Let's Talk about the Calgary Police Service

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by timun

Are you really so naive that you don't know that one of those "different meanings" you speak of is corruption and deceit?

Sorry what? Where are you getting this from?

[Misterpants]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Strong and powerful union.


Curious how many folks deriding the CPS for the thin blue line patch were supportive of Kaepernick’s kneeling despite being told not to.

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.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Sorry what? Where are you getting this from?

So you are that naive... Or very deliberately obtuse.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by timun

So you are that naive... Or very deliberately obtuse.

That fact you chose to insult me rather than answer the question is pretty telling.

I can assure you I'm neither of those but I'd still like to know where your facts are coming from that the symbol represents corruption and deceit.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

For this particular story if what the ladies say about the police response is true, it looks more like they didn't want to be bothered to arrive, more than there wasn't a need.

Maybe it's a failure of communication by the police to the public about the state of modern policing.

if there is an expectation of the public that the cops will show up when 911 is called, it's on the police service to educate us.

I agree, and this incident may push things one way or another.

A change being bandied about that I'm looking at with some interest is changing the word "dispatched". The options I'm most in favor of are 'assigned' or 'put on'. So that instead of being 'dispatched to a call', an officer would be 'assigned a call' or 'put on a call'.

Takes away the implication of 'dispatch' that an officer will go to someone/where.

But there's also a tricky line to walk with what can and can't be done online or over the phone. I've noticed that the public has been calling for the police to modernize for years. To 'get with the times' and figure out online/phone reporting. CPS has developed a pretty robust online reporting tool, and with COVID for the last couple years, really heavily refined it.

And yet, when I tell people this, that they can report their issue online, almost to a one they are upset/disappointed they aren't seeing a police officer in person. So that's something being looked at, as well.

[Red Slinger]

Personally I've never associated the "thin blue line" with White Supremacists although there always seem to be White Supremacists in any organization that has a bully pulpit. I think it's mostly stood as a symbol of police protecting police. Too often, that means that police have historically not been subject to a suitable amount of oversight and often face different (read: lessor) consequences for when they do break the law. 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'd say the general mentality of policing has improved over the last 10-20 years but many of them still seem to be of the mind-set that they are somehow 'in charge' and citizenry answers to them.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Curious how many folks deriding the CPS for the thin blue line patch were supportive of Kaepernick’s kneeling despite being told not to.

That comparison goes out the window once you consider that one is a publicly funded police force and the other is... well, a professional football player. I don't know about you, but I generally don't hold them to the same standard.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

That comparison goes out the window once you consider that one is a publicly funded police force and the other is... well, a professional football player. I don't know about you, but I generally don't hold them to the same standard.

...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.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

That fact you chose to insult me rather than answer the question is pretty telling.

It was 9:00 am and I'm working, I didn't (and still don't) have time for a comprehensive response.

I didn't insult you though, as long as you're not being deliberately obtuse.

I can assure you I'm neither of those but I'd still like to know where your facts are coming from that the symbol represents corruption and deceit.

I'll just quote myself from earlier:

Originally Posted by timun

Originally it was meant as you described, "what stands between good and evil", but since... about as long as I can remember, back to the early '90s at least, it's also been used as a euphemism for some police officers' "code of silence" about their own misconduct. The idea that "thin blue line" not only stands between "good" and "evil", but between fellow cops and anyone else. In such a case, it insinuates that cops = "good" and the rest of us = "evil" that they have to protect each other from, and when cops start viewing the rest of the populace as "evil" or "the enemy", well... you get itchy trigger fingers and pieces of #### like Derek Chauvin.

It's also something that a lot of fascists and other far-right groups have glommed onto. That whole idea of "law & order" over a "just" society that happens to be mostly white and Christian...

As I said, the "thin blue line" has come to represent the line between cops and the rest of us. As Mickey76 put it:

Originally Posted by Mickey76

[...] an excessive force complaint where the only witness is the officer in question partner and he wears the patch, and I am certainly going to be more inclined to consider he cares more about watching his partners back then telling the truth.

I would presume the exact same. "Thin blue line" = "cop who would perjure himself to protect another (dirty) cop rather than tell the truth".

