What Some Seattle Cops Think the Problem Is

They Think the City's "Socialist" Agenda Has Gone Too Far in Protecting Racial Minorities, Curbing Coarse Language, and Scrutinizing Officers Accused of Misconduct

Comments

1
Time to fire every last of these thugs and their brass and start over. They failed to evolve and adapted along with the rest of society, and can no longer be trusted to protect the public, since they see many of us as enemies.

It's funny to hear cops bitching about socialism while they are drawing a salary paid by tax dollars. Law enforcement is socialist organization, idiots. You are paid by us. We own you, so show some respect for the community.
2
I must be very naive. I didn't really think the characterization of most police as retrograde, racist dipshits could really hold true overall. Now I know.
3
Police are the gang we pay protection money to protect us from the non-police gangs.
4
So if they're so damn disgusted by this liberal city and its attitudes, let 'em get a job in fucking Enumclaw or whatever hillbilly holler with "real American values" they crawled out of.
5
Dominic, I'd be happy to get the police union newsletter on the Web for all to read if you or someone else is able and willing to provide copies of it to me.
6
@ 3 Your statement is not far from the truth.
7
From:http://www.thestranger.com/extras/images/Guardian2.pdf

re: America in 1776

"America was exceptional then, and we must remain exceptional now."

I think slaves, women and non-property owning males would like to have a word with you on the definition of "exceptional"
8
This is only going to pour fuel on probably many fires but please pass the full content on to every member of the City Council and the Mayor. This is pretty outrageous -- why are they police in a city or region if they have an obvious and crushing problem with the norms of the society they decided to be police in?
9
It's actually on the guild's website, Dominic. Good job with your research.
10
Sounds like the city can save some money by eliminating frivilous expenses, like a police union's newspaper.

In regards to the N-Word, at least theyre not dropping the hardy R.
11
@9: Link, please.
12
@9) The online archives show no update since 2009.
13
I see the article titled, "Just Shut Up and Be a Good Little Socialist" is online here:

http://www.thestranger.com/extras/images…

The third paragraph:

Social justice is a socialist scheme thatjudges people not as individuals, but by their race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Again, please research it yourself. The groups touting social justice all tend toward thepolitical left, including socialist and communist groups.


The final paragraph:

I'll leave you with this refresher: employing the RSJI, the City of Seattle is actually deciding on which people do or do-not "merit punishment" for a crime, based upon their race, ethnic heritage, and/or socio-economic status. So far this only applies to DWLS3, but one has to ask, what's next? They're also deciding purchases and the issuing of city contracts based upon similar criteria. This is social justice, folks, and socialism has no place in Seattle, and positively no place in the Seattle Police Departnent.


I'm sorry, I thought the collective voters and elected officials set city and police policies? This is ridiculous--the whole article is essentially advocating a revolt by the Seattle Police Department against the city's own priorities, elected officials, and policies.

Seriously -- you guys should contact the Mayor's office and each Council member for a statement on this.
14
@9 That's funny. I just went to the Police Officer's Guild website and did see a link to the 'Current Issue' of the Guardian. It hasn't been updated since April of 2010, and even that issue won't load for me.
They do have the President's Message up to May 2010 though. And the tone of those letters pretty much matches up to this article. The Police are the Good Guys and everyone else is just out to get them.
Funny, I thought their motto was to Protect and Serve.
15
I think it's time for the Department of Justice to independently investigate the SPD and find out if this rot is as pervasive as it seems.
16
@12 Yeah, I just noticed the date of the President's Message, and it was May of 2009.
17
"Yes, enemy. A liberal after my money in taxes may be my opponent..."

...also known as "where your salary and pension comes from", officer.

18
So, if it's okay for them to call me a "bitch" and a "motherfucker," does that mean we can call them names too? Or will that get me a nightstick upside the head or a Tasing?
19
The Seattle police have stolen from us a national treasure in the form of culture we can never get back. The footage is chilling. The thought that a person could be shot dead in the street in an instant with no non-lethal methods administered. I am only left with questions. I sincerely hope this changes the face of our city. As a lifelong resident of Seattle I think some "cleansing" is in order as far as our public servante are concerned. However the problem may be some peoples motives to become a police officer, as well as fierce hiring campaigns and other such things. I hope that we can begin to hold officers as accountable for their actions if not more accountable than the public.
20
Officer Clayton Powell endorses using "motherfucker", "bitch", and "n****a" as effective, "in-your-face" communication. Would that be the same officer Clayton Powell whose ex-wife accused him in 2000 of being abusive, controlling, and demeaning toward women, and has a permanent restraining order against him?

