Spike wrote: <and I snipped>
>
> It's the same old story. Many people want the cops out stopping the
> bad guys, as long as they are not the ones being stopped. And if the
> suspect is injured, it's the cops fault for chasing them. In other
> words, they give tacit approval to people who break the laws society
> institutes.
>
> You don't want pursuits for traffic offenses because it's just another
> form of taxation and revenue collection.... UNTIL.... your child is
> the one killed by a speeder.

I have no objection to cops stopping cars for speeding/etc. when there
is a genuine issue of public safety; and I have no objection to the
high-speed pursuit of cars that don't stop when blue-lighted, regardless
of the reason for the original blue-light.

But we all know that some tickets are issued merely to raise money, and
every such ticket reduces the reputation of cops. Sorry, Spike, in my
book, revenue-driven ticketing is just plain wrong.

Worse even than the tickets issued solely for revenue is the attitude
shown by many cops: the attitude that if you don't support the cops in
every possible way and in every possible situation, then you are anti-cop.
That's wrong.

In this region, city and state cops are notorious for testlying and for
internal cover-ups. That's wrong.

The public's perception of cops is certainly not helped when some cops
are making in excess of $200,000 per year. But, no legislator dares to
even mention reducing the pay/benefits packages, out of fear of the clout
of cops. That's wrong.

I've found most cops to be good, moral, people. But there are wrongs in
police operations that need to be exposed and corrected, and the image of
individual cops continues to be limited by the image of the group.
--
Cheers, Bob