The device had fallen out of a Newport Beach police officer’s Chevy Tahoe after he forgot to shut the back door, according to a police report.Why should the tax cows have to hoof the bill? No one seriously believe this is a training issue--that people have to be instructed that stuff can fall out the back if you don't close the door?
Now, Marcum and at least one other driver want the city of Newport Beach to pay to replace their tires. [More]
Why not make the "Only One" responsible pay for the damage his negligence caused?
People are lucky no one lost control of their vehicle and died or killed someone.
[Via Ed M]
9 comments:
Oh, now come on!!
Don't you think we should give Law Imposement the benefit of the doubt?
Exposing this incident to public scrutiny could compromise ongoing criminal investigations and put Officers' lives at risk! And we all know that their lives are MUCH more valuable than your or mine!
If Officer Friendly let fly with the spike strip, then it MUST have been the right thing to do... 'cause it was a Cop what dunnit!
Who are you to question your superiors?
at least he bothered to retrace his steps and help the affected. they'll just harp on how "professional" that was.
Ok, let's be right about this. The cop screwed up. It was a totally human mistake. This was a mistake, not an intentional act. He did what he could at the scene to lessen the impact.
Let's not get all over the cop on this. Should he have been more careful? Yes. However, this illustrates perfectly what "Only Ones" is about. Cops are merely human just like the rest of us.
Usually we read about abusive, vicious thugs in uniform who knowingly harm others just because they can without consequence. We should never give them a pass. But this is different. It was simply a careless mistake made by an all too human man.
Does he deserve to be on "Only Ones"? Yes, because even though what he did, unlike most on Only Ones, was not evil or even grossly negligent, just average run of the mill negligent. But it does qualify him for inclusion because it once again disproves the superman theory of law enforcement.
Some of you must be stroking out about now, for I am not known for my empathetic nature as regards cops. But fair is fair.
My primary concern, SA, is the shielding by virtue of government employment from paying for the damage his mistake caused. There is no department or city you and I can turn to and expect they'll pick up the tab for our mistakes. If he does not insist on paying for the damage he caused himself, it will color my judgment.
Therein lies the rub. He was responding to an assignment, so the city is on the hook. If they refuse to pay we can't blame the cop. But it does serve to prove our point that the administrations who employ cops do so for reasons that have nothing to do with service or prevention of crime.
The city owes these bills and they should pay, but it is almost worth it(of course, it wasn't my money, so I can say that with an almost straight face) if they don't, to expose them to more of their worshippers just what amoral bastards they are. Something like that repeated often enough may just kill the worship of authority that has "Germanized" America.
What is amazing is that there is even a question for the council to consider. It should be a slam/dunk that the city pays. Even more amazing is how many people don't get it. Remember when Lautenberg was first introduced? Lifetime loss of gun rights, even ex post facto, for any conviction of misdemeanor domestic violence. The kicker? The original amendment, before modified, exempted law enforcement and military personnel. Yet we still have people who do not understand the intent of our self-appointed masters and how Lautenberg exposed the rotten core for all the world to see and we turned our heads to avoid the reality.
I am long past hoping for a peaceful solution, therefore I hope to see more and more abuse by our "betters" until enough eyes are opened that we can recycle them.
Oh, and David, I have no heartburn with item on this, just didn't think we commenters should jump all over this guy as though he were as bad as Abate and his ilk.
Let me say Ditto what David said. I can hear Homer Simpson having a good belly laugh, "Ha ha! It wasn't me...!!"
I use sarcasm and absurdity to demonstrate hypocrisy and absurdity. I would make the same type of comment to illustrate the absurdity of a cop leaving his weapon in a public restroom.
I said this above, "Don't you think we should give Law Imposement the benefit of the doubt?".
After being absurd in Officer Friendly's defense, I'll say something like the following, "If Officer Friendly did A, B, or C, it MUST have been the right thing to do!"
Kind of an absurd assertion, huh? I suppose the same applies when the Chief of Police or Mayor says it.
I think you both have the impression that I was responding to your statements, I was not. I was just trying to keep the more unappreciative (like myself) from going off the deep end on this, when it is so much more deserved somewhere else(s)
Going to a city job or not, it was his screw up. He should man up and take responsibility. End of story. At the very least he should lose his job and all pension benefits.
ah but Chris, the city should have immediately ponied up the money as he was their agent doing their work. Any recompense on his part would then be between him and his employers. I am sure there would be some.
Post a Comment