 |
MyFox Kansas City
|
Mayor Funkhouser said why not let people with a criminal record be a police officer?Barely 11 percent of Kansas City’s police officers are African American. The police chief and the mayor say that’s not enough. At a town hall meeting Wednesday, Mayor Funkhouser suggested lowering standards to recruit more minority police. The Mayor said this is just an idea… a way to provoke debate to come up with creative ideas to hire more minority cops. But is it realistic? Ken Christopher is a criminal justice professor with Park University. He said, “The more you can attract candidates you can reliably trust the better off you are.”
Christopher said there are other ways to recruit minorities without compromising standards. “To say you’re willing to take on people who’ve committed felony violations is pretty much outside the mainstream about what police hiring practices are about,” said Christopher.
This is already done with the military, so hey, why not? What could possibly go wrong?
Funkhouser? That sounds like a failed 80s MC Hammer rival
Aren’t the requirements to become a police officer already extremely low? I looked at a few PD sites, and generally an applicant needs a high school diploma (or GED) plus about a semester’s worth of college, a driving license and no serious criminal record.
There is a big difference between the military and law enforcement. Soldiers are not trained to know and enforce the law, they are trained to fight wars. Thus, there is a good reason why law enforcement does not want to hire people with a penchant for not taking the law seriously.
Talk about giving guns to the criminals.
That could actually work if its restricted to drug possession.
#1 Actually Funkhouser sounds like a house music DJ moniker.
As for lowering the standards… what they can’t get enough paranoid sociopaths anymore?
Cursor_
I think Funkhouser was just talking to hear his voice – he often does such things. From wiki: Crimes commonly considered to be felonies include, but are not limited to: aggravated assault and/or battery, arson, burglary, embezzlement, grand theft, treason, espionage, racketeering, robbery, murder, rape, kidnapping and fraud.
“suggested lowering standards to recruit more minority police”
Where the heck is the NAACP on this? is that not a racist remark?
Funkhouser – Sounds like one of the guys from Police Academy, doesn’t it? đ Well it is Kansas… đ
it has been said before life copies movies or is it movies copy life.
Cheers
NAACP
I wonder why no one has spoke out that the NAACP name is not PC and needs to change – drop the “CP = coloured people”. Last time I checked calling someone ‘coloured’ is not cool.
I am not attempting to make a joke of this – I am serious. With everything else being PC why has this gone unchanged?
Sorry, off topic
Cheers
#8, in the eyes of racemongers, such a comment is racist, but for people who put rational thought ahead of politics it’s a reasonable look at the real world. This is the same thing that colleges and businesses do all the time.
“What could possibly go wrong?”
Humongous lawsuits!
Actually, as the contributors to this blog have pointed out by inference on countless occasions, there’s a very, very fine line between cops and crooks. I believe that to be true.
Now, if only there was a test to show which crooks, once bought by the police department would stay bought by the police department, this inequity might finally be rectified.
S’wonderful how govt-mandated racial discrimination has reached the point where it’s regarded as completely normal and proper. Some much of what has gone wrong in present-day America stems directly from this insane and unjust bigotry of making skin color more important than qualification or merit. The cultural-Marxist goal of destroying America from within continues apace.
There’s something Through-the-Looking-Glassish about a policy of hiring minority criminals instead of white noncriminals. But we’ve collectively become so inured to it that it seems like business as usual, which, in a way, it is.
Hiring – or not hiring – people because of their skin color was wrong in the past and it’s every drop as wrong today. Now it’s gone past just hiring incompetents because they have the approved pigmentation, it’s reached hiring LAWBREAKERS to ENFORCE THE LAWS?? Just to make sure that whites are shut out?? That qualifies as going to insane lengths to keep racial discrimination alive.
Some sane thinking on this and related issues is to be found here.
#11
“in the eyes of racemongers, such a comment is racist”
Exactly Mike, I’m not talking about rationality, I’m talkling about reality. Where is Mr Jesse and Rev. Al? oh wait a minute, you mean it’s ok to talk down about minorities as long as their getting a freebie? hmmmm….
#13, Three Headed Moran,
The cultural-Marxist goal of destroying America from within continues apace.
It is rather boring how you always like to suggest everything is PC or Marxist inspired.
Your rant though, is just another piece of compelling evidence of how a bigoted mind justifies things.
BTW, I love your link.
the American Civil Rights Institute, funded in large part by the ultra-conservative Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee
Yup. Real objectivity there. Another class act.=
Racist idiot reflexively attempting to defend your PC racist shit – you, like a true believer, spent more time trying desperately to find something to smear with than you ever spent reading what AA opponents have to say.
I couldn’t give a shit if Satan Himself cut them a check every day. I support their ideals and their actions, which are to eliminate racist discrimination in government and the workplace.
I notice you can’t seem to come up with a single rational thought to support the insanity that is the topic of this thread. All you can do is, in typical PC fashion, reach for a tired, lame smear tactic.
Classy. đ
#13 3HC
“Thereâs something Through-the-Looking-Glassish about a policy of hiring minority criminals instead of white noncriminals…”
I might modify that statement to something like, “white people who’ve managed not to be caught at criminal activity”.
“…itâs reached hiring LAWBREAKERS to ENFORCE THE LAWS??”
I’m sorry to point this out to you but it’s true nonetheless, this is neither new nor remarkable.
