Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Rate-My-Cop: New Website Has Police Furious
cbs13.com — Police agencies from coast to coast are furious with a new website on the internet. RateMyCop.com has the names of thousands of officers, and many believe it is putting them in danger.
hdar3415- 3370 diggs
- digg it
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -13/+820Easy response. If such a site is "dangerous" to cops then a similar site listing people with their crimes and MUCH more information is equally dangerous and unfair. You can't have your cake and eat it too. I actually dare them to take this to court and all the way to the Supreme Court. It'll be interesting to see the outcome and how it affects sites run by the police.
- kcb2, on 03/11/2008, -120/+28Not sure if this is a fair comparison - a criminal loses certain rights once they are convicted of a crime.
- byronm, on 03/11/2008, -3/+175Police are public servants and thus have taken and oath to serve and protect and in no way shape or form should they remain anonymous to those they serve. Posting names of officers and being able to publicly speak about them is LONG overdue. I consider it an important part of "checks and balances" That most people have chosen to ignore because that age old misnomer "it only impacts a criminal"
- dvda2, on 03/11/2008, -47/+6yes, but where is the oversight for this website. People can lie. You know i, I know it. If someone lies about my family members who are cops and they get hurt because of it, that makes the site legit. No accountability. I agree there should be something like this but this is not the way its not fair. They put their lives on the line. Who checks and balances this site. I'd ask you to think about it but ... its the internet ...
- jftitan, on 03/11/2008, -1/+25So how do you propose a better idea? Instead of bitching about the hypothetical outcome, how about coming up with a better idea, or method to hold law enforcement accountable to the public?
- 2keysmatt, on 03/11/2008, -0/+18Responding to both dvda2 and jftitan's responses, I think the easy answer for a better solution is to post formally filed complaints to a site. I don't even know if things like that are public record or not. They certainly should be. But requiring postings to be formally filed complaints should stop a lot of the BS. Plus, then officers would know of the complaints and the site should allow responses from the officer. Just my 2 cents.
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -0/+16jftitan
There's the rub. In order to hold them accountable to the public one would have to expose their name and badge number. Interesting huh? Let's cut to the chase of what dvda2 is really afraid of: accountability. - lordno, on 03/11/2008, -1/+19Oversight? The site has to make money to stay up. If the site does nothing but tell lies no one will visit it. Capitalism will regulate this because we live in AMERICA! What kind of American thinks it is bad to have their fellow citizens holding their government accountable? Cops aren't CIA operatives. They don't need anonymity.
- KnightWhoSaysNi, on 03/11/2008, -0/+15@2keysmatt
Formal complaints would then invite retaliation from the bad cops. Every approach has its advantages and disadvantages. - Antwan718, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2@ lordno
Why should CIA reps even have that anonymity? - hypertension, on 03/11/2008, -0/+0@ jftitan
Remember that website pervertedjustice.com? Like on that site, cops could be given a "right to reply". Easy peasy. - OldJesser, on 03/11/2008, -1/+3@Antwan
Try conducting clandestine operations when someone could access a site with all your personal information, or could maintain a list of known agents that included every single agent ever. - causeitsme, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3@OldJesser, and why pray tell in a democratic republic should any of our citizens be conducting clandestine operations, openness in govt. is severely lacking in this day and age and I for one feel that you can be open honest and safe, the more open and honest you are, the safer you'll find yourself. I'm not saying to not be aware and vigilant, just don't be a secretive, covert lowlife. That's what they are you know. There is no reason for ANYTHING that our govt. does to be secret! The excuse of National Security doesn't hold up under honest scrutiny.
- lordno, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1@Aantwan
The CIA works outside of our borders. Cops work inside. Slight difference there.
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -1/+55Cops can also lie. So can prosecutors. That's been proven this past year over and over as more and more people are finally released after being proven innocent after spending years in jail.
- nospinhere, on 03/11/2008, -26/+3So that makes it right? You are no better then the few cops who lie. btw, you have protection in the judicial system. There is no oversight with the website. With this website anybody can post some ***** because they were pissed they got caught doing 20 over the speed limit.
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -1/+12nospinhere
Spin away. Frankly you are also ignoring the fact that a citizen who has had a cop do well can ALSO post. Therefore it's feedback. Just like any other job. The police forces need oversight. We are seeing a marked increase in the amount of abuse cases (if you watch the news you know it's true). The best way to expose a bad apple is to allow the public to give feedback in this manner. This way their department doesn't try to cover up the issue as they have done in the past. As for my lying, hate to break it to you but if I lied, even at the scene of an accident or crime, then I would be charged with that. If I lied in court I would be charged. Why is it that cops are allowed to lie and yet they are respected due to it? Christian morals state that he is no better than a criminal. - RobotBuddha, on 03/11/2008, -1/+17Not to mention the cop himself can post a defense. I agree 100% with the people who've said this is long overdue. A lot of the apathy about our participatory government is due to it being a black box on so many levels. Anything that allows people to be more a part of the process is a good thing. You don't get change without people talking about it first.
- wedgemartin, on 03/11/2008, -1/+28I agree with deadcrickets. Cops lie all the time, and people serve jail time, and wind up doing days and days of community service as a result of it. If some individual lied about a cop, what is the cop going to have to do? Smirk and eat a doughnut?
- LonesomeFighter, on 03/11/2008, -3/+23Not only do cops lie, they are also legally allowed to lie to you when at the scene of the crime, accident, whatever.
- a1532b, on 03/11/2008, -11/+3Lonesomefighter, not that I doubt you, but do you have a link to backup that statement? I've never heard that before...
- VSLOATHE, on 03/11/2008, -1/+11They are encouraged to say things like "Things will go easier if you just cooperate", which is a misleading statement at best, and in my opinion a flat out lie. It is never in your best interest to confess anything to a police officer. His job is simple: arrest you and let the courts sort it out. Any confessions or statements that can be construed as an admission of wrongdoing are just icing on the cake for them.
- WilliamDavis, on 03/11/2008, -1/+14Not only are they allowed to lie, but they're trained to lie, and take pride in those lies. Is that how citizens are supposed to treat each other?
- hellotyler, on 03/11/2008, -2/+7They directly lied to me. ***** cops.
- faceless105, on 03/11/2008, -1/+25I think this is great., Incase anyone remembers that case a while back with a crazed cop who pulled someone over with a hidden camera in their car. The cop threatened to make up crimes to arrest him on. It later came out that after the case, someone posted the individuals (not the cops) information on some police forum and there were reports of police following him waiting for a slip up. No law enforcement agency seemed to care then, it's stupid that they'd get all up in arms now. Even if I were in their position, I'd hate to say it but I think if they're afraid of something coming out of this, then they aren't doing as good a job as they should be.
- plhearn, on 03/11/2008, -0/+11My main concern with this is that if you're a cop on that site every person you wrote a traffic ticket is going to post about how you're a bad cop who pulls people for no reason. When you do your job and arrest or prosecute someone you can't expect them to give you unbiased feedback about how well you do your job. However, there are some cops, like that guy from the skateboarder video, who really need to be called out on their abusive behaviors and this is a good tool for that purpose.
- oldhick, on 03/11/2008, -8/+13How are traffic violations doing your job? Thats not protecting and serving, thats generating revenue for the department and we should know who is spending all of their time doing it.
- 2keysmatt, on 03/11/2008, -3/+11Responding to oldhick, you don't see keeping idiots from doing 85mph in a 40mph zone as protecting? Are you nuts?
- logan074, on 03/11/2008, -2/+6I completely agree with 2keys. How is it safe to let anyone drive however they want to. Should there be no punishment for someone driving 100 mph through a neighborhood?
- RobotBuddha, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9I think you underestimate the average person on the street. Last time we were pulled over the cop was very polite. I'd certainly have posted a positive comment about him if the site existed at the time.
- plhearn, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4I would also do my best to leave a fair review, but since their job mostly involves punishing the people who are reviewing them there is going to be a lot of bias in the average review.
- Antwan718, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1For the most part I agree with you on traffic violations, though people generally arent dumb enough to do 85 in the 40, and last time I got pulled over it was because the cop tried to insinuate that there was a no left turn sign, after having to walk over to the spot where the sign was posted, I showed the cop there was no sign. Those are the type of cops that are likely to get written up on this.
- dvda2, on 03/11/2008, -47/+6yes, but where is the oversight for this website. People can lie. You know i, I know it. If someone lies about my family members who are cops and they get hurt because of it, that makes the site legit. No accountability. I agree there should be something like this but this is not the way its not fair. They put their lives on the line. Who checks and balances this site. I'd ask you to think about it but ... its the internet ...
- neilschelly, on 03/11/2008, -1/+33They are usually supposed to get them back after they serve their time, so they have a chance at becoming a normal person again.
- DrDash, on 03/11/2008, -1/+10Not all rights are restored to felons, such as owning weapons. Now you can go to court and get tehm restored, but they are not by default.
- shaka999, on 03/11/2008, -2/+35This is one that I find interesting when it relates to sex offenders. At least in Colorado once your a sex offender you have to be listed in a database for the rest of your life (I think). The database shows where you live so people in the neighborhood can be "on guard".
This seems ridiculous to me. If the offender is such a risk then why the hell were they released in the first place? If they aren't a risk then why are they in a database attaching a virtual scarlet letter to them?
Makes no sense to me.- KnightWhoSaysNi, on 03/11/2008, -0/+13Especially when a lot of supposed sex offenders have been convicted for having sex with a 17 year old girl who said she was 18.
In other words: people who represent absolutely no danger to the community whatsoever.
- KnightWhoSaysNi, on 03/11/2008, -0/+13Especially when a lot of supposed sex offenders have been convicted for having sex with a 17 year old girl who said she was 18.
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -2/+10shaka999 is correct
That and how come there is no repeat drug offender list? Or a murderer list? How about a serial robber list? What? Don't like those ideas? Tough! Equality is bound to happen. Cruel and unusual punishment is what the lists are right now.- WNW3, on 03/11/2008, -4/+4I like those ideas. Am I not supposed to? Lists for all!
