"How many "bad apples" must there be until it's understood that there's no such thing as a "good cop." Real "gun control" would mean disarming police." -- Trancecoach

There is -no- number that could prove such a claim. Unless you prove that each and every individual cop is "bad". Due to my wife's affliction (schizoaffective disorder), we deal with cops anywhere from one to five times a year. And they show up under a wide variety of impressions, depending on what her condition was at the time. Sometimes it's claims of a prowler or intruder, sometimes it's claims of domestic violence, sometimes it's me, calling for help to keep her safe from herself.

This has got to be one of the worst types of situations for any cop...they have no idea what they'll be walking into. And in 10 years, we have yet to see a single cop who was less than wonderful, both with her, and with me.

It's going to take one hell of a lot more than stories of -other- cops behaving badly to change my mind about the guys who have helped me keep her safe and happy. Frankly, I think your ideology is showing.

One more instance of cops covering for each others murders. I only wish I could be surprised by this, but sadly this is exactly how criminal cops are treated almost every time. It took over 4 years to get any charge at all, and that only came about because of public shaming and investigation (the only investigation in this murder) by the local news, and there must have been not only absolutely zero investigation but actual cover up at the scene by the entire force (at least every one involved in any way with the 'investigation') for his story to have held up at all in the first place. There was clearly no GSR test done on him, or it would have shown he shot her...and the investigators had to actually HIDE the testimony of most or all of the witnesses to further his story that she shot herself (with his secured gun) and actively help him claim he wasn't involved.

That, @Stormsinger, is why so many people no longer believe in the 'good cop'. That doesn't mean the cops can't EVER act properly or 'good', it means that, in this and far too many other cases, entire forces are obviously, unavoidably complicit in crimes up to and including murder (if you help cover it up, you're complicit...that's the law), and murderers are bad, period, no matter how many little old ladies they help across the street or how professionally they act when they're not being actively or passively criminal.

(before someone jumps on the 'passively criminal' phrase as ridiculous, please note that it's the law that an officer MUST act to stop any serious crime they are aware of, and not doing so is being actively criminal by intentionally shirking their sworn duties).

Believe it or not, I do understand the problem with the "thin blue line" mentality. I'm quite sure I've spoken out about it more than once here on the sift. But I strongly object to painting everyone in any group with a single brush. Hell, I even know some decent Republicans.

Claims that one case, or a hundred cases, prove that there are no good cops are absurd and unsupportable. Just as absurd and unsupportable as those claims made here and there that there are no bad cops.

For every "bad cop" caught on tape there are often multiple other police, im sure, considered "good cops" that look the other way and would never/rarely call out a bad cop regardless of the legality or morality of their actions.

I believe that police (good or bad) will always side with their own regardless of morality/legality. You would have to be extra ordinary super cop not to, and po po just aint that.

The problem with that idea is, to be a cop in today's climate, you must have some level of loyalty to your fellow officers over your loyalty to the public/law. Those few that have publicly displayed the reverse have been driven out of their jobs, if not out of law enforcement completely. I've never heard of a case where that didn't happen, but I would be happy to read any you might know of.
That means that, at best, the 'good' officers turn a blind eye to the actions of their 'bad' workmates...or get driven out. Sadly I don't see a third alternative where they are whistleblowers against their workmates but continue to successfully work in the same force with the bad cop's friends afterwards....that simply doesn't happen in any report I've seen.
I already explained why 'turning a blind eye' makes them bad in my eyes.
In my opinion, that makes the supposition that there are no 'good' cops far more supportable than the absurd, easily proven false claim that there are no 'bad' cops. It's possible it's an overstatement, but if so not by far, and as I see it it's a reasonable position to take until whistle blowers always keep their jobs and those that harass them lose theirs more often than not...and that's absolutely not the case today.
It's not just a personality issue, it's a systemic issue.

I feel like the title for this one should indicate "man who is a cop kills his wife". But that sure doesn't make the circumstances any better, it's just a very different situation from an on-duty cop killing a random civilian (that's what I expected from the current title).

I haven't heard of one either, but the fact that we -have- heard of good cops blowing the whistle, even if they were forced out later, proves that there have been some good ones. And it's completely unbelievable that there aren't still some others out there, who haven't yet had to make that decision, but who will choose the right path when push comes to shove.

Tarring them with the same feather as the bad cops is doing them a disservice almost as bad as the coverups are for the rest of us. It's unfair, unjust, and just plain wrong.

I'm all for locking up the bad cops, and for treating those who cover up crimes by their fellow officers as equally guilty of those crimes. But I'm -not- fine with condemning people for crimes there is no evidence they participated in. I'm not willing to become what we are trying to fight against.