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

A criminology prof at Mount Royal chimes in:

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/no-eviden...gist-1.5851144

Knowing some members of the CPS who don't really care about the symbol itself, they all say the same thing - it's that THIS particular issue is what the commission takes a stand on? Out of EVERYTHING wrong with CPS, this is the thing the CPC felt was most important? They are silent on almost everything else and provide no support for other far more important issues. The problem is, is that those more important issues don't get them votes.

In essence the stand against the symbol is not really about the symbol at all, it's a stand against the commission itself. At least that's my take away.

While I do agree that in the end, you do what is asked of you in this setting, I can certainly understand the push back. I look at it like this: at my job, let's say there are 100 people wearing a pin that commemorates a lost friend. And we have been wearing it for a decade. Then all of a sudden, there's a board of directors telling your boss that they have done some research and that the pin can no longer be worn. Not only that, but they are saying the pin has roots in racism and one board member even say's there will be a "reckoning" if that direction isn't followed. I think it's ok to question that decision. What research has been done exactly? Also, there are other huge issues at this workplace that the board has been silent on. Why is that? Why are the focused on this pin?

Take a stand against the commission? Are you listening to yourself? This is the hill you're choosing to die on. The commission told you to remove the flair and the cops are disobeying, but that's the commission's fault? Are you joking? That's the dumbest switcharoo projectionist logic I've ever heard.

And yes, this is important. If it's not important to you, take the stupid-ass patch off.

And FFS, I'm sure the commission can handle discussing a patch (this should be easy; cops are making it hard) and other things. Just because this is an issue doesn't mean they're not handling other issues, too.

And where did this "white supremacy" crap come from? That's not why police have been asked to remove this non-compliant symbol from their uniforms.

That's cherry-picking one piece of the opposition to it and conflating that with the larger problem of the symbol. Refer back to this article:

A year-long consultation process was held — involving two Calgary police associations and Beyond the Blue, which supports police families, along with several community groups like the Anti-Racism Action Committee and the CPS Community Advisory Board — where some Calgarians "have clearly expressed that the thin blue line patch on police officers makes them uncomfortable due to its history and current use by groups opposing racial equity," said Cornett.

"As policing evolves, so must its symbols. Discontinuing the use of a symbol that is undermining some Calgarians’ trust in the police is the right thing to do," she said.

Then you have Calgary Police Association president John Orr saying:

"However, we feel quite strongly the symbol is an important one for policing," he said. "It has been misused and misrepresented by some, however it has very real meaning to us."

Yeah, well sometimes when a symbol you like is co-opted by racist elements and used in a way to increase divisiveness and intimidate minorities, maybe change your fataing symbol you dumb fata. Maybe I should start wearing a swastika around. It's a symbol I relate to from before the Nazi's appropriated it, so why should I have to stop using it just because it has been misused and misrepresented by some?

That doesn't even touch on the fact there's an argument to be made this is a desecration of Canada's flag policy:

*The dimensions/proportions of the National Flag of Canada have an exact ratio of 2 to 1 (twice as long as it is wide), and must not be modified.
*The National Flag of Canada should not be written on or marked in any way, nor be covered by other objects.
*Nothing should be pinned or sewn on the National Flag of Canada.
*The National Flag of Canada should never be dipped or lowered to the ground as a means of paying a salute or compliment to any person or thing.

The symbol is racist and it's divisive in addition to being racist. I see a guy with a gun walk into my store with his thin blue line and desecrated Canadian flag and I'm uncomfortable. I don't like this guy is brazenly thumbing his nose and disobeying orders put in place to make the public feel comfortable. Does he not care that it's an intimidating symbol? I don't like when a guy has an us-versus-them attitude and I'm the THEM. And I have to do what he says, not disobey, and I must comply.

And it's not up to the police officers to pick and choose what they're allowed to flair up their uniform with, anyway. They work for us. They are overseen by us. The community does not like the symbol. Take it off you fataing pieces of #### while you still have a modicum of respect from the community.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by timun

It was 9:00 am and I'm working, I didn't (and still don't) have time for a comprehensive response.

I didn't insult you though, as long as you're not being deliberately obtuse.