- burrgrinder, on 03/11/2008, -2/+0Slight differences in motives though. Some felonies are crimes of opportunity and can be effectively rehabilitated or deterred either by counseling or increased risk. Murder 2 isn't premeditated. You may intentionally kill someone, but you may not be a psychopathic serial killer (i.e. killing someone a several hours after you are raped *is* murder, legally). If your crime falls in that catagory, I see no reason for a list.
Sexual interests in children cannot really be treated besides hormone therapy that nixes their sexual drive (not a bad thing, but it's not legal in all states). Premeditated murderers, rapists, habitual violent offenders that are consistently the aggressor, etc, etc, etc. Go ahead and make lists for these people.
Not every felony is a black or white case. Making lists for all of them would create a large burden on the system to keep them updated and accurate, and not all of them would even be needed. Some of them aren't even a danger to you even if they can't be rehabilitated. Larcenists, for example, are rarely a threat to your life, while burglars are. It gets messy. - cquinnd, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3You are not supposed to because it is only a short step from putting you on the list for being convicted of a crime, to putting you on the list for just being accused of a crime, to putting you on the list just for having the same name as a person convicted or accused in another state or town. See the current problems with the no fly list for an example.
- SPRFRKR, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2Not sure they can vote either.
- 2keysmatt, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5I agree with shaka999. I've had those same thoughts as peruse the listings of offenders around me. Sites show pictures now too. I think the only reason we have those laws around sex offenders is that no one wants to appear to be on the side of sex offenders. Any politician wanting to get in good with their base can propose a law restricting rights and no one is going to say anyone for fear of being called a sympathizer to sex offenders. You really get into a gray area when you have people on that list for merely peeing in public or the 19 y/o who had relations with his 17 y/o g/f.
- aliengoods, on 03/11/2008, -1/+73The right of the people to disseminate information about their government, be it positive or negative, is essential to our democracy. The police officers are working as agents of the government, and we have every right to keep tabs on them in an open, public forum. Also, information regarding who is licensed by the government to practice law enforcement is a matter of public record. They should have no expectation of privacy if that is the line of work they chose.
Furthermore, I would put forward the same argument they love to use on average citizens. If they don't have any to hide.....- Nocturnal, on 03/11/2008, -3/+6Exactly. I mean we have the full name and much more info about our president. What is the difference? President > Police IMHO.
- purzzzell, on 03/11/2008, -1/+19The "if they don't have anything to hide" statement is the first thing that sprang to my head as well.
- evo8ftw, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2I agree with you but the United States of America is a Republic.
- troye, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1This is one smart digger here I tell you... one smart digger.
- Ellipsys, on 03/11/2008, -0/+25Except the problem is that people are often put in the newspaper or other public venues when they've merely been arrested, not convicted.
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -0/+20And sometimes when their name is cleared in court there is NO follow up piece in the paper or on TV news. Which is why I personally believe that nothing should be in the media and NO media conferences held by police officers until the person is convicted.
- Antwan718, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1Unless there is a follow of the same caliber on that same scenario with the outcome.
- troye, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5Like for prostitution, the Florida Today and Channel 13 news (both in Central Florida) put up pictures of innocent people, not yet proven guilty, who were accused of soliciting prostitution on the local TV news channel and on the Florida Today website.
And then these frickin' stupid cops want to complain about embarrassment and safety, pfft!
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -0/+20And sometimes when their name is cleared in court there is NO follow up piece in the paper or on TV news. Which is why I personally believe that nothing should be in the media and NO media conferences held by police officers until the person is convicted.
- khockett, on 03/11/2008, -0/+11It's true that convicted criminals lose certain rights but police (and newspapers) post personal information of anyone arrested/ticketed. Innocent until proven guilty and all that...
- AriaStar, on 03/11/2008, -2/+7You know if you were the victim of ID theft, arrested for a crime committed in your name, and then found innocent, your arrest record is public record? That record can make it ***** difficult to get job, a place to live, etc.. Even without a conviction you've still lost your rights. We don't have them, so why should the cops?
- byronm, on 03/11/2008, -3/+175Police are public servants and thus have taken and oath to serve and protect and in no way shape or form should they remain anonymous to those they serve. Posting names of officers and being able to publicly speak about them is LONG overdue. I consider it an important part of "checks and balances" That most people have chosen to ignore because that age old misnomer "it only impacts a criminal"
- computergod, on 03/11/2008, -4/+66RTFA, this is all public information. Any personal information will be removed.
- 5urr3al5am, on 03/11/2008, -30/+3a person could do the same thing with the information thats in a telephone book and list 'good' and 'bad' residents -- you're a dumb ass, quit trying to be controversial to add meaning to your life
- jgzman, on 03/11/2008, -1/+13Yes, and I can think of no reason that would be wrong. Uncomfortable? Yes. Wrong? No.
- 5urr3al5am, on 03/11/2008, -7/+1put your money where you mouth is... feel free to follow up this post with your address, phone number, and of course, place of employment.. I would advise against it, but you appear to be a big fan of it.. go for it
- jgzman, on 03/12/2008, -1/+3If you want the information, I encourage you to find it. I go to some small effort to ensure that I cannot be easily found. I have no doubt that anyone who really wanted to could find me, though.
Public information is public information. If I were to post my information, would I have any right to bitch if photos of my house followed shortly therafter? No, I would not. If, however, you hacked into my banking records to find my address, I might have grounds to be a bit irritated.
Last of all, I am a private citizen. Police Officers are not.
- Abomonog, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Well you definitely lived up to your name, 5urr3al5am. I fail to see the controversy in computergod's
comment.
- jgzman, on 03/11/2008, -1/+13Yes, and I can think of no reason that would be wrong. Uncomfortable? Yes. Wrong? No.
- raynar, on 03/11/2008, -30/+2Its not supposed to be public dumbass, there are supposed to be records that the public does not have access to. Judges, cops, etc etc arent supposed to be listed in conjunction with their address.
- deadcrickets, on 03/11/2008, -1/+22The site doesn't list personal info. Name, badge number, precinct. All public information.
- ronaldinho, on 03/11/2008, -1/+3I don't think this will really have any potential harm on the officers' family and privacy. Knowing their badge number isn't going to lead you to know that his wife's name and that she's hot.
- raynar, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1please. cops are fat. fat = un-hot wives.
- shotgunefx, on 03/11/2008, -13/+6Hopeful that remains the case. I'm still wary of it though. I worry about the families.
My dad was a cop, I got my first death threat when I was around five, phone call, someone detailing how they were going to kill my family, which surprisingly didn't scare me, but made me furious. I told them off in a rather adult manner, but I digress.
And while many cops are assholes, people make ***** up ALL THE TIME. Not even just different perception of events, but fairy tale *****. I've witnessed it dozens of times.
A for instance, one time , a drunk (who was about 5'3) was trying to start a fight with a friend on the force who's 6'3. (For some reason shortie took offense to his girlfriends friend, thanking my friend for saving her from a boyfriend beating years ago pre-force WTF is wrong with people?)
Anyway, he was saying some nasty ***** in his face (like "Oh your a tough guy, pussy?") , my friend just kept shrugging it off (yeah, yeah) even though one punch would have demolished the kid. So this goes on for about 10-15 minutes and finally the patience goes to zero.
My friend stands up and he's going to pummel this kid, and he should have, but I know what's going to happen. "Oh some cop beat me up while I was minding my own business!". So I grab the kid, pushed him out the door and locked it. Problem averted right?
No one laid a hand on that *****. Next thing you now, the kid is filing a report saying 3 people beat him on the street, one an off duty police officer. ***** like this happens all the time.
More than likely this is just going to be a bashing site with no utility as it would require some objectivity, and if you go by the comments here on any given police story, I think it's fair to say it's heavily biased.
That's not to say some of the posters here don't have legitimate reasons, but I don't doubt that the majority are pissed because the fascists pulled them over for speeding or rolling through a stop sign.- rilus, on 03/11/2008, -3/+12The problem is that cops also make ***** up all the time. Yes. ALL THE TIME. Not cops do it but a lot of them do it.
So, what recourse do we have except than complain and hope that good ol' boy Rodney gets a hand slap. If a criminal wants to hurt a cop or his family, he can do it just fine without the website. They have been doing it for ages.- giveer, on 03/11/2008, -2/+3"...make ***** up all the time. Yes. ALL THE TIME. Not all cops do it....."
I know it doesn't give one much credit to defend cops on digg, but in a debate, your sentence would be considered completely self-contradictory. - insllvn, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4All the time does not mean all cops do it , but rather that it occurs with sufficient frequency in that cops that do lie, that at any given time it would be reasonable to assume a cop is lying to get an innocent person into trouble, because that person pissed off the cop. In a RL debate, I would hesitate to make an ad hominem remark about reading/listening skills, but this is digg right? So to review, s/he made 2, non-contradictory assertions.
1. some, but not all, cops lie
2. those cops that do lie, do it frequently
- giveer, on 03/11/2008, -2/+3"...make ***** up all the time. Yes. ALL THE TIME. Not all cops do it....."
- 42Vindictive, on 03/11/2008, -2/+4This website doesn't need to make it any easier.
- cawpin, on 03/11/2008, -6/+2rilus, if you actually think that you're an idiot. Cops don't need to make ***** up, people are stupid enough and ignorant enough of the law that they screw themselves.
- OldJesser, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2cawpin, if you actually think that you're an idiot. We've seen video examples of where cops have either made ***** up or threatened to. Stop dreaming.
- shotgunefx, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1And you see perps lie all the time too. There's almost a million cops in the country, of course some of them are liars and assholes.
You have people on the other end lying a lot more than law enforcement. Not that it makes it ok, but you need to put some perspective on it. Say you have 100 videos a year showing some abuse (no idea what the number is, but i know it's not all that high), ok, you have to figure that's a small number of the actual abuses. Fair enough, but you also have to remember that's out of tens of millions of interactions. Plus, there are so many small statutes that if they want to, you are most certainly violating one of them, so they don't have to make stuff up all that often if they "want" to arrest you.
