Senior Officer's experiences and account of middle eastern crime (2 Viewers)

[Not-That-Bright]

I agree with Mathmite, those of you who disagree with him should probably actually read what he wrote because this is a change from his usual additude.

 

[frog12986]

I care nothing for what believe to be the purpose of the course. Courses such as these provide one with the opportunity to develop their analytical and literature skills, as well as skills in relation to the appropriate application of legislation. Key attributes necessary to the development of a well rounded investigator and general duties police officer. The social and criminologically based subjects are dictated by academic ideology and the pervasion of political correctness. The actual workings of society are vastly different to the perceptions of those within the confines of the academic world. A world the purports to have developed grand solutions to societal problems without any actual success...

As I mentioned previously, the key to research and understanding is source variety.

the difference being that Dr Kennedy has a PhD behind him and has been educated and isn't racist and actually offers a solution to the problem.. Which can be contrasted with the person who gave the above speech who doesn't have a PhD.. Isn't educated, holds prejudices and offers no real solutions and simply criticizes people because they are Lebanese. He's a simple closet racist and there's no other way to look at it.Many officers share this prejudice which is exactly why the bachelor of policing degree was created - to overcome the inherent prejudices that come with being middle to lower class white people.

THe biggest issue here is that policing is not about holding a PhD, or being able to adequately argue the application of Gramscian theories as solutions to crime. University education whilst providing the benefits I mentioned in relation to intellectual development, does not automatically develop someone into a police officer. The most important asset of any officer is common sense, and their relative ability to make decisions in the heat of the moment. Prejudices will always exist, and quite frankly no amount of tertiary education can alter deep seated views.

And you've been not paying attention in the lectures? Or was it that you didn't have him as a first year lecturer?

Ha, not paying attention in lectures? I think quite the opposite; comparative first year results should clear that up. I've had him as a first and second year lecturer, and believe him to one of the most genuinely decent people I've met. However, this does not validate the leanings he has towards social causation and 'racism' as excuses for the prevalence of crime. They are, and always will be contributing factors However, if the solution that Dr Kennedy speaks of is so viable, why have the results failed to eventuate? The type of social reform he continually sprouts has been tried and tested on numerous occasions in various social settings without the predicted results. The nations of leftist thought are testament to this..

Racial prejudices on either side will always inflame situations, however it appears to me that you believe these issues to be one sided. I presume you are one of these individuals that believes the Middle Eastern Organised Crime Squad to be a racist establishment aimed at weakening the social position of these individuals..

My biggest piece of advice, is to go to www.policensw.com/board and join the police discussion; real police, in real society. You will most likely disagree with a large percentage of what the officers say on the forum, but sometimes individuals may forget that you are more able to understand and appreciate the workings of police in society after the copious amounts of study that you have conducted..

 

[Not-That-Bright]

One thing that I can guarantee however, is that many officers will be able to relate to Mr Priest and his attitude towards crime in NSW.

Well of course, the police will always think the solution is just giving them that LITTLE bit more power.

Of course social factors play a central part in the development and entrenchment of crime in particular communities, however we are yet to see how this type of rationalisation contributes to the development of tangible solutions.

I don't see how such proponents would ever even claim there is a 'tangible solution'.

Every officer that you meet at this point in the degree will share Dr Kennedy's views and approaches to crime. However, when you conduct your station placement you will realise that these attitudes, moulded in the confines of educational institutions, do not bear any resemblance to the attitudes of many officers dealing with these people every day. I suggest you communicate witha broader section of the policing community, and realise that university education greatly conflicts with the social and political reality within the NSW Police.

It's quite easy, when dealing with arseholes every day, to reach the fall-back emotional conclusions.

The social and criminologically based subjects are dictated by academic ideology and the pervasion of political correctness.

Perhaps it is true that such heavy-handed "realist" approaches to criminology are not explored as they should be... as is often the case with university education.

The actual workings of society are vastly different to the perceptions of those within the confines of the academic world. A world the purports to have developed grand solutions to societal problems without any actual success...

Really? Can you prove that or is that just some rhetorical banter?

THe biggest issue here is that policing is not about holding a PhD, or being able to adequately argue the application of Gramscian theories as solutions to crime. University education whilst providing the benefits I mentioned in relation to intellectual development, does not automatically develop someone into a police officer. The most important asset of any officer is common sense

Wow, I hope not.

“Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.” - Einstein

Officers should be looking beyond their common sense, while a great tool it can only get us so far, there are many things in this world which simply cannot be solved with common sense.