I don't know if he should be offering communication advice.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/131879_co…
21
Dominick, watch your ass my friend. Please, honestly, be careful. Cops can be very, very vindictive.
22
Isn't the very notion of a government-subsidized police force socialist in nature? Last I checked, my money is being taken from me to pay for law enforcement, without my explicit consent or right to abstain. One could argue that the average citizen could do a better job of protecting themselves through the purchase of personal firearms rather than pay for communal police protection.

Let's let the free market decide!

Methinks some of these officers not only need an education in racial sensitivities, but basic civics, rhetoric, and introductory logic.
23
@22 and he is also a member of a union! Aren't unions a socialistic anti-capitalistic organization? (according to teabaggers)
24
Some cops seem to have forgotten that they serve at the pleasure of the public. Or perhaps they never fully understood this to begin with.
25
The Seattle PD is a disgrace to this great city. There are a lot of unemployed, eager, fit, smart, ethical young men and women in this city. Fire these useless racist fucks, bring in new effective leadership, get some effective oversight, and hire some new cops not poisoned with this kind of shit.
26
To all of the leftist stakeholders...

The Guardian is the PROPERTY/PUBLICATION of the Seattle Police Officers Guild.... a union...

This has nothing to do with the City of Seattle period! There is NOTHING the City of Seattle can do about this.

The Mayor and City Council members are each mailed a copy of this each month.

Have you fine citizens ever heard of the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press? Of course you lefties are familiar with the 1st Amendment because your type hides behind it when you burn the precious American flag, or want to call a crucifix submerged in urine as art.... And of course the Stranger rag knows the 1st Amendment protects their vulgar shit they print each week.... "Fucking in the Streets" etc.

There is not one fucking thing you can do about the Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press enjoyed by the rank and file of the Seattle Police Officers Guild.

Should the City even try to curtail that a lawsuit will be filed in Federal Court and the Seattle citizens will pay!

Before you run off at the gums about the author with the flowery N word.... better figure out how dark is skin is...... You may be shocked!

Dominic... How about we mail you a copy each month, or drop one by the 1500 block of 11th Avenue?

You people.... yes I said you people.... print what you deem necesary, and we the pigs will write what we want!

Tough Titty said the Kitty if you don't like it!!!!

ROFLMAO!!!!! Cheers!
27
I love how one author calls the city 'leftist' and 'socialist' while calling himself 'apolitical'.

That's like saying "I'm not religious, but you are a witch and should burn at the fucking stake."
28
@26: fake troll.
29
@26 - I assume you are a Seattle cop by the contempt you exhibit for those you are appointed to protect. (Lots of liberals in Seattle - good to know you hate them.)

You also seem dim-witted, seeing as you completely missed the point of the article: No one said you can't publish whatever the hell you want; no one is trying to take away your first amendment rights - they are just dismayed at what is written.

We want good cops, not a bunch of assholes who believe they are above the law. Which category to you fall into?
30
@26- I didn't see anyone say a single thing about having the government censor the private publication of The Guardian.

No sir, like most conservatives, you can't tell having your moronic ideas criticized from being censored.
31
"You people.... yes I said you people.... print what you deem necesary, and we the pigs will write what we want!

Tough Titty said the Kitty if you don't like it!!!!

ROFLMAO!!!!! Cheers! "

The issue isn't that Seattle cops are allowed to write this shit. The issue is, the kind of Seattle cops we have choose to write this shit. I'm not sure how the Seattle PD got this bad, but it's a disgrace.
32
This is pretty fucking disturbing! These are the people who are charged to "protect and serve." More like divide and conquer. This shows that the department is completely out of touch and out of control. Mayor McGinn or Tim Burgess should be all over this shit. If they do not act it really shows who is running things in this town. The cops.
33
Until about 30 years ago SPD officers were required to live inside the city limits. Originally this was so they could get someplace fast in an emergency; but wouldn't it be a good idea if they actually had to live among us?
34
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are both guarantees against prior restraint. The idea that public employees can say whatever the fuck they want to without getting any reaction from their employer is nonsense.
35
soo cute watching everyone bash the cops but they're the first ones you going crying for when you get robbed or your shitty passive aggressive hipster attitude gets you socked in the mouth at a bar.
36
@26 or @35 Right, Cops are just so special we shouldn't criticize them or ever think they do anything bad.

Fuck, man, Cops are people and if we the people don't oversee the Cops, then they can devolve into a gang.

With great power comes great responsibility.
37
We have to be careful not to paint the entire SPD with the same brush because of these disturbing authors. I know a lot of people in Law Enforcement, most of whom are humane, caring people who literally put their lives on the line to serve all of us. As in any sector of society there are people with strong and perhaps disagreeable opinions and unfortunately they tend to be the most vociferous. Let's attempt to keep a balanced and respectful attitude so that real communication remains possible and the real issues can be addressed.
38
Please do not ascribe to the approximately 1200 members of the Seattle Police Officers Guild (myself included) the views of the three or four individual officers who bother to submit material to the Guardian.
39
@36 Moot wrote, "soo cute watching everyone bash the cops but they're the first ones you going crying for when you get robbed or your shitty passive aggressive hipster attitude gets you socked in the mouth at a bar."

