*fume*

[dudelovenext]

This is why I extremely dislike (not sure I'd go so far as to say hate) the police. I've never had a single positive encounter with them.

I know it's not right to generalize, to make a judgement about a profession before you meet the individual...but when it's a 100% negative rating, it's extremely hard to try and form a neutral opinion.

Comments

[theevil-chie.livejournal.com]

That's retarded. There are no words. ...except maybe "retarded".

[relucesco.livejournal.com]

Sick.

[thestupidguy.livejournal.com]

I'm going to side with the cops on this one. That guy could have put himself and others in danger. He had no business trying to save that otuer guy when rescue personnel were on hand at the scene. It's like when stupid people try to squirt a house blaze with a garden hose and get in the way of the real firefighters. Sure they're trying to help, but they just get in the way and delay things.

Sure the story had a positive outcome, but he's lucky.

[elsmd.livejournal.com]

I'd agree with you if the guy didn't save the other person's life. People squirting a blaze with a garden hose aren't stopping the fire single-handedly. This guy did the job that was needed to be done - no harm, no foul I'd say.

There's no good reason to basically charge this guy $2000 for saving someone...

[thestupidguy.livejournal.com]

"This guy did the job that was needed to be done"

But it wasn't his job to do. If rescuers were not on hand, then it probably wouldn't have been a big deal. But if the situation is being handled, stay out of it instead of possibly causing a bigger problem. Whether or not he saved the guy's life is irrelevant.

.

[elsmd.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it COULD'VE been a bigger problem. That's true. But the fact that it instead turned out to be the best-case-scenario should be enough to let it slide.

Re: .

[lagoonbug.livejournal.com]

Exactly. The police were there but were the rescuers even there soon enough? The guy was probably the first one there. I'd have done the same thing.

Re: .

[thestupidguy.livejournal.com]

"Yeah, it COULD'VE been a bigger problem."

Which is reason enough to arrest the guy, who was repeatedly told to get out of the water.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Just another reason for me to dislike police even more.

Re: .

[elsmd.livejournal.com]

"But the fact that it instead turned out to be the best-case-scenario should be enough to let it slide."

You conveniently left out this counterargument to the concession.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Maybe because of your position they have a little more respect for you. The average person seems to command 0 respect from them.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Terrible that the police reward him with arresting him.

I'll admit, we don't know the whole story. We don't know when Newman was there, and we don't know when "emergency personal" arrived.

Still, I figure it's one of the split-second decisions.

Re: .

[thestupidguy.livejournal.com]

But that counterargument was not sound. What are you saying? That breaking the law is perfectly fine if there's a good outcome?

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

While the story doesn't tell the time that Newman or the emergency personal arrived. If emergency personal were there at the exact same time as Newman, they would've restrained him from entering the water.

I think it's a terrible thing to punish a Good Samaritan.

Re: .

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

The ends can justify the means, in certain situations.

Re: .

[thestupidguy.livejournal.com]

And I don't think they did, in this case.

Re: .

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I just can't see that since a life was saved.

[thestupidguy.livejournal.com]

What likely happened is that Newman was already in the water by the time rescue crews arrived. No big deal there. According to the story, he was repeatedly told to get out of the water. So at that point, he should have gotten out and let the crew to its job. If he had saved the guy before any crews got there, more power to him.

As it stands, it's very unlikely that the guy would have died if Newman hadn't saved him. Who knows. If Newman had listened, they may have gotten the guy out faster. It's hard to carry out a safe operation if someone is in the way.

You see him as a good Samaritan. I see him as an obstruction to a public service.

Re: .

[elsmd.livejournal.com]

Actually, yeah. That is what I'm saying. That was a foundation of the Civil Rights movement, after all.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Except the public service was performed, so I don't see the problem. Was he trained for something like that? No. But he started it and he saw it through.

[kittykitsune.livejournal.com]

if he had saved the guy before rescue crews got to him, Newman would have been a hero..... but fact of the matter is, if rescue crews were so concerned, why didn't they go in to rescue the man themselves instead of fretting over some guy trying to do some good then that would be another issue. Fact of the matter is, Newman saved someone and all the police did was tell him to get out of the water and then screw him after he saved someone. I disagree with the police on this one. the end justified the means.

