"Equal Standard of Conduct for Police"

I wanted to add some additional commentary on a recent political issue, but first an update on my post I've been working on. As you can see it isn't finished yet, otherwise it would be posted. Why hasn't it been completed as soon as I had hoped? I have to move into a new apartment in Arlington by this weekend and there is a complication - and it actually relates to the subject matter of this blog. I've rented in two places so far since finally gaining employment after years of being unable to get a job with the false felony charge. Both rental properties stated they do background checks and employment checks on potential renters. I've been lucky; both apartments only checked my rental history and my pay stubs. The first place resulted in having a high security deposit thanks to only one other rental history that I had - back in 2006 when I had to break my lease because the Charlottesville legal system refused to bond me out to save my job. Well it looks like I wasn't lucky the third time around. This time the rental company did in fact do an extensive background check - not just employment but also criminal. Thanks to the felony charge I have a problem now that is going to affect my ability to rent any apartment from this leasing company for some time. I'm not going to go any further into this situation at the moment, I'm quite frankly too angry right now. But as I'm sure anyone can understand, I have bigger issues and that lengthy post will have to wait until things settle down.

I did however decide on including another video by the individual from my previous post. This video was prompted by the recent shooting of a homeless man - essentially shot because he didn't have a permit to camp and didn't provide identification. As an individual who's the son of a retired police officer (my father was in SWAT, NARC and later Detective) I'm well aware that many cops out there are good people trying to do the right thing. But these days we have more individuals going into law enforcement who have no business ever being given a badge. These individuals are also not being punished when making really bad calls or being held to higher standards.

Shooting a 98 year old veteran in a nursing home with a bean bag shotgun (killing him) is a bad call. Wrestling a jogging woman to the ground for jaywalking because of her startled reaction to an initially unknown person grabbing her is a bad call. To shoot a homeless man in the back because he didn't ID himself and was camping somewhere he didn't have "papers" for is a bad call. Too often I've seen worthless police chiefs and agencies cover up for these actions and give nothing but excuses. I see cops violating traffic laws every day that these same cops would immediately pull a civilian over for. I was nearly rear-ended by a cop back when I still worked for Northrop Grumman, because he was riding my bumper even though I was doing the speed limit. The cars in front of me slammed on their brakes and I had to hit mine - what attracted my attention to my right side was the bumper riding cop next to me who had to swerve into the shoulder because he was so close there was no room to stop. That badge only gives you one thing - the authority to enforce the law, not the authority to break the law. Too many police seem to not understand this simple concept today. If you refuse to hold yourself to the same standards you enforce upon us, what right do you have to then try to hold us accountable when we misstep? Before jumping immediately into the "Cause ma authoritah!" stance, just remember that authority comes from we the people and we can take it back.

However, it would be unfair to simply write off these incidents as merely a problem with law enforcers. A big chunk of blame comes with writing these laws that police then have to enforce. No matter what the profession, you will always get individuals who don't have any business being there. When you add fear, adrenaline and an issued service pistol you are guaranteed to have an incident at some point. As Mr. Cameron states quite well, when creating or enforcing a law we all need to ask ourselves one question: "Is this worth taking a man's life for?"

There is one thing I did forget to bring up on the previous video. I'm sure that Ms. Manweiler, upon viewing that video, rolled her eyes at the individual - especially when he jokingly said that ex parte was latin for "secret trial where defendant has no fucking rights". What does a guy wearing a camo hat with a suit know about law right? Well Mr. Cameron is actually a practicing attorney with more years of courtroom experience than Michelle Manweiler. Just thought I'd point that out before anyone assumes this guy doesn't know what he's talking about when he discusses the law.

P.S. - Cute attempt at hiding yourself by using IP's from other countries, but there is some information you just can't hide even with an IP outside the United States. Thanks for playing though.