I see this argument frequently, and I don't understand it. We go to the police to intervene when someone violates the law. It's their job to do so. We also complain when they abuse their authority and when they express disdain for us -- their employers. There is nothing contradictory about these actions.
40
@37 DRSpamNot wrote, "We have to be careful not to paint the entire SPD with the same brush because of these disturbing authors. I know a lot of people in Law Enforcement, most of whom are humane, caring people who literally put their lives on the line to serve all of us."

DR, could you please refer to one instance of the good apples speaking out against the bad apples at SPD?

@38 "serving in seattle" wrote, "Please do not ascribe to the approximately 1200 members of the Seattle Police Officers Guild (myself included) the views of the three or four individual officers who bother to submit material to the Guardian."

Sir or Madam, have you submitted opposing material to The Guardian or elsewhere? Would you care to publicly (and non-anonymously) denounce the words published there with which you disagree? Until you do, your silence will be seen by many of us as agreement and complicity.
41
@ 37 but keep in mind that one of those authors (SPOG pres Rich O'Neill) was elected by all members of SPOG.
42
The problem with the race and social justice Initiative is that it tells cops and prosecutors to treat people differently based upon their race. Seriously. It wants prosecutors to take into account a persons race before charging them. That is why cops and prosecutors hate it. Cops and prosectuors want everyone to be treated equally, is that so bad? The author may use strong words, or even words that are offensive to you, but understand all he wants is equality. The pendelum has swung too far in Seattle. We worry so much about not being discriminatory to minorities, policys now intentionally discriminate against the majority. A white male can be charged with crimes in the city that a black male can't. While it is just for suspended licenses now, it will likely extend in the future.

The concern over coarse language is a differnet entity entirely. Officers should be able to use strong (non-derrogatoty) language when it is neccesary. Imagine dealing with a violent felon who is about to attack you. Sometimes violent criminals would be more likely to respond to "get the fuck back" then " please don't hurt me sir". Officers don't want to call you names or hurt you. They just want to be able to use the language necessary to keep you safe.

You can hate on the police all you want and critizce them regularlly because of freedom. Call them names if you like, it's your freedom. But no when you need a cop, really need one, that same cop is going to be running to help you.
43
@42- And the problem with the cop who wrote about it is that he thinks liberals are his enemies (not his political opponents).
44
I think I know why Seattle cops get gunned down.
45
@42 DBA wrote, "Sometimes violent criminals would be more likely to respond to `get the fuck back' then `please don't hurt me sir'."

False dichotomy. "Step back NOW," communicates the order without profanity or an expression of fear.
46
If it is just a handful of officers that are spewing this crap one would think that the rest of the officers would stand up and say something to them.

I mean if I were a cop, and just wanted to do a good job and help people (which there are many of) then I go and read that crap, I would say something, because I would not be lumped in to that stereotype.

But if the good cops just sit back on their hands and don't speak out about the bad apples they really have no grounds to stand on. Their silence and passivity says it all.

This country has enough hate going on right now. If you have a voice good honest policemen and women USE IT. Please use it.
47
@42 the problem, though, is that it is the role of the police, and similarly the military, to enforce policy and law as decided upon by the people they protect and the elected officials that those people put forward. It is neither the right nor position of the police or military to either set policy nor law, excepting the application of policy to enforce the policies and laws that the people tell them to enforce. That's it. The entire mission of the various "armed forces", as they were, is to enforce the law that we ask them to, in the manner we ask them to do that. If that's incompatible with their beliefs, they need to take their police work to another community.
48
@42, and I'm neither endorsing or denouncing things like the race and social justice initiative. The point is--that's city policy, law, and the direction voters and elected officials in the city want. If a given city employee isn't OK with that, well... they can run a city initiative to get it changed, or try to replace enough elected officials to get it changed. But, police, as a group, in their capacity as cops, don't, shouldn't, and should never get to make such decisions if those decisions override city policy.
49
I'm just glad we can finally agree that it's probably not ok for African Americans to drop the N-Bomb.
50
@45 I have to respectfully disagree. Sometimes that works great without a doubt. But I'm inclined to believe that you are not a violent felon, and don't understand that their are people that need to be spoken to using harsher words. I'm specifically talking about intense situations where the language is necessary to deter or prevent a use of force.

@47 Thanks for your intelligent response. I too believe it is the police's responsibilty to serve the people. One thing we need to remember is that Seattle cops never made any commitment to enforce the policy or will of the city. They swore to uphold the laws of the state of Washington and the constitution. The intiative the officer objects to is not law. The law gives the officer discretion of enforcement.

