Calling All “Good Cops”

Travis Wilson shared the following post, originally written for PoliceZero.com.

The myth of the “Good Cop“ has been ongoing for some time now. I wanted to give an open invitation for those law enforcement officers that believe they are “Good Cops” to come forward and reveal themselves.

Submit Your Story
Click banner to submit a police story, tactic idea or any other police related content.

What makes a “Good Cop” ?

While people’s definitions and parameters may be different, a very small sampling of my own should suffice to get some response.

1. Your income cannot come from theft or coerced compulsory taxation.

Theft is an act that as a law enforcer you must punish and incarcerate people for, so it stands that you yourself should not be beneficiary to income of the same origination. Payment for services by compulsion and punishment for refusal is little more than what “the law” defines as extortion and groups that use these methods are considered criminal in nature and are arrested and punished as well. Acting as the sanctioned and protected mafia of an area doesn’t turn an immoral and illegal by law act into a moral and righteous act.

2. Your income cannot come from dealing in stolen goods.

Police departments and sheriff’s offices often use the sale of seized property as a means of income. This activity is again illegal for anyone not on “Team Blue”, so it should be that you yourself do not make income from the act. Selling these stolen goods at auction nets PD’s and SO’s loads of money for their newest toys, from Lenco BearCat APC‘s to boats,  motorcycles and weapons of all sizes, all in order to further the “just following orders” excuse.

3. You do not enforce laws that have no victim.

Victim-less crimes account for more incarcerated people than any other. Crimes without victims are willful and wanted acts against the only participant and should not be used as a reason to punish people. Enforcement of laws that lock up or financially hurt people who seek to only endanger themselves, intentional or not, is a piss poor way to deal with vices and voluntary actions. As the late Lysander Spooner laid out,”There can be no crime where there is no victim.” A counter argument goes that society is the victim. But, as society is, as a whole, a collection of unaffected and in most cases unknowing of the “crime” being committed, “society” cannot be held as a victim when individual reactions cannot and will not be taken into account and individual restitution is not required.

In the minds of many, myself included, there is no such thing as a “Good Cop”. There are good people who are police officers who have in their minds a mental deception that they are doing a noble and decent job at being agents of the State apparatus. There are people with the greatest intentions of doing solidly decent work and serving the community they live in, protecting life and property; but their role in the system and it’s malfunctions; it’s blatant hypocrisy to that which it claims to achieve negates those pure intentions. You cannot be a good part of a bad system.

Travis Wilson

banner-store

EPN

Pre-1919 Unique, Historic Dominion Police Badge Collection (rare Rare Rare)  picture
Pre-1919 Unique, Historic Dominion Police Badge Collection (rare Rare Rare)
$437340.75


Extremely Rare - C. 1880's - 1911 Nypd Police Collection Lot 1 picture
Extremely Rare - C. 1880's - 1911 Nypd Police Collection Lot 1
$45000.0


	Police Comics #2 Nm 9.4 picture
Police Comics #2 Nm 9.4
$21733.0


Extremely Rare - C. 1870's - 1917 Nypd Police Collection Lot 2 picture
Extremely Rare - C. 1870's - 1917 Nypd Police Collection Lot 2
$13000.0


Original 1920's Prohibition Law Enforcement Badge picture
Original 1920's Prohibition Law Enforcement Badge
$10500.0


  • CopApologistsSmellLikeshit

    Their is no such thing as a good cop, and their is no such thing as a good person who is a cop, If their was than not many cops would be breaking the law

  • tz1

    You miss the most important things.
    A good cop would rather be the victim than the violator of rights.
    A good cop de-escalates, if there is an argument, he defuses it. If someone is excited he acts to calm them.
    A good cop respects the rights of the accused and doesn’t tr to play games, intimidate, or threaten a suspect into giving them up.
    A good cop controls his emotions – he isn’t fearful or angry so he can handle the situation.
    A good cop is trained so knows the constitution and no or least violent options.
    A good cop gets a warrant before searching.
    A good cop would not do anything beyond what the citizen acting on his own rights would do.
    His purpose is to keep the peace and public order, and to defend the weak who cannot do so themselves.

    There’s more. Note these wouldn’t apply to private security, some would prefer big, violent, intimidating thugs that beat first, ask questions later. When it comes to Liberty v.s. some other goal like security, most will go with the latter. Justice is not even talked about. You want results, not respect for rights – what rights.