Some kids I knew when I was a teenager got arrested last night with....
150 pills (white, yellow, blue, green, pink in color),
over 200 grams of cocaine, ($30,000)
an undisclosed amount of crack cocaine,
an undisclosed amount of marijuana,
3 firearms (2 pistols and an AK-47 machine gun), ammunition and a stun gun
How much you want to bet the first thing they said is "It's not mine", "I didn't put it there", "I don't know where it all came from", or "I was framed". First thing they'll probably do tomorrow is go and say "Not guilty".
YMMV - biotch, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I would refute that. In my few dealings with cops I realized they were basically paid professional liars. In virtually every dealing Ive had with a cop, he was being dishonest in some way from trivial white lies, to flat out bald faced all intending to insinuate that he could make my life a living hell if he wanted to. Thats how they learn to exert control... just threaten people and they comply. Anything that makes them think twice about doing that is fine by me.
- OldJesser, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Shotgunefx, I'm not saying that all cops are bad cops. I was responding to cawpin's comment that "Cops don't need to make ***** up, people are stupid enough and ignorant enough of the law that they screw themselves." Some cops do lie, whether you like that or not.
- shotgunefx, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I know they do, a lot of people in general lie.
I had a statie (sorry state trooper) try and ***** me once big time. I was a teen, I was following my friends home (I didn't know the way) and my friend started goofing off. He went around this rotary 3 or 4 times. I kept following doing around 25mph (limit was 20). The way the place is layed out, you can see a few hundred feet in every direction of the road.
It was around 3am, no one on the road. My friend was drinking a bit previously, I was not. Anyway, I see the lights coming over the hill, so I slow down to about 15mph before he crests the hill.
I was driving an old Dodge St. Regis (one of the cop cars out of the Blues Brothers). Anyway, the cop goes by me, towards my friend. My friend thinks the cop car is me and speeds off being a tard.
It's a divided road, so I can't get off. Anyway, I catch up a few minutes later and he has my friend pulled over.
The cop jumps in the road and pulls me over too. Asks for the license and registration. Then silently hands me a ticket. "DRIVING TO ENDANGER", lied and said I was doing 55mph and reckless (I was not). That's a ***** criminal offense for driving around a rotary 3 times 5mph over the speed limit, keep in mind he didn't even see that 5mph or even the first two times around the rotary. I drove for a living at the time too. If I didn't beat that, I would have been ***** for no reason at all except the guy was a hard-on.
My friend, he said was doing 65mph, which was ***** as well. He sped up to 45mph tops when he pulled away from the cop thinking it was me.
Now the funny thing is that my friend was alright to drive, but he was buzzing, probably would have failed a breathalyzer (and he had two passed out people in back), didn't even bother to give him one.
- shotgunefx, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1And you see perps lie all the time too. There's almost a million cops in the country, of course some of them are liars and assholes.
- ronaldinho, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2Shotgun, it seems this is what is listed in the website: name, badge, precinct. You know what? If someone is going to come after your family, they will, whether this website exists or not. At first I thought about that question too: what about your family? But if no other personal information is given (like marital status), then how is that going to hurt the officers? How? I like this website. A LOT. It keeps cops on their toes.
- shotgunefx, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Well, that's why I said "Hopeful that remains the case." (of course I meant hopefully)
One of the perils of living in the information age, it's pretty easy to find out anything about anyone. Notice I didn't say the site shouldn't exist. I just think they should take great pains to not publish such private info.
I still doubt it's utility. Not that it doesn't have a right to exist, just think it's going to be mostly used by people who don't like cops anyway, so negatively biased. (and I don't think, politically, it's going to do much to anyone's toes, but who knows)
You generally have two classes of people interacting with cops. (Not that this covers everybody, painting with broad strokes here)
1.More or less straight-laced people who either A. need there help, B. get in trouble, usually over something minor, traffic violations, noise complaints, etc (or maybe not so minor DUI, battery).
B happens a lot more than A, so most people look forward to interacting with a cop like a prostate exam. It means hassle. A PITA. You get pulled over and your subject to scrutiny, you have to sit there and do what you're told like your 5. No one cares for that.
2. People who dabble in illegalities, ranging from the very bad, to the relatively harmless (smoking grass, possession etc). Bigger hassles, more scrutiny. A prostate exam with a rotorouter. They like them even less. Sometimes, even when it's an A situation (often related to the dabbling), they get the B side of things as well.
So many people don't like cops, because it usually means they're in trouble, no surprise there.
I'm not saying some cops aren't *****, some are, more than the general population from my own experience. But a lot of people who bash cops are really only pissed because they got caught or they thought the cop should have been nicer, etc.
Not like there aren't people who are legitimately been ***** by police, but no where near what most bashers would have you believe.
- shotgunefx, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Well, that's why I said "Hopeful that remains the case." (of course I meant hopefully)
- JoshReflek, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1@Shotgunefx "So I grab the kid, pushed him out the door"
then two seconds later you say...
"No one laid a hand on that *****"
Interesting....reminds me of something I read earlier...
"people make ***** up ALL THE TIME. Not even just different perception of events, but fairy tale *****. I've witnessed it dozens of times."
And everyone on Digg just witnessed it......you're apparently as corrupt and delusional as the cop who raised you.
Respect is earned, not demanded....that's obedience.- shotgunefx, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1No, you are just retarded and distorting my words.
By no one laying a hand on him, I meant the people he falsely accused of hurting him. MY hands did touch him, but touch is not usually what's referred to with that saying. It's pretty much universally accepted to mean "not hurt", but you knew that. Regardless, hardly corrupt, certainly not delusional.
Putting two hands (one on each arm) on someone and ejecting them from a bar is not assault, especially when you're a bouncer. And when I say ejecting, not knocked down, not thrown against a wall, not hurt in any way.
But if you want to be pedantic. No one hit him, no one struck him or in any way cause bodily harm of any type.
Did he accuse me? No. He accuses a cop, a politicians kid (who didn't even talk to him) and a third party. All people who didn't lay a hand on him. All people who were never outside when he was (which is where he said the assault happened)
But I'll paraphrase it in small words that you can't needlessly twist for dramatic effect.
Person tried to start a fight.
Person was removed from premises without being hurt for trying to start a fight.
Person lied to get cop in trouble.
Clear enough for you?
- shotgunefx, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1No, you are just retarded and distorting my words.
- rilus, on 03/11/2008, -3/+12The problem is that cops also make ***** up all the time. Yes. ALL THE TIME. Not cops do it but a lot of them do it.
- 5urr3al5am, on 03/11/2008, -30/+3a person could do the same thing with the information thats in a telephone book and list 'good' and 'bad' residents -- you're a dumb ass, quit trying to be controversial to add meaning to your life
- Ajnag, on 03/11/2008, -2/+63It will be interesting if this website becomes more popular. I wonder if cops think its dangerous because they KNOW they sometimes treat average citizens as criminals, and they KNOW they overstep their legal bounds often if they can get away with it. They KNOW they are assholes to the public, and they want us to accept it as part of "protecting us" just like we all accept every aspect of the Patriot Act.
- wedgemartin, on 03/11/2008, -13/+19Well said. My feelings are this.... anyone who *wants* to be a cop, should not be allowed to be a cop. Obviously the psych tests and evaluations are failing, because we've got a buncha meat head frat boys running around out there getting off by abusing their authority. I say we have it work like jury duty... Every citizen ( with a clean record ) has to serve a month or so as a police officer and then they're done. Sure we'll get a bunch of people in there that shouldn't be cops, but um... look at all the cops we have now? I think we'd be better off.
- Bioboy, on 03/11/2008, -1/+12That is perhaps the stupidest thing I have ever read on Digg. Do you have any idea how long it takes to become even marginally competent with the tools needed to become a peace officer? "Let's just give a gun and authority to average citizens." Yeah that's a great idea. I can't believe people dugg you up for your comment. Your comment merely shows that you have no experience with what you are speaking of. Either that or you are just obtuse to the extreme.
- senatorpjt, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1I'd agree that every citizen should be competent with them. A lot of countries do that (Israel, Switzerland, Finland come to mind off the top of my head)
- Bioboy, on 03/11/2008, -1/+12That is perhaps the stupidest thing I have ever read on Digg. Do you have any idea how long it takes to become even marginally competent with the tools needed to become a peace officer? "Let's just give a gun and authority to average citizens." Yeah that's a great idea. I can't believe people dugg you up for your comment. Your comment merely shows that you have no experience with what you are speaking of. Either that or you are just obtuse to the extreme.
- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -13/+4Actually, it's dangerous for police for the same reason it is dangerous for pedophiles, there are people who would do harm if they had that kind of information about the subjects. This would not be a problem if everyone was sane and moral but that is just not the case. Would it be safe for every kid on Facebook or Myspace to have their info listed on a consolidated website in this fashion. "Rate this kid, this is where he lives, this is where he goes to school...".
Being fair and being right are not the same thing. The real question is, do you want the people who are sworn to protect you to face possible harm beyond what is expected of them? If so, should they even exist to protect you at all?
As far as cops being @$$#0le5, the truth is, that describes the majority of the current society in the US right now. Bad behavior, bad manners, disrespect, selfishness, etc... is worse now than I have ever seen in my lifetime. The police are a part of that society, is it surprising that there is a surge of unprofessional police? Look at the pool that the govt draws from.
When citizens want to see their protectors harmed regardless of whether or not they deserve it, that is very telling. Our society seems to be broken.
Lastly, no two police agencies are the same and their memberships are diverse as well. To say that they are all the same is uninformed. Some are Ivy school graduates and some were juvenile offenders. It runs the gamut.
Oh, and what does the patriot act have to do with policing.- rilus, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9For the umpteenth time, no private information will be listed on the site, much like Facebook and Myspace you mentioned.
It is right to rate the people that are supposed to protect us. If they are not doing their jobs properly AND they're not outing the bad apples, someone has to do it, one way or another.