I personally would not tell an officer that he is not allowed to follow his own beliefs on what is right. They hired him beause they believed he was capable and knew the difference between right and wrong. Officers need to be able to think like you and I and not be forced to blindly follow a public policy which borders on unconstituionality (I may have just made that word up!)

Public policy isn't always right. Remeber that racially charged public policy once prevented blacks in certain areas or from using a certain drinking fountain. Civil rights activists, including public officals and police went against these policys. While the social justice programs are nowhere near the injustices of the 60's, they are discriminatory and I beleive the officer has the right to stand against it.

Thanks again for discussing and not the all too prevelant name calling.
51
Why are the douchebags always the loudest ones in the room?
52
I love this statement:

"It is extremely frustrating when individuals with zero police training feel qualified to voice their opinions on police actions."

No criticism ever! No matter how outrageous the behaviour you witnessed rest assured it was 'police work' and you, with 'zero police training', just don't understand.

Worth noting this wasn't uttered by just some random loose canon on the force but the union president.
53
re: O'Neill lamented, "It is extremely frustrating when individuals with zero police training feel qualified to voice their opinions on police actions."

I find it extremely frustrating when individuals with zero democracy education feel qualified to voice their opinions on public policy.
54
@50 You said, "While the social justice programs are nowhere near the injustices of the 60's, they are discriminatory and I beleive the officer has the right to stand against it."

In that scenario, the city then should also have the explicit right to terminate the officer's employment. Again--cops do not get to decide which laws and public policy to enforce. If marijuana were legalized in the city, and the Mayor and Council announced that the city would no longer enforce any marijuana laws--as the city is legally entitled to do so--would cops who disagreed and decided to arrest people on county, state, or Federal charges be given a free pass?

Police are sworn to uphold the law, but they still are municipal employees that are bound by civil policies that the city passes. If the City Council and Mayor decide they are required to always let off anyone for any jaywalking crime, or xyz crime, with a warning on the recorded first offense, it wouldn't be a negotiable matter. The police, I'll say again, do not answer to themselves in their professional work. They answer at all times to their employers. Any officer who disagrees with that notion, to be honest, isn't a civil servant, or fit to be one.
55
oohhhhh, seattle. i love that all of you live under the persistent delusion that police, anywhere, are there to protect you. good luck with that.

the cops are right - citizen accountability boards (and the forums that liberal pawns like the stranger are orchestrating) are just sideshows. they do absolutely nothing to change the fact that the police are the original terrorists.
56
I went through the Daryl Gates era in L.A., when a failure to enforce policy at the top led to institutionalized abuses on the street. Some leadership to counter this perception is required here.

Mr. Diaz?
57
@54 I disagree with the statement that police don't get to decide what laws to enforce. They do actually, it is called discretion. The law gives that power to each and every individual officer. An officer never has to write speeding tickets or arrest people for shoplift. Or he can do both everyday. It is his desicion, not the citys. If the department feels that he is being unreasonable they can take action against him. If marijuana was de-criminalized by the council, the officer would still have the authority to arrest the person under state law, the law he swore an oath to protect. He would however likely be in violation of dept policy which he could be punished for. The case would not be affected though. He still has the power to make the arrest. Seattle government can't legalize marijuana because it still is against state and federal law. Laws created by elected representatives also. So officers would still be "serving".

I'd like to get away from the hypotheticals an deal with the issue at hand. The officer is complaining about a city policy that discriminates against people based upon their race. Shouldn't he be championed for this? Or does it only matter if the race is a minority?

Many on this page have called for other officers to speak out against this officer. Why should they be allowed to have an opinion if he shouldn't? If the department created a program targeting black males, wouldn't you want the officer to speak out, even if the city didn't want him to?

I'm glad that he didn't let fear of termination for speaking out keep him from writing the truth about a racist agenda.
58
@57, DBA wrote, "Many on this page have called for other officers to speak out against this officer. Why should they be allowed to have an opinion if he shouldn't?"

Please show me where anyone said he shouldn't have an opinion. I haven't seen it.
59
@20: Excellent find. Clearly a bully.
60
"A white male can be charged with crimes in the city that a black male can't."

That's an allegation you're going to need to back up with evidence @42. And not just "my buddy who's brother is a cop says..."

My impression is that the exact opposite is true. But prove me wrong.

I've always thought the problem with cops is that they spend such a high percentage of their time in the company of scumbags and meatheads that after a while everyone starts to look like a scumbag or a meathead.

How about term limits for police officers!
61
@58 I thought that was what majority on here were upset about? That he spoke out against the citys policy? Is it his expression of his opinion that is aggravating?
62
@61, DBA, disagreeing with someone's opinion, or believing that the opinion that person holds indicates that he's not suitable for the job, is quite different than saying he's not entitled to an opinion. Similarly, as Dwight wrote @30, criticism of one's opinion is different than silencing it.

