Today I stopped Caring….
Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 5 months ago to Government
Well at least one cop understands how we feel about his profession, but he blames us, not those of his other 900,000+ compatriots who've given us just cause to despise the profession and those that would abuse their positions in it.
By Lt Daniel Furseth, DeForest, Wisconsin Police Department
"Today, I stopped caring about my fellow man. I stopped caring about my community, my neighbors, and those I serve. I stopped caring today because a once noble profession has become despised, hated, distrusted, and mostly unwanted."
By Lt Daniel Furseth, DeForest, Wisconsin Police Department
"Today, I stopped caring about my fellow man. I stopped caring about my community, my neighbors, and those I serve. I stopped caring today because a once noble profession has become despised, hated, distrusted, and mostly unwanted."
Sort of like the belief that the threat of Capital Punishment 'keeps people from killing people.'
If anything, those laws 'prevent' people who wouldn't commit that kind of crime in the first place and have no effect on the ones who would anyway... whether the crime is murder or running red lights and stop signs.
That's what I meant in my 'confession' that I DO 'run red lights' but ONLY when it's safe, imnsho, to do so, AND the light appears to be malfunctioning.
Laws are created as reminders in society for 'things to Don't Do.' If you say they 'rein in' people from doing bad stuff, you'd have to then quantify what percentage of participants ARE 'reined in' and what percentage are NOT, as well as WHY...
Whole 'nother discussion... :)
The laws will only do so much. People sometimes choose to not follow them. Could you imagine the anarchy if there were no laws? At least the laws rein in most people.
One of my co-workers, dozens of years ago, was killed by a repeat-offender drunk driver as she was returning to work from her lunch hour.
Beautiful, successful young girl. Just graduating with a degree, had a great boyfriend, and some bitch t-boned her. I'd complimented her on her looks while walking in to work that day. By early afternoon she was dead.
And the LAWS (i.e., LACK of 'anarchy') were also 'on the books already' about drunk driving. The t-boner-bitch was estimated at roughly 60 in a 35 zone.
It's not the laws or lack thereof; it's people's behavior! Laws may lead to punishment, and SOMETIMES they discourage people from doing stupid things, but they are NOT primary means of 'danger prevention.'
The bottom is where too many projects fail though. Management often (not always thankfully) has a tendency to think they can issue orders and demands and get exactly what they envision. But in reality since so many of them have rarely if ever done the work they are trying to manage, the instructions leave a lot to be desired.
If the workforce buys in, they will get it done anyway, and help correct the procedures. But if they don't buy in they do what they are told and things wind up worse than before the project started.
Six Sigma is very much a team effort, and buy in is required at all levels.
Unfortunately too many people cause the projects to either have problems, or flat out fail when they get defensive, or try to control things about which they are clueless. And you are right, its usually the middle that goes wonky on you.
You are missing the point that without the law there would be anarchy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(and your first answer is probably wrong, too... )
:)
But most of the laws against that stuff came from societal agreement to set up some limits so that folks who want to do those things can, in some cases, be made to take responsibility for their actions, and especially if those actions actually hurt other people. And speeding and running red lights can greatly increase the odds of hurting (or killing) an innocent victim.
Anarchy is, again, a straw dog thrown into discussions to deflect the discussion away from the concept of personal responsibility and rationale.
One of my favorite examples used to be the Autobahn in Germany, back when it had NO speed limits AT ALL posted anywhere. Total anarchy.
I kept getting passed by faster cars because my rental had a huge front end vibration above about 60 mph. I learned to pass quickly before the headlights in my rearview mirror quickly got 'wider' and flashed furiously.
Then I asked a German friend about the speed limits and accidents on the 'Bahn... He said that there were few problems. If someone went off the road with an accident, they didn't bother to send police or ambulance, just a wrecker to remove the shredded wreck from the field nearby. Survival chances at those speeds were negligible and accidents were often single-car wrecks. So, at one level... no problemo.
When I have to wait, alone, for a minute or more for a red light to change, I occasionally will, With Extreme Caution, go through the intersection. My stepson-lawyer told me that I could claim to have assumed that the signal has sustained some kind of electrical or mechanical failure if no cars had come through the intersection on the crossing road during that period. I've probably done that dozens of times.
But VERY carefully. And never been caught, ticketed or involved in an accident.
But if 'everyone' did that 'all the time' for 'any reason,' it Would be anarchy and Very Dangerous, and you should bet that folks like me would rarely, if ever, run those lights or signs.
Or, as I've learned over the decades, the 'right answer' is often "It Depends."
:)
Why have the mongering and pandering been accepted [or even tolerated] 'far too long'?
I am an advocate of Critical Thinking, and some folks have labeled my approach as Socratic. Whatever...
When people pose issues that 'need fixing,' I approach the stated problems NOT with 'my answer' (unless they demand it, but only under duress...) but with the Question Cycle of "well, why DOES THAT HAPPEN?"
The 'problem' as I see it, is that 'everyone' wants The Answer to come from that initial posing of the question. I believe that, in most cases, that's impossible.
The First Answer to "Why?" is nearly always simple, easy and wrong.
Why Things Go Wrong requires, in my NEVER so humble opinion, the Repeated Asking of "Why does THAT occur" until you get close to what might actually be a Root Cause of The Problem.
Why do people steal?
Because they are poor and need stuff.
Why are they poor?
Because the system screws them over.
Why does 'the system screw them over'?
Because it's designed to do that.
Why is it designed to do that?
Because it's run by money-grubbing rich folks.
Why do MGRF's run it?
Because they have money and power.
Why do they have money and power?
Because they inherited it or have political pull.
Why do they have political pull?
Because our political system is built that way.
Why is it built that way?
In my experience, unless one or both sides of that Why-Because 'dialogue' deliberately try to avoid finding Root Cause, a rational give and take on that WILL get close to Root Cause in no LESS than about six iterations. And those are the Easy Issues.
Some month or so ago, I engaged my step-grandson in such a discussion on a subject he'd inquired about. We went, according to his count, something like ELEVEN layers down and still hadn't found Root Cause, and it wasn't because we weren't both trying to find it.
The issue was, in Reality, just That Complex as to require that kind of in-depth search!
I'll now go back up the thread a bit and demonstrate how my questions could be applied to some of the 'answers' AND questions above.
Thanks for participating and inspiring.
It is a responsibility that, as you say, would preserve the freedoms and rights of our society.
Thank you for your passionate responses.
JC
Taking principled stands are the only way that we can maintain our freedoms and rights against those in our societies that wish to deny such. IMHO
I simply have no interest whatsoever in determining or limiting what you or anyone else does with their lives and actions up to the point of attempting to use or apply force to me or stealing from me.
You brought up the need for police to control 'hostile areas' and that justifies the war type actions that police partake in and apply to their interactions with citizens. And yes, if someone else make's it necessary for me to protect myself and my property, I am prepared. As anyone should be.
Load more comments...