have done much to avoid the situation that occurred between the young woman and the troopers. Whether or not Waite was reaching for the door or the gun on the State Trooper’s belt, her close proximity to the trooper’s gun gave him the right to defend himself the way he saw fit.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Koty Emery's comment,
April 28, 4:40 PM
I understand that Alcoholism is under the Americans with Disabilities Act, but an officer convicted of a DUI seems to violate the police department's need to accommodation for the disability. "The ADA has provisions in it, across the board, to not require employers to subject other people to unreasonable risk to accommodate a disability," Then again, I guess the real question is if he should lose his job because he was off duty.
Rob Duke's comment,
April 28, 5:36 PM
I guess he has a right to have a chaufer drive him around in his undercover car because his alcoholism makes him disabled. He would be the cop verion of Arthur...
Mandy Burris's comment,
April 29, 9:59 PM
If an officer can be fired for stealing off duty because it is behavior unbecoming of a law enforcement officer then being convicted of a DUI is also grounds for dismissal. His alcoholism did not force him to get into the vehicle and drive home when he had been out drinking. If the decision was made to drink then a plan should have been in place for a designated driver or a hotel within walking distance, etc. These are the things that he should have been teaching the public about drinking and he ignores them when it comes to himself? Any other crime and the officer would be seen as hypocritical and the department would have caught no end of grief if they would have kept him on. Blaming the job for why he was drinking in the first place? Fine. Not taking responsibility when your personal choices endangered lives and cost your department money is not acceptable. If he had come forward about wanting to seek treatment and had not been convicted of a DUI then he would have more of a right to sue, but as it stands he is abusing the classification of his circumstances as a disability. In addition, if Oregon is like Alaska, his refusal to provide a breath sample (assuming he made it to the actual official stage and refused, not just the PBT) is a felony charge and if he is now a convicted felon he cannot have firearms, therefore he cannot legally continue to do his job.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
|
Maximillian Anderson's comment,
May 24, 8:38 PM
It is sad to see that an officer felt so much physical pain that he killed himself. It is more common to read about officers that have mental health problems that lead to their suicide but this was a little different. Ultimately, it sounds like the job is what lead to his needing multiple surgeries because he was a street cop. The article said that he was planning to retire in about five years and that he was living with his most recent knee pain for three years. I wonder if he was going to physical therapy for his most recent knee replacement in April. It seems like a little over a month and a half after a knee replacement surgery is too soon to give up hope.
Kevin Bishop's comment,
Today, 4:54 AM
It is pretty depressing to see that an officer was experiencing so much pain that he chose to end his life. The number of surgeries he had had over 32 years was high but the article did not mention how many of those surgeries were job related. It is possible that some of those surgeries were related to other problems. It is important for people to fully research the careers they are choosing to go into before starting them. My father is a master automotive technician and experiences pain in his elbows, back, and wrists from using all the different power and hydraulic tools. Certain jobs can cause physical damage such as policing, automotive repair, construction, etc. Physical therapy can definitely help reduce the level of pain associated with those types of injuries. Like Max I wonder if the officer was going to physical therapy and if it was providing any kind of relief.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Seth Dinkel's comment,
May 24, 10:38 PM
It is important to create a definitive line between behavior that is rebellious and behavior that is unacceptable. In this case Paris Brown acted with behavior that can only be viewed as unacceptable in society today. Paris Brown was old enough to realize that her status in life made her a target for the press. The police commissioner could easily have found a more ideal candidate for the job. Often times people apologize, not because they regret the behavior they have committed, but because they regret having been caught committing that behavior. There are many young upstanding individuals in society who would make a more ideal candidate for the position. Second chances have their value, but we should reward politically correct behavior in individuals more often. When people are rewarded after committing a politically unacceptable behavior, they do not learn that there are consequences for their actions.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Maximillian Anderson's comment,
May 24, 8:57 PM
The article says, "Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey told a Philadelphia Daily News columnist in February of last year that he believed he had made a mistake in granting the former officer's request to go back to work too soon after he was shot." This officer was shot in 2007 and retired from the department in 2011. I am not sure why they try to connect his shooting, coming back so quickly, and the charges against him. I do not think that his shooting and coming back quickly have anything to do with what he did to the two women. It is incredible to see someone who was so high up-once invited to sit with the First Lady at a Presidential address to congress- fall so far and do what he did to the women.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Rob Duke's comment,
May 22, 2:25 AM
FYI, that risque photo wasn't there when I scooped this article....
Kevin Bishop's comment,
Today, 4:42 AM
I will be the first to say that the risque photo definitely caught my attention and the article was not quite as interesting. Mexico's police force must be in a extremely negative state if they are attempting something this unusual. I am unsure that it will prove to be a very successful solution. All humans regardless of gender are susceptible to corruption. The female officers may become just as corrupt as the male officers. If the female officers are the only ones that are allowed to issue citations does that take away the probable cause of driving violations for male officers? If the male officers cannot use driving violations as a reason to issue a traffic stop perhaps they will miss out on catching criminals committing related crimes. Not being able to issue citations may lower morale for the male officers. It will be interesting to see the state of Mexico in a year and see the public's feedback. I hope it turns out well.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Kevin Bishop's comment,
Today, 5:17 AM
Some of these reforms suggested are actually pretty intelligent. I agree that an individual should be allowed to do anything to his or her body without the government's interference. However that action must not harm any other person. I agree that the government should not restrict the acts of two consenting adults on private property. Both of those amendments would of course have a lot of consequences that people may not like. Drug use, suicide, etc. would then not be restricted. Citizens should be allowed to record any words or actions of a governmental official. In the current time period with abundant recording devices, officials should assume at all times that they are being recorded. The officials then can always do the right thing. Not all of the amendments are very good and the ones I agree with can easily turn out negatively.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Mandy Burris's comment,
April 29, 9:44 PM
Rob, I agree. It is not easy to "turn off" the policeman side at the end of the day and so stopping to help someone stranded on the road is second nature in addition to kind and generous. It's terrible to think that two officers have been lost in different ways to a kind act and a driver attempting to prevent an accident. I think that both officers should be considered "on-duty" in this situation and the incident should be treated with the same support and reverence had they been wearing their uniforms and badges.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
|