Police

bholcomb said:
I don't drink, and look pretty far from a criminal.

Alright bholcomb, I am glad you "know" what a criminal looks like. Does Martha look like a criminal? Exactly. Honestly you should know better if you work with law enforcement in Lansing, would you rather have police profiling people to what they think a criminal looks like? Or treat everyone the same?

I'm sure the age requirement of 15 is either a typo or referring to the fact that there are one or two positions within the security department available to 15 year olds, i.e. lost and found.

Odysseus, you're the one who asked the question, man. I fail to see how you're taking offense here.

bholcomb said:
I hated feeling like a criminal and having my stuff searched every night.

The sad thing is my first couple of years working at Cedar Point, they NEVER had officers at Commons. Maybe once in a while you would see one or two at the gate around 2AM. But that was it.

With the quality of employee's they have been hiring dropping, the amount of problems at Commons is going up. I can remember spending a whole summer living there and never having my bag searched. The last time I lived in Commons was 2004 and it was almost every night I was being searched. *** Edited 2/14/2007 11:10:33 PM UTC by 99er***

I'm getting the feeling then that they even do searching without any intent or reason to believe that you have something you shouldn't...?

That's what I got out of it. There are a handfull of times I can remember seven to eight officers at the gate and they were searching about every other person with a bag/purse/backpack. They all had those wooden sticks that they use specificly for searching bags. Because of that, the damn line to get in would back up so long it would take 15/20 minutes just to get in. They would tell me the same thing everytime I would ask; "Its for your own saftey!" Maybe someday they will figure out that its the day time when there are no officers around that people bring stuff in.

Its company policy that bags can be searched but they only search when nothin is happening cause they are fishing for stuff. If you try and complain about anything they usually give the generic answer of its for our safety or the canned response "Will look into matter/Will review" (typical of employee management relations meetings) or basically they arent doing anything.

You missed my point.

YUP. you see alot of laundry baskets and duffle bas coming in during the day

Hmm... i never had my bag searched... nor do I remember them searching bags

You bet your behind I would like them to profile criminals.

And while we're at it, I wish they'd profile people in airports more often. Old ladies aren't blowing up planes. Stop making them take their shoes off. It's a waste of everyones times.

The problem is that some people, no matter who they are, are willing to attempt about anything for the right price. Smart criminals/terrorists/enemies wll try their hardest to hit you were you think your safe. Througout history, among the best attacks were those that were completely unexpected.

So what exactly does a criminal look like Ben? I would like to know, because if I could differentiate criminals from law abiding citizens based on appearance alone I would make a lot of money.

Spend a week doing a ride-along with a police department in a large city, and you will know what a criminal looks like. Or at least have a good idea of what most of them look like.

99er said:
Spend a week doing a ride-along with a police department in a large city, and you will know what a criminal looks like. Or at least have a good idea of what most of them look like.

Hmm... I beg to differ. You would see the individuals that are apprehended in that specific city. Many crimes go unsolved, so it would be an inaccurate method of data collection. Also big city crimes are usually different then crimes in small cities, rural areas, etc. Maybe the individuals who you consider to be what a criminal looks like are only the ones that got caught. Maybe all the little old ladies are the ones getting away with crime because no one suspects them. Statistics also show crime is higher in areas of lower socioeconomic status, but this could be because they are often the areas where police have more presence and authority. Often times people commiting white collar crime such as embezzlement are not charged, because they are either not caught, or political pressures causes the charges to be dropped. This causes a disproportionality among those who are charged and convicted of crimes. Therefore the individuals you may believe to be what a criminal looks like are only those individuals who are caught which is an inaccurate assumption and ignorant. *** Edited 2/15/2007 4:47:29 AM UTC by Odysseus***

Somehow, I doubt the CP police have a big problem with having to find employees that are guilty of "white collar crime" when they're searching people going into the housing areas.

Or old ladies with drugs and concealed weapons.

*** Edited 2/15/2007 5:04:55 AM UTC by Ralph Wiggum***

Odysseus said:
Hmm... I beg to differ.

Well don’t.

Are you just going off of statistics for that post? Or do you truly have experience in the law enforcement field? As a friend of mine that read your post said, “This Odysseus sounds like some kind of an advocate for the NAACP.”