I presume you are one of these individuals that believes the Middle Eastern Organised Crime Squad to be a racist establishment aimed at weakening the social position of these individuals..

Personally I'm not.

 

[breaking]

I notice that not one person has actually attacked what i've said. They only attack UWS, a lecturer there, or me.

well stop being so fucking shit all the time?

 

[Optophobia]

The most important asset of any officer is common sense,

Common sensical approaches don't always work. American policing is based upon "common sense" notions of bad guys going to gaol. COPS makes me sick everytime i watch it because they rarely use discretion. These approaches don't work and being tough on all criminals is unachievable.

Prejudices will always exist, and quite frankly no amount of tertiary education can alter deep seated views.

We should just let prejudices reign.. because they are always going to exist.

Ha, not paying attention in lectures? I think quite the opposite; comparative first year results should clear that up. I've had him as a first and second year lecturer, and believe him to one of the most genuinely decent people I've met. However, this does not validate the leanings he has towards social causation and 'racism' as excuses for the prevalence of crime.

He never offered it as an absolute explanation for crime (that is why we have criminology units). He offers it as an explanation for how things can and do go wrong when police are unfairly tough on marginalised minority groups.. Which is what the man who gave the above speech is doing.

They are, and always will be contributing factors However, if the solution that Dr Kennedy speaks of is so viable, why have the results failed to eventuate?

Because they have never been implemented? Zero Tolerance approaches were eventuating in the year 2000, and were made worse by the emergence of september 11. The level of prejudice has risen world wide since then.

The type of social reform he continually sprouts has been tried and tested on numerous occasions in various social settings without the predicted results.

Where?

The nations of leftist thought are testament to this..

What?

Racial prejudices on either side will always inflame situations, however it appears to me that you believe these issues to be one sided. I presume you are one of these individuals that believes the Middle Eastern Organised Crime Squad to be a racist establishment aimed at weakening the social position of these individuals..

No, i believe it to have been created by political hysteria. More Australians commit crime than any minority ever could. Do we have a "white anglo-saxon crime squad"?

My biggest piece of advice, is to go to www.policensw.com/board and join the police discussion; real police, in real society. You will most likely disagree with a large percentage of what the officers say on the forum, but sometimes individuals may forget that you are more able to understand and appreciate the workings of police in society after the copious amounts of study that you have conducted..

What they say on that board is not binding and may not be 100% correct. Humans make mistakes all the time. Yes, a large amount of police are racist etc. That doesn't make them correct.

You seem to suggest that being racist is the logical step to take once you become a police officer.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

No, i believe it to have been created by political hysteria. More Australians commit crime than any minority ever could. Do we have a "white anglo-saxon crime squad"?

Middle Eastern gangs are a special situation requiring a special response. It may be in part a political ploy, but I can see the usefulness of having a specialist group set up to deal with a decently large segment of crime where specialist skills are needed.





Special.

 

[banco55]

I'd be curious to see the stats on the number of people of middle eastern extraction in prison versus their numbers in the wider community.

 

[Optophobia]

frog12986 really only attacked the educational institution. He didn't really attack what i said.

We can see how realistic frog12986's attitude is, assuming he thinks along the same lines as "Tim Priest":

I grabbed the nearest male and convinced him that it was he who had thrown the brick.

As non-practical as my approach may be, it's still not as *bullshitty* as Tim Priest's approach is.

Oh, and it is racial:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/iemma-plays-the-race-card-on-crime/2006/01/22/1137864801435.html#
Iemma plays the race card on crime

January 23, 2006
Page 1 of 2

Dog-whistle politics about ethnic gangs rule now on both sides of NSW politics, writes Anne Davies.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

Last week was one of Morris Iemma's worst since he became Premier. Having demonstrated he had a tough strategy to quash the unrest in Sydney, in the aftermath he has been suckered into descending to the same disgraceful rhetoric as the Opposition Leader, Peter Debnam.

Iemma has been tripped up by his decision to indulge in a daily session of spin rather than waiting for the police do their job, and inevitably came unstuck over a detail: the existence of a video.

He is now facing a rebellion in the police force and is on the edge of descending into the same political dog-whistling Debnam has indulged in since the riots began, with potentially terrible results for the fabric of our community.

Having gone from a statesman-like position of not labelling offenders by their ethnicity, Iemma on Friday repeatedly referred to the revenge attackers as "grubs", and changed the name of Taskforce Gain - which has been dealing for four years with organised crime in south-west Sydney - to the Middle Eastern Organised Crime Squad.