As for other officers' opinions, @40 I wrote:

@37 DRSpamNot wrote, "We have to be careful not to paint the entire SPD with the same brush because of these disturbing authors. I know a lot of people in Law Enforcement, most of whom are humane, caring people who literally put their lives on the line to serve all of us."

DR, could you please refer to one instance of the good apples speaking out against the bad apples at SPD?

@38 "serving in seattle" wrote, "Please do not ascribe to the approximately 1200 members of the Seattle Police Officers Guild (myself included) the views of the three or four individual officers who bother to submit material to the Guardian."

Sir or Madam, have you submitted opposing material to The Guardian or elsewhere? Would you care to publicly (and non-anonymously) denounce the words published there with which you disagree? Until you do, your silence will be seen by many of us as agreement and complicity.


Neither has responded. If other officers disagree with your union leader, then let's hear it. Nobody is silencing you. I'm encouraging you to speak out. Are you afraid of crossing O'Neil?
63
"...the city is inflicting its socialist policies directly on the Seattle Police Department." Um, yeah, the PD is, like, part of city government and should therefore be impacted by city policy. WTF?

Jesus, it gets worse and worse. How do these cops not realize that they're public employees (Socialism! Killit killit!) who work for the city and are supposed to be protecting and serving the people in it?

"Asked what goal this sort of rhetoric serves, O'Neill says in an e-mail: 'It is called free speech and freedom of the press. Officers have those rights, too.'" Actually, they don't, at least not as officers. They absolutely have those rights as private citizens, but while executing their duties as officers, they are more restricted in how they can act (by way of analogy, officer, you can masturbate in the privacy of your own home but you can't jerk-off onto a guy you have in cuffs - unless it's consensual and in the privacy of your own home). It's fucking scary that the sole people with whom we are vesting the power of legal state violence don't understand that.
64
"It is extremely frustrating when individuals with zero police training feel qualified to voice their opinions on police actions."

It is even more frustrating when individuals with zero humanity are allowed to exert control over actual humans.

65
The bottom line is that, whether they like it or not, we employ these police officers and when they are at work they need to represent our values not their own.
66
@42: Please detail this allegation.

"A white male can be charged with crimes in the city that a black male can't."

67
@65 You are absolutely right! When they are at work, they happily and willingly abide by the rules and regs prescribed in the thousands of pages of Department manual. If not, they shall be disciplined (unless they are a the rank of Lieutenant or above). However, when they are off and if they pen an article for the union newspaper, they can do so freely to express one's opinion. It is absurd that so many posting here cannot draw the difference between the Seattle Police Officers Guild as the rank and file's bargaining unit, and the Seattle Police Dept for which these brave men and women work. The funny thing about this drama, is the people who run this City... Council and Mayor get a copy of the paper each month.... They have never whined like Dominic......
68
@63 and 65 You both refer to this officer as only having freedom of speech while he isn't at work. I guarentee you he did not right this article while at work. He most likely did so in the privacy of his own home.

I am still not sure what the issue is. The fact that he didn't like the citys racist agenda and spoke against it? What about his ideas make him Incapable of doing his job. I doubt his beliefs on this subject have affected his actions at work in any way. The program is really making the biggest difference in the prosectuors office.

@65 Police can't represent what everyone wants. Child molestors want different things from their police than teachers. Weed smokers want different things out of their police than racers. Are you saying that you value racial discrimination based programs like the race and social justice initiative?

69
@42 happy to. The city's prosectors office has been instructed to take into account a persons race and ethnicity when determing whether or not to charge defendants with driving while license suspended. That is the way they describe it in public. But how do they use a persons race as a determing factor? Simple, minorites aren't charged. This program has only been instilled for this minor traffic crime as of right now, but the city is planning on spreading it. I wouldn't be surprised to see it spread to trespasses and minor assaults shortly.
70
Sorry that was for 66 not 42
71
@68 So you as an officer(supposedly) consider the majority of Seattle citizens, who want police officers to follow the laws and guidelines passed by our elected officials, the same as child molesters. Good to know. Fuck you.

Why don't you resign and join the force in Sultan or whatever bumfuck town you live. Oh that's right, none of your redneck methhead neighbors will pay enough taxes to the pay decent salaries you feel entitled to. Only us stupid evil socialist liberal n*****s and f**s.

When can we start having residency requirements for city employees?

72
@69 I think that what most are aggravated about here is not that the officer expressed his opinion but what that opinion was. Aside from the hyperbolic assertion that attempts to mitigate racial profiling constitute a 'racist' agenda (also being made by yourself it seems) he also hit a number of extreme right wing talking points about socialism and such and disturbingly mentioned that he considered those with opposing political views to be his 'enemy'.