You would see the individuals that are apprehended in that specific city.

I have worked with many departments from small West Layfette, Ohio to Tampa Florida. Crimes are commented the same from city to city. A car theft is the same in Columbus as it is in Pittsburgh.

Also big city crimes are usually different then crimes in small cities, rural areas, etc

Murder is murder. Doesn’t matter if it happened in Sandusky or Detroit.

Maybe the individuals who you consider to be what a criminal looks like are only the ones that got caught.

Well DUH. But that doesn’t mean that those who got away were the little old ladies. Out of the 27 car theft criminals caught in Tampa, 22 were Hispanic Males, 3 were Caucasian males, and 2 were African American. If you were in this theft unit, would you go back out looking for little old ladies? Wake up man!

Therefore the individuals you may believe to be what a criminal looks like are only those individuals who are caught which is an inaccurate assumption and ignorant.

Reading that makes the comment about the NAACP seem very accurate. I am done with this argument because it will never end and go nowhere. When you have had some kind of involvement with a department ranging in size from a small town department to Pittsburgh, Columbus, and Tampa, then you can tell me what you think of profiling. It doesn’t take 5th grader to watch a couple episodes of COPS to see the obvious.

If profiling is so wrong and it doesn't work, why would Federal, State and Local governments actually pay people to do just that? Like, that's their ONLY job.

Seems like a losing argument, I'd let it go.

I agree the CP police, in general have taken on an overly "proactive" attitude. I also feel that this causes them more trouble than is probably necessary.
As an attorney, I deal with cops all the time and one tenet any seasoned law enforcement officer knows is that you don't have to act like an idiot to be an effective officer, and it is usually easier if you don't.

What I mean is, if someone is behaving in a dangerous/unlawful/unruly manner, by all means, intervene. That's what good policing is, and makes people feel safe. However, last year I saw the CP midway police stopping young-looking people on the midway who were smoking/carrying cigarettes, (not in line, mind you) and IDing them and generally giving them a hard time. These were people just walking around, not behaving in a rowdy or dangerous fashion. Yes, I know it's technically against the law to smoke if you're not 18, but the fact that a private company chooses to have its cops hunt down paying customers who might be smoking underage while outdoors is a tad much. Would you see this happening anywhere else?
The commons cops and hotel cops have also displayed a similar "Gotcha" attitude, as if they're waiting for trouble. In Municipal Court in the summer you see their cases, and you have to wonder how many employers wait so anxiously for the opportunity to catch their employees screwing up?
I hope things are different this year, as it makes for a more fun and laid-back environment. If someone's seriously breaking the law, stop them. Otherwise, relax. *** Edited 2/19/2007 4:50:17 AM UTC by cptedsdisciple2***

cptedsdisciple2 said:
but the fact that a private company chooses to have its cops hunt down paying customers who might be smoking underage while outdoors is a tad much.

Is it really Cedar Point telling the cops to stop people breaking the law, or is it just the fact that they ARE cops and doing their job? A cop is a cop no matter who the boss is. If someone is doing something against the law on the property that they are patrolling, they will stop it. How bad would it look if they didn’t bust underage kids smoking? I can see a news agency or a anti-smoking group really getting involved if they knew that was happening. Doesn’t matter the law, or who is the boss, if you’re a cop you enforce the law. And it just so happens, underage smoking is illegal.

Would you see this happening anywhere else.

I would hope so.

The commons cops and hotel cops have also displayed a similar "Gotcha" attitude, as if they're waiting for trouble.

Well, that is pretty much what a patrol cop does. He just walks around waiting for something to happen. Sometimes I have thought it’s a bit much when the officers wait in the Commons parking lot after Louie’s closes waiting for the drunks to stumble back. But then again, for the amount of times I have see a drunk guy try and run across Cedar Point road almost causing vehicle accidents makes me glad the police officers are there waiting for them. Not to mention the fact that the officers are also keeping an eye on the cars in the parking lot. I wouldn’t want some drunk person damaging my car.

If someone's breaking the law, stop them. Otherwise, relax.

I think that contradicts what you said above?