Hacker News Reader

Comment by ludicast | Hacker News Reader

I agree. I'm a fireman with the FDNY and cops absolutely are on our side (and the same side as EMS as well).

In the past 12 years there only was one time where I even witnessed tension between us and them (an elevator emergency with victims, where ESU (New York's SWAT equivalent) and FDNY had overlapping jurisdictions). The bench-clearing hockey game brawls are the stuff of TV.

Cops are by and large professionals, who get shot in the face while protecting the same community that vilifies them for a few bad apples.

View on HN

> vilifies them for a few bad apples.

What is that saying about "a few bad apples" again?

For those who are unfamiliar what this is referring to, the full saying is "A few bad apples spoils the bunch." This refers to the fact that overly ripe apples give off a chemical that speeds the ripening process of other apples, so a few bad apples among many good ones can destroy them all.

The same thing can apply to people. The fact that there are bad police out there is only to be expected, just like you'd expect to find a few rotten apples in a large bunch of them. But just like the apples, you have to remove them, or the rot will spread. Bad police don't seem to get removed nearly often enough.

And often, they don't get removed because the "good" police protect them with a thin blue line of silence. Those "good" police aren't really good the very instant they protect the bad.

Those "good" police are just more bad apples.

Police are under constant pressure from the public. Everybody they arrest is indignant, angry and certain the policeman is just hassling them.

So the police develop a thick skin, and close ranks to protect one another. They couldn't exist otherwise. Its understandable. But it leads to problems when things like police hazing perps is tolerated. It leads to deaths in custody etc.

I blame the leadership, which tolerated hazing and mistreatment. That has to be squelched instantly, or it grows without bound until somebody is seriously injured or dies.

> They couldn't exist otherwise.

Policing in other western countries indicates otherwise. For example, if police were held personally liable, as a strict matter of law, for the cost of their mistakes (just as individuals in the private sector bear the cost of their mistakes), they would tend to act more responsibly. Britain is an example of this.

Cops are by and large professionals, who get shot in the face...

... at about the same rate as pizza delivery drivers.

thats a fantastically interesting response, nice. Are tehre statistics for these sorts of things, i think that'd be a really interesting article on its own, comparison of violent crime rates against various occupations.

I don't know if anyone breaks it down crimewise, but the US Bureau of Labor Statistics keeps track of the "most dangerous jobs" in terms of injuries and deaths from all causes, updated on an annual basis. Law enforcement often doesn't even make the top 10, but you'd never know that from all the whining they do.

One source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/08/22/americ...

Yeah... The ESU/FDNY Rescue pissing matches are really the only example I can think of where there is somewhat regular tension between cops and other emergency services.

What's the deal with ESU, anyway? Does it really make sense to have a parallel rescue company? Seems like I only hear horror stories (like when they dropped a car on that motorcyclist...)

EDIT: Also... "large professionals" indeed ;)

I'm not sure whose call it was for ESU to have these duties, but it probably was sold as increased neighborhood coverage, the same way engines do CFR until the real experts show up.

Though I've had good experiences with them, I imagine there could be a lot of problems if their books assign them different tasks that conflict with us (I don't know what they learn). As far as the "car dropping" goes, there's no excuse for that ;).

On your side? Against who?!

Don't read too much into that... He just meant that Law/Fire/EMS are not on different sides. Saying that people are not on different sides does not imply another side even exists in the first place.

The fact is that emergency responders _do_ end up getting attacked/assaulted/etc on a surprisingly regular basis. I can't remember the last time I didn't get at least verbally assaulted by someone at least once a week. Physical confrontations are all too common, and having law enforcement there when someone takes a swing at you is a very helpful thing... While there doesn't have to be two sides, that doesn't stop some idiots from choosing to make up their own side... When that happens, I'm glad to have someone with a taser and a gun on my 'side'.

It's not necessarily a 'bad' thing. It's an acknowledgment that we're often "forced" to be in situations with aggressive people where cops have defense mechanisms, tools, and we only have our wits. It's a "I've got your back" thing, not in the 'thin blue line' sense, but more "You take a swing at me, I have a taser. You take a swing at the paramedic, you're going to jail."

People are vilified for breaking the law. Wearing a blue shirt doesn't change that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com