USLawman.com Editorial Page

EDITORIAL PAGE

THE YARD

Should Inmates Have Access to Gym Equipment?

May, 2004

The defendant, whose build can best be described as somewhere between scrawny and gaunt, is asked by the judge to stand for sentencing. He and his attorney comply. The judge hands down a ten year sentence at a location to be determined by the Commissioner of the State Department of Corrections. The defendant disappears through a side door between two sheriffs officers.

Twenty-two months later the officer who arrested the above defendant is handling a first aid call on a front lawn when he sees a figure approaching on a bicycle. The bike stops at the next house over, and the figure gets off. The officer recognizes the subject but from where. Then, the face flashes in the officer’s mind. The last time he saw this face was when it was walking out of the courtroom almost two years ago. The face is the same, but scrawny and gaunt no longer apply. Instead, this subject more closely resembles an Olympic boxer. (Serving only twenty-two months of a ten year sentence is an issue for another day)

The above scenario plays out time and time again, albeit, with different circumstances. Bad guys go to jail, bad guys get released and the bad guys are now in the best shape of their lives. Their “street juice” is enhanced by having done time, their knowledge of crime technique is enhanced by almost two years with mentors, and their physical strength is enhanced by a daily workout regiment on taxpayer-provided equipment.

The issue of providing inmates with weight training equipment still lingers unresolved in many areas around the nation.

One television program addressing the issue had a piece where they were interviewing a corrections officer. The CO explained that having a fitness program served to occupy the inmates and reduced violence in the facility. While we have no statistics backing up that position, it does makes sense. It is important too that we provide CO’s and facilities with resources to keep them safe.

However, after seeing this scenario repeat itself and having to confront these super-criminals, we are strongly opposed to inmates having any weight training equipment accessible to them.

Law enforcement will be dealing with most of these inmates again after their release. According to the United States Department of Justice, “an estimated 67.5% [of persons released from prisons] were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years.”

When these subsequent dealings take place, the former inmate is much stronger, much quicker, and much faster, all courtesy of the funds deducted from your paycheck every other week.

If it is not law enforcement who must face these super-criminals, it may be our citizenry who don’t have a belt filled with toys or a radio to call for help.

If a program or programs are needed to replace weight training in order to keep inmates occupied and reduce violence, something should be implemented. We have to support our CO's. But, it should not be anything that can further their abilities to commit violent crime.

Frankly, I would rather buy them Sony Playstations than have them spending an afternoon on a bench press.

What are your thoughts?

USLawman.com

Use the scroll box below to share

your opinions, and we will post them below.

Note: If you want your name, agency, email address, etc. posted,

you must include it with your submission. Otherwise, we will list you as anonymous.

LOCAL COPS TO BECOME

THE IMMIGRATION POLICE?

April, 2004

A bill that would allow local law officers to enforce immigration laws has been introduced by two southern senators. Senators Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., and Zell Miller, D-Ga., are the sponsors of the bill which would allow police officers to arrest undocumented immigrants so they could be deported.

Let’s face it, in many states the issue of illegal immigrants has more to do with Mexican people than any other group. No matter how you feel about this issue, try and read this article with an open mind.

When they first came, the Mexicans were completely in fear of local law enforcement. Through hard work and genuine kindness, many officers earned the trust of this community. Because they are ineligible for just about all services and privileges from driver’s licenses to mortgages, law enforcement has been one of the very few public services they have been able to utilize. Ironically, for many of them we are the only ones they have come to know and trust.

This new Federal law, if enacted, brings up a myriad of issues, especially for lawmen and lawwomen in states with large numbers of undocumented residents.

First, the issue of illegal immigration has been almost completely ignored for over a decade. This is not a knock on the INS (known today as BICE) guys either. The ranks of Federal immigration officers have been stretched so thin that they have only had time for illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes and cases related or possibly related to terrorism. Also, they cannot be expected to make up for the dangerously understaffed enforcement conditions at the border. The result has been a massive, massive influx of illegal immigrants.

The task of locating, processing and beginning deportation proceedings would take up countless man hours. Where would local, county and state officers find the time to take on this new responsibility? Where would we squeeze in this function between traffic enforcement, narcotics work, DWI’s, first aid calls, accidents, citizen assist calls, alarms, and a ton of other calls normally handled each day?

Then, we would have to deal with the problem of how to identify them. Yeah, you might say that it would be easy. Since most of the undocumented people in the United States are of Mexican descent, we could just start rounding up Mexicans. How would you do that? How would you spot them? Would you base it on their obvious appearance? If so, you could be in violation of racial profiling statutes that many states have adopted. It would also violate firmly entrenched case law which prohibits police from using race as a factor in developing reason to conduct an investigative detention or arrest.