 

[Optophobia]

Middle Eastern gangs are a special situation requiring a special response. It may be in part a political ploy, but I can see the usefulness of having a specialist group set up to deal with a decently large segment of crime where specialist skills are needed.





Special.

Yeh but you can't really correlate any type of crime with an ethnicity. Does the task force deal with red light offences? Littering? murder?

I can understand a "Gang squad" or a "ram raid squad" or a "armed hold up squad", in which people of all ethnicities may commit offences, but concentrating a task force on one ethnicity seems fruitless.

A white man commits a drive by shooting
A lebanese man commits a drive by shooting.

Should one squad deal with one and another squad with the other?

 

[frog12986]

Yeh but you can't really correlate any type of crime with an ethnicity. Does the task force deal with red light offences? Littering? murder?

I can understand a "Gang squad" or a "ram raid squad" or a "armed hold up squad", in which people of all ethnicities may commit offences, but concentrating a task force on one ethnicity seems fruitless.

A white man commits a drive by shooting
A lebanese man commits a drive by shooting.

Should one squad deal with one and another squad with the other?

Specialised squads have existed long before the 'Middle Eastern' issue. In fact, it does not merely target people of "Middle Eastern Origin" but rather those of that particualr decent who are involved in organised and complex crime syndicates. The very fact that there is an over-representation of persons from this background, along with those of 'South East Asian' decent , in organised and syndicated drug crime warrants a specialised approach to target resources and abilities towards such crime. Organised crime is not something that the 'average' Australian, regardless of decent, falls into.

Of course, more 'Anglo' Australians will commit crime, however it is the over representaion of persons from the decent we are discussing in ORGANISED crime that renders it necessary to develop a specific and targeted approach.

As for racism, I have not made any particular reference to what Tim Priest stated, or the validity of what was said, I merely attempted to discredit your usage of Dr Kennedy's thesis as a gospel in relation to crime solutions; solutions that are yet to prove their worth. I never stated that prejudice was right, or that it was 'the logical step to take once you become a police officer'.
As I said initially, both Priest and Kennedy have views that are at the extreme ends of the spectum, and adopting either as complete gospel would be irresponsible on any persons part. Hence why it is essential to gain the broadest range of views possible to develop a line of thought in relation to the issue.

My advice in relation to listening and relating to serving officers is not based on the premise that they are 100% right, or that it is the be all and end all, but rather that as individuals who have served the state and dealt with situations and individuals in the course of their duty, they are more likely to be equipped to respond to your queries than some criminological theory. As you will eventually learn, as I have, experience is one of the most valuable assets to any police officer, and attempting to undermine that with academic thought is a rather difficult task. If you intend to take the 'Know-all' approach into the police based upon what you have studied, you will find it to be a very tough task. Arrogance, particularly in relation to something which you have not actually undertaken yourself, does not apply well to any occupational setting.

Moreover, if you are utilising COPS as a basis for your rants on Australian policing practice, then you are definitely heading down the wrong track..

 

[Not-That-Bright]

but rather that as individuals who have served the state and dealt with situations and individuals in the course of their duty, they are more likely to be equipped to respond to your queries than some criminological theory.

Well I disagree and would like to see your evidence for that, if by 'some criminological theory' you actually mean the criminologist at a university themselves.

Yeh but you can't really correlate any type of crime with an ethnicity. Does the task force deal with red light offences? Littering? murder?

Mainly drug-related crime. But you must understand, alot of these people have international connections, to deal with them requires specialist knowledge in their culture etc... It's not as simple as just the TYPE of crime they commit.

 

[frog12986]

Well I disagree and would like to see your evidence for that, if by 'some criminological theory' you actually mean the criminologist at a university themselves.

In clarification, I'm not stating which can better discuss crime reduction and prevention methods, but rather which individual is more able to discuss what it is like dealing with the vast cross sections of the community, both victims and offenders alike. It is this first hand experience that assists in shaping the views of most officers, not some pre-developed 'prejudice' that they may have.

 

[Optophobia]

I merely attempted to discredit your usage of Dr Kennedy's thesis as a gospel in relation to crime solutions; solutions that are yet to prove their worth.

I didn't offer it as a crime solution. If offered it as an illustration of what happens when marginalised communities are unfairly targetted by police. Policing motivated by the attitude of people like Time Priest.

