Let's Talk about the Calgary Police Service

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Sliver

And don't forget the this conclusion:


Captain Otto: is it possible you have the answer already that the symbol - to the public and your governing body - is seen as racist and divisive, but you just don't give a fata and will continue displaying it for all of us to see the rules don't apply to you?

Bravo CPS. I went from a total naïve guy supporting the cops and believing the hogwash that they have such a dangerous job (they don't even crack the top 10) and are protecting us while we sleep peacefully in our beds to thinking they're a bunch of disgusting pigs in the span of like four or five years. Well you wanted an us-versus-them police force and you have it. Nice work. I'm happy to be on the other side of that stupid-ass blue line.

This is the hill you want to die on?



Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[timun]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Nah. Just asking for facts behind your conclusions. Yet you don't have any. And you call me purposely obtuse.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

You are being obtuse, because you're willfully ignoring or dismissing what other people are saying and appealing to the rest of us to "think of another side" to the "issue". And then you're prattling on and badgering me about providing "facts" to substantiate that there are corrupt, deceitful cops out there. Are you so blindly ignorant that you really need me to substantiate my "claim" with the last few decades' worth of stories about "bad cops"? Like, are you that dumb?

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Hey, if you want to engage in this, at least read my post and respond to the points. If you have a convincing case, please make it. We're listening.

I'm also waiting for that.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

This is the hill you want to die on?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

I'm also waiting for that.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

W

T

F

are you talking about?

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by timun

You are being obtuse, because you're willfully ignoring or dismissing what other people are saying and appealing to the rest of us to "think of another side" to the "issue". And then you're prattling on and badgering me about providing "facts" to substantiate that there are corrupt, deceitful cops out there. Are you so blindly ignorant that you really need me to substantiate my "claim" with the last few decades' worth of stories about "bad cops"? Like, are you that dumb?

I just think it's more complex than what's being presented.

I personally don't care if I deal with a cop with or without a silly badge. If they are respectful and helpful, that's all I care about. I won't judge the whole lot because of the above complaint or the symbol.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[timun]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

I just think it's more complex than what's being presented.

I personally don't care if I deal with a cop with or without a silly badge. If they are respectful and helpful, that's all I care about. I won't judge the whole lot because of the above complaint or the symbol.

If you think it's a complex issue then why are you taking a simpleton's view of it? You've asserted that you know CPS members for whom the patch is nothing but a generic message of support for each other, for fallen comrades, etc. Okay, but there's the rest of us who are telling you that it has also become a symbol of police corruption, "the blue wall of silence", and co-opted by other groups who use it as a symbol of hatred, and you keep badgering us for "proof" and wholesale dismissing our concerns.

If you "personally don't care if you deal with a cop with or without it" then why are you defending wearing it when all the rest of us see it as a problematic symbol? Why are you proverbially standing in the way, if it's so unimportant to you?

You said earlier:

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Knowing some members of the CPS who don't really care about the symbol itself [...]

If they don't really care about it then why don't they take off the ####ing patch?!

[jammies]

I probably wouldn't even notice a patch, but I'm definitely noticing the police union assuming they are the arbiters of what is appropriate to wear on their uniforms. I'd have much more respect if their message had been, "We respectfully disagree that the patch in question is intended as support for racist or divisive values, however as dutiful servants of the public order we will remove the patch as requested by our lawful superiors."

Doubling down on the issue only confirms the beliefs of people who think "thin blue line" means "always cops before civilians". It's tone-deaf, stupid, and accomplishes nothing useful.

[Fuzz]

Are they allowed to wear whatever they want, or are their uniform standards? If they are breaching a uniform code, then this shouldn't be controversial at all.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

The irony in this case is that they are refusing a lawful order (ie. breaking the law) by continuing to wear the thin-blue-line patch thereby further ensconcing themselves in the notion that they are above the law.

I’ll start by saying for reasons I’m not about to get into, I have more reason than most people to not trust the police and not want to give them the benefit of the doubt in a lot of situations. I don’t think they should be allowed to wear something on their uniform just because they want to, but I also think there has to be some recognition from the police commission as to why the officers wearing the pin for reasons not related to racism or believing they should be above the law are doing so. (This appears to be the case now that they are having formal discussions with the police association)

With that being said, there’s a big difference between breaking the law and insubordination. The police commission has agreed to let them continue wearing the pin while they have some discussions about it over the next couple of weeks, not sure how what they’re currently doing could be considered as illegal or insubordinate.

If we don’t want the police being held to a different standard of law, well then we can’t hold them to a different (or made up)standard of the law when we find it convenient.

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

JFC who gives a ####.

Bottom line is, the patch is currently perceived by the public in a non-positive manner, and this causes distrust in the police force. The police force NEEDS to be trusted.

