News
Jan 13, 2011 at 4:00 am
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
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In News
Editors' Picks
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
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.
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"
In regards to the N-Word, at least theyre not dropping the hardy R.
http://www.thestranger.com/extras/images…
The third paragraph:
The final paragraph:
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.
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.
...also known as "where your salary and pension comes from", officer.
I don't know if he should be offering communication advice.
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/131879_co…
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.
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!
That's like saying "I'm not religious, but you are a witch and should burn at the fucking stake."
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?
No sir, like most conservatives, you can't tell having your moronic ideas criticized from being censored.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
False dichotomy. "Step back NOW," communicates the order without profanity or an expression of fear.
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 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.
"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.
I find it extremely frustrating when individuals with zero democracy education feel qualified to voice their opinions on public policy.
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.
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.
Mr. Diaz?
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.
Please show me where anyone said he shouldn't have an opinion. I haven't seen it.
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!
As for other officers' opinions, @40 I wrote:
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?
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.
It is even more frustrating when individuals with zero humanity are allowed to exert control over actual humans.
"A white male can be charged with crimes in the city that a black male can't."
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?
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?
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.
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.
@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
Absolutely bizarre.
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.
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.
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.
Good work, Stranger. Now that's what I call community service.
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.
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.