I'll just quote myself from earlier:



As I said, the "thin blue line" has come to represent the line between cops and the rest of us. As Mickey76 put it:



I would presume the exact same. "Thin blue line" = "cop who would perjure himself to protect another (dirty) cop rather than tell the truth".

Maybe don't post if you don't have time to respond is a more concise manner.

You quoted yourself as proof? I guess u should have been clearer. What are the facts behind your conclusion of corruption and deceit as it relates to the symbol besides whatever you've heard on the news recently?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Misterpants]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Maybe don't post if you don't have time to respond is a more concise manner.

You quoted yourself as proof? I guess u should have been clearer. What are the facts behind your conclusion of corruption and deceit as it relates to the symbol besides whatever you've heard on the news recently?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

Like, are you looking for a directive from hate groups saying they formally adopt this symbol as theirs? The fact most people in this thread agree that it has a problematic association is indicative of this topic's public perception.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Maybe don't post if you don't have time to respond is a more concise manner.

You quoted yourself as proof? I guess u should have been clearer. What are the facts behind your conclusion of corruption and deceit as it relates to the symbol besides whatever you've heard on the news recently?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

So you are being deliberately obtuse, then.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Take a stand against the commission? Are you listening to yourself? This is the hill you're choosing to die on. The commission told you to remove the flair and the cops are disobeying, but that's the commission's fault? Are you joking? That's the dumbest switcharoo projectionist logic I've ever heard.



And yes, this is important. If it's not important to you, take the stupid-ass patch off.



And FFS, I'm sure the commission can handle discussing a patch (this should be easy; cops are making it hard) and other things. Just because this is an issue doesn't mean they're not handling other issues, too.



And where did this "white supremacy" crap come from? That's not why police have been asked to remove this non-compliant symbol from their uniforms.



That's cherry-picking one piece of the opposition to it and conflating that with the larger problem of the symbol. Refer back to this article:





Then you have Calgary Police Association president John Orr saying:





Yeah, well sometimes when a symbol you like is co-opted by racist elements and used in a way to increase divisiveness and intimidate minorities, maybe change your fataing symbol you dumb fata. Maybe I should start wearing a swastika around. It's a symbol I relate to from before the Nazi's appropriated it, so why should I have to stop using it just because it has been misused and misrepresented by some?



That doesn't even touch on the fact there's an argument to be made this is a desecration of Canada's flag policy:





The symbol is racist and it's divisive in addition to being racist. I see a guy with a gun walk into my store with his thin blue line and desecrated Canadian flag and I'm uncomfortable. I don't like this guy is brazenly thumbing his nose and disobeying orders put in place to make the public feel comfortable. Does he not care that it's an intimidating symbol? I don't like when a guy has an us-versus-them attitude and I'm the THEM. And I have to do what he says, not disobey, and I must comply.



And it's not up to the police officers to pick and choose what they're allowed to flair up their uniform with, anyway. They work for us. They are overseen by us. The community does not like the symbol. Take it off you fataing pieces of #### while you still have a modicum of respect from the community.

Wtf are you going on about?

This hill? It's a bigger hill is the point, but you skipped over that.

Take a look at who they consulted when they made the decision and you really might be enlightened.

But why try and think of another side when it's easier to judge everyone by the way the wind is blowing.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[timun]

What are the facts behind your conclusion, Cpt. Otto?

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by timun

So you are being deliberately obtuse, then.

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

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Misterpants

Like, are you looking for a directive from hate groups saying they formally adopt this symbol as theirs? The fact most people in this thread agree that it has a problematic association is indicative of this topic's public perception.

And don't forget the this conclusion:

A year-long consultation process was held — involving two Calgary police associations and Beyond the Blue, which supports police families, along with several community groups like the Anti-Racism Action Committee and the CPS Community Advisory Board — where some Calgarians "have clearly expressed that the thin blue line patch on police officers makes them uncomfortable due to its history and current use by groups opposing racial equity," said Cornett.

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.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by timun

What are the facts behind your conclusion, Cpt. Otto?

I see what you did there. Got me.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[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.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Wtf are you going on about?

This hill? It's a bigger hill is the point, but you skipped over that.

Take a look at who they consulted when they made the decision and you really might be enlightened.

But why try and think of another side when it's easier to judge everyone by the way the wind is blowing.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

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.