I never stated that prejudice was right, or that it was 'the logical step to take once you become a police officer'.

You stated that the views of the people on the other forum were that of Tim Priest.

As I said initially, both Priest and Kennedy have views that are at the extreme ends of the spectum, and adopting either as complete gospel would be irresponsible on any persons part. Hence why it is essential to gain the broadest range of views possible to develop a line of thought in relation to the issue.

That sounds a bit empty. Have you developed a line of thought? What is it?

As you will eventually learn, as I have, experience is one of the most valuable assets to any police officer, and attempting to undermine that with academic thought is a rather difficult task.

Well apparently Time Priest has had "experience" in policing and look at his conclusions. Obviously you are wrong.

Moreover, if you are utilising COPS as a basis for your rants on Australian policing practice, then you are definitely heading down the wrong track..

I utilise COPS as a basid for my "rants" ?

 

[frog12986]

I didn't offer it as a crime solution. If offered it as an illustration of what happens when marginalised communities are unfairly targetted by police. Policing motivated by the attitude of people like Time Priest.

The underlying issue of course extends beyond policing. It extends to a point whereby marginalisation exists as a self-fulfilling prophecy due to the rejection and animosity toward particular ways of life. Why is it that 'self-marginalisation' can occur in a 'positive' sense, i.e. through cultural recognition or governnment support (ABSTUDY), yet the moment the individuals are identified or 'targeted' on the basis of the identification that they have in fact developed, it becomes a racist, prejudicial tirade..

Individuals such as these begin an automatic process of marginalisation the moment they identify themselves to be 'Lebanese' or 'Lebanese Australian' despite the fact that they may be 2nd or 3rd generation. Moreover, when this type of marginalisation occurs in conjunction with a vast overrepresentation in crime involvement, it will ultimately descend into the 'unfair targeting' that you talk of.

You stated that the views of the people on the other forum were that of Tim Priest.

Actually my point was based around the fact that more police officers, individuals who directly deal with these people every day, will relate more to what Priest is conveying. Not because of any deep seated racism, or cultural acceptance of such approaches, but because this type of attitude is moulded and developed in the manner of contact that the officers have with these individuals in the course of their duty.

Well apparently Time Priest has had "experience" in policing and look at his conclusions. Obviously you are wrong.

Obviously I must be. However you will find out in due course, that the majority of what you have learned, particularly in the social science fields, will be rendered useless once you are in a direct situation. Reality is quite different to the world of academia, and if you believe that you have a greater authority to judge nd percieve a situation than an officer with even 5 years experience you will be greatly surprised..

 

[Optophobia]

Individuals such as these begin an automatic process of marginalisation the moment they identify themselves to be 'Lebanese' or 'Lebanese Australian' despite the fact that they may be 2nd or 3rd generation.

Yeh i wish they would hurry up and assimilate. They can't identify as Lebanese, it's against the Australian way.

Actually my point was based around the fact that more police officers, individuals who directly deal with these people every day, will relate more to what Priest is conveying.

Because they are prejudiced. This becomes counter-productive.

Not because of any deep seated racism, or cultural acceptance of such approaches, but because this type of attitude is moulded and developed in the manner of contact that the officers have with these individuals in the course of their duty.

The same can be said about attitudes towards police.

Obviously I must be. However you will find out in due course, that the majority of what you have learned, particularly in the social science fields, will be rendered useless once you are in a direct situation.

That's because it's not meant to be applied when i'm on the field. The units you learn in 3rd year are for that.

Reality is quite different to the world of academia,

Then why do they teach us this? To waste our time? Dick head.

and if you believe that you have a greater authority to judge nd percieve a situation than an officer with even 5 years experience you will be greatly surprised..

hmm.. University degree + 5 years on the job experience or
5 years on the job experience.

Who's better off?

 

[littlewing69]

Well good on ya mate! That's great and i'm sure it solved the problem of the group having a negative attitude towards police. After arresting them, i'm pretty sure they are going to love you.

The problem is not the group having a negative attitude to the police, the problem is some dickhead throwing bricks at people. Taxpayers provide for police forces to maintain some semblance of public order and safety, not to hand out hugs.

 

[frog12986]

The same can be said about attitudes towards police.

Now I wonder why persons of Middle Eastern decent (or any background for that matter) who are involved in criminal activity, would have resnetment towards police authority..

That's because it's not meant to be applied when i'm on the field. The units you learn in 3rd year are for that.