The average citizen being an ***** is not excuse for our policemen being assholes. They are not supposed to be your average citizen; they're supposed to be the best of the best.
When a society seems to want protections from their "protectors," that is very telling. Our society seems to be broken, indeed.
Ajnaq was bringing up the Patriot Act to compare it with government actions that infringe on our rights that most citizens just take without any complaints because they're told not to. - Ajnag, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Thanks for spelling it out to them, Rilus :) This is the same mentality that has been used since 9/11 in the federal government, however its been going on with police for much longer. If this process continues, then what is to stop the government or law enforcement from requiring all citizens to be fingerprinted with blood samples on file regardless if they are a criminal? What's to stop them from tracking our every move each day? The fact is, neither the federal governement nor the police can keep us safe 100% of the time, without removing many of our guaranteed rights as American citizens, as well as drastically changing foreign policy by making our "allies" enforce our laws worldwide (which they already do to an extent). This is very unlikely to happen without many reprocussions. I'm not prepared to trade in my rights for promises that can't be fulfilled. If I want to be safer, I'll move to Canada.
- senatorpjt, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Cops walk around with a uniform on all day. If people want to kill cops, just look for the guy in the blue suit. It's not like pedophiles where you wouldn't know unless you saw their name on the site. People aren't going to be browsing through this to find cops, they're easy to find already.
- rilus, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9For the umpteenth time, no private information will be listed on the site, much like Facebook and Myspace you mentioned.
- wedgemartin, on 03/11/2008, -13/+19Well said. My feelings are this.... anyone who *wants* to be a cop, should not be allowed to be a cop. Obviously the psych tests and evaluations are failing, because we've got a buncha meat head frat boys running around out there getting off by abusing their authority. I say we have it work like jury duty... Every citizen ( with a clean record ) has to serve a month or so as a police officer and then they're done. Sure we'll get a bunch of people in there that shouldn't be cops, but um... look at all the cops we have now? I think we'd be better off.
- timusca, on 03/11/2008, -10/+265DON'T RATE ME BRO!!!
- Ajnag, on 03/11/2008, -15/+4lol good one
- andrewthrice, on 03/11/2008, -3/+4lol bad one
- walkclothed, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1lol good one.
k im gonna get dug down here then I want someone to say the "lol bad one" thing again. The people will be pleased.
- mGARANDEUR1, on 03/11/2008, -4/+4IM NOT A DUDE!!! A DUDE WORKS AT A RANCH!!!
- Ajnag, on 03/11/2008, -15/+4lol good one
- jmeeter, on 03/11/2008, -2/+19http://ratemycop.com/
- Metlprocker, on 03/11/2008, -0/+23Looks like getting dugg did the cops a favor... it brought down the site for now
- aliashandle, on 03/11/2008, -0/+10I'd say rating a la amazon or newegg or any other retailer website is a great idea for government websites to emulate. This can go for most professions. Judges, lawyers, doctors, shoe maker... etc. In NYC bloomberg can link it with calls from 311 maybe mash it up with google maps where issues regarding to various services are the reasons for the call. Recently Bruce Schneider wrote an article on wired.com about the lack of equity in regards to power between the privacy of an individual and the privacy of a public official. The gist was that surveillance on the people in power makes sense, it fosters liberty.
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/ ... - BoneStamp, on 03/11/2008, -0/+7Reminds me of: http://www.RateThatDriver.com
- socokoolaid, on 03/11/2008, -0/+8Example of online criminal information site which far exceeds what is available of those police: http://judici.com/
- linagee, on 03/11/2008, -5/+7Who pays for the time cops waste complaining about the site? Is this where my tax dollars are going?
- jakatak, on 03/11/2008, -19/+6Cops being posted on the net isn't the same as criminals being posted on the net. Criminals lose their rights for privacy once they commit a crime. Cops should have the right to privacy as much as the next. It's the same reason you go by the name deadcrickets instead of your real full name. It's too easy to find out where someone lives via the internet. Now you can see what car they drive by looking at a snap shot of their house via Google Maps satellite feature.
I wouldn't want to risk my life being a cop and have my face on the internet identifying me.
Hey Digg.com. Why don't you post all our real names on digg.com for a week. See how the digg users react. It's the same for cops.- kepone, on 03/11/2008, -0/+18Well too bad you're wrong- Officer's names, badge numbers, etc are already public information. If officers do their jobs properly and treat people fairly, they will have nothing to worry about. The only ones complaining are the ones that treat innocent people like criminals, or the ones that take 3 hours to show up in a black neighborhood and 3 minutes for a white neighborhood.
The internet is changing everything folks, the watchmen are now watched by the masses, get used to it, there is no more hiding. - WilliamDavis, on 03/11/2008, -0/+12"Cops should have the right to privacy as much as the next."
If you want to work for government and be granted all sorts of powers not given to the average citizen, you should at least be willing to identify yourself. Police should have nothing to fear from the citizenry they belong to. In fact, if they're doing a just job, the public loves them. Policeman was once a very respected job.- Abomonog, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1That is because the first police were really peace keepers and that was exactly all they did.
However, it is an odd irony that the one tool that enables a police officer to be there when called also contributed to the growing hatred of police. The car. In 1908 there were less than a thousand police driving cars in America. In 2008 there are less than 10,000 walking beats. Considering the vast population increase that means almost no police are out there communicating with the people and working with them. Used to be when someone was down and out a cop would help him to a shelter or just make sure the passed out drunk was out of sight somewhere. Today its scoop-em-up-and-haul-em-to-jail. There is also the fact that our police actively enforce laws that are obvious constitutional violations when they are the ones with the most power to protest.
- Abomonog, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1That is because the first police were really peace keepers and that was exactly all they did.
- kepone, on 03/11/2008, -0/+18Well too bad you're wrong- Officer's names, badge numbers, etc are already public information. If officers do their jobs properly and treat people fairly, they will have nothing to worry about. The only ones complaining are the ones that treat innocent people like criminals, or the ones that take 3 hours to show up in a black neighborhood and 3 minutes for a white neighborhood.
- YKKonMyZipper, on 03/11/2008, -2/+9All police names and sate cops names are public information. ***** we pay there damn pay checks I wanna know who they are. I just don't see what the big deal is if you already know how to use a search engine all that info is at your fingertips.
- Bigskinny717, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2if they were to take it to court i dont know about that because many if not all cops have close ties with other law enforement including judges.
- Bilabrin, on 03/11/2008, -0/+46Well, Well, Well,... what happened to the "If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide" argument?
Just knowing that THEY know this site exists makes me feel safer.- lazlotlomax, on 03/11/2008, -0/+0Hee Hee Well Said I would think being above reporach like they cliam they are that they would welcome as much light as possible shed on their deeds !!!! (I Tried to veil my sarcasm)
- oxdeltaxo, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9They claim that we'll use unfair maligning to make them look bad, whatever happened to them using the drug war to make simple pot heads look like drug dealers?
If they try to shut the site down they'll move the server to another country. - Herostratus, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2Heh,
this comment had 420 Diggs!- TheOneTrueGod, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2Update: +792 diggs now.
- SteViLx, on 03/12/2008, -1/+2You know why you can't have your cake or eat it?
Because the cake is a lie. - akirhol, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Looks like GoDaddy caved again, the site was pulled.
- kury, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2I just called godadddy (1-480-505-8855) and they said it was due to lack of payment by the owner... (I was surprised that they gave me that info.. but thats what they said)
- kcb2, on 03/11/2008, -120/+28Not sure if this is a fair comparison - a criminal loses certain rights once they are convicted of a crime.
- syroncoda, on 03/11/2008, -16/+474police officers, not sheriffs, are federally paid, and therefore, under DEMOCRATIC rule. having the public make up their own mind and voice their own opinions in a SAFE environment about what they think of the local law enforcement is PERFECTLY UNDERSTANDABLE and in fact a damn good idea. so, officers, it comes down to that old christian saying, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone." so shut up and accept the modern world.
- aliengoods, on 03/11/2008, -3/+32Are they federally paid or federally licensed? I was under the impression they were typically paid by their state or municipality, but I could be wrong.
- shiitake, on 03/11/2008, -2/+14Actually, the distinction is blurred. Some police programs are federally funded, as are some homeland security. The funds simply pay for a number of man-hours, and not necessarily earmarked for specific officers.
For example, a federally funded anti-drug initiative allows local agencies, both police and sheriff, to hire additional officers but those officers aren't hired for that one specific task.
Marshals, however, are always federally funded. - bentman78, on 03/11/2008, -6/+25wrong. There is no federal police force in the US. The FBI and CIA..etc do not count.
Police officers are paid for by the county/state they serve.- ooby, on 03/11/2008, -1/+6There is no one federal police force in the US.
Fixed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_police#United ... - charlietuna, on 03/11/2008, -1/+6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_police
Scroll down to United States - texpundit, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9Actually, there is a "federal" police force. It's not an all-encompassing one, nor is it the only one...but it's the closest thing we have to National Police.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Marshals_Service- Abomonog, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Very good, I didn't think of them. But I would hazard to say that the FBI does indeed qualify as a federal police force.
Their job is the exact same as any detective, except on a nationwide level. Technically their activities are supposed to be only domestic (INTERPOL is supposed to handle international liaison and investigation duties). That the FBI is restricted to investigating only certain types and level of crime matters not. Federal cops don't need to direct traffic.
- Abomonog, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Very good, I didn't think of them. But I would hazard to say that the FBI does indeed qualify as a federal police force.
- borninda818, on 03/11/2008, -2/+1I would like to point out that the Royal Thai Police are in fact, federally funded.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Thai_Police
- ooby, on 03/11/2008, -1/+6There is no one federal police force in the US.
- billygotee, on 03/11/2008, -6/+8No need for caps. You misinterpreted that verse. You hopped from idea to unrelated idea in an irrational and attention-deficit manner. Overall, I give your comment a rating of 2 for effort.
- citgod, on 03/12/2008, -1/+1a 2 out of...
- centran, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5They may get federally funded but local police are not federally paid.
