On Apr 26, 3:14 pm, John H. wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 08:21:45 -0700, wrote:





On Apr 26, 7:52 am, John H. wrote:
On 25 Apr 2007 18:39:24 -0700, wrote:

On Apr 24, 6:28 pm, Tim wrote:
On Apr 24, 8:24 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

Or..... They thought they had all the enforcement (shakedown)
officials covered. You just don't get it, as much money is made by the
so called good guys in the drug business, as the bad guys.

Well, apparently not all the enforcement folks are bad guys, right?

Right. Not all are all bad, in fact, probably very few, but in so many
police departments, the bad ones seem to rule. If you have a situation
where there are one or two out of a dozen or so that are bad, and the
rest are either afraid to expose them, or turn away due to the blue
shield of silence, you got a dirty dozen. I have seen otherwise good
cops go along with bad ones on too many occasions out of fear for
their jobs, or their own personal safety. Eventually, the good ones
just seem to go along. Where I grew up, the local police ran and
protected the drug business, everyone knew it, you just kept quiet and
stayed out or their way.

Strange. I've got two brothers who are retired cops. Neither are rich. And,
neither have discussed the rule of police departments by bad cops. That's
not to say they don't exist, but they may not be as prevalent as you make
them out to be.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Perhaps, but then again, as the old saying goes, "there is no such
thing as the mafia". Many times however these cops don't necessarily
think that their actions are "bad". I also have relatives who are
cops, and I would not want to cross em'. With respect for your sincere
debate, I will leave this one alone for now.