Town Hall Meeting: INGO and Law Enforcement

[USMC_0311]

You're right!!
I won't stoop to naming names, but anyone who visits INGO every day knows who the pot stirrers, and Cop haters are.

I don't know who they are. Like I said earlier call them out by name and use some examples. Maybe they don't know it.

I think that 1 or 2 LEO on here are a little sensitive and complain to much. Would you like for me to name names? Anyone who visits INGO everyday knows who they are, right?

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't know who they are. Like I said earlier call them out by name and use some examples. Maybe they don't know it.

I think that 1 or 2 LEO on here are a little sensitive and complain to much. Would you like for me to name names? Anyone who visits INGO everyday knows who they are, right?

You pulled the card now play it.

 

[USMC_0311]

You pulled the card now play it.

Him first.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Him first.

Ah... the old Donlad Trump ruse.. lol

 

[KG1]

okay, i'll name names.. Keyser Soze.

 

[UncleMike]

I don't know who they are. Like I said earlier call them out by name and use some examples. Maybe they don't know it.

I think that 1 or 2 LEO on here are a little sensitive and complain to much. Would you like for me to name names? Anyone who visits INGO everyday knows who they are, right?

I'm just trying to be polite.
But go ahead and stir the pot if you want to.

 

[USMC_0311]

I'm just trying to be polite.
But go ahead and stir the pot if you want to.

I think you are stiring the pot by not calling them out.

Name names, define cop bashing, throw a dog a bone. We got to know what to fix or who to fix.

 

[91FXRS]

 

[PatriotPride]

No. What this sounds to me like you're saying is that we either must allow a free-for-all, where anyone can say anything at anytime, no matter the effect on the people on the other end of the connection, no matter if it sends the site to the PD equivalent of Stormfront, no matter what the owner of the site wants OR we must have a total "police state" mentality here and tightly restrict all conversation.

This is a false choice (and incidentally, would also mean members such as yourself, who do not live in Indiana currently, would of necessity, be banned.) We are humans and we are adults, which at least in theory means we are capable of rational thought, tact, and polite, civil behavior without the Mod staff having to act like parents to a bunch of unruly children who have not yet learned how to behave in a mature manner.

NOTE: I am NOT calling members here by any names, I am making a comparison between two modes of personal interaction. In the one, you control yourself. In the other, someone else must do it for you. Neither Fenway nor any of the mod staff want the latter.

Is it that hard for you (generic you, not you, personally) to treat people with civility and good manners?

Blessings,
Bill

I apologize if I confused you---please allow me to clarify.

First, I am NOT advocating a free-for-all. I'm simply advocating equality. If certain members of Law Enforcement feel that INGO should restrict itself to discussing only INDIANA related Law Enforcement matters, then WHY should that not extend to every other aspect of the site? Want to discuss something in the Break Room? Keep it related to Indiana only. Want to discuss the Great Outdoors? Keep it related to Indiana only.

Second, why would I, "of necessity", be banned for happening to move out of state? Many of my friends and family live in Indiana, and I visit from time to time as Indiana recognizes my LTCF that my state issues. No disrespect intended, but that appears to be a rather knee-jerk reaction, and a solution to a problem that does not exist

 

[PatriotPride]

I don't think there should be anything done to change the forum at all: no new subforums, no restrictions, no censorship. If I don't like, I just don't play here.

This is, after all serious business. It's the internets!

(FLAME ON! )

+1 for saying what needed to be said. I wholeheartedly agree with your entire post, but for the sake of brevity just quoted what I felt was most important.

 

[PatriotPride]

As for possible solutions to the bashing issues, is it possible to ban someone from a specific topic or forum section only. There are plenty of people here who can play nice on a variety of topics, and are quite helpful in many ways, yet they just cant seem to play nice in a specific arena. Could, at the mod's discression, someone not be banned from the entire site but be banned from the "LEO's" section based on their inability to play nice? Instead of taking the ban all LEO discussion, and instead of having a free for all which leads to butt hurt, how bout closing those sections only to those specific individuals causing the problems? First, is this at all possible? Second, is it even a good idea to limit peoples ability to read/post on specific topics?