[nekomi-7.livejournal.com]

Why didn't they arrest Duamni who was dumb enough to go swimming there in the first place.

[humu-ted.livejournal.com]

I'm gonna have to side with Stu on this one. While I don't think it was necessary to actually arrest the guy, I *do* think that he could have been obstructing actual rescue efforts.

When I was training for lifeguarding and CPR one of the most important things we had to learn was to keep the situation from escalating. A lot of people want to help if someone is drowning but without the proper training they can EASILY become a victim themselves thus doubling the problem.

*IF* Newman was there before rescue personnel and was in mid-rescue, that's one thing. If he was in the water and halfway to the guy, that's understandable. However, if he was just standing there as the report says, then he should have gotten out of the water and let the rescue operation procede.

Think about it from the rescue personnel's prospective. There's one guy in the water who needs immediate help. There's another guy who doesn't need help but he may in about 15 seconds if he keeps going deeper into the water. If you only have time to save one person, you save the one with the highest chance of survival, i.e. Newman. However, you don't want to *have* to save him so you try to get him OUT of harms way. He ignores you thus taking your attention away from the person currently in trouble. It's not an easy scenario to deal with.

However, he DID save a man's life and I think that at the very least should get him out of being arrested. I would think that a harsh warning from officials would have been just as effective. I don't see arrest really being the best solution to the problem here.

AND I'd also like to point out that Duamni was a moron for going swimming directly after eating in a place known to have viciously strong undercurrents. He should have gotten a warning from officials as well. If Newman was really deserving of jail time, so was Duamni IMO.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Actually, from the report, he wasn't just standing there. It seems that he was in the water already when he was asked to leave the water.

The report says that he was standing there after rescuing Duamni, not that he was standing there before hand ignoring the police.

The rescue personnel's job should've been to rescue. I can understand yelling and telling Newman to get out of the water, but while this was happening the rescue attempt should've been happening (which the article doesn't really state what exactly the rescue personnel did).

True, Duamni was a bit of a dumbass.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

That's a pretty good question.

[humu-ted.livejournal.com]

Yeah the article was pretty scanty with the details so I can't condemn anyone for their actions or inactions. I can see where the Police are coming from though because of how dangerous that kind of thing can be so even though I want to hate the police and I look for every opportunity to do so, I just can't use this one to fuel that. :P

While I *do* hate the Police in general, I have a few friends who are cops so it's tough to generalize. The ones I hate though are the jerks who sit on roads waiting to give speeding tickets. They suck. *has been pulled over too many times* :(

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Yeah, why weren't they making more of a rescue effort rather than yelling at Newman? Of course, it doesn't really tell what the rescue crew was really doing during this time.

Re: .

[lagoonbug.livejournal.com]

I agree. Let's say you're at some college town where there's a house full of Marines or football players, basically big guys. And you know that some girl is drunk and passed out and about to be gang raped in an upstairs bedroom. And you know that even if the cops were called right now, the can't possibly show up for a matter of minutes. And you're already in the living room behaving yourself. And the guys who are about to commit the crime are drunk so you can pretty much break them up and push them out of the room since in this example you're a strong guy yourself. So do you call the cops and just wait for them and not step in there and break it up? I don't think so. You go in there before someone is violated in the second worst way(the first being murdered). You rally some help if you can and do it.

[lagoonbug.livejournal.com]

If we apply too many rules and procedure to everything, things won't be done right. If I can swim someone out of drowning, I'll do it. If I see a beached whale or seal at the beach, I'll get a bucket and pour water on it. If my neighbor's house if on fire and everyone's outside, I'll grab my hose and water it down while waiting for the fire fighters. If we always just stood back and wait for the "professionals" to come, we're neglecting.

Re: .

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

My thoughts exactly. If the authorities are there and doing there job, hey, I can sit back and watch. If not, I feel it's my duty as a fellow human being to try and help, in whatever way I can.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

It's a person's right to risk their life to try and save another. To me, it's not an arrestable offense (depending on the situation...but most usually I'd say no).