Personally I think the officer in question did us a service by indirectly giving us a window into the attitudes of certain members of the SPD. Problem is if some other members don't step up and repudiate his views this kind of leaves the impression that these sort of views are widely held within the department.
73
Please step up, other members.
74
I think this point needs to be made because people keep dancing around it without actually stating it plainly:

The problem is not that the authors of these editorials hold the opinions that they do, nor is it that they expressed those opinions in a public forum.

The problem is that many Seattle residents are concerned that the cops with these opinions can't possibly be doing their jobs correctly while holding such basic opinions. And frankly, considering recent events, this concern is not easily dismissed.
75
Residency requirements could help. Make it so that within 5 years of enacting the legislation, all city employees must live within the city or at worst an "immediately adjacent city or town". Shoreline, Lake Forest Park, Kirkland, Bellvue, Mercer Island, Renton, Tukwila, White Center, Burien. If you're not a stakeholder in the city, what is your stake in it's people?
76
@71 Is there really a need to resort to childish name calling? I'm sorry if my example using child molestors offended you. I did not mean that Seattle residents (like myself) are child molestors. Please read it again and you'll see thats not what I said. I was just stating that different people want different things from their police. I'm sorry if it came off poorly.

@74 Thanks for stating your concern plainly! The concern is that a person with his beliefs can't be doing his job correctly. I can tell you this just not right. The Officer has published several books, has appeared on different radio stations over 25 times including stations and shows that many would call liberal, and has done guest appearances on TV multiple times. He is a well spoken individual who everyone of you would like if you had the opportunity to meet I am sure.

The department has not, and won't take any action against him because of how he does his job. That is what they are concerned about. I am sure if many of you were contacted by this Officer, you would think that he was the nicest, and most caring Officer you have met. He may have used strong words like "enemy" in his article, but who hasn't got heated when discussing politics? Where he demonstrates his best poise is in his work, and I assure you, if you had the opportunity, you would gain a great appreciation for how he does his job. I had the oppurtunity to see him work on a ride along once and I appreciated having him work for my city.

@75 I am sure the city and the department would love to have their employees all live in the city. The fact remains that many cities that have this requirement find it much more difficult to hire and maintain qualified personnel.
77
@76, So, basically what you're saying is, "Behind the smile of the tiger, the jaws bite deep." He's smiling to your face, while inside he's a seethign cesspit of hatred towards you, and this is a safe thing?
78
ahahahahah
To the 'Socialist' Hating Cops:
Fuck you sideways.

Guess what?
You make your living off other people's taxes.
Go on and on about the Liberals and shit all you want(I agree with a lot of that, btw) but at the end of the day you get paid to walk around with a gun and protect the rich at the expense of the common taxpayer.

I guess us civilians shouldn't expect too much from overgrown high school jocks who found themselves unemployed after being suckered into another illegal war. Cop on, Dickheads.
79
they are a very funnee bunch the seattle cops.
they assemble in bunches of a half a dozen each, say at the tully five corners store in t he u-district/laurehurst areal; or the u-village starbuck, early in the morn, boyd and girls.... and would you believe it... giggle giggle giggle... everything that anyone of them says must be funee as hell. one of the weirdest things to behold week after week.
80
they are a very funnee bunch the seattle cops.
they assemble in bunches of a half a dozen each, say at the tully five corners store in t he u-district/laurehurst areal; or the u-village starbuck, early in the morn, boyd and girls.... and would you believe it... giggle giggle giggle... everything that anyone of them says must be funee as hell. one of the weirdest things to behold week after week.

81
Judging all Seattle cops by the author of this article is like lumping all non-cops in with Rush Limbaugh. I know many educated and aware officers who serve the public with integrity. Our police force consists of Seattlites, both conservative and liberal. They are us... just with badges.
82
@81:Ifester: There are lots of non-cops who speak out in opposition to Limbaugh. I don't hear any cops voicing opposition to O'Neill. Do you?
83
Sorry, @81, they are not Seattlites, in case you didn't read closely. Few of them live in Seattle. Birk lives in Bow. And like they say, one bad apple spoils the whole bunch, especially if those other apples don't do anything to distance themselves from the bad ones, and even support the bad ones.
84
Most Seattle Cops will say "Fuck you Seattle whack jobs!!!!!".... when they read comments in legitimate media like Seattle Times, P-I and even the birdcage liner Stranger when they bash Seattle's Finest and Brave.... but when they come to work and strap on the gun and badge.... they will spill their blood to protect the Seattle people.... they don't care one damn rip about who it is, black, white, brown, yellow, Barney purple, gay, straight, bi, tranny, Muslim, Christian, Jew, Athiest, Pagan....... they will do their job blindly!!! Think about that whack jobs........ They serve all of Seattle EVERY MF'n day!!!!!! Get it through your stoned brains already.....
85
This is a great article Dominic. When people really start to investigate the facts and evidence on how the police think and act, they begin to see that it is not the bad apple that is exception to the rule, but they are the rule.
86
I read some cop say they treat and protect all people equally. You are a liar. We saw the 4-7 seconds of video of the hearing impaired carver. Lets not to forget the womans voice stating why did you do that. He was minding his own business!? My step dad was a banker and me and my friends were teen trouble makers. Let me tell you from my experience cops do not treat all people equal. Evidence is the famous Rodney King video, Shaun Bell on his way to his wedding or the Somali kid shot on his door step.Not to mention the regular shooting of less publicized kids usually person of color sometimes shot in the back. And if you really want to see twisted look at the many you tube video of cops shooting family dogs. see for yourself how necessary most of those situations look. you will be surprised how many videos there are. You know what they say about those who abuse animals.

