|
Post by truth1 on May 10, 2005 13:16:22 GMT -5
I know you are smarter than that to compare the police and gangs. I know that absurdity I just read was just venting, right? There is a HUGE difference between a cop getting shot and a punk gangbanger.
|
|
|
Post by CCADP on May 10, 2005 13:46:14 GMT -5
I AM comparing the attitude you described to a gang mentality. Thats what it is. Its a gang mentality; no matter if the gang's colors are BLUE or whatever the gangs in the US wear.
That mentality of "if u kill my friend I will kill you" is a gang mentality and thats a problem if we are talking about people paid by the public to protect the public. Revenge has no part in their job and if they cannot handle that they should be given counselling or a desk job; not power and a revolver and a night stick! He's a civil servant - NOT a gang member there to decide justice himself or to walk around with a "if you f&@( with us we'll kill you" attitude.
One of good family friends that I have known my whole life is a cop - a good one - who would agree 100 percent with what I have written here.
|
|
|
Post by oztash on May 10, 2005 22:34:33 GMT -5
It sounds horrible. However, I am hesitant to believe that this man was minding his own business when the officers "assulted" him. If you ask the officers, I am sure they would say the inmate was at fault. The truth is probably down the middle, with both sides antagonizing the other. Truth... This is not the only man to report abuse, there are quiet a few cases being reported... Ask someone who writes to pen-pals Iam sure there are many more horror stories that never become public. Tasha
|
|
|
Post by oztash on May 10, 2005 22:39:06 GMT -5
Frank Valdez had a history of violence. He was housed in the "X-Wing" unit because he was out of control and extremely violent. He was there because he killed a prison guard. He had a history of fighting police and correction officers. I do not know the truth of what exactly happened; however, I think Frank got exactly what he deserved. Why feel sorry for him? This guy was the "worst of the worst". He died the same way he lived--violent. Wow, I cant believe you just said that truth... I thought you were against murder, and thought all murders deserved the dp..Sounds like double standard to my, to say that he deserved what he got... Would you tell his family that? And dont you think that his murder's should pay the ultamite price, execution... Really if your going to be for the dp, it cant be right for one but not for another, murder is murder.. Tasha
|
|
|
Post by oztash on May 11, 2005 4:50:23 GMT -5
You see, cops and correction officers have a brotherhood unlike any other. They really tend to take care of their own. Pay back may not be right, but I do understand. Truth, This brotherhood and taking care of their own, when did this become a licence to murder and get away with it. Tasha
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 12, 2005 8:49:06 GMT -5
Honestly, everyone knows that prison is not a nice place and some of the guards "abuse" prisoners. Most of the inmates in there knew that before they committed their crimes.
|
|
|
Post by CCADP on May 12, 2005 8:50:18 GMT -5
so that makes it alright?
society should then accept that taxpayers are paying civil servants to abuse people entrusted to their care ?
|
|
|
Post by oztash on May 12, 2005 9:31:22 GMT -5
so that makes it alright? society should then accept that taxpayers are paying civil servants to abuse people entrusted to their care ? This is the double standard Iam talking about, its just a excuse that a lot of pro's and the police, guards use, to get away with murder..... Excuses Excuses, as many pros have said, its time to stand up and admit what you have done...Well I put the challenge out there for all police, guards, etc, to stand up and take there medicine... Tasha
|
|
jj
New Arrival
Posts: 5
|
Post by jj on May 12, 2005 10:38:54 GMT -5
Honestly, everyone knows that prison is not a nice place and some of the guards "abuse" prisoners. Most of the inmates in there knew that before they committed their crimes. some of the guards "abuse" the prisoners??? You think that is right? Oh, yeah there is one rule for one group of people and another rule for another group of people.
|
|
|
Post by CCADP on May 12, 2005 10:44:11 GMT -5
This is true - truth1 - its like on the other thread when I asked you; if you would support the death penalty for your mother or child if the jury thought they were guilty of 1st degree murder. You said you wouldn't be calling for it; wouldn't support it essentially. That makes no sense; since you are so committed to the death penalty being the only punishment for 1st degree murder that you come and talk about it every day - it only stands to reason that you'd feel that way across the board about all first degree murder cases. (just like i feel across the board there is never a reason for the DP) Yet when I asked you; why is your family member any different? Why do you believe one thing for someone you care about - and another for everyone else?
Why the double standard.
You never answered.
So again - the double standard question comes up.
Any answer to it on this thread?
