2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

I have spent many years working with police officers. It seems that they are given tools to use; yet when one of those tools is put into action, the pubic gets upset; and, ultimately, the police officer gets put on administrative leave.

Why are officers given those tools if not to use them?  It seems to me that the use of the tools (used when the offender has been less than cooperative) gives the officers a method to end the confrontation.  They also use them, in my opinion, so that the offender is kept from injuringing him/herself or others.

Police have a job to do - and I believe the majority of them are just like you and me - dedicated to their profession. 

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context