CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:4
Arguments:6
Total Votes:5
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (4)

Debate Creator

Sitar(3680) pic



1 point

Hello S:

I dunno bout some list.. But, it's the Thin Blue Line that protects bad cops.. It DEMANDS that, even if you're a GOOD cop, you WILL NOT snitch on the BAD cop... That is just so, and everybody KNOWS it. To me, that makes the "good" cop every bit AS BAD as the BAD cops..

excon

GoodListener(603) Clarified
1 point

You are an ex-con hahahahahaha you cannot stand on a high horse, you know the type of 'no snitch' code among the prisoners?

Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

I’ve never heard a cop characterize the thin blue line as a “no snitch” policy. Rather, since they get fired for dishonesty, I’ve heard them say they would do a lot for their fellow officers, but they wouldn’t risk their job.

1 point

California is the only state where they do not require court access to lists of this kind.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-sheriff-brady-list-20171208-htmlstory.html

In other states, you end up on this list for the purposes of documenting bad conduct that may be relevant to job performance and court cases. As such, courts can use them to discredit the word of a given officer if he has been known to lie. As a result, in my state of an officer lies about anything at all, even something minor, he/she is fired. I don’t believe my State has a Brady list. Instead they are just fired since the Brady list makes anyone one it worthless on the stand.

Since California is the only state that blocks this list from court access, it’s reasonable to think California is the only state with a problem. It needs to be rectified.

1 point

It does, and that's not what it's there for. There's a seriously bad policy here.