I think MOST cops are criminals or borderline criminals The sheriff in the small town I grew up regularly confiscated drugs and alcohol from the kids in town and the neighbors would see him bringing it into his house for personal consumption. I have another angle of this situation too. My grandfather was a cop. As a child seeing grandpa only after work hours I saw the badge as a personal stay out of jail free card considering all the times he was pulled over speeding. Just a flip of the wallet and we were off. But oh boy if you were some kid pulling a California stop in a neighborhood while we were on our way to the county fair. That was a three hour ordeal. He thought he was above the law and he was a bully. He and my blood father got caught poaching. They shot a plastic deer. Yep caught on camera by DNR or game warden. Badge didn't get him out of that one.
Cops will prioritize according to social status and the fake paper citizen or corporation has a higher status then individual business man as we saw from WTO. A business man is more important than a regular person as my banker step dad shows. I think unless you are a racist like my blood father and cop Grandpa I think it is reasonable considering the prison population and the News paper that whiter is more important over darker. Strangely doesn't seem to matter with all the darker skin on the force. But if you think that strange My blood father who is proud to be a racists. His best friend was black when he was in the army. He would say he hates N*****S more than me.
87
Those wanting to forward these docs to the City Council... uh, you could have easily done so yourselves using the info on this page.
88
"You work for us, WE pay your salary!"

"You make your living of OTHER PEOPLE'S taxes"

Don't forget, you (probably) don't pay any more of a cop's salary than he does. They live here and pay the sales tax, just like you do.
89
I like the Stranger. They haven't had much in the way of decent articles over the last few years, but this is one of the best.

I am far to the right of most readers of this paper, I've also served in the armed forces that honestly helps protects most of our freedoms.

While I will always go into a situation with the local police with respect, I am often disappointed by the level of professionalism that they display.

There was a time that they would have been demoted for using profanity against, let alone injuring, maiming, or killing a member of the public that they have sworn an oath to protect.

It is not "Us versus Them". No matter how you choose to parse it, they are public servants, and the public deserves their best attitude 24/7. They are not patrolling a war zone, they do not have extra-judicial powers, and they are not members of the military. Take off the fatigues, put down the machine guns, lose the negative attitude.

If they can't, they should find other employment.
90
I believe that most cops (Seattle police included) are good, professional, peace-keepers. I also believe that as with most large groups, there are a few bad apples, including the authors (and including the guild president!!!) who speak their mind without fearing that their hateful language will be challenged.

The idea of the "thin blue line" has unfortunately become the police equivalent of La Cosa Nostra. Evil flourishes when good men do nothing, and unfortunately it seems that standard operating procedure is to protect the department or the force over the public.

The clear disdain for the political leanings of the public that they are suppose to be protecting is the most glaring indicator of the problems at hand.
91
Police union is the real gang in town. I wish it could be dismantled together with the dysfunctional internal affairs process. Police departments have so much discretionary power and conflict of interest in this country... I think America will down in history as the most hypocritical empire that ever existed. We preach so much we don't.
92
As I said in the email I just sent to a Seattle City Council person, it would appear that the episodes of Paul Schene and Ian Birk are not anomalous, but rather symptomatic of a systemic problem.

Absolutely bizarre.
93
We should print all these 'articles' and pass them out on the street corner...
94
Seattle Police, meet Toronto Police.

Do you know why I'm angry with the police, 42?
Because my sister went to a leftist academic conference in Toronto, and was greeted by a police officer with a shotgun. At an academic conference. That scares the shit out of me.
When the police start expressing extremely right wing views in news papers calling leftists 'the enemy' I worry that the police view my sister as the enemy, and me the enemy, and when police start aligning themselves strongly with a political ideology, I get visions of pre-WWII Germany and the parallels going on in the US.
Thank god I'm getting my citizenship in an non-north american country next year.
95
#94, Hopefully to some place nice and sunny, with raw papaya and mango in every meal.