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 12, 2005 13:26:13 GMT -5
I said I would not protest the penalty. I would not be happy about it, of course. I would not be happy about them being executed. I would not say that it is wrong. I NEVER said the family member should not be executed. I said I would not be happy to see it. If my cousin plotted to kill another person, then my cousin will have to deal with the consequences.
|
|
jj
New Arrival
Posts: 5
|
Post by jj on May 12, 2005 15:24:54 GMT -5
I said I would not protest the penalty. I would not be happy about it, of course. I would not be happy about them being executed. I would not say that it is wrong. I NEVER said the family member should not be executed. I said I would not be happy to see it. If my cousin plotted to kill another person, then my cousin will have to deal with the consequences. The Pro's are always asking.... "What if it was your family member that was murdered" and we can only speculate what we would do because we have never been in that situation. That is all you can do, speculate. I'm sure your answer would be different if it was YOUR family member on death row.
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 13, 2005 8:24:37 GMT -5
The Pro's are always asking.... "What if it was your family member that was murdered" and we can only speculate what we would do because we have never been in that situation. That is all you can do, speculate. I'm sure your answer would be different if it was YOUR family member on death row. Joy, that is what the conversation was about.
|
|
|
Post by tulla63 on May 17, 2005 6:42:14 GMT -5
But Truth, that isn't what the state is paying them for. The state is paying the CO's to be responsible for the security of the institution. Which includes the inmates. I too understand they have a "brotherhood unlike any other", but they can tend to that brotherhood on their spare time. They do (of course) protect one another once threatened. As they SHOULD HAVE DONE when Valdez was murdered, but you know as well as I that they would NEVER do that!!!
I've been involved with Florida too for years, (not FSP though), but I've never heard of any incidident where a guard protected an inmate from another guard.
How come? If they aren't looking out for the inmate's safety as much as their own, then they're not doing their jobs, Truth!!
First off: We DO know which guards were responsible. I may have a hard time understanding your reasoning, and if I misunderstood you, please feel free to explain:
What I find to be hard to deal with in your postings, is that it does not sound like you agree with yourself. First, you say you do understand it when some guards may feel its "payback-time".
Next thing you say is: "No, that is not my "code". My code is personal responsibility. If they were able to figure out which guard was responsible, then that guard should be brought to justice".
So what you're really saying here (unless I misunderstood you as usual), is that you understand the need the guards may feel regarding payback time, but because it does not go with your "code", and if we should go by what your "code" is, then he should first be met with understanding, and then be brought to justice.
I could write for days about what happened when they tried to bring those moronic thugs to justice, but I don't have time. Suffice to say that it does not sound like you understand what your own "code" is. At least, when it does not go with your own opinions at any given moment, you simply switch "code".
So - which is it? Personal responsibility, or understanding for the lower needs of human nature (pay back time)?
If I DID misunderstand you - you're free to explain, and if I did, I did not do so to offend you, and I would appreciate if you could try to respond in a polite and respectful manner.
Thank you in advance,
Turid
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on May 17, 2005 8:19:55 GMT -5
But Truth, that isn't what the state is paying them for. The state is paying the CO's to be responsible for the security of the institution. Which includes the inmates. I too understand they have a "brotherhood unlike any other", but they can tend to that brotherhood on their spare time. They do (of course) protect one another once threatened. As they SHOULD HAVE DONE when Valdez was murdered, but you know as well as I that they would NEVER do that!!! I've been involved with Florida too for years, (not FSP though), but I've never heard of any incidident where a guard protected an inmate from another guard. How come? If they aren't looking out for the inmate's safety as much as their own, then they're not doing their jobs, Truth!! First off: We DO know which guards were responsible. I may have a hard time understanding your reasoning, and if I misunderstood you, please feel free to explain: What I find to be hard to deal with in your postings, is that it does not sound like you agree with yourself. First, you say you do understand it when some guards may feel its "payback-time". Next thing you say is: "No, that is not my "code". My code is personal responsibility. If they were able to figure out which guard was responsible, then that guard should be brought to justice". So what you're really saying here (unless I misunderstood you as usual), is that you understand the need the guards may feel regarding payback time, but because it does not go with your "code", and if we should go by what your "code" is, then he should first be met with understanding, and then be brought to justice. I could write for days about what happened when they tried to bring those moronic thugs to justice, but I don't have time. Suffice to say that it does not sound like you understand what your own "code" is. At least, when it does not go with your own opinions at any given moment, you simply switch "code". So - which is it? Personal responsibility, or understanding for the lower needs of human nature (pay back time)? If I DID misunderstand you - you're free to explain, and if I did, I did not do so to offend you, and I would appreciate if you could try to respond in a polite and respectful manner. Thank you in advance, Turid Turid, What I meant was I can understand the philosophies of the guards. There is an unwritten code in prison that may prevent a guard from interfering when another guard assults an inmate. The same unwritten code is present for the inmates when they attack a guard or another inmate. They also cannot talk because they are labeled a snitch. So, I understand why these things happen, even if I do not think they are right. There are alot of things in this world that I understand--even though I may think they are wrong. What I meant by personal responsibility is that if an inmate or a guard attacks the other, then they should accept what is coming to them. However, I do not think it is ok for a guard to attack an inmate if the inmate does nothing wrong. I hope I cleared this up.
|
|