Police departments generally like to hire people of any race who are smart enough not to have been caught breaking any laws and smart enough not to admit to breaking any laws.
Keep in mind, one of the questions asked of potential new recruits is this: “Have you ever tried drugs?”
Only the people smart enough to say “No” get hired.
That means none of the honest people get hired but that’s OK, the police don’t want to hire honest people because honest people would never convict any real criminals in court, where lies are mandatory.
It’s a strange system but it’s the only one we got.
#16 Three Headed Moran,
So what is your point? All racists, like you, try to justify their bigotry on some worn out cliche of fear.
At least here in Houston, the exceptions they’re making are for those with marijuana violations on their records(!)
As time passes, this can only lead to a reduction in MJ arrests and hence, prosecutions, and thusly the ball starts rolling toward redirecting police efforts toward actually fighting crime, for a change.
And I’d be dishonest if I didn’t mention that, as a matter of personal experience, over many years and in many places, I have yet to be fucked with by a black or Hispanic cop. Females, yes. But I have never run into a black, Mexican or Cuban cop on the kind of power trip that too many white cops, male AND female, suffer from… It ain’t like they don’t exist, but it’s plain that they’re pretty rare on the ground if I haven’t yet encountered one.
…in fact, now that I think about it, I’ve noticed that white cops are the ones who make it a point to avoid duties where they are less likely to encounter bad people who might hurt them. The ‘clean-cut’ Nazilike arrogant, authoritarian wiseasses seem to like working hooker stings and radar speed traps a lot more than going after armed robbers and such minor annoyances. They leave that to their minority brethren…
…I’m sorry, did you mumble something, Batshit?
#17–Cinaedh==strange post. I could write that tongue in cheek but my take on you is that you are a straight shooter.
Things in cop-land must be very uptight? Sad.
Nice issue there==do you take applicants who’s only black mark is they once took drugs? I wouldn’t exclude them. Otherwise you get applicants with canned answers==kinda like presidential candidates. Let the liars pass, they know the game.
#20, Three Headed Moran,
No, I directly asked you what is your effen point? Specifically referring to #16.
Racist idiot reflexively attempting to defend your PC racist shit – you, like a true believer, spent more time trying desperately to find something to smear with than you ever spent reading what AA opponents have to say.
Is your point to suggest that because you are a racist bigot you shouldn’t have to defend my computer shit? (good, wouldn’t want you to)
Is your point to say I am a true believer?
Is your point trying to imply that I haven’t ever read anything about Anti-Aircraft opponents have to say? (actually, I don’t know of any Anti-Aircraft opponents, got a link?)
I couldnât give a shit if Satan Himself cut them a check every day. I support their ideals and their actions,
Is your point to proudly proclaim your religious ideals?
Is your point to justify bigotry?
Is your point to support constipation?
I notice you canât seem to come up with a single rational thought to support the insanity that is the topic of this thread. All you can do is, in typical PC fashion, reach for a tired, lame smear tactic.
Is your point to say âphuk yuu I’m a nicer guy than you isâ.
Is your point to suggest I would be better off with a Mac?
Is your point to infer you have a problem with my PC or the way I use it?
#21 bobbo
You’re correct, I was being absolutely straight with my comment. None of them will admit it but I’m sure lots and lots of cops experimented with grass and hash when they were young, especially in college – exactly the same as Presidential candidates.
Keep in mind, I’m only talking about the ones who tried drugs and didn’t get caught. If they were dumb enough or unlucky enough to get caught and charged (not even convicted) they won’t be recruited.
With other crimes, it’s obviously the same thing. If they didn’t get caught, they have clean records and they’re viable candidates.
As to lies, well, didn’t you know everyone in Court lies? The defendant lies. The cop lies. The witnesses lie. The lawyers lie. The prosecutors lie. Only the judges don’t lie – because they don’t have any reason to lie.
# 23 Cinaedh –Hah!!
“I’ve read your moving papers”
“I spent a lot of time reviewing your cited material.”
“You present a very close case.”
I guess you have never been in chambers?
BUT–real issue there on how “personalities” are subtly selected for and against. Willing to lie for the perceived benefit of the employer is a huge bias.
And back to Hilliary. Two lies in one day==her biggest fault is she gets impatient over people not getting government handouts, and she believed Bob Johnson saying he was refering to Obama’s organizational efforts and not drug use.
We have a trained/demonstrated liar running for President. When she lies about the obvious with very low stakes, what do we expect for anything important and relevant?
Its all right there to see.
Mayor Suggests Lowering Standards For Police Officers…while concurrently raising standards for criminals.
#24 bobbo
Once again, you’re correct, I’ve never spent any time in chambers. I did waste years of my life in the courtroom, waiting for things to happen and in the box, fencing with lawyers. That was long ago and far away but I’ll bet not a single thing has changed in the interim.
#17
You are partially correct. I have a friend whom I have known from a time before he ever thought of being a cop through his current day employment as a police officer. Police forces want people that have *some* experience with the criminal element but preferably did not get caught. They do not necessarily want squeaky clean people. They want smart people (but not so smart that they wouldn’t do something other than police work ;->). Thus, if on an application you answer that you have tried drugs, that is not a knock against you. However, if you did drugs extensively or sold them that is entirely different.