Government and power to civilians

[FoFa]

Since we are suppose to be a government for the people, by the people, where does government get off saying trained civilians are given too much power? Aren't police just trained civilians?
I know the military is just trained civilians, cause I were one.
This is the kind of crapola coming out of the government that bothers me.

 

[Kraj]

I don't see anything unreasonable in there. If someone is going to have police authority over me I'd like them to be trained and sworn as police officers, thank you. I'd rather not have any schmuck who wanted to be a cop but couldn't make the cut strutting around with authorit-ah.

 

[FoFa]

Well maybe you missed the part about be trained by the POLICE DEPARTMENT (actually at their academy). Now if it was someone arresting people, or reacting to threats, yes, a police officer, but directing traffic?????

 

[Kraj]

No, I didn't miss that part; I think you're reading too much into the quote. You're assuming that the union president believes that directing traffic is too much power in the hands of civilians. But he doesn't explicitely say that; you don't know for sure. The article itself states that he's not opposed to the idea but wants to know the details. I get the impression that he's concerned about exactly what powers will go along with directing traffic.

In Illinois we have a department called ESDA (Emergency Services Disaster Agency). ESDA employees are basically volunteers who are occasionally called out to assist the police with certain duties on large scenes. These people - in general - are the motliest crew of police-officer-wanna-be geeky cretins you'll find anywhere. If they want to be at an incident and put up police tape and tell people where not to go, fine. But I would have a serious problem if someone decided these people should be able to, for example, detain me.

 

[FoFa]

See the whole problem I have with that is that government thinks like that. We can't give the people to much power. For instance, letting someone make their own mind up to get an abortion or not. Wheather you can be married because you like the same sex. Wheather you need to wear a seat belt or not. Way too much power for the average citizen.

 

[selenau837]

See the whole problem I have with that is that government thinks like that. We can't give the people to much power. For instance, letting someone make their own mind up to get an abortion or not. Wheather you can be married because you like the same sex. Wheather you need to wear a seat belt or not. Way too much power for the average citizen.

I agree with you on all points except the seatbelt on. I love the fact there is a law for that. I hate that my isurance premiums keep going up because of idots that refuse to wear one, and then cause accidents.

I feel that abortion is a choice that people should have. I don't believe in abortion, but feel the government shouldn't take that right away from a woman.

I believe that if you are in love, you should be able to marry whom you want, no matter the sex.

That's just my two cents, for what it's worth.

I guess I'm somewhat of a liberal Republician eh!

 

[Rich]

I agree with you on all points except the seatbelt on. I love the fact there is a law for that. I hate that my isurance premiums keep going up because of idots that refuse to wear one, and then cause accidents.

Suprised that you didn't mention the real benefit of belting up, the drastic reduction in deaths and serious injury

 

[selenau837]

Suprised that you didn't mention the real benefit of belting up, the drastic reduction in deaths and serious injury

That too, but the people that don't wear one actually don't care about their life. If they did, they would wear a seat belt and there wouldn't be a law that required people to wear one.

So why worry about their life if they don't.

I guess, I'm just in a mood today. Not very compassionate today. I'm sorry guys.

 

[Kraj]

See the whole problem I have with that is that government thinks like that. We can't give the people to much power. For instance, letting someone make their own mind up to get an abortion or not. Wheather you can be married because you like the same sex. Wheather you need to wear a seat belt or not. Way too much power for the average citizen.

I don't see what this has to do with granting police powers to people other than the police.

 

[Rich]

That too, but the people that don't wear one actually don't care about their life. If they did, they would wear a seat belt and there wouldn't be a law that required people to wear one.

So why worry about their life if they don't.

Well now you've opened up a new can of worms, you see as a nation you allow the authorities to take draconian measures to protect you from a miniscule terrorist threat and yet you wont allow it to protect you from a real and known threat?

 

[selenau837]

Well now you've opened up a new can of worms, you see as a nation you allow the authorities to take draconian measures to protect you from a miniscule terrorist threat and yet you wont allow it to protect you from a real and known threat?

I don't see it as a miniscule terrorist threat. I'm thankful for all the measures they are taking.

 

[Rich]

I don't see it as a miniscule terrorist threat. I'm thankful for all the measures they are taking.

Then compare the figures for those killed by terrorists in the States in the last five years with those of road deaths through lack of wearing a seatbelt or wearing crash helmets

 

[selenau837]

Then compare the figures for those killed by terrorists in the States in the last five years with those of road deaths through lack of wearing a seatbelt or wearing crash helmets

Well when you look at numbers yeah!

 

[FoFa]

I don't see what this has to do with granting police powers to people other than the police.

It doesn't, the issue is the government thinking people should not have too much power.

 

[FoFa]

Suprised that you didn't mention the real benefit of belting up, the drastic reduction in deaths and serious injury

That is why I wear them , law or not. Same with a motorcycle helmet. But how does the government say I should not have the power to make that choice myself?

 

[Rich]

But how does the government say I should not have the power to make that choice myself?

The same right that allows them to listen in on your phone calls, the same right that insists children attend school, the same right that forces you to stop at a red traffic light, do you really want me to continue?

 

[selenau837]

The same right that allows them to listen in on your phone calls, the same right that insists children attend school, the same right that forces you to stop at a red traffic light, do you really want me to continue?

Why would children not attend school. Are you advocating children not being educated??

Red lights are common sense. Could you imagine the chaos that would ensue on the roads with out traffic signals, and signs?

Phones...well I'm not keen on that. That is too much like big brother, but at the same time; If it can help determin sleeper cells and terrorist among us, then do it. I have nothing to hide in my phone conversations. They may get a few surprises if they listen in. but that is on them if they choose to do that.
However from my understanding, they aren't listening. They are simply looking for patterns. I'm do not have all the facts, so I can only tell you how I understand it.

 

[Rich]

Are you advocating children not being educated??

No of course I'm not, however it wasn't that long ago that children went to work at a very early age.
Government legislation changed that.

Red lights are common sense. Could you imagine the chaos that would ensue on the roads with out traffic signals, and signs?

Their use is enforced by law, again introduced by government, whether we like it or not sometimes we have to be protected from ourselves

 

[Kraj]

It doesn't, the issue is the government thinking people should not have too much power.

That's an issue based on your opinion (which is fine) not the article. The article you posted is in regards to the mayor of Houston granting certain powers to civilians which are normally reserved for the police. The union president's comments are expressing a concern over that practice. Period. That's it. End of story.

Add in the fact that the underlined quote that outraged you was not spoken by a government official, but rather by the president of the police union, and this article has nothing to do whatsoever with "the government thinking people should not have too much power". In fact, it would indicate the exact opposite is true since the only government official referred to (ie., the mayor) wants to put more power in the hands of civilians.

 

[selenau837]

No of course I'm not, however it wasn't that long ago that children went to work at a very early age.
Government legislation changed that.

Exactly, the realized that kids needed to be kids instead of little slave workers. The child labor laws are great, and very much needed.

Their use is enforced by law, again introduced by government, whether we like it or not sometimes we have to be protected from ourselves

Exactly, we do have to be protected from ourselves. If there was no laws and regulations and people did as they pleased, this world never would have evolved into what it is today. We would still be staring into the fires in amazment and hunting our food with sticks.