[quote="Anonymous"][quote="Anonymous"][quote="Anonymous"]Yep, I can tell. You missed your Meds today and your ill-written post proves it. I don't know of any employee of any public safety agency or SAO that is given tax exempt status; so I guess we pay our own salaries. As for your assertion that we "get away with murder" please tell me who we have killed?[/quote]
[ul][li][b]SETH ADAMS[/b] - and your collective, utter lack of compassion and ethics, damages people to the point they understandably feel that their lives are no longer worth living, and their anxiety-ridden bodies have to turn to medication just to be able to breathe "your air."[/li][/ul][ul][li]I will immediately, and with much gusto, accept $70,000 from you, a free car "w/everything", free health care "w/everything", free para-military training & gear, and a chance to hit the "disability lotto", if you only want about $20,000 back. [i]You do not pay your own salaries; your victims do.[/i][/li][/ul][ul][li]Yes, the post is not so well written, and the person who typed it was clearly emotionally affected at the time. Maybe they were victimized by the police recently, or one too many times, and now their personal, as well as emotional security, has been utterly shattered? Maybe their financial and physical health have suffered as well, making the emotional trauma all the more difficult, if not impossible, to overcome? Perhaps they've been victimized by criminals that don't wear uniforms also? And the vulgar release of truth you are criticizing is all their helpless, broken psyche could muster to empower themselves enough to carry on for another 5 minutes?[/li][/ul]Sloppy as the delivery may be, the message is clean and clear; you do not consider this to be the irrational post your comments reflect, or you would not have responded with such callous, pre-packaged gibberish.[/quote]
Seek help, seriously. This thread was about the SAO, which by the way had zero to do with the Adams situation, one in which I agree with a lot of what was speculated about. 70K? Not here. Free? Also not here. I have no victims and there is no collective. There is what we believe and what can be proven.[/quote]
You are correct, but please read the original post to which both criticisms refer, seriously:
[font=Arial, Tahoma][i]Just who the f***k are you kidding. Just about everyone of you that promotes stops treat those stopped by by promoting provocation and do so by promoting yourselves as some who's above the law. You entice trouble just to get another arrest. If you think for one minute you,especially you that posted this are making this world or any part of it a safer place. Man you'd better wake up as you are the perfect example of why public mistrust grows larger each and everyday against those ho wear badges. If nothing is to be hidden than why fear the scrutiny. You have pinpointed yourself as one of hose who carry a badge and can get away with murder. Remember one hing you ahole we the taxpayers pay your salary. You work for us and should be responsible to answer to us. Most all of you have no respect for anyone,not even yourselves.[/i][/font]
The above poster, even though you are correct that the post should be referencing the SAO, is actually referring to deputies, and I addressed it, and the comments accompanying it, with this in mind. I think there is just a mis-understanding here, in that the comments directed at the post assume (rightly) that the SAO is being called out, when it is actually the actions of deputies that are. Please note that the thread gets corrupted early on with references like "LE's not doing their job", which can easily be confused with LEOs, and "LEO" isn't such a specific term either. I think this is why the insightful post about watching mentally unstable deputies instead of the SAO was not validated (good idea by the way!). And, my point was, that the poster obviously does "need help", for the valid reasons I, and they, stated. Fair enough?