What happens when the first mistake is made, and a person of Puerto Rican descent is accidentally swept up. If not Puerto Rican, maybe Brazilian, Colombian, or any other person of Latino descent. What about a Mexican person who is here legally? Would we begin asking all Hispanic persons for special identification proving they are here legally, or would we limit such a request to persons who appear to be Mexican? How is a Puerto Rican gentleman going to feel when he is inadvertently asked for this special identification? (As you probably know, persons from Puerto Rico have the same status as US citizens and are not required to file or possess any residency paperwork)

If we pursue illegal immigrants from Mexico, it’s only fair that we also look at persons who may be here illegally from other countries. China is another country from which people come here illegally. Do we start asking for special identification from people who appear to be of Asian descent? Where does it end, and how long will it take for the public to view us as the SS asking people for their papers?

Then, we have the issue of extremely complex immigration laws which make our local and state laws look like a children’s book. Most of us have not had any training in student visas, work visas, green cards, and the mountain of other paperwork and issues relating to residency.

If all of this begins, trust in the law enforcement community by the Mexican community and eventually the entire Latino community would all but evaporate. Crimes would no longer be reported. The Mexican community would become an even bigger target than they already are, and it would be open season on them.

This would eventually lead to an anti-law enforcement epidemic. Do you remember the picture of Elian Gonzalez (the boy from Cuba) being take away by police from his Aunt’s Miami home? Pictures like this one and worse would say more than a thousand words.

Then, what would we do in cases where an undocumented, Mexican couple has children that were born here in the US? While the parents might be here illegally, their children are legal, US residents.

There are just too many reasons for us not to take on this immense responsibility. We are here to combat crime and serve our citizens. The battle against illegal immigration should be waged at our borders and ports, not in our apartment complexes and parks.

The entire issue is not a simple one. Undocumented persons do put a strain on certain resources including schools and health care. Also, there is a limit to how many people our towns and cities can hold. There are other issues as well, but you cannot list the negatives without mentioning the positives. They come here because they are filling a need. They do the jobs that first generation immigrants have done for a century. They're not asking for handouts nor do they want any. They simply want to work and raise their families.

It all comes down to a choice. We can either offer an amnesty to the undocumented persons who are already here which would solve most if not all of the problems associated with having undocumented citizens, or we can become the immigration police and face all the issues listed above and more. An amnesty program seems like the better choice.

Deporting Mexicans under the guise of anti-terrorism seems a bit far fetched. The resources that it would require to take on such an immense task would be better used to further reduce crime and serve our citizens.

Separating embracing parents and children is not why we took this job.

USLawman.com

Your Views

May 13, 2004

"Here in Wisconsin we are experiencing a dramatic increase in violent and drug crimes, because of the illegal immigration. I deal with the District Attorney's ofc almost daily and I see the lock up list routinely comprised of 30-40% illegals. We could substantially impact crime and make our communities safer if we could address this issue. We do not have to go out "hunting" for illegals, we run into them on traffic stops, disturbances etc. We ask people for drivers licenses or ID all the time. It seems simple enough to ask if they are a citizen when they are unable to produce normal ID. We have several meat packing plants in our area that were raided by INS several years ago, netting over 100 illegals. (the first and last time I have ever seen them) If we are having significant problems with unemployment we need to enforce the immigration laws so that these jobs are available for our own citizens. There is a very large amount of money being taken out of our local economy and being sent to other countries every week. Don't assume that because these jobs are being held by a large number of illegals that they are "low paying" jobs. Many people in this community have raised families for several generations in these jobs."

-D Nelsen

-Wisconsin Officer

April 28, 2004

"I think it's almost to late as it is now. I'm Mexican my parents and I where born in the u.s. and i don't have a problem if an officer asked me for my green card. They (officers) don't know who are born here or other places. We need to take care of our people first, and if other people don't like it then don't come to the US to live."

-Anonymous

April 25, 2004

"I live in North Central Texas, and I know that the INS agent assigned to this area makes close to 100,000 per year. Why should I do his job for him plus my regular duties for 1/3 the pay. Maybe, the Feds could cut the pay of agents and make more positions available to help battle this problem."

-Anonymous

April 7, 2004

"This is a hard topic! In Arizona we deal with this daily. Mostly we ignore the illegals, but since the smugglers have become more dangerous we have needed to pay more attention to them. I don't know the answer, but something should be done about illegal immigration from any country."

-Anonymous

April 7, 2004

"The problem of illegal immigration is very out of hand. However, I agree with the article. It brought up good points, but I still think that we have to do something with the southern border. ."

-Mike

-Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

Most Recent

Professional Courtesy

March, 2004

Recently, there have been emails going around about officers writing other officers. This month’s editorial is in response to those emails and the practice of officers writing other officers for minor infractions. Throughout this article, the words “cop” and “officer” are used frequently. They refer to all law enforcement officers including State Troopers, Sheriffs and Corrections officers, Federal officers, retired officers, etc.