That's all that matters, and therefor the patch should go. Who cares what it stood for 20 years ago, what some expert says, blah blah blah.... it only matters what the public think of it NOW. I don't give a flying F what the police think it stands for.

It is going to go though is it not? I could end up being wrong but I highly doubt the commission is going to allow it, there will be discussions between the commission and the police association where they’ll probably end up agreeing to allow some other hopefully non-offensive symbol or something of that nature. I can’t speak for the association but I don’t think the issue is the symbol so much as how the decision to remove it was handled.

Knowing what I know the pin can be interpreted as representing I don’t think it should be on their uniforms. At the same time, and this isn’t meant to be condoning them wearing the current pin at all, I don’t think waiting an extra 2 weeks to enforce that and potentially come up with a collaborative solution between the commission and association is going to do all that much harm either given the fact that these pins have been worn for years.

I think the result you want is on its way, just give it a couple of weeks.

[Raekwon]

To be honest I don't know how any symbol should alter the national flag at all. It seems every country has their version with their flag and for the most part it seems to blend in better but a line directly across the Canadian flag seems negative regardless.

[undercoverbrother]

It is pretty simple.

You employer tells you not to wear something you don't.

Honestly I am surprised this is such an issue.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

It is pretty simple.

You employer tells you not to wear something you don't.

Honestly I am surprised this is such an issue.

Because cops are Special and beyond Rules obviously.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Because cops are Special and beyond Rules obviously.

Odd that the militarization of police didn't include discipline and doing as you are told by higher.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

It is pretty simple.

You employer tells you not to wear something you don't.

Honestly I am surprised this is such an issue.

You’d probably be surprised to hear that uniforms/dress codes are actually a very prevalent issue in a lot of workplaces. In this case it really doesn’t help matters that the CPS established a past practice of allowing the officers to wear the pins for a significant period of time even while knowing the public had an issue with it.

I actually think the path the commission is taking right now is probably the safest move from a labour relations and taxpayer perspective, even if it’s not the most popular option in the court of public opinion. I don’t think that upholding a discipline against an officer who violated the original order would have been a slam dunk, and a ruling like that could have made the problem worse in the long run because it would have reinforced the us vs them mentality. Not to mention it would have cost taxpayers a lot of money unnecessarily.

[81MC]

Originally Posted by #-3

Tell us more? You think it is a good thing that our police force can wear pins to make sure everyone understands they are here first and foremost to protect their friends, and that serving the community is a secondary concern only after they know them and theirs are taken care of?

The message is clear the only question is if we should accept them publicly sending it.

To protect and serve indeed.

First, I didn't say any of that. You're preconceptions are clear, but don't project that onto me.

Paraphrasing, and apologies in advance if this isn't accurate:
Locke: "The Us vs Them symbolism is problematic...We are the them and the police are us...its Police on one side and the public on the other".

Well, no, that's not what it means, and that's clear. The police force are the "thin blue line" while either side of the line is society, the 'us' Locke must be referring to. The other side of the 'thin blue line' is those that are a threat to our civilized society. It is in no way symbolic of the divide between the police force and law abiding citizens.

Sliver: "Cop wearing TBL badge in my shop...thinks he's Rambo...get real, its Calgary."

So what if the officer was doing exactly the same thing but without the TBL patch? Would he be a Rambo wannabe because he's wearing the police uniform? If that's the case, you're projecting your feelings about the management of the Police onto individual officers, which is whack. And if not, it's remarkable that you would be willing to condemn a person for displaying what was, until very very recently, an allowed symbol. One in which you have very limited personal investment, certainly less so than any officer. It's clear Sliver's position on the symbol is at odds with what an officers might be. Attacking en masse the character of anyone who
disagrees is deplorable.

Krovikan: "Its a racist flag". You can't just announce something and have it be fact. All the injustice carried out by police forces all over north america are not inextricably supported by this symbol.

Whoever the hell: "Desecration of the Fla
g!" K, than you must take issue with the City's latest decal campaign where they've taken the Flag, put the City logo in the middle and plastered some slogan on it? That's government issued man.

"Your boss tells you not to wear something, its that simple". We all know damn well if LGBTQ+ members wanted to wear a pride flag, these same posters would be arguing for their right to do so. Or BLM. Or Cancer Ribbons. #### man, we make exceptions all the time, including headwear.

It's a symbol that has a meaning that is apparently quite different for different people. That's not abnormal. The difference here is that people have a lot of distrust, hatred, or disdain for the police. Without meaningful consultation and discussions regarding what it actually represents to those who wear it, we've accomplished nothing but further discredit the police.

I'll fully admit my bias. I do not have the rosy coloured view of our society that apparently some here have. Calgary has ~20 000 violent crimes a year. Yeah, I value their service.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Misterpants

Lol, one is an issue with how the community views a vital public service in an area where relationships are absolutely vital to program success and one is...a guy who holds no authority whatsoever, playing a game. These types of silly arguments equating stuff like this are ridiculous.

