In general, yes. Why do I say "easy"? It might be fundamentally difficult - perhaps in labor or hours worked. But the job is easy because there are no rules. For starters you have civil forfeiture. A police officer can take any cash you have on hand because it could be suspected drug money. This money is then itself sued by the court. Of course it ends up in the coffers of the police through various state and city slush funds. There have been numerous cases of old ladies and low income people having their entire paychecks seized in a traffic stop. You have qualified immunity. This one goes without saying. Police officers are virtually impossible to sue for actions taken in the course of official duty. Ostensibly this was to allow police officers to do their job without fear of undo repercussion but it has been used as an enabler for violence and abuse. Without absolute proof a police officer will almost always run free without so much as an investigation from the DA. You have the police union which is one of the most powerful unions in the country. It goes without saying this makes your job easier when you're provided the best lawyers in the country for free when you make a mistake. You have Warren v. District of Columbia. A police officer has no duty to arrive to an active crime scene. This one really seals the deal. A police officer doesn't even have to do their job if they don't want under Warren v. District of Columbia. You have the militarization of the police. It's hard to think an officer has to do tough police work when they go weapons free the second they feel nervous. Pro-police pearl clutchers believe criminals have gotten more dangerous and thus more firepower is needed however the FBI statistics show most violent crime is committed with handguns. Lastly there's no real requirement for an officer to understand the laws they enforce. Cynically, this makes abuse and violence far easier on the part of the officer. You can play the game but don't even know the rules! Imagine if your day job had just one of these perks. You'd think it was the easiest thing in the world. They get all of them. As for bad people I think the evidence shows this is almost certainly true. There are a lot more "bad apples" than we think and we're actually looking at something more like a "bad orchard". If the military has it's own police force (MPs) why can't the police have their own police force? Why don't police have strict ROE? Why don't police walk the beat anymore and converse with the neighborhood instead of driving around in their armored fear-mobiles to intimidate people into compliance?
Pucky... Cops have a very tough job. One of the most difficult and dangerous jobs out there. Most All the shit you list is anecdotal. ‘a cop can just rob you...’. But they generally don’t. Cops are arrested far far far less often than the general population. You can say it’s because they are cops. Or you can say it’s because they mostly respect law and order. it’s very likely the latter. There are bad apples in every orchard. But your assumptions that their job is easy because they have little to no responsibility or repercussions are unfounded.
Or because there's only been one major study on it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...er-year-or-3-per-day-are-arrested-nationwide/ With a conclusion: The article says "police officers are arrested far less than the civilian population" but there was no mention of per capita rates. Per capita is what matters because if you don't account for per capita rates the statement is vacuously true based on the fact the civilian population is larger than law enforcement. It's not a "small group of bad apples" it's a problem with police enforcing laws on themselves. I eagerly await more of these studies. Police crime has been trending up since at least the war on drugs. I'd imagine more studies will find these numbers significantly higher and the per capita rate will likely reflect their propensity to violence both off duty and on duty.
There is an interesting Pew study on views of police vs public here. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/01/11/police-views-public-views/ Are they seen as enforcers vs protectors etc.
Not even top 10 cuh. Jose across the border's risking his neck in greater numbers by occupation. https://www.businessinsider.com/the...s-ranchers-and-other-agricultural-managers-28
Just to remain clear or as an opportunity for the tardfucks here to wise up, there is no greater barrier to removing a bad cop or a bad teacher etc, than their unions- and lefties are the creators and enablers of union protection systems- which have clearly gone way, way, way over the top compared to some of their original purposes. If the Minn bad cop had not been caught on camera, he would be in his job today. Everyone there knows how the dance works. An arrestee dies in the custody of a cop, the local coroner who plays on the same team coughs up an autopsy report that says that he died of a heart attack or corona or some bad shushi, whatever. And the beat goes on. Another incident on the officers record is added to the double-digit number of other incidents but there is no removal. Or the police chief takes heat and ends out having to defend trash that he would have liked to move out himself years ago. So now, communities all across the world are having protests of being looted because the lefties in Minneapolis are running a union protection scheme that keeps any bad actors from being moved out until the kill someone in a way that is so visible that it cannot be overlooked and once a case moved into the criminal justice system that supersedes all their union games. Same way with teachers. You have teachers in Chicago that cannot read and write, could not possibly organize and run a classroom but they are totally beyond removal. Once in a while one of them will come in drunk and rape one of the kids and sometimes- very rarely- will that result in removal. What the lefties don't see coming though is that these unions have taken on a life of their own. All the "progressives" are thinking their city councils are just going to eliminate their police departments. Heh, good luck wit dat. It's the other way round they have "rights" and contracts and they will turn on their city bigtime. They are the ones who will give the city a little taste of what no police will look like by going on strike for a few weeks right in the middle of the summer and let you see how that works out for ya. It's just more of the lefty bullshiite. Minneapolis runs a corrupt city and corrupt, lawless people department but rather than it being their fault it is the fault of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, and let's not forget the Crusades. The Justice Department needs to do to some of these states and cities what it has done to some of the southern states in the past - ie. to put their police departments etc under the receivership/whatever the right word is- of a court appointed master until such time as basic civil rights standards and procedure and policies are adopted and made operational. The lefties don't like that because we are talking about northern states/cities- ie chicago, fergueson, detroit, minneapolis etc.- and that kind of action is usually reserved for southern states. Because well, north is good, south is bad and kkk-ish and confederate types allegedly. The democatic party has failed the dem plantation beyond comprehension. It's all about taking them down of the shelf for votes and election time. That's all. After that, go away.