Local police are paid either by their city or sometimes the county depending on the area. sheriffs are paid by the state. - sodade, on 03/11/2008, -0/+13I have an idea: why don't we get rid of our insane drug laws. Then we only need 50% of the police we have now. Raise salaries to 70-100k, cull out as many assholes as possible and recruit the best of the best only.
- Typhoon2009, on 03/11/2008, -1/+7That reminds me of Family Guy... "Let he who is without sin... KICK THE FIRST ASS"
- shakbhaji, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1"You're crazy Jesus! You're crazy!!"
- WiseWeasel, on 03/11/2008, -3/+259If police departments are so concerned about this, maybe they should make a competing site where people can voice their concerns, perhaps with more safeguards in place to prevent abuse, while keeping the transparency of the user-generated information reporting. This type of site would be a great tool for city and state governments to stay on top of poorly-performing departments, and to know when it might be time for an audit or change in local management. In the absence of such a site, they have nothing to complain about when people take matters into their own hands.
- TheShad0w, on 03/11/2008, -1/+10Couldn't have said it better!
- subat0mic, on 03/11/2008, -9/+2cause they can't type a line of html to save their own lives? simple people do simple things (or nothing).
- akcoder, on 03/11/2008, -1/+9I agree whole heartedly. After the exchange I had with a cop on Sunday, I'm going to file a formal complaint against him. He was extremely rude and hostile towards me through out the entire encounter. He most certainly did not exhibit the behavior of a group of people who want to be referred to as "Anchorages Finest"
- Cannon49, on 03/11/2008, -2/+23Because then they would have to become responsible for their actions.
- raynar, on 03/11/2008, -11/+7everyone hates a cop until they need one....
- oderdigg, on 03/11/2008, -2/+18Very true. Whenever I need a copy they're not around. That's what I hate. They are there to get me for speeding 10kph over the limit but won't do diddly ***** all when it comes to armed robbery. FYI, when I used to work at a cornerstore, I was held up at gun point and police took 45 mins to show up and pretty much said, "there;s nothing we can do" .. yeah.. I hate the police.
- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -14/+1If you knew more you would say less. Also, "pretty much" nothing they can do because they didn't have enough info? Nothing they could do to make you feel better? Nothing they could do at that moment? Nothing they could do to prevent it? What were you referring to?
As far as response times... it depends on where you live and the resources each department has. If there are only 3 police cars in your area, guess what... If there is a car accident with injuries, a domestic incident, and a lost child... it's going to take a while before they respond. Right now MOST agencies are short handed and it's getting worse.
Matter of fact, in some places in Florida it may takes 2-5 minutes for a backup unit to respond to a police officer who is in a shoot out. You think 45 minutes is a long time for an event that is over, try 2-5 minutes while fighting for your life.
As far as saying police do NOTHING, then who does put criminals in jail? They end up there somehow.
As far as hating the police because you can never find them when you need them, is that why you hate women... lol. Sorry, had to say that. If you really hate the police you need to rethink that. You should really hate the people who put a gun in your face and not the people who shouldn't have been that blunt about their limitations. You should dislike the INDIVIDUALS who told you that and not paint all cops that way. If I used your logic, I would hate everyone from every group. It's not smart.- bphicke, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6The cops are too busy arresting people for victimless crimes to do anything about real crime.
- flatlinebb, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2I know that they are different departments, but if you took some of the cops that ticket you for chicken-***** stuff on the freeway ans made them patrol the streets and help out as backup, maybe they would not be so short-staffed.
- sockpuppets, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5I got a jaywalking ticket in Oakland once. No kidding.
- sovietninja, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1However it takes less than a minute for cops to pull out a tazer and taze someone having a seizure. Maybe if they took 45 minutes to get to this guys house he would have lived.
"We were fighting for our lives, we thought he was gonna blow up so we tazed him, I saw it on Heroes"
- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -14/+1If you knew more you would say less. Also, "pretty much" nothing they can do because they didn't have enough info? Nothing they could do to make you feel better? Nothing they could do at that moment? Nothing they could do to prevent it? What were you referring to?
- oldhick, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5Most of us still hate them then too. They are always so friendly and so respectful to us.
- bxblox, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9Last time I called a cop for help he gave me a ticket. Thanks officer.
- siszam, on 03/11/2008, -2/+3The police aren't doing us a favor when they are called. They are doing what our taxes pay them to do. The problem is, if you call the police there is a good chance you will be victimized by them too. If everything wasn't regulated and turned into a police matter or a felony people could take care of their own business like the use to.
- PatrickHenry, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Name one instance where anyone would need a cop?
- Memitim, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2If you have a problem and call a cop, you now have two problems.
- oderdigg, on 03/11/2008, -2/+18Very true. Whenever I need a copy they're not around. That's what I hate. They are there to get me for speeding 10kph over the limit but won't do diddly ***** all when it comes to armed robbery. FYI, when I used to work at a cornerstore, I was held up at gun point and police took 45 mins to show up and pretty much said, "there;s nothing we can do" .. yeah.. I hate the police.
- jgzman, on 03/11/2008, -0/+11I concur. This would never have happened if the police already had a method in place to register complaints about officers, and have those complaints taken seriously, and acted upon. There is no such place, sadly. (technically, we can complain to the station, but it will be a cold day in hell when they either take our complaints seriously or act upon them)
This site has no method to exact justice, but public shaming is not a bad start.- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1How complaints are handled depends on where you live. In NYC there is an agency devoted to handling complaints against cops which has a phone number and a website. You NEVER have to step foot in a police station.
- tnvwboy, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3For me the great thing about this idea would be to see that other people also had issues with a particular officer. I'll assume that a majority of currently registered complaints are never made public unless that officer does something big enough to make it on the local news and it's dug up.
- akcoder, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2The police dept where I live has a process for filing complaints... That process is to talk to the guys supervisor, who in my case (I just filed a complaint today with the local PD) happens to be a good friend of the cop I'm complaining about...
Blue wall...
- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1How complaints are handled depends on where you live. In NYC there is an agency devoted to handling complaints against cops which has a phone number and a website. You NEVER have to step foot in a police station.
- LonesomeFighter, on 03/11/2008, -3/+7wait, if the cops had their own site and lets say I gave a cop a bad comment (cuz they deserve it), they would know my IP address (without trying to get warrents) and that surely will not be a good outcome for me. I prefer this site stays in the private non-governmental control.
- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -3/+3You are a little too paranoid, for one. Two, if you had an interaction with the police and you made a complaint with a third party, what makes you think that they couldn't find you? Isn't that a part of what cops do, find people?
The majority would not retaliate because of the consequences or for a lack of interest in breaking the law. Now if you lived in another country that might be a different matter.
- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -3/+3You are a little too paranoid, for one. Two, if you had an interaction with the police and you made a complaint with a third party, what makes you think that they couldn't find you? Isn't that a part of what cops do, find people?
- bphicke, on 03/11/2008, -0/+14I think I would rather the site be run by a third party. Giving control to the police would make it too tempting to censor negative comments.
- CeeAyy, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2It's a good idea that will never happen voluntarily.
- shadowspawn, on 03/11/2008, -10/+423I, for one, do not welcome our new overlords.
'Bout time someone watches the watchers, even if it is the watchees.
Hm, my watch is broken.- Theisos, on 03/11/2008, -2/+18Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
- purzzzell, on 03/11/2008, -1/+20Intersting take, i was going to recommend he check the battery first.
- Theisos, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9lol. 2 Points!
- purzzzell, on 03/11/2008, -1/+20Intersting take, i was going to recommend he check the battery first.
- expatcatalyst, on 03/11/2008, -1/+19"They say that officers who are rated face unfair maligning without any opportunity to defend themselves." Oh just like us citizen's huh?
- wedgemartin, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5Yeah. How's it feel, officer?
- yeti22, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Wrong. Citizens get an opportunity to defend themselves in court.
- FatLoser, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Then perhaps WHEN it happens, the officer can take the slanderer to court. Shutting down the site because it "could" be abused is grounds for shutting down the whole god damned internet and in fact reality as well.
- biotch, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2well IN COURT cops can defend themselves too. On the street citizens cant defend themselves worth *****. So online cops can cry me a river for all I care.
- PatrickHenry, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Let us see, you have two people with a vested interest in fleecing your ass. The cop and the judge. Tell me just where does the defense come in?
- yeti22, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1How does a judge have a vested interest in fleecing your ass? If the judgeship is an elected post and he wants to look tough on crime, maybe, but arbitrary aggression could be used against him in the next election. If the judgeship is an appointed post, his only motivation is upholding the law as he see fit.
- brufleth, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Cops can lie just like anyone else can. I know. I'm fighting a speeding ticket and the cop wrote out a little story that is 100% false. When I go before a judge next week the judge will side with the cop despite there being ZERO evidence. He "estimated" my speed and it says as much right on the ticket.
Maybe this officer just made an honest mistake and then confused my ticket with someone else's in his notes. Or maybe he pulls people over all the time because he thinks they were going a little too fast and then fabricates stories to make the tickets stick. A website like this allows citizens to keep a record on officers and allows for some oversight.
This isn't small time money really either. The ticket and court fee will run me $170 and then insurance increases will probably cost me well over $1000 over several years. All because a police officer lied. Where's my defense?- yeti22, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1If you can keep your cool, you can explain to the judge what happened from your perspective and may convince him that it's an unfair ticket. On the other hand, if you go in there saying there is ZERO evidence and the officer LIED, the judge probaby won't listen to you, and on top of that you'll be wrong. First, there is evidence: the officer estimated your speed and determined it was too fast. His estimate carries legal weight because he spends a large part of his day paying attention to how fast cars are driving, and as a trained officer of the law is something of an expert. Second, he didn't lie because he clearly and honestly stated the basis for the ticket.
Defense is not attained by exaggerating and attacking the cop for his (presumed) motives, it's about clearly assessing the facts of the case and putting together a coherent argument. That's what the judge will be judging you on, how well your argument corresponds to the facts of the case, and whether it outweighs the cop's argument.