My comment was in direct response to this comment by Jayswin.

Originally Posted by jayswin

I really don't understand the process commencing over this right now. You're a police force and were told you can't put an extra badge on your uniform that isn't part of the standard uniform?

It represents some pretty ****ty things in North America, everyone knows that. So they're told they can't wear them. Awesome, easy peasy, done. Then suddenly I read that the police don't like that and are upset and therefore they have called off the directive to remove the badges?

Like, I really don't understand how this is allowed? Even Mcdonalds employees can't wear a badge that has nothing to do with their standard uniform, and if hundreds of McDonalds employees banded together and said we all like this badge, it means something to us, that would change nothing. The badges would be off or the employees wouldn't be working there. So baffling to me.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

...and one of them is protesting so that innocent people don't get murdered and the other are protesting to continue having themselves treated at a higher standard than the average citizen.

nm

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Are they allowed to wear whatever they want, or are their uniform standards? If they are breaching a uniform code, then this shouldn't be controversial at all.

There are uniform standards. I'm not going to weigh in on whether the thin blue line patch should be allowed or not but, not allowing them to wear one could be a charter violation (speech). Whether it's reasonable is obviously up for debate. Nevertheless, uniform policies have been challenged before when the violated the right of Sikhs to practice their religion while serving in the RCMP.



https://www.cbc.ca/2017/canadathesto...-won-1.4110271

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by 81MC

First, I didn't say any of that. You're preconceptions are clear, but don't project that onto me.



Paraphrasing, and apologies in advance if this isn't accurate:

Locke: "The Us vs Them symbolism is problematic...We are the them and the police are us...its Police on one side and the public on the other".



Well, no, that's not what it means, and that's clear. The police force are the "thin blue line" while either side of the line is society, the 'us' Locke must be referring to. The other side of the 'thin blue line' is those that are a threat to our civilized society. It is in no way symbolic of the divide between the police force and law abiding citizens.



Sliver: "Cop wearing TBL badge in my shop...thinks he's Rambo...get real, its Calgary."



So what if the officer was doing exactly the same thing but without the TBL patch? Would he be a Rambo wannabe because he's wearing the police uniform? If that's the case, you're projecting your feelings about the management of the Police onto individual officers, which is whack. And if not, it's remarkable that you would be willing to condemn a person for displaying what was, until very very recently, an allowed symbol. One in which you have very limited personal investment, certainly less so than any officer. It's clear Sliver's position on the symbol is at odds with what an officers might be. Attacking en masse the character of anyone who

disagrees is deplorable.



Krovikan: "Its a racist flag". You can't just announce something and have it be fact. All the injustice carried out by police forces all over north america are not inextricably supported by this symbol.



Whoever the hell: "Desecration of the Fla

g!" K, than you must take issue with the City's latest decal campaign where they've taken the Flag, put the City logo in the middle and plastered some slogan on it? That's government issued man.



"Your boss tells you not to wear something, its that simple". We all know damn well if LGBTQ+ members wanted to wear a pride flag, these same posters would be arguing for their right to do so. Or BLM. Or Cancer Ribbons. #### man, we make exceptions all the time, including headwear.



It's a symbol that has a meaning that is apparently quite different for different people. That's not abnormal. The difference here is that people have a lot of distrust, hatred, or disdain for the police. Without meaningful consultation and discussions regarding what it actually represents to those who wear it, we've accomplished nothing but further discredit the police.



I'll fully admit my bias. I do not have the rosy coloured view of our society that apparently some here have. Calgary has ~20 000 violent crimes a year. Yeah, I value their service.

User name does not check out. Lol.

But thanks for this post. You have more time and energy than I do to devote to the lack tolerance for views other than their own in this thread. Yet out of the other corner of their mouth, they love to preach about their tolerance for all.

Edit - I suspect you won't get many responses since it doesn't fit the narrative.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[timun]

Originally Posted by 81MC

Paraphrasing, and apologies in advance if this isn't accurate:
Locke: "The Us vs Them symbolism is problematic...We are the them and the police are us...its Police on one side and the public on the other".

Well, no, that's not what it means, and that's clear. The police force are the "thin blue line" while either side of the line is society, the 'us' Locke must be referring to. The other side of the 'thin blue line' is those that are a threat to our civilized society. It is in no way symbolic of the divide between the police force and law abiding citizens.

Well, no, that's not what it means, and that's clear. You can't just announce something and have it be fact.

Krovikan: "Its a racist flag". You can't just announce something and have it be fact. All the injustice carried out by police forces all over north america are not inextricably supported by this symbol.

The use of the flag didn't gain much currency until it was flown after a certain cop in Minneapolis nonchalantly murdered a certain black man in the street. It's pretty strongly associated with injustices carried out by police forces all over North America...