The third year UWS units are in fact less relevant to operational policing than the specific units in the two preceding years; particularly those dealing with powers, SOPs and law. Of course Goulburn is the cornerstone to the development of police officers, however certain UWS units (in years 1 and 2) provide a necessary foundation.

Then why do they teach us this? To waste our time? Dick head.

:rofl: Obviously you don't understand why we are taught certain things; critical thinking. I would be quite surprised if Dr. Kennedy hasn't mentioned that before. It is about obtaining different views, and analysing their application to the real world. The point is not to absorb the lecturers material or viewpoints as you would dictation, but rather to use you OWN mind to develop a viewpoint, from a vast range of sources.

Moreover, just because the Dr. believes a certain viewpoint, it does not necessarily make it correct, and the same logic applies to anyone else. However, the key issue is about researching and analysing the material that you obtain.

In terms of reliability, which you will learn in relation to evidence (in 2nd year, and is extremely relevant to operation policing), who is more able to comment on the dealings of police with society? An academic? Or a police officer? Who is more able to identify types of drugs? A pharmacist? Or a lawyer? Who can more aptly understand the intracacies of carpentry? A carpenter? Or a philosopher? Now there may be no distinct answer in relation to any of those questions, however it is a matter of weighing up the relative reliability and experience of each in dealing with question in issue.

hmm.. University degree + 5 years on the job experience or
5 years on the job experience.

Who's better off?

Well that would obviously depend the quality of the police officer. If you believe that the university education, when matched with experience, will automatically derive quality policing skills you are in a complete dreamland. With the type of arrogance you display in relation to the issue, you are headed down a one way path. :wave:

Once again, I suggest that you sign up to the police forum and share your views, have a debate or challenge an individual there. There a few UWS students active on the forum, and in fact, a criminology PhD student/tutor is also active on the forum. Now that person does not agree with everything that is said, but can attempt to develop a coherent argument where necessary..

 

[Optophobia]

Now I wonder why persons of Middle Eastern decent (or any background for that matter) who are involved in criminal activity, would have resnetment towards police authority..

Perhaps it was because a police officer grabbed hold of him and made him believe that it was "he who threw the rock", even though it wasn't him.. But it was assumed that it was him merely because he was a middle easterner.

The third year UWS units are in fact less relevant to operational policing than the specific units in the two preceding years;

I find that hard to believe.

however certain UWS units (in years 1 and 2) provide a necessary foundation.

Make up your mind.

:rofl: Obviously you don't understand why we are taught certain things; critical thinking. I would be quite surprised if Dr. Kennedy hasn't mentioned that before. It is about obtaining different views, and analysing their application to the real world. The point is not to absorb the lecturers material or viewpoints as you would dictation, but rather to use you OWN mind to develop a viewpoint, from a vast range of sources.

If that were the case then they would have us doing philosophy units.

Moreover, just because the Dr. believes a certain viewpoint, it does not necessarily make it correct,

yes, but it is more likely to be correct than that of the man in the speech above.

Well that would obviously depend the quality of the police officer. If you believe that the university education, when matched with experience, will automatically derive quality policing skills you are in a complete dreamland. With the type of arrogance you display in relation to the issue, you are headed down a one way path. :wave:

A person with a degree has an advantage over someone with out a degree.

 

[The Brucemaster]

Perhaps it was because a police officer grabbed hold of him and made him believe that it was "he who threw the rock", even though it wasn't him.. But it was assumed that it was him merely because he was a middle easterner.

Actually he didn't grab him and harass him because he was Middle Eastern, it was a strategy to solve a crime.
Whether that strategy was the 'right' or 'wrong' thing to do is debatable but either way it was effective.

yes, but it is more likely to be correct than that of the man in the speech above.

So what you are saying is that a university lecturer knows more about operational policing than an experienced detective? Riiiiiight.....

A person with a degree has an advantage over someone with out a degree.

Why? In fact, I beg to differ, especially in regards to policing. Someone without a degree is going to have more experience in the police force than someone with a degree (assuming of course they commenced training/uni at the same time). The fact is that policing is a job that requires experience more than formal education for success.
In any event, all police officers must complete some form of tertiary education, either doing the Bachelor of Policing at UWS or the Associate Diploma, done by correspondence through Charles Sturt after completing training so I really don't see your point...

 

[banco55]

The trend of requiring police officers to have a degree is mostly due to credentialism. Policing used to be thought of as roughly equivalent to the non-com ranks of the army and to join the non-com ranks of the army you still don't require a degree.