So you want certain members censored? Hardly sounds fair. I imagine you'd have an issue with it if a Mod got a hard-on for you and banned you from 1/2 the site.

 

[Rookie]

yet another thread full of rancor and venom.

Can you provide examples (especially if you feel I'm guilty)?

 

[Rookie]

okay, i'll name names.. Keyser Soze.

He was a troll whose mission was to create a bad LE perception.

 

[KG1]

He was a troll whose mission was to create a bad LE perception.

Yes I do realize that and I also know that he is no longer here

 

[Benny]

He was a troll whose mission was to create a bad LE perception.

I miss him.

 

[Rookie]

Are you really trying to tell me that you don't know what cop bashing is?

I'm trying to say that a lot of people want to know what crosses the line. People have different definitions. For example, a girl at work claimed civil rights violations because she didn't get the job she wanted. Why didn't she? She has zero seniority.

Is going toe to toe until one side is proven right considered cop bashing?

Multiple people have asked for definition, no one has answered. Why?

 

[lovemachine]

I don't know who they are. Like I said earlier call them out by name and use some examples. Maybe they don't know it.

I think that 1 or 2 LEO on here are a little sensitive and complain to much. Would you like for me to name names? Anyone who visits INGO everyday knows who they are, right?

I'd like to see a list of the names.

AND

A list of the cop bashers who are a little sensitive and complain too much.

 

[Rookie]

Yes I do realize that and I also know that he is no longer here

I think some of the issues that we are having are a result of him being allowed to continue his antics unchecked.

 

[KG1]

I think some of the issues that we are having are a result of him being allowed to continue his antics unchecked.

Agreed

 

[Kick]

The problem is that different people consider different levels of criticism to qualify as bashing. For some like UncleMike, any scrutiny of LE is considered bashing. For others, they are capable of drawing the line between criticisms of poor public policy and case law that put the people in harm's way and plan and simple jackasses who happen to hold a badge and use that badge to get away with behavior they otherwise couldn't/shouldn't. Which level of "bashing" should we be concerned with? Is it no longer acceptable to hold LE accountable for its actions, to be vigilant with the powers that we grant them? Would you have us ignore the real problems because it makes some of your colleagues uncomfortable?

Or do you not think there's a problem? Is that why all levels of scrutiny are considered bashing? There's nothing wrong with LE in this country and any attempts to highlight bad behavior are barking up the wrong tree and motivated by nothing more than sheer hatred for all things LE? Sometimes I get the feeling that sentiment is more common here than it should be.

Are you really trying to tell me that you can't see the forest for the trees? Or is this just a simple case of being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse

Do you ever tire of repeatedly posting the same argument and just wording it differently?

I'm trying to say that a lot of people want to know what crosses the line. People have different definitions. For example, a girl at work claimed civil rights violations because she didn't get the job she wanted. Why didn't she? She has zero seniority.

Is going toe to toe until one side is proven right considered cop bashing?

Multiple people have asked for definition, no one has answered. Why?

I have not answered for two reasons.

1.)This is not MY forum and it is not up to me to provide a definition. It is up to Fenway and what HE defines bashing as.

2.)It's really not that hard to figure out. A specific complaint about a specific officer is not going to be considered by most to be bashing. A specific complaint about a specific incident is not going to be considered bashing by most. However, calling all cops anything, saying "I hate cops", "You can't trust cops", "Cops are scum", "Cops are....",, Well I hope you get the picture, will be considered bashing by most. Some may also consider the same stupid comments like, "Another isolated incident" or "just another of the FEW bad apples" is bashing. I think it's annoying as all hell and pointless to post since almost every active member of this forum already knows how that poster feels but, I would definitely not consider it bashing.

I'm trying to remain respectful but COME ON PEOPLE!!! Do you really need a manners lesson from myself, the admin, and the mod staff or can we all just pretend like we know how to act in public