Jump to content

drak's sekrits

  • entries
    43
  • comments
    105
  • views
    16,767

Unions


Drak

771 views

Law enforcement should not have unions. Or actually, anyone who works in government should not belong to a union. Our government is a powerful entity. Its servants should not band together to amplify that power. Whenever I read a statement from the Policeman's Union, I perform a translation. The Union spokesman states, in translation, "The accused is guilty of all charges without reservation. There are no mitigating circumstances. There are many other things that have not yet been brought to light, of which the accused is also guilty." This is what the Union representative always means, in every case, whenever he speaks on behalf of anyone in his Union. Unions of government employees should be disbanded. Government servants have enough power as it is without needing to form a collective organ to defraud and deceive the public that they are supposed to serve.

3 Comments


Recommended Comments

Zombie

Posted

I can't comment on the US, but I'd be surprised if it's that different from the UK. Here in the UK the police are not employed by government and they are not an arm of government. Parliament makes law, the police enforce it, and government "runs things". Kind of :funny: That means the police can and do go after individuals in parliament and government when they break the law. Isn't this what happened in the US with Watergate?

 

It's all about separation of powers.  Of course there are nations where police are an arm of government. There's a term for these: Police States.

 

So I'm relaxed about police in the UK being in a union, which can be a useful control on inappropriate employment terms and conditions. Likewise with government employees - mostly they're a bunch of admins and low grade staff. Obviously unions have no place at the top of the government food chain, where the Law is eat or be eaten :lol:

Zombie

Posted

.

Drak

Posted

I can't comment on the US, but I'd be surprised if it's that different from the UK. Here in the UK the police are not employed by government and they are not an arm of government. Parliament makes law, the police enforce it, and government "runs things". Kind of :funny: That means the police can and do go after individuals in parliament and government when they break the law. Isn't this what happened in the US with Watergate?

 

It's all about separation of powers.  Of course there are nations where police are an arm of government. There's a term for these: Police States.

 

So I'm relaxed about police in the UK being in a union, which can be a useful control on inappropriate employment terms and conditions. Likewise with government employees - mostly they're a bunch of admins and low grade staff. Obviously unions have no place at the top of the government food chain, where the Law is eat or be eaten :lol:

 

In the U.S., police are employed by the government, insofar as their wages are paid by taxpayers. Police powers are checked by the government, both local, state and federal. In cases where cops do something wrong, it is always the unions that are speaking out and taking action on behalf of the accused, but what about the victims? Who stands up for them? Sometimes law enforcement seems too clubby, with prosecutors, judges, cops all on the same side, and unions just tend to aggravate that.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...