    Were there private security, one agency would get biggest, propagandize they are the best, become a monopoly and insist everyone join. In short, what we have now.

  • JC

    Police officers do not get any of the money seized. This is just another article of propaganda bullshit. The PD are good. They work a difficult job with decisions that don’t make everyone happy.

  • t

    tz:
    Interesting list.
    But you are missing the biggest key ingredient of what we do.
    On a different thread I’ve had another of a series of discussions with Yankee Fan.
    In that specific discussion…while YF raises some very good points…he’s missing 2 that you miss as well

    First is the question about “rights”. As in…whose are more important? Your aren’t any more important than Billy’s are. And that’s where the police end up all the time. To “defuse” those often volatile situations…we have to look at what is reasonable or…what is lawful.
    I always use the example of the loud party. Does your “right” to a freedom of expression out way Billy’s “right” to not have you intruding into his repose? That right there is the rub…which is more important? If both have a “right”….how can they possibly be in conflict? But they always are.
    That example goes into just about everything CBers bitch about. Drunk driving, speeding, using drugs, no drivers licenses, etc.
    it’s all about reasonableness. After all….you have to keep in mind what the Constitution did…it set forth GOVERNMENT. It didn’t abolish it.

  • t

    tz:
    Oops…
    I forgot:

    You also missed that we are just people. No chip implants during the academy. Just people that have families, and bills to pay. We go to your church and coach kids sports teams. We shop at the same stores and use the same roads.

  • Peter Lemonjello

    STFU you half wit wannabe cop. You can’t spell worth a shit but we’re supposed to believe you write reports everyday?

    “Does your “right” to a freedom of expression out way Billy’s “right” to not have you intruding into his repose?”

    Really, “Out way”? Did you mean “Outweigh”, fool? It’s not two words, dipshit, it’s one.

  • t

    Wow
    Scathing.

    I guess when you can’t make a point there’s always spelling and grammar on e blog site comments section.

  • tz1

    I’m not sure whom “we” that you refer to is.
    The constitution limited government and enumerated a subset of rights.
    I also noted you say there are two things I missed, but there is a first without a second.

    As to the party, deafening volume is an aggression, not an expression. If he is downwind, can I use acrid, stinky smoke signals to express my displeasure? As to a peace officer, he should attempt tomsettle the immediate conflict and leave it for the next day to negotiate terms for the future. Perhaps some soothing drinks, or paying for a nice hotel or something – get to Yes.

    The problem is when someone is objectively unreasonable. If peace officers are known to be fair arbiters, then their suggestions have moral force and that itself de-escalates. Someone might have a right, but is being unreasonable abour exercising it.

  • Chris

    Note: JC is always on this site 24/7 posting disparaging remarks to all articles without providing any evidence to the contrary, which gives credence to that he is either on payroll to do so or is just a basement dwelling troll looking to get a rise out of people. Do your fellow readers and the owners of the site a favor and pat him no mind.

  • t

    tz:
    Ummmm…tinge second part appears in a seconds later comment that’s starts with “Oops”

    And WOW…meet “aggression” with more aggression. And you wonder why the police end of fighting with people? That is the peak of unreasonableness….
    and it’s exactly what we deal with all the time. Your stance was the “only my rights matter approach” that is why I have lots of job security.

    As for the Constitution.
    It’s like I’ve written hundreds of times…what die that document create and why did the amendments get added after the body of the document was done ?

  • Peter Lemonjello

    Yeah that’s right shit for brains. Next time use better judgement.

  • tz1

    Your second comment didn’t appear on my Disqus feed when I replied.

    All rights of every human being matters. From conception to natural death, but some find a million lives inconveinient each year so legally kill them. No right to privacy, only emanations and penumbras. For me, I try to defend others’ rights before my own because I value principles.

    The amendments (I assume the Bill of Rights, 1-10) were added to make explicit what was common law.

  • Patrick H.

    Shouldn’t we give them a handycap like in bowling? I mean they practically have a snowballs chance in hell?

  • Patrick H.

    But some of you shoot people in the back n drop a taser. Or rape a woman during an arrest. But when other defend those actions allies are lost enemies are made.

  • Patrick H.

    So police never get raises from moneys received, or more vacation time for better quotas?