Please leave your passport at the customs counter when you renounce your American citizenship. Don't worry, those that are staying in the US will continue to work towards making this a better country than most.
96
I grew up in another state, and spent some time living in L.A. Now I'm am not going to disagree with this article, because the truth is that policemen should be,and act like professionals at all times, They shoulsd also, as someone pointed out, follow the policies and rules set forth by the the law, city council, etc. I only want to point out that having grown up elsewhere and having spent time in other cities and states, what I have seen of the SPD overall is a police force that has generally shown great respect and restraint when dealing with the public. I was here for WTO and I have been stopped many times, even when acting like an ass when I've had too much to drink. Had I been in many of the other places I've lived, the first thing that would have happened is a night stick on the side of my head. And I say that as A Hispanic male, not a WASP or otherwise.
I only bring this up because I would like people to realize that Seattle really is a shining light in this country, and while I agree that we can't let this go unchecked as we don't want to turn into L.A. part 2, I believe that over all, the SPD is still better than most.
97
Having read a couple of the PDFs linked from the Guardian, it appears that at least these authors and SPD members fail to understand that they are tax leeches who get paid by our tax dollars. They work for us, and not vice versa. The arrogant assumption that they are above public scrutiny and public policy input is disgraceful, disturbing, and shameful. Their sense of entitlement is both false and shocking in its pervasiveness. Especially shocking when considering that use of deadly force, eg, John T Williams, is almost always condoned, right or wrong. One of the authors is clearly a delusional tea bagger packing a gun and a badge! How does this happen? Been happening forever, folks. I moved out of my home town years ago partially because I saw that the dumbest kid in my class growing up now had a badge and a gun. Ian Birk has no business or qualifications to be a cop/tax leech. He'll skate.
98
Having read a couple of the PDFs linked from the Guardian, it appears that at least these authors and SPD members fail to understand that they are tax leeches who get paid by our tax dollars. They work for us, and not vice versa. The arrogant assumption that they are above public scrutiny and public policy input is disgraceful, disturbing, and shameful. Their sense of entitlement is both false and shocking in its pervasiveness. Especially shocking when considering that use of deadly force, eg, John T Williams, is almost always condoned, right or wrong. One of the authors is clearly a delusional tea bagger packing a gun and a badge! How does this happen? Been happening forever, folks. I moved out of my home town years ago partially because I saw that the dumbest kid in my class growing up now had a badge and a gun. Ian Birk has no business or qualifications to be a cop/tax leech. He'll skate. Johannes "gee, I thought it was my taser" Mehserle got only two years for shooting an incapacitated, prone Oscar Grant in the back in Oakland. But at least it was a conviction and jail time. That's a start (always brightens the day to see images of cops in cuffs and jail jumper). Ian Birk, you're next. And SPD...based on the arrogance portrayed in the PDFs from your Guardian? You suck.
Good work, Stranger. Now that's what I call community service.
99
It appears that my prior comment needs a point or two of clarification. Having said: "Ian Birk, you're next", I would like it clearly understood that I am referring to standard judicial proceedings and investigations, currently underway, and nothing else.
In addition, I retract my "SPD, you suck" statement. Blanket indictments serve no purpose and a functioning community needs the high percentage of SPD personnel truly engaged in community service. Every organization has its bad apples. Unfortunately, the stakes are much higher when those bad apples are armed and dangerous. I stand with many others that John T Williams was murdered. Alternative behaviors were available and not used. Deadly force was used as option one. What attitudes are prevalent within SPD that enable that? The PDFs from the SPD Guardian give us some clues. Let the public beware.
100
Since the death of an innocent by deadly force used by a state agent is worthy of much public discourse, I will continue.
Within my employment culture there has been a significant increase in emphasis on safety. One of the catch phrases common in today's employer safety regimens is, "everyone get home safely everyday".
Within one of the Guardian PDFs a similar reference is made by a SPD officer. However, there is an addendum that should alarm the general public and invite intense scrutiny of the officer's intent. Here's the quote: "lets
protect ourselves from all sides and get
home...by any means necessary."
In light of a shared perception in the John T Williams case that "shoot first, ask questions later" may be in play, an important question for the public safety might be, what percentage of SPD operates under the "by any means necessary" theory? The implications are quite clear. Does the safety culture of police organizations now translate into "when in doubt, take 'em out"? Get home every night, by any means necessary? No one forced this profession, inherently fraught with danger, on any cop in this nation. They chose this career path. If, by any means necessary (euphemism for deadly force), is the entrenched safety mentality of our police organizations, then John T Williams will happen again, and again, and the general public will interact within the community at its own risk. The above is somewhat supposition, yet seems to follow logically from digesting the thought patterns displayed by SPD personnel in the Guardian PDFs. John T Williams is way dead and the public should press for answers about the mentality, behaviors and policies that got him that way.