My problem with a site like this is that it's going to be filled with sob stories like yours where the facts of the case are discarded in favor of an emotional argument about how "I was just going a little over, and that jerk wrote me a ticket anyway!"
- yeti22, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1If you can keep your cool, you can explain to the judge what happened from your perspective and may convince him that it's an unfair ticket. On the other hand, if you go in there saying there is ZERO evidence and the officer LIED, the judge probaby won't listen to you, and on top of that you'll be wrong. First, there is evidence: the officer estimated your speed and determined it was too fast. His estimate carries legal weight because he spends a large part of his day paying attention to how fast cars are driving, and as a trained officer of the law is something of an expert. Second, he didn't lie because he clearly and honestly stated the basis for the ticket.
- KMyHero, on 03/11/2008, -0/+0Serpico is always watching...
- Deadpixel1221, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2"Did you know that Fred spent much of his life...honoring a profession that has gone largely unsung around here? Some of them are here tonight. The profession is law enforcement. I know Fred feels that too often our feelings are locked in...and we feel restrained and perhaps even embarrassed to reach out and touch an officer of the law. After all, they are people, aren't they? Stand up. Pat them on the back. Reach out. Shake hands with any one of these men in blue. Hug a cop! Yeah, go ahead. I said it. Yeah! That's a wonderful feeling! I'm so proud tonight! Oh, say can you see By the dawn's early light What so proudly we hail At the twilight's last gleaming Hip, hip, hooray!"
- Deadpixel1221, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I guess digg users are to young to remember a quote from Fletch.
- Theisos, on 03/11/2008, -2/+18Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
- lickmylovepump, on 03/11/2008, -10/+349can't find the cop that came to my fast-food store and demanded that he get a 'liter of cola'. he was was crazy but his mexican cop-friend was cool.
- Rysac1, on 03/11/2008, -2/+50Shenanigans!
- EmberJGT, on 03/11/2008, -7/+3Eat at Shenanigans enjoy your food! Eat at Shenanigans Calvin Works Here!
- WNW3, on 03/11/2008, -1/+12Double baco cheeseburger. It's for a cop.
- bandomac, on 03/11/2008, -0/+7What, are you going to spit on it?
- lickmylovepump, on 03/11/2008, -1/+4double bacon cheeseburger, hold the spit.
- skyshock1, on 03/11/2008, -4/+10You boys like Me-Hee-Ko?!?
- zeromancer, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2mex-eee-ko *
- Ookadoo, on 03/11/2008, -2/+16It stinks like sex in here
- lickmylovepump, on 03/11/2008, -1/+4someone got carried away with 'the repeater'.
- fuzed, on 03/11/2008, -2/+26Didn't something happen to him involving a school bus full of kids?
- jsd8cc, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2I think he was also reprimanded for throwing a fire extinguisher at a minor.
- EmberJGT, on 03/11/2008, -2/+17Chicken *****! BAGOCK
- kayvman78, on 03/11/2008, -5/+6I'll believe that when me ***** turrns purrrple!
- raynar, on 03/11/2008, -2/+15CAR RAMROD!
- justinx0r, on 03/11/2008, -1/+6Team Ramrod.
- skyroket, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Say CAR RAMROD!!
- rikwakefield, on 03/11/2008, -1/+9littering and..... littering and..... littering and......
- gimmeit, on 03/11/2008, -4/+2URSALA! URSALA! I LOVE YOU URSALA!
- StolenLamp, on 03/11/2008, -2/+8I got you good, *****!
- serif69, on 03/11/2008, -1/+5Does this look like spit to you?
- mmaSENSEI, on 03/11/2008, -3/+8It sounded like he kept saying "Meow"
- poordavey, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2do you understand meow!?
meow!
- poordavey, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2do you understand meow!?
- schroeder, on 03/11/2008, -1/+14Name: Rodney Farva
Location: Spurbury, VT
Occupation: Spurbury Police Officer (Former Vermont State Trooper)
Vehicle: Car RamRod - bandomac, on 03/11/2008, -1/+7Who's up for a mustache ride?
- unjustend, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6Who wants a mustache ride.
/can't make'm speed.- mckirsch, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1I do! I do!
(in my best german accent)
- mckirsch, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1I do! I do!
- unjustend, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6Who wants a mustache ride.
- nicepants, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4Don't spit in that cop's burger.
- UnstableMind, on 03/11/2008, -1/+4BTW, He's not Mexican...
- rikwakefield, on 03/11/2008, -0/+10Oh man, these comments have just inspired me to get Super Troopers out and spark a fat one. Thank you!
- Scrappy1850, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3do you really need inspriation for that?
- AngryIrishMan12, on 03/11/2008, -0/+8When these boys get their syrup in em' they get all antsy in the pantsy
- popularwinner, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4Don't you use that boyfriend voice with me.
- albinorhino101, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2The lice hate the sugar
- ronintetsuro, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Ohhh, you smell pretty.
- arplayer2k, on 03/11/2008, -3/+2Super Troopers.... alright!
- Rysac1, on 03/11/2008, -2/+50Shenanigans!
- suzywang3000, on 03/11/2008, -87/+6it is a little bit too much... if it were not for the perks such as being able to tase with impunity, there wouldn't be many police officers. I say ban that site.
- homer4199, on 03/11/2008, -3/+14Thanks for playing, please try again later.
- EarlOfLade, on 03/11/2008, -1/+9Shouldn't that be: "Thanks for playing, please do not try again later."?
- suzywang3000, on 03/11/2008, -7/+0oh my LOL!!! you two very funny guy!!!
- lickmylovepump, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2So, a chinese man named 'Sue'? May I call you Suzy? I believe digg here is basically telling you to kindly shut the hell up.
- suzywang3000, on 03/12/2008, -1/+0i am telling the hippies on digg to rudely shut the hell up.
- lickmylovepump, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2So, a chinese man named 'Sue'? May I call you Suzy? I believe digg here is basically telling you to kindly shut the hell up.
- EarlOfLade, on 03/11/2008, -1/+9Shouldn't that be: "Thanks for playing, please do not try again later."?
- Truzseeker, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4You need to wake up and smell reality. How about the Rampart division of the Los Angeles police department and the huge scandal that required investigation and serious corrective action.
- TrevorBelmont, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1Speaking of smelling reality, this guy just said that tazing people was a perk and you took him seriously.
This leads me to believe that you may not be an authority on what is and is not real.- jj101, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3Speaking of reality "this guy" you mention (who is called Suzy) mentioned the tasing as a joke while making a separate point. That doesnt mean the whole comment was a joke. There is such thing as context.
- TrevorBelmont, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1Speaking of smelling reality, this guy just said that tazing people was a perk and you took him seriously.
- theskyisblue, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5obviously you are retarded
- suzywang3000, on 03/11/2008, -3/+1just brilliant - do you mind if I use that one sometime?
- lickmylovepump, on 03/11/2008, -1/+3I wouldn't, if I were you. It would be a little bit weird to hear that from a handi-capable person such as yourself.
- suzywang3000, on 03/11/2008, -3/+1just brilliant - do you mind if I use that one sometime?
- lickmylovepump, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3welcome to earth, are you new here?
- CryRightardCry, on 03/12/2008, -0/+0Yeah, but you consistently come down shilling for evil.
You daily defend corruption and scandal while cheering misinformatation and dishonesty.
There was really no doubt you'd support banning free speech and public information.
C'mon, you are one of the more ANTI-civil rights people on digg.
The fact that you once again get it so WRONG is really not surprising.
Here's hoping you get harassed by a cop and have no recourse.
- homer4199, on 03/11/2008, -3/+14Thanks for playing, please try again later.
- GinsuGuy585, on 03/11/2008, -9/+163RateMyCop.com is already down, and there wasn't even a hard-link from the article.
I actually have 2 good ratings to make for cops that let me off on minor speeding violations.- Rysac1, on 03/11/2008, -7/+18Don't expect too much from this news station, they are a joke in Sacramento, almost as bad as Fox40
- Neoanarchist, on 03/11/2008, -4/+6Not sure why you're being dugg down. Thanks for the tip.
- franklymister, on 03/11/2008, -12/+78Cops shouldn't be praised for letting people off from a ticket - they should be praised when they apply the law equally and fairly, with respect for the citizenry.
It's nice that you got out of a ticket, but I'm more interested in justice and equality than special favors.- subat0mic, on 03/11/2008, -5/+35the thing is, "tickets" are bogus 90% of the time. parking tickets. most speeding tickets (since usually the driver isn't being reckless, esp. those on interstate highways).. it's people minding their own business, getting bothered by these people.
it's how they make money, and it's "easy crime" they go after to make this money the most efficiently.
if taking down gangbangers was easy we'd have no gangbangers. murder is "icky", and "dangerous"... etc...- Devaney, on 03/11/2008, -10/+3no, you're very wrong--traffic stops are the main way average cops (vs detectives, undercovers, special gang units...) take down criminals; they leverage the minor violation to gain access to search the suspect, and eventually the car, for drugs, weapons, etc...that's why traffic stops are so huge; most officers would rarely have any easier way to make contact with gangbangers or whoever else (at least in bigger cities, obviously this isn't the case in rural areas and smaller towns, except for busting teens with pot)
- saranagati, on 03/11/2008, -2/+5Though I agree a traffic stop is a big way to detain criminals that they can't gain access to however, that's not the main purpose for traffic stops. The main purpose is for funding. If what you said was true, then they shouldn't give us tickets when they don't find anything. Not to mention that reason is retarded to begin with. Why should I have to suffer in the hands of the police because the police are having trouble catching a criminal?
- Devaney, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3In my experience I've received about 10 warnings for every traffic ticket I've ever received. If you're driving like a moron you're going to get a ticket, but if you're going 1-5 mph over there's a minuscule chance you'll get a ticket if you don't act like a prick. Parking tickets are another story...
