Well let's nip the first point in the bud, of course you are right but I'm speaking in regards to United States policing, I don't know how you got the notion to bring up London policing with context of the situation but it's excused. Also am I correct in my reasoning that your finishing statement is with regards to the police chief being black? it's an argument I'll give you that but we also have a clear history of tokenism with blacks being put in positions with no actual influence, they are given these positions as a front to give the illusion of inclusion which is a result of integration.
The chief of police position is not a job like the county sheriff, where the people vote him in. The chief has to have a lot of previous experience. To give you some inside info that a lot of people don't know, the chief of police and fire chief jobs are like being the president or CEO of a company. They are not just figure heads, but provide larger-picture direction for the organization. To be qualified, you have to have a lot of previous police experience, particularly at the higher levels. To get promoted from police to sergeant and to lieutenant to captain and so on, you have to jump through hoops at each steps. Unlike regular jobs where you get a promotion on merit, you have to apply to be a sergeant and then go through an interview process, like a job interview. You can not get promoted too. A lot of cops try multiple times to get promoted too. When you become a sergeant, you are a first-level supervisor and start doing less street cop work and more managerial duties. Then, when you get to lieutenant, you are doing almost zero street cop work. You'll show up to a crime scene or accident scene if its a mega-big deal. Then, when you get to captain, you are managing the managers. All desk work, unless a really really big deal happens in your precinct, like multiple homicide scene. Making it to chief is not easy. When a city police department looks for a new chief, they interview multiple candidates, it's not just one guy applies and he's good to go without the formalities of doing an interview.
Thanks for the advice buddy
I've already done as much it is actually worrying how many officers(in my personal experience) did not attain higher education most have military backgrounds or came straight out of high-school, but this is beside the point and should not be discussed beyond this point.
I was going to concede with you until you made the comment about the actions of one officer not reflecting poorly upon other officers, A unit is a team if one member of that team screws up a light is shined upon that whole unit.The job of a law official is very different from common jobs because you have to uphold a certain standard even when not in uniform, everything you do while off-duty still reflects on you because you choose to become a cop, if a off-duty cops injures someone off duty it will be reported that an off-duty cop was in an altercation versus a civilian was in an altercation, this is again because law officials are held to a certain standard, if one officer makes a mistake it will reflect poorly on the entire force, this is regardless of how you personally feel.
Well, there is the team mentality in police departments, just like there is a team mentality in the military and on sports teams. Every supervisor does not want the cops in their platoon to be a screw up. Why? They have to do paperwork when a cop screws up, small or big, and he or she has to answer why he didn't notice signs of a bad cop going bad. Yes, it's true that as an cop, you have to watch how you act while off duty. Where as an every day retail worker can get turnt on his days off at the club o whatever, the cop has to watch what he does, hobbies, recreation, etc.
So if a cop in Minnesota screws up, how is that the fault of all other cops in America? Especially if all other cops would have handled it completely differently. That's like saying if Steph Curry screwed up one game, he not only lost the game, and the team not only lost the game, but the entire NBA lost the game.
You entirely missed the point, I don't know if this was intentional or just exhaustion from responding to so many people, or maybe I need to make it much more clear. I'm not actually looking for a response about personal experience, I posted researched information and put forth a question, the question is what happens when low-risk offenders are around high-risk offenders?
I see.
Well, it depends on how strong of a person the low-risk offender is. If he's a beta, he's probably going to follow whatever the high-risk offender does, which goes in line with what you are assuming, bad company will bring you down to their level.
If you have someone who is mentally strong, he won't do whatever the high-risk offender says.
So when it comes to cop work, what kind of person is the good cop, is he mentally strong and doesn't succumb to peer pressure or is he a beta?
An example is what if a bad cop likes to workout, but he uses steroids illegally. A good cop has a couple choices to make, 1. join him in taking steroids, 2. not take the steroids but say nothing, 3. not take the steroids and report him to Internal Affairs.