True. But there's a difference between being attacked by a criminal that you're trying to arrest, and being executed from behind while eating lunch. It's a completely different kind of danger.I'm going to try and be respectful about their position. I understand that policing is dangerous work and every interaction can be life threatening.
However, all of those things are true the day you sign up to wear the badge and do the job.
If you're a cop and you are not mishandling any life threatening events (which would be the vast majority of cops), I'm not sure why you're supposed to accept criticism for mishandling life threatening events.If police willingly accept the praise that comes when they put their life on the line for events like 9/11 then they need to willingly accept the criticism that comes from mishandling other life threatening events, moreso when it results in the loss of life of the citizens they're supposed to be protecting.
Cops can either enforce the law, or they can choose not to enforce the law. Cops cannot change the law. I don't think reassessing how they engage the public is going to change the amount of people who are breaking the law. The only question is whether or not a cop is there to enforce that law.If there is a legitimate drop off because the police are reassessing how they engage the public, I can support that.
Are you saying that you can support a cop's decision to not do his job if, for example, he doesn't like law X or Y, and therefore will not respond to that call or arrest that person?