Since the days of Wyatt Earp there has been an unwritten but etched-in-stone doctrine which we call professional courtesy. Under this doctrine law enforcement officers are suppose to take care of each other. It’s not just about traffic tickets either. It is much more than that.

None of us on the job today created professional courtesy. We inherited it from those who came before us, and we’ll hand it down to those who come after us. Law enforcement is a culture and is no different from other cultures. We have certain rules, certain language, certain music, certain days and periods of remembrance and celebration, and, for the most part, we enjoy being around each other. Professional courtesy is just part of our culture.

Last year I went to Hoboken, NJ with some guys from work. We went to the bar district which overlooks Manhattan. I forget the name of it. When we couldn’t get a parking spot we asked some Hoboken cops for guidance. They put us in an unauthorized area behind their police car, so we wouldn’t have to walk and so they could watch our car for the night. The guys and girls at some Port Authority police departments will let you put your car in their lot and shuffle you to and fro when manpower allows. If your wife and kids break down in our town, we’ll get them back to you in one piece even if it means setting up a three-county leap frog with the departments in between.

The bottom line is that we extend courtesies to each other that we couldn’t normally do for the public. I may have never met you, but you know if you need a favor, just ask. I know the same. This is not to say that we don’t go above and beyond for the public, because we do. It’s just that most of us understand that as part of an often alienated group, we have to look out for each other.

Taking care of other cops doesn’t stop at a state border either. If you’re not familiar with the Seattle and you flag down a radio car for directions, tell them who you are and what you’re looking for. If it’s in their sector and they're not busy, I’ll bet that 9 out of 10 times they’ll throw you in the back and shuttle you to the front door.

However, professional courtesy is not diplomatic immunity. In the old days there were no limits to what cops would do for each other. Those guys though didn’t make the salaries we do today. There aren’t many readily available jobs with the money, benefits, and pensions we have, so risking your job to fix a traffic ticket is no longer part of the equation. If after returning to your car you find a parking ticket, pay the frigging thing. Don’t risk your job and the job of the dopey flatfoot who gave it to you. In many states, in order to withdraw a ticket you have to write a letter to the judge requesting permission for the dismissal. You also have to explain why you want to have it dismissed. If you indicate that it was because you wrote the wrong statute, you will be asked to produce the ticket you issued with the correct statute. All tickets are numbered and tracked, and if a summons is not turned in, you’ll receive a letter from the court asking you to document it’s disposition. Behind-the-scenes chicanery takes down peoples careers and lives. Most of the time when you see some officer’s career self destruct, it is for some stupid, minor violation. It’s just not worth it.

Also, if you’re drunk and end up causing a three-car accident with injuries, you can’t expect to be whisked out the back door of the scene. Doing 75 in a 25 MPH school zone is nothing less than abuse. When a spouse signs a domestic criminal complaint, hands are tied. An arrest has to be made.

By far, the majority of us subscribe to the doctrine, and most of us would agree that committing crimes or severely abusing your privileges is out of bounds. One could probably speed on the Route 80 from Pennsylvania to California and not receive a summons. This doesn’t mean you should do it.

Also, there are always two sides to every story. If your relative or courtesy card gets written, give the issuer the benefit of the doubt before declaring war. Sometimes people don’t produce the card or identify who they are. Other times their conduct was absolutely deserving of the citation, and they're only telling you half the of story. Then, there’s those situations that don’t fall into either of these categories. These are the instances where the issuer just doesn’t care. The really disturbing part is often these same guys won’t hesitate to call you at your precinct asking for a favor. That is complete hypocrisy. This group is by far the minority. These situations should be handled in house by his or her peers.

Oh, one final note. There is one last group whom should not go without mention. While they may not fall under the doctrine of professional courtesy, they are somewhat relevant to this topic in general. In fourteen years as a police officer, I have never, and absent extraordinary circumstances, would never give a minor summons to a veteran. These older guys from WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, and even the more recent conflicts have been to places geographically and mentally that most of us couldn’t even imagine. In a way, they’re even above professional courtesy. Most of us have never served a day in a military uniform, but that doesn’t mean we can’t try and understand and appreciate this very special people.

February, 2004

Welcome to USLawman.com. This site officially opens in March of 2004.

The goal of USLawman.com was to create a national site with substance and not just a few headlines surrounded by advertisements.

As you can see, we have sections on tactics, job tips, tools of the job, and a Roll Call section which will give you random information of use or at least of interest to law officers.

Most of our content will be updated each day or each week. Editorials, special reports, and related pages will come out monthly.

If you like this site and its contents, we have two requests. First, save it to your favorites and check in often. Second, email everyone in your address book to help spread the word. The site won’t be worth doing if we don’t get visits.

Also, please feel free to offer any suggestions, ideas or feedback.

That’s it for now. Thanks, and enjoy.

USLawman.com