But wait! There's more!

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/evans-cop-cleared-of-criminal-wrongdoing-in-ashley-fallis-death-investigation06162015

misleading title

OK, but you must see that if, once a cop behaves 'good' they are no longer cops, that means there are no cops actually being good?
Tarring those extremely few, only momentarily 'good cops' (since as soon as they're 'good' they are no longer allowed to be cops) with the same tar as the 'bad' cops is NO WHERE NEAR the level of evil that protecting murderers, violent thugs, thieves, kidnappers, etc. is. Please. Be reasonable. It may be slightly unfair, but not even in the same league of wrong as protecting murderers from prosecution.
If you are for locking up bad cops, including those that cover up crimes, you must concede that that means 90%+ of cops need replacing, right? (I think I'm being incredibly generous to allow the possibility that 10% aren't complicit, I think the real number is closer to 2%).
I have explained why they are all complicit/participants. There is evidence that they, at best, turn a blind eye to the bad one's, and more likely/often actively help the 'bad' ones escape prosecutions. The only way they aren't 'turning the blind eye' to their fellow officers almost daily is they are so inept they actually don't notice their fellow officers being criminal...so they're also 'bad' cops...in this instance meaning ineffectual cops. MmmmK?

Shouldn't it really be 'Men who are cops murder one of their wives because she might have smoked pot'?
It wasn't just the shooter, it was also the 'investigator', and the entire department covering up this crime...making them all complicit. Remember, it was an on duty cop that hid evidence and ruled it a suicide instead of a murder, and the rest of their force that did no follow up/investigation at all (at best).

And you have to see that your claim of "no good cops" totally ignores those who have not yet witnessed any problem. Perhaps they're new to the force, perhaps they work in an honest precinct. But it's absurd to claim they don't exist. Whistleblowers -do- continue to show up, which is solid proof that some cops are not corrupt.

And yes, I absolutely do believe that tarring the good cops with the same brush is every bit as bad. "...better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer...", as Ben Franklin said. Moreover, if you want cops to be honest, it's completely counterproductive to blast them -all-, both good and bad, for being corrupt. Especially when not doing so is as simple as adding the word "most" or "many" to your bombastic claims. I really don't understand why you're fighting against being accurate in your statements. That's not how I've come to perceive you over the years.

No, I mentioned those few officers that had not seen the criminal action (and so not ignored it), they are just such a tiny minority that they are statistically insignificant. I gave them...and the non-corrupt forces an incredibly generous 10%, even though I believe the true measure is closer to <2%. I have yet to see an independent investigation of any police force that failed to find rampant criminal behavior force wide. I conceded that they likely do exist...somewhere...but they have yet to show themselves, and appear to be quite endangered if not extinct.
Whistleblowers do show up, but in such tiny numbers compared to total law enforcement that they statistically don't exist at all.
I understand that's your position, I just disagree. Ben Franklin was talking about private citizens VS law enforcement, and you have twisted it backwards. Those IN law enforcement have a higher duty to be honest, non-violent, non-criminals. Do you not agree? And please understand no one has suggested putting them all in prison based on a presumption of guilt...which is what Ben Franklin was talking about...the court of public opinion is a different matter. Also, in practice, assuming that all law enforcement is 'bad' and are untrustworthy liars actually lets far more innocent 'escape suffering', since they are the one's making the (often enough, false) charges. Just something to think about.

OK, let me try another tact. Do you think it's OK to put all members of a mafia crime family in prison, even though some may have done little more than honest accounting work? Well, I'm not suggesting prison, or even replacement, just meaningful, independent oversight EDIT:with real teeth. While I would LIKE to replace all officers (including the 'good' ones, let them all re-apply with stricter standards) and start fresh, I do see that that's not in any way reasonable or feasible...the best I can hope for is a change in behavior and a change in how we treat them...to one of zero tolerance for any professional malfeasance.
OK, once again, there is a statistically insignificant population of law enforcement that is totally 'pure' and not criminal. They exist. Because law enforcement as a group has become SO corrupt, they will be lumped in with the rest in public opinion until they prove themselves. There comes a point when the presumption of innocence is so damaged by a particular group of like minded individuals (which excludes by race, as a race is not 'like minded') that it no longer makes sense....and I'm far past that point. I now presume they are all trained liars (and I contend that's true, all of them, 100%, it's part of the job, and another way they're 'bad', but that's another discussion altogether) and that they'll lie to and about anyone they come in contact with. It's a terrible presumption to have to make about a group of people, but the only logical one to make since the alternative so overwhelmingly often leads to severe suffering for the innocent.

Moving this video to Trancecoach's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.