- subat0mic, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2driving 75 in a 65, or even 85 when there's no traffic, is not (always) driving like a moron. but they'd be happy to collect my money. that's where i'm very right. if traffic stops was just for gangbangin, then they wouldn't ticket non-gangbangers... they'd warn them. and just because you have a good experience, doesn't mean it is so. the thing is, it's sooo easy to steal money from soccer moms minding their own business going 75 in a 65... of course you should realize we're talking about the greyness of truth here, and not the black and whiteness of our law, which isn't all that black&white when you realize they pick and choose who they pull over and give tickets to and ignore the scaries...
who would you choose, the soccer mom in the ford explorer or the scary guy in the beat up toyota? which one is more likely to pay the ticket, thus satisfying your quota for the month? the whole idea of quota's are f**kd up to begin with. - hillkiwi, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1@saranagati Agreed. Where I live police have a quota of 20 speeding tickets per month, and it was recently in the news they were debating increasing this for the sole purpose of funding. The police officers themselves were the ones who hated the idea and prevented it from happening.
Keep in mind I live in Calgary, AB, and we don't have a lot of major crime.
- Rodalli, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Please, please, please. It's 2008. Well past time to retire the word "gangbangers" from our dictionaries.
- terajoule, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I have an idea. Let's take out all stop signs, traffic lights and speed limit signs. See what happens. Don't want a ticket? Don't break traffic laws. How hard is that?
- Himself, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2Speeding tickets are the expression of fascism used to fund the very same. Reckless driving ought be cited, but merely trying to maximize one's gas mileage ought not be a crime.
- socialismEVIL, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1what?!? no hippies weighing in on this? Optimized gas mileage is better for the environment
- mmaSENSEI, on 03/11/2008, -1/+5I agree with the first part of what subat0mic said. Have anyone ever seen "Parking Wars"? There is a chick that sits in the bushes and just waits to hand out tickets. Most of them are bogus violations and they know it, that's why they seek around and hurry to write tickets and put boots on peoples cars.
- esteskid, on 03/11/2008, -0/+0yeah they are a bunch of dicks, try living in center city philly with a car and trying to park it on the street for a while, i despise them all...
- Nudar, on 03/11/2008, -1/+17Please, frank. If the law was applied equally, every single person in this country every single time they drive would get a speeding ticket. How many times have you gotten in your car and not driven at least 1mph over the speed limit?
- BabaRamDass, on 03/11/2008, -0/+15If everyone was getting busted because the laws were being enforced equally, then it might cause us to reassess the fairness, effectiveness, and significance of such laws.
- franklymister, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3Thanks BabaRamDass - you made my point perfectly.
- gimmeit, on 03/11/2008, -9/+2Yes they should be praised for letting you go for such a stupid ass crime. They know that a speeding ticket could possibly ruin your day,week,month, or hell even year. This cop let him go with a warning I assume because he was a nice guy. IF the same cop stopped the same guy later on that day for speeding, then I would think he would get a ticket that day.
Cops have quota's to meet each month/quarter and if they don't make that quota....well I don't know what happens but they sure do find the simplest thing to pull you over for just so they can "get the #'s in" that the state wanted to see.
I agree with subat0mic in that 90% of all tickets are bogus little ***** tickets designed and made law JUST to get money from Americans. Law enforcement is a business whether you like it or not.
I got off of doing 110mph in a 70mph zone few years back. Do you know why? Because there was noone around, except for the cop. I was driving an M class BMW Z4, red mind you, in the middle of the day on a 3 mile long straight stretch of hwy 264 in Rocky Mount, NC. The cop let me off because I was test driving the car seeing what it could do. I told the cop exactly why I was doing 110mph on his highway. "Yes officer I know I was going that fast. I'm test driving this car and just wanted to see what she would do if I floored it in 4th gear and well...here we are."
The cop obviously new that I wasn't meaning any harm to him or anybody else on the road, I was just playing around. Now some of you would say that I was being 'careless and wreckless' or 'I could've killed someone' or 'you are a dangerous driver' or 'you should have been arrested' or... well I don't really care what you think. I will do whatever it is I want, when I want to do it, and how i want to do it. So long as nobody gets killed or injured than you should care what the ***** I do. Same applies for this site. If you comment on a cop being nice, so be it. If it's stating the bad things he's done, and many other people say the same things than they just might be onto something!! WTF can't you understand about that. If you haven't been to the site yet, which you haven't because someone already took it down, than you have no right to say anything about it.- Ascus, on 03/11/2008, -2/+4That is what racetracks are for, idiot. You should not have been let off, but sadly if he had written you a ticket, it would have be just as bad as doing 110mph in a school zone. So you got lucky and got a cop with a heart. He also probably liked those pictures of Jackson you gave him.
- logan074, on 03/11/2008, -2/+4So you can do whatever you want as long as no one gets injured? Should I be allowed to just randomly shoot my shotgun off in the street to test it as long as I do not shoot it at someone?
- jftitan, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2Yes... Yes you should be able to shoot your shotgun in the air to TEST it out. Just like i should be able to drag donut holes into your front lawn.... Because it doesn't hurt anyone.
/Bad analogies FTW.
- jftitan, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2Yes... Yes you should be able to shoot your shotgun in the air to TEST it out. Just like i should be able to drag donut holes into your front lawn.... Because it doesn't hurt anyone.
- jjhall, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2Actually yes, you should be able to. You should be able to do anything you want to, insofar is to doesn't harm anyone else in any manner (physical, financial, labor, etc.) However, there are too many idiots that did so in an unsafe manner and people got hurt. Therefore to protect people, laws were passed that say you can't. One (or a few) bad apple(s) spoiled it for the rest of us.
Laws take the common sense out of the equation. Look at it this way. Say there is a playground with lots of kids next to a road. You are driving on that road. What would you do as you got near that playground? If you have the least bit of common sense you'd slow down to a reasonable speed that would allow you stopping time if a kid decided to run out into the roadway. The problem is too many people do not possess the ability to use common sense and drove through the same area without adjusting their speed appropriately. Consequently people got hurt. In order to curb that behavior, they now have very low speed limit signs in place and heavily fine people who ignore them.
The only thing that gripes me is the very vague signs that are sometimes in place, like "25 MPH (when children present)". Define children present... Obviously if school is in session or there are soccer games being played children are present. But what if it is 8:00 at night, and you see no children. An officer driving from another angle sees one kid walking his dog around the back corner of a building where he is hidden from your view. Are you then violating the law if you didn't slow down? Depending on if the officer (and potentially the judge) are capable of using common sense, it could go either way. Laws should be clear and dry, with no room left for interpretation outside of extreme extenuating circumstances.
To get to the grandparent post, if he was on a flat stretch of highway with no other vehicles in the immediate area and no blind curves, then why should he not be able to drive at extreme speeds? Who was he (potentially) hurting besides himself? Now had he rolled his car across a ditch and had to be rescued from his car, then the excessive speed should be taken into account on deciding if he has to reimburse the fire department for the extrication. At that point he took a calculated risk to his own safety and he gets to accept the consequences.
- jsd8cc, on 03/11/2008, -3/+3@franklymister
Your method looks good on paper, but is pragmatically impossible, not to mention obtuse. I'm more interested in the Spirit of the law vs. the Letter of the law. Policy tempered with common sense is important, yet--unfortunately--non-existent in this day and age. Now we have what I like to call LawBloat...where under the sheer amount of laws (many unnecessary), perfectly responsible citizens--while *technically* breaking the law (apropos GinsuGuy585, I assume)--are castigated by policies A) created to make money, or B) meant to harm the dangerous.
- subat0mic, on 03/11/2008, -5/+35the thing is, "tickets" are bogus 90% of the time. parking tickets. most speeding tickets (since usually the driver isn't being reckless, esp. those on interstate highways).. it's people minding their own business, getting bothered by these people.
- EarlOfLade, on 03/11/2008, -1/+14That's great GinsuGuy, people need to rate the good ones too. They have a tendency to drown in all the bad ones.
- BoneStamp, on 03/11/2008, -0/+24Just don't say that they let you off on a ticket, they could get in trouble and not do it anymore.
- BrandonB1218, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1It's at the officers discretion. He wouldn't get in trouble for that. They DO have ticket quota's they have to meet but, they won't get fired if they decide to no give you a ticket.
- Devaney, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2you're right, police have a huge amount of discretion for any situation and wouldn't get in trouble. but ticket quotaS are mainly just a myth, a few cities secretly have them but they can't be legally enforced, they're just a guideline to make sure the cop isn't just sleeping all day...and even then the ones i've heard about (NYC) are around 30 traffic violations A MONTH, you'd have to be an incredibly lazy cop not to find at least twice that many people driving very dangerously in an entire month.
- BoneStamp, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I agree, but depending on what he did and why he didn't get a ticket... I dunno, just seems better not to say anything about it. I'm all for praising the police, but I don't think we need a record of how many tickets people got out of.
- BrandonB1218, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1It's at the officers discretion. He wouldn't get in trouble for that. They DO have ticket quota's they have to meet but, they won't get fired if they decide to no give you a ticket.
- groovytrance, on 03/11/2008, -7/+1http://www.ratemycop.com/
this site works...
ratemycop.com does not...- MonkCanatella, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Doesn't work anymore.
- kupa, on 03/11/2008, -1/+5Wow, GoDaddy looks like they've taken them offline already.
- kury, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I just called godadddy (1-480-505-8855) and they said it was due to lack of payment by the owner... (I was surprised that they gave me that info.. but thats what they said)
- microchp, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3There is nothing stopping everyone from making their own version. Just make ratemycop.(yourdom.ain) and stick phpBB or some other forum software there. It doesn't have to be fancy. If these sites are hosted all over the world, then there is no easy way to stop it. People could also get their own domains. How many variants could you make? GoodCopBadCop.org ?
I bet there are a few hundred people reading this digg article that could easily throw several sites such as these up in minutes.- fuzzybeard, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1badcop.nodonutforyou.com?