[humu-ted.livejournal.com]

Well, technically it's a person's right to commit suicide but it's against the law. Legality and Rights are not always the same thing.

[elsmd.livejournal.com]

If suicide were somehow punishable, it would be against the law. There's nothing beneficial about it.

...unless the guy doing it really REALLY sucks. :P

[dol-fin.livejournal.com]

Well you should only deal with the police if you get in trouble so....

anyway, i like the guys who sit on the side and give tickets.. maybe people will follow the speed limit *Drives 60* :)

anyway, this will be thrown out by the judge.. unless we have some information that wasn't released by the public. I suspect that is the case, because otherwise he would be playing the mad 'abused' person, instead of the 'humble me' person

Re: .

[dol-fin.livejournal.com]

Well, its not illegal to save someone. Its illegal to disobey the direct order of emergancy personell

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Well, except for some people it's an escape.

I'm against suicide myself, but...it's a person's right to do with their life what they want. Though I'd still try and talk anyone out of it.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

They'll pull people over for stupid reasons, just to see if they can catch them for something.

Heh, well, I don't. I wish we had an autobahn here in the U.S. :)

Re: .

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Like was posted earlier, sometimes doing the right thing isn't always legal.

Stupid reasons are often hazords

[dol-fin.livejournal.com]

They can pull you over for 1 mile over the speed limit.. but luckly, the police (at least here) follow a 15 MPH buffer zone.. but even still, there are so many stupid things people do... like cut in front of trucks. do they relize that the trucks CAN'T stop? And they leave that space between them and the next car for a VERY good reason?

*drives a moterhome, knows how hard it is to stop 5 tons of moving car*


What really pisses me off is the cops that go over the speed limit... in a cop car :/

Re: Stupid reasons are often hazords

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Yeah, though, usually for 1 MPH over you could contest it and the judge will usually let you off with a warning.

Yeah, everyone here goes at least 5 MPH over. Everyone would probably go 10 if it weren't for the cops. Though...we do tend to have some stupid drivers around here.

[tak178.livejournal.com]

Are we talking about the politically correct and polically neutered police of King County?

Personally, I've never had a "bad" encounter with the police. The only times I have been given a ticket are when I was specifically in the wrong...I've had my share of tickets. If I did not have a fair-minded officer at the scene of my accident in Feb 04, I could have been a lot poorer.

Here is a story...

When a friend of mine and I were up in Vancouver in Nov 04, we were driving along the roadway beside the Expo 86 building, when a nutcase from behind us whipped around the side of our car...had to be doing AT LEAST 60. Next thing we know, there is an RCMP walking out in the road holding up his hands to the thug...and low and behold, the nutjob PROMPTLY pulled over.

You see, it's all about persepctive. We do not value or respect police officers here in the US, simply because we look at any impediment to our freedom, as just that, even if WE do something stupid. I thank God everyday that we have police officers. They put their necks out everyday to protect and serve. They are up there with Firefighters and the soldiers fighting for us in Iraq right now. If we had half the respect that the Canadians have for their police, we'd be in much better shape.

~Dave

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Most police officers treat me like I'm some sort of thug. Maybe I just have that kind of look, I dunno.

I remember when I was pulled over once because I stopped in a crosswalk (never mind there was no pedestrians around). The first question out of his mouth was, "You been drinking?"

>_<

Part of me realizes that yes, they do do good deeds. But it seems when they're not doing those good deeds, they have a chip on their shoulder and a little power trip.

They don't respect me, I don't respect them. I smile at them and give 'em a fake dose of courtesy when I have to.

[thestupidguy.livejournal.com]

"The first question out of his mouth was, "You been drinking?""

Busted.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Never mind at the time that I hadn't had a drink in about three days.

[berrykitten.livejournal.com]

Probably the worst thing ever done to me by a police officer was them slamming my grandparent's heavy oak door into me when I was between it and the wall, when I was about 7. The knob just barely missed my face.

[dudelovenext.livejournal.com]

Geez, sorry to hear that. :(

I'm sure there are good police officers out there, but I have a feeling they are few and far between. :( That really shouldn't be the case.