Remember the Officers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
And yet it being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States.

Huh?
crazy2.gif
Link
 
Last edited:
@bmwturbo , Sometimes it's best to not say anything. This is one of those times.

Total respect for the Thin Blue Line.
 
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by JustN89
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
And yet it being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States.

Huh?
crazy2.gif
Link


The vast majority of injuries LEO's incur is due to automobile collisions.

When it comes to deaths LEO's barely crack the top 20.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...tal-injuries-happen-most-often/38832907/

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf

Literally from the article you posted:
Quote
The most common cause of workplace fatalities among police officers is direct violence from other people, but a close second is transportation accidents.
. Whether it's from a car or anything else, violence is violence.


But that's not really here nor there, it's still one of the most dangerous jobs in the U.S., as shown by any metric and no matter the cause of the incidents. Those facts fly in the face of your previous, completely irrational claim that
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States.
.
 
It's a dangerous job, without question. Unions will always try to create a narrative that their employees are in danger, or underpaid, or overworked. I think that narrative is easy to sell when it comes to cops and firefighters. They face danger, but they have more workplace protections to minimize the risk than most other professions and get a guaranteed pension until they are dead.

Public sector employees are always portrayed as altruistic public servants. In my experience in the public sector I have found this to not be true.
 
Dangerous job even in nicer areas of the country.

Being a cop in a very nasty area would suck the life out of me...

Cops have a high rate of suicide. I can understand why.
 
Originally Posted by Mr Nice
Dangerous job even in nicer areas of the country.

Being a cop in a very nasty area would suck the life out of me...

Cops have a high rate of suicide. I can understand why.
They also have higher rates of domestic violence, but that doesn't fit the narrative of them being heroes.
 
Originally Posted by JustN89
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by JustN89
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
And yet it being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States.

Huh?
crazy2.gif
Link


The vast majority of injuries LEO's incur is due to automobile collisions.

When it comes to deaths LEO's barely crack the top 20.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...tal-injuries-happen-most-often/38832907/

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf

Literally from the article you posted:
Quote
The most common cause of workplace fatalities among police officers is direct violence from other people, but a close second is transportation accidents.
. Whether it's from a car or anything else, violence is violence.


But that's not really here nor there, it's still one of the most dangerous jobs in the U.S., as shown by any metric and no matter the cause of the incidents. Those facts fly in the face of your previous, completely irrational claim that
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States.
.

With in the context of the OP my claim is completely rational.

Here's some context:

Police/Sheriff's fatal injuries in 2017: 12.9 per 100,000
United States automobile fatal injuries in 2017: 11.40 per 100,000 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812603

The act of driving is almost as deadly.

Yes society places a higher value on the deaths of LEO's due to the circumstances under which it occurs but still.
 
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
With in the context of the OP my claim is completely rational.

Here's some context:

Police/Sheriff's fatal injuries in 2017: 12.9 per 100,000
United States automobile fatal injuries in 2017: 11.40 per 100,000 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812603

The act of driving is almost as deadly.

Yes society places a higher value on the deaths of LEO's due to the circumstances under which it occurs but still.

I don't understand the strawman you're trying to create here.

Okay, so marginally more policemen die in the line of duty then people driving,which then leads you to your claim that it's "one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States"? I hope you can see how that doesn't make any sense at all. I think you do, because you literally linked an article that listed LEOs as one of the most dangerous occupations in the U.S, regardless of how many people die while driving. So let's just throw out your notion that being an LEO isn't one of the most dangerous jobs you can have.

No one is claiming that driving isn't dangerous- just refuting your baseless claim that being an LEO is one of the safest jobs you can have.

Yes, people put a higher value on the value of the loss of an LEO while in the line of duty than a person driving to Wal-Mart. Both are tragic, but one is trying to protect and defend and one is trying to pick up some milk and oreos.
 
Originally Posted by JustN89
I don't understand the strawman you're trying to create here.

Okay, so barely more policemen die in the line of duty then people driving,which then leads you to your claim that it's "one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States"? I hope you can see how that doesn't make any sense at all. I think you do, because you literally linked an article that listed LEOs as one of the most dangerous occupations in the U.S, regardless of how many people die while driving. So let's just throw out your notion that being an LEO isn't one of the most dangerous jobs you can have.

No one is claiming that driving isn't dangerous- just refuting your baseless claim that being an LEO is one of the safest jobs you can have.

