all this abuse of power on the taxpayer dime is
nothing new in the history of mankind.
Perhaps they should do wellness checks on these officers
statements like these just perpetuate it.
Who is "they?"
And when the next article is "wellness checker uses power to molest wife of officer who used power to molest kid of..." are you going to say "they" should start doing checks on the wellness checkers who wellness check the police?
Or are we going to start going more draconian?
Say institute rules where everyone that gets elected or into any kind of civil service whatsoever goes through surgery to make them a eunuch, takes pills to offset any kind of sexual impulse that may influence decision making? Must live in a padded room for the rest of their life, with their only access to the outside world via drones and robots? And can receive absolutely no information with any kind of emotional bias whatsoever?
Something like that?
Most of the problem with government power abuse ultimately stems from the people that continue to say/believe "they" should do something.
thank goodness there are laws to prosecute those FOUND to be guilty of abuse.
That doesn't really help the victims all that much.
The kid(s) was still abused, or the person was still murdered.
Prosecuting people doesn't really change that.
It doesn't magically make what it does to their bodies, their psyches, their personality, disappear.
At best it makes you (a person outside of the situation) feel better and gives you a false sense of security.
With all the increasing laws to prosecute those "FOUND" to be guilty of abuse, or whatever...are our prison populations nonexistent? Are criminals de-arming? Crimes becoming less severe? Pedophile crimes nonexistent and not leading to them finding new and innovative ways to get around the rules?
Other than that "FOUND" to be guilty, doesn't necessarily mean actually being guilty.
it is so interesting how the underlying premise of taxpayer money is being overlooked ...
It doesn't seem all that germane if there's an assumption that the person is going to molest kids whether or not they're being paid by the taxpayer.
Also relevant, I don't think the employment ad on craigslist stated "looking for someone to join the sheriff's department. Must have prior law enforcement experience or justice degree. Primary duties are blackmailing parents to molest kids. Must meet state mandatory 40 diddling hours a month."
It's not being subsidized by taxpayers. It's just a molester who happens to be paid by taxpayers because of their "job," the power associated with the "job" is being used to facilitate his molesting of a child.
all this abuse of power on the taxpayer dime is a shame really.
Have you ever seen a movie that was associated with Harvey Weinstein?
Lord of the Rings? Pulp Fiction? Scream? Jackie Brown? Shakespeare in Love? Chocolat?
Do you still watch movies, or t.v., or read books, or buy anything whatsoever?
Do you believe that there are no child molesters or rapists or harrassers in the movie, t.v., or book business, or in any consumer product business?
How do you know you aren't directly subsidizing the behavior?
There's really no difference.
Taxpayer dime, or your own personal expenditure, if the money isn't being advertised as being used for that purpose it doesn't really matter if it's on the taxpayer dime, or from you buying a movie ticket.
"Abuse of power" is abuse. It's a "shame" whether it's on the taxpayer dime or not.
Saying "they" should do something, is just another way of saying "let's give them more power which can be abused."
It's the same as an American applying for benefits. The difference is Americans have a ss # and have to report wages. The Mexican women have men working for cash. That's how they live so well. They are qualifying for benefits while Americans are being turned away after paying into the system.
