Quote Quoting tenantweary
View Post
I don't suppose there is any bias there then? As there is at least one very public incident of a sheriff who shot a vet who was standing from a prone position on his command.
No more or less so than your "he's my family member who went to war and now should be left alone to drink and drive without the convictions being embarrassing" drivel is. The difference here, though, is that my partner is still dead and your cousin was only embarrassed. The PO did his job without discretion. He should be reprimanded and trained on his IPC skills. But, as I've said, and as the supreme court has said, cops can be jerks and it doesn't violate the constitution.

The occasional embarrassment of one's parole are inherent in being convicted and paroled. I'm sorry that he's found this unpleasant. Perhaps this will be a good incentive for him to remain sober while driving. He could, of course, choose to finish out his term in prison where no coworkers would have to see him be berated by an a-hole PO. Or, he could file a complaint against the PO along with his coworkers.


Oh, I see. Perfectly fine when they enrolled into service. Shells of their former selves when the get out. Now their obligation is to shut the hell up and leave society alone. Gotcha.
That's a consequence of being involved in the severe trauma of killing people, injuring people, and being shot at. It's not unique to veterans of combat. Police officers have extremely similar problems with which to contend. No one is suggesting anyone shut the hell up about whether veterans get the help they need. That's not the issue here. This is about him breaking a law, apparently as often as he deems fit. The issue isn't confused by yours truly.

A part of getting help, a large part of it, is him asking for help. There are enough people running around trying to get help that the medical profession no longer goes door to door recruiting patients. Moreover, he's a veteran; chances are he can get help for free or nearly so.




No one on this thread has made that point, the point is should he be continously accused of being a drug/user dealer and gangster. Good attempt at confusing the issue.
The point is attendant to his repeated violations of the law. This says, literally, that he feels free to violate said law whenever the mood hits him.


Lets see... Richard Riordan, former mayor of LA, 3 dui's, is he a gangster, drug dealer? George Bush? Dick Cheney? Lee Baca tried to bribe Sherman Block from running against him... I wonder if there isn't a double standard somewhere?
Confusing the issues? Bush wasn't four times convicted of anything. As far as we know as a matter of public record, he wasn't convicted of anything. Or do you know where these supposed police reports can be found? I've never heard that Cheney or Bush is a drug dealer. I know of no better armed, trained and funded gang than the U.S. Gov't. It's good business to have a strong gang capable of undertaking extreme measures of violence against those who would do us harm.

I see your points, one person here has had personal experience with billigerent drunks, another with a psychotic vet, so as far as your both concerned, lets keep creating prisons, and rehabilitation be thrown aside.
This plainly misreads much of what both Carl and I said. That whole thing about hoping he's on the road to sobriety and has given up his life of crime would be evidence that we believe in rehabilitating criminals. Indeed, our criminal justice systems works very hard to give some meaningful rehabilitation to those who wind up on the wrong side of it.

I find your defending your affiliation with law enforcement admirable. I disagree with your positions. I have achieved nothing but a polarization affect on this thread.
You give yourself far too much credit.

I'll continue to support all vets who reach out as i have in the past. you should see some of the pictures of my cousin's friends, 1000 miles stares still, 20 years later. I'll be sure to tell them to stay within the limits of the law as they are not a special subset of anything nor deserving of "extra" rights.
That's good advice. Veterans, ex-cops, former fire fighters . . . none of these people have a special right to cash in their good works in the past for a freebie on criminal violations of the law tomorrow.

Life is much like the military: what have you done for me lately? While good works are great for a person's life, bad works can undo them. It isn't a balancing test. I'd rather have a person in my life who never helped anyone, but also never went out of his way to break a law potentially killing someone than a guy who saved a thousand lives but feels entitled to engage in as risky a behavior as he chooses. Particularly when the risk he's assuming is on behalf of people who haven't consented to it.

Or do you really think veterans deserve a get out of jail free card? If so, where does it stop? DUI? Rape? Murder? Blue collar crime?

Please, spare us the psychological attempts to intuit what we think and feel. We answered your situation with respect to all the facts, good and bad alike, as they were presented.

Frequently in conversations like this, at least for my part, my personal feelings aren't relevant to the reality of what is. But for the record: I wish veterans had an equal time of measured reintegration back into society to what they missed by being forward deployed. I doubt you'd find many veterans who would welcome that, though. And our government has fallen out of the habit of forcing people to get the help they need unless and until they run into the wrong side of the law. Then, incidentally, as an additional measure to incarceration, they're forced to undergo counseling for drug abuse, alcoholism and the like. I think that's called rehabilitation.

The system isn't perfect, but making it perfect is extremely expensive and probably not possible.

In short: your cousin at least 4 times chose to drive drunk and was convicted for it. He did the crime, he deserves the time.

Apart from that, he needs to seek counseling. We can't force meaningful counseling on people, but we can force meaningful time in a prison/jail, which solves the problem of the threat they pose to random society for a set period of time. What he ultimately makes of his life is entirely in his hands.