- Rysac1, on 03/11/2008, -7/+18Don't expect too much from this news station, they are a joke in Sacramento, almost as bad as Fox40
- jeremyduffy, on 03/11/2008, -0/+83This reminds me of "Ratemyprofessor.com" and I like it for the same reason. You can tell which comments are BS that people only leave because they are mad and which ones are something you should pay attention to. The information on there could be helpful when deciding whether or not to fight a ticket.
Too bad the site is down though. I wonder if it will come back or if it's been yanked.- KingGorilla, on 03/11/2008, -0/+14Ratemycop should have a hotness rating too
- bxblox, on 03/11/2008, -1/+6There should be a bribeability scare as well.
- bxblox, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4*scale
- MonkCanatella, on 03/11/2008, -1/+1Me rove you rong time!
- Rsulliv1, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3The site is slow due to volume.
I do think that they should make a more rigorous comment form. There are too many "This guy sucks" comments on there. I think they should make a few required fields regarding specific facts about why the officer is good or bad. Without that, the site will be full of non-substantiated fluff. Not that it's an awful thing... - sporg, on 03/11/2008, -1/+6You should always fight a ticket jeremyduffy there is always the possibility you will win. I thoroughly enjoy making sure the cop has to go out of his way to appear. First request a court hearing and then file a written request for a delay as soon as the date approaches, use the most outlandish excuse you can think up (some districts are so backed up your court date could be almost a year away.) In traffic court you will lose 99% of the time even if the ticket is bogus but you can usually at least get the judge to remove the points if you agree to just pay them the money (which is all they wanted anyway). If you are forced to pay elect to take the payment plan and then file for as many extensions as you possibly can just to be difficult. The more people who do this the more bogged down and backed up the system becomes and the less revenue the state gets easily through the grand traffic ticket racket.
- Spliced88, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2Thanks for making everyone else wait on your stupid ass.
- sporg, on 03/11/2008, -1/+5You are free to insult me all you like. I will continue to gloat over the fact that my insurance rates have never been raised by some bogus speed trap. If you don't like waiting just mail in the payment and accept it up the arse points and all.
- Spliced88, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2So, nobody else matters but you.
That is what is wrong with some people, no sympathy for fellow human beings. You don't care about making everyone else wait longer in lines, pay the government employees more, and just be a drag on society as a whole.
I wouldn't be gloating over that. - terajoule, on 03/12/2008, -1/+1Big deal, so you found a way to stick it to the man. Not like anyone gives a *****.
- Spliced88, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2So, nobody else matters but you.
- Extraneous, on 03/12/2008, -1/+1I don't see you making any effort for revolution from this decaying theocracy. You should be more concerned with the fact that you're being shafted by the system you're trying to defend here.
Open your eyes... wait... I forgot they started removing those from Americans...- terajoule, on 03/13/2008, -0/+2Decaying? It's been dead and buried since 1913. Come join us in the Haliburton labor camps, comrade.
- Extraneous, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1My bad, I just haven't turned on that god forsaken tv in so long I'm not even sure what's going on. I just hate being lied to, so I spend my time being productive, rather than brainwashed.
How's the weather in the camps this time of year?
- sporg, on 03/11/2008, -1/+5You are free to insult me all you like. I will continue to gloat over the fact that my insurance rates have never been raised by some bogus speed trap. If you don't like waiting just mail in the payment and accept it up the arse points and all.
- Exact0, on 03/11/2008, -2/+1You realize you and me are the ones paying all those people, right? Yes! The answer is to give them a reason to hire more people, spend more of our money, and have more contempt for the common citizen
I have to dig up the story, but there was a cop that made something like $70k in overtime (plus his normal pay) for going to court for tickets he wrote.
- Spliced88, on 03/11/2008, -2/+2Thanks for making everyone else wait on your stupid ass.
- Dunhamzzz, on 03/11/2008, -17/+49A DUDE LIVES ON A RANCH!
- dagetti, on 03/11/2008, -10/+5Lmao, that's awesome.
- ChristBehemoth, on 03/11/2008, -29/+11How about using "thosewhotaze.com" instead of "ratemycop.com" ..
- tman84, on 03/11/2008, -7/+182Some cop called me a *****.
- displaced1, on 03/11/2008, -1/+30I think the same one came into my work and ordered a liter of cola.
- tman84, on 03/11/2008, -1/+9He was holding up a sign that said CAR RAMROD
- 42Vindictive, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2Meow you step out of that car boy.
- AgentMull, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6And a Pie, Apple.
- tman84, on 03/11/2008, -1/+9He was holding up a sign that said CAR RAMROD
- jd72277, on 03/11/2008, -2/+20well, were you?
- IHaveIssues, on 03/11/2008, -3/+66Were you ***** a chicken at the time?
- DrDash, on 03/11/2008, -1/+27Did it stop you from violating that chicken?
- displaced1, on 03/11/2008, -11/+7His black friend kept talking about mustache rides, or was he mexican?
- purzzzell, on 03/11/2008, -4/+9I call Shenanigans!
- displaced1, on 03/11/2008, -0/+7NEXT PERSON TO SAY SHENANIGANS GETS PISTOL WHIPPED!
- Deranged, on 03/11/2008, -0/+8say, farva, what was that restaurant you like... the one with the stuff all over the walls?
- displaced1, on 03/11/2008, -0/+8You mean Shenanigans?
- jftitan, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2"Ooooohhhhh" *hands pistol to displaced1*
- GeekyGerge, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2http://photos9.flickr.com/13480892_a6be4d568e_o.jp ...
- displaced1, on 03/11/2008, -0/+7NEXT PERSON TO SAY SHENANIGANS GETS PISTOL WHIPPED!
- demiurgency, on 03/11/2008, -1/+28We prefer to use the term chicken-"lover".
- socokoolaid, on 03/11/2008, -0/+7Inter-species erotica - Clerks 2
- centran, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9It's better then being caught ***** a bear and asking if you need assistance.
- mGARANDEUR1, on 03/11/2008, -2/+1Some cop caught me ***** a bike in a hotel room and arrested me. I demand payback!
- gangafreak, on 03/12/2008, -0/+0whats so funny tell me right meow
- TheOneTrueGod, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Even if you did ***** a chicken (which I do not assume) it is wrong of the cop to call you "*****" as if it were your hobby/business. Once is not many times. scnr
- displaced1, on 03/11/2008, -1/+30I think the same one came into my work and ordered a liter of cola.
- foolawrence, on 03/11/2008, -11/+32Should combine site with sex-offender registry. Then vigilante stalker not have to go to two sites.
- wedgemartin, on 03/11/2008, -1/+4Come on you people. That ***** was hilarious.
- rilus, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6It's not about being vigilantes. It's about voicing opinions which is entirely different from the sex offender list.
- chalkboy, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6Alot of the people on a sex offenders list never touched any one they were put there because of stings like the ones on to catch a predator. They just seem unconstitutional to me.
- signalwarfare, on 03/11/2008, -1/+2why don't you take a seat...
- rilus, on 03/11/2008, -0/+11Absolutely agree, chalkboy. Like many, many people have asked: "If these people HAVE repaid their debt to society, why are they still marginalized. If they HAVEN'T paid their debt to society, why are they out of jail?"
- chalkboy, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6Alot of the people on a sex offenders list never touched any one they were put there because of stings like the ones on to catch a predator. They just seem unconstitutional to me.
- digitallysick, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I totally agree with you, the law is all about exploiting you in the news papers if you get arrested for any minor detial they can destroy your good name. But yet when people want to voice an opinion about them, its "not safe and an outage" ha, welcome to the world most ex felons live in
- kingofinternet, on 03/11/2008, -8/+34yeah it puts pissant suburban super cops in danger. waaahhh!
- BrandonB1218, on 03/11/2008, -3/+1Yes, it does. You don't think the people they put in jail wont try to come after them for revenge? It's happened before, you just don't hear about it. At least twice in one year in my city, some criminal decided to follow a police officers family home and he killed them all.
- biotch, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2And exactly how does this site facilitate that?
All the info on the site can be obtained by any criminal. - allahuakbar, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1The criminals already know the cops' names idiot. This website isn't facilitating anything.
- biotch, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2And exactly how does this site facilitate that?
- BrandonB1218, on 03/11/2008, -3/+1Yes, it does. You don't think the people they put in jail wont try to come after them for revenge? It's happened before, you just don't hear about it. At least twice in one year in my city, some criminal decided to follow a police officers family home and he killed them all.
- CrankyHippo, on 03/11/2008, -1/+82I'm sure if they yank this site, someone will just make another one and it will be even better.
- subat0mic, on 03/11/2008, -0/+9someone host it in sweden. :)
- thatfunman, on 03/11/2008, -0/+6It's really no different than ratemyprofessor.com
- Deranged, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3shiiiit. you can rate damn near anything nowadays. Just a few weeks ago, a few friends and I were drunk rating mullets and chicks' racks.
- KingGorilla, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4ratemypoo.com
- linagee, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4ratemydigg.com
- WilliamDavis, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2Except that your relationship with a professor is largely voluntary. Your relationship with a policeman is manditory, backed up by guns and prisons. There's really more of a need here, particularly when most professors seem to value feedback.
- biotch, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1I would prefer if a mandatory encounter with someone with guns and prisons and night sticks is influenced by a site that makes him think twice about abusing his power.
- Deranged, on 03/11/2008, -0/+3shiiiit. you can rate damn near anything nowadays. Just a few weeks ago, a few friends and I were drunk rating mullets and chicks' racks.
- socokoolaid, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5They will never *yank* it, it's protected by freedom of speech all arguments against the site are about person information of the officers, which the site doesn't contain. Obviously it got *dugg* pretty easy though. Hopefully they aren't using them police computers we pay for to DDoS the site.
- microchp, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Agreed. Who wants to race on making a new one? :-)
- SilasTomorrow, on 03/11/2008, -2/+170All public servants should be held accountable. This is one option.
- MicheleFloyd, on 03/12/2008, -0/+1Next it will be BMV clerks, just watch.
- provost, on 03/11/2008, -5/+35i would say that you probably don't have that much to be afraid of if you are good at your job and uphold public rights like you should.. rather than, you know, hassling people and giving out 300 do
