The Instigator
Wylted
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
DarkHazard
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Police officers should be more friendly

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/4/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 592 times Debate No: 74769
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Wylted

Con

1,000 characters. 3 hours between arguments. Do not accept the debate if you can't handle this.

Full Resoltion: Police Officers should be friendly and polite when approaching citizens on the job in most circumstances.

Background: Often police officers can come across as rude, they are often short with people and skip the pleasentries as they say.

Some people really dislike cops because of their bad attitude and think there is absolutely no harm in an officer being polite and friendly while writing them a ticket or taking down their witness statement or even arresting them.

My goal is to prove that police officers should generally engage in behavior most would find rude. You don't want a friendly officer out there writing tickets. Even if he knows when to cut the friendly off.

Police shouldn't just be harsh when dealing with suspected criminals, but also when dealing with trivial matters, such as writing a ticket, directing traffic or handling the scene of an accident.
DarkHazard

Pro

I am honored to debate with you today!

In your in argument here you are generalizing police officers, but its true that they can be rude and that can be a good thing. In some cases being harsh and rude to us civilians is unnecessary. If a police officer were to be nice and kind to the person their giving the ticket to it could help with the current rioting. A police officer being kind to a person will change the negative view they have on police officers and help them understand that not all of them are "bad". But I do agree that in certain situations you have to be harsh and invasive such as a criminal running away on foot. Though having a friendly officer tell you that you were going to fast and he will need to write you a ticket without seeming threatening will help people and police officers to understand each other.
So to wrap up with what I'm saying is that there is for sure some cases where rude or harsh actions need to be taken. But in other cases it's unnecessary.

Thanks!
Debate Round No. 1
Wylted

Con

Being a LEO is unlike most jobs. For example, Leo's are often targeted for murder based on just being Leos. In 1992 the FBI released data it gathered from 3 studies done on over 120 instances of Leos being targeted ffor death. These studies found that predators would study Leos and often times pass up the people with command presence (jerks). Those without command presence were seen as weak and were more likely to be attacked.

http://www.policeone.com...

Presence is also important for other things. A cop is dealing with public safety issues. It's been found that a phrase like "sir could you kindly step back" isn't going to get as quick and effective of a response as yelling "BACK UP"!. In matters of public safety it is more important to be effective in getting civilians out of dangerous areas than being percieved as friendly. Cops have a job to do and safety to consider. Being mean is effective at doing that.
DarkHazard

Pro

Haven't you noticed that recent officer causalities are because of the whole police brutality argument going on. The reason why some police officers are in danger is because they are not in a good relationship with the people they are protecting. Some people think that the police force is against them (which I don't believe myself) and are trying to be cruel to them. You can see this by all the rioting and protesting going on all over America. The more rude or harsh police officers will only enhance this current issue in America leading to more rioting, protests, and untrust in the police force leading to more casualties on the Police forces side. If the police would treat people kinder it would calm all of the rioting and protests and help restore trust with citizens and police officers. Those studies are back in 1992 and are not recent enough to provide the evidence that this is the case during this time being. Like I said if it's for the safety of the public to be rude then its ok.
Debate Round No. 2
Wylted

Con

I'd rather reduce incidents of use of force with body cams rather than putting Leos and the public in danger. cams have been shown to reduce use of force 50%. http://www.policefoundation.org... The problems with brutality is perception. The media sensationalizes things. The public is unfamiliar with the use of force continuum , but mostly it's a public relations problem.

Broken windows policing is used in most big cites and some small, causes a lot of blowback when not done hand in hand with the modern theories on "community policing". Mistrust in cops would dramatically decline, if community policing was more than just lip service. http://www.lesc.net...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org...

More trust means less resistance and Leo's not having to escalate the use of force continuum

The study from 92 is valid because human psychology is the same as then.
DarkHazard

Pro

DarkHazard forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Wylted

Con

My opponent has not responded to my rebuttals and my main arguments go uncountered. Since new arguments in the final round aren't normally accepted, this should be an automatic win for me. Thanks judges
DarkHazard

Pro

DarkHazard forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by DarkHazard 2 years ago
DarkHazard
Wow this debate is getting intense!
Posted by DarkHazard 2 years ago
DarkHazard
Well thank you! Yours is quite fantastic too!
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
I like the profile picture.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
WyltedDarkHazardTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro skipped half the rounds.
Vote Placed by m4j0rkus4n4g1 2 years ago
m4j0rkus4n4g1
WyltedDarkHazardTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con presented the issue clearly and showed why there seems to be no alternative for police other than to appear rude. His points addressed that cops dealing with emergency situations do not have time for pleasantries, and that figures of authority must do more than simply wear a uniform to convey the importance of their authority. Pro brought up points about anti-police sentiments and riots, but Con rightly addressed these issues as having more to do with PR. While Pro's point might be relevant in some situations, it is not relevant to the generality and the overall discussion. For the rounds where Pro participated, Pro did an okay job of raising points, but Con's arguments were more complete and logical, and Pro's forfeit of multiple rounds did not help. Con brought relevant sources to the table, whereas Pro did not, perhaps for lack of time. In the future, I would caution Con about presenting a debate on such a hot topic with such a short time limit!