Thread: Im lost for words

Originally Posted by Tussock

I agree on the term civilian. I also think the term "the public" is in more common use for a reason.

Unarmed policing is a founding premise of the respect and sympathy of the public is it not. So I imagine when they are armed, they are prepared to accept the same level of suspicion or mistrust as any other armed police force?

The sympathy comes from doing a dangerous job in a vulnerable way. Once they are doing it in a forceful way, whats the point of feeling sorry for them?

I disagree, I think what tools an officer has on his belt has nothing to do with sympathy and respect coming from the public, that sympathy and respect comes from doing a job that helps people and is often dangerous and thankless while maintaining a high level of respect and integrity.

I think you're way off.

Originally Posted by Tussock

Yeah, and the attitudes of the public in this thread reflect that............

I don't think cops spend enough time listening to "civilians".

Using this thread as a gauge of public opinion towards Police is just stupid. As usual, the antis make the most noise. Police are generally held in high regard

Don't just take my word for it:

Trust survey results revealed: MPs, journalists least trusted - National - NZ Herald News

Surveys show few agencies are more trusted than NZ Police | Integrity Talking Points

Police, health, courts most trusted by M

The job of Police revolves around listening to civilians, you're not getting the policing and justice sector confused are you?