Yes, people put a higher value on the value of the loss of an LEO while in the line of duty than a person driving to Wal-Mart. Both are tragic, but one is trying to protect and defend and one is trying to pick up some milk and oreos.
I think BMWTurboDZL is pointing out that driving for a living is almost as dangerous, and if being a cop was a significantly more dangerous profession, the stats would back it up. If you're a cop who does not operate a vehicle, it is not a dangerous job at all.

You could also say that driving activities are more dangerous than the other activities that the officer undertakes during their shift. That makes their job seem pretty cushy compared to working in a mine or framing houses.
 
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by JustN89
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
And yet it being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States.

Huh?
crazy2.gif
Link


The vast majority of injuries LEO's incur is due to automobile collisions.

When it comes to deaths LEO's barely crack the top 20.

While this may be true (Police rank 18th), I will argue that they are the only profession in the top 20 whose jobs are performed strictly in the service of the community. The only other profession on there that I would consider close to them in that respect are pilots.

I respect both greatly.

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Police/Sheriff's fatal injuries in 2017: 12.9 per 100,000
United States automobile fatal injuries in 2017: 11.40 per 100,000 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812603

The act of driving is almost as deadly.

Yes society places a higher value on the deaths of LEO's due to the circumstances under which it occurs but still.

The difference being, one of those 11.40 out of 100,000 could very likely have died because they were reading their phone while driving, sped too fast, got drunk and then drove.. etc..
.. whereas the LEO likely died in the process of putting himself in danger to save someone else.

Sure, the numbers may be within 15% of each other, but how many of those in the second category died in the process of helping or protecting others?

I get what you're saying, but it honestly feels like you're trying to trivialize the sacrifice that so many LEOs have made in the course of their service.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by SirTanon
While this may be true (Police rank 18th), I will argue that they are the only profession in the top 20 whose jobs are performed strictly in the service of the community. The only other profession on there that I would consider close to them in that respect are pilots.
Moral argument. So they don't get compensated? "Strictly in the service of community" means altruism.
Originally Posted by SirTanon
The difference being, one of those 11.40 out of 100,000 could very likely have died because they were reading their phone while driving, sped too fast, got drunk and then drove.. etc..
.. whereas the LEO likely died in the process of putting himself in danger to save someone else.
Moral argument. They died working a job where they were paid for taking risks. There's nothing selfless about working a dangerous job where you are compensated for the fact you might get killed. You don't see miners or construction workers get the same amount of hero worship even though those occupations are more dangerous.
Originally Posted by SirTanon
Sure, the numbers may be within 15% of each other, but how many of those in the second category died in the process of helping or protecting others?
Moral argument. Building a house or fixing someone's car "helps and protects others" as well.
Originally Posted by SirTanon
I get what you're saying, but it honestly feels like you're trying to trivialize the sacrifice that so many LEOs have made in the course of their service.
Strawman. He pointed out how the stats taken out of context can make being a police officer seem a lot more dangerous than it is. Your safe space is one click away.
 
Originally Posted by maxdustington
Originally Posted by JustN89
I don't understand the strawman you're trying to create here.

Okay, so barely more policemen die in the line of duty then people driving,which then leads you to your claim that it's "one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States"? I hope you can see how that doesn't make any sense at all. I think you do, because you literally linked an article that listed LEOs as one of the most dangerous occupations in the U.S, regardless of how many people die while driving. So let's just throw out your notion that being an LEO isn't one of the most dangerous jobs you can have.

No one is claiming that driving isn't dangerous- just refuting your baseless claim that being an LEO is one of the safest jobs you can have.

Yes, people put a higher value on the value of the loss of an LEO while in the line of duty than a person driving to Wal-Mart. Both are tragic, but one is trying to protect and defend and one is trying to pick up some milk and oreos.
I think BMWTurboDZL is pointing out that driving for a living is almost as dangerous, and if being a cop was a significantly more dangerous profession, the stats would back it up. If you're a cop who does not operate a vehicle, it is not a dangerous job at all.

You could also say that driving activities are more dangerous than the other activities that the officer undertakes during their shift. That makes their job seem pretty cushy compared to working in a mine or framing houses.

I don't care what crazy correlation he's trying to make. He made a baseless assertion, posted facts that directly contradicted his claim, and now is trying to create a strawman that driving is just as dangerous.

Saying "And yet it being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States", which was his original assertion (forget driving deaths, framing deaths, or whatever other strawman you want to make), was completely wrong and sticking to the claim is just being insensible.

Originally Posted by maxdustington
Moral argument. So they don't get compensated? "Strictly in the service of community" means altruism.

I don't think you understand how the word "service" is being used here. It literally means "the action of helping or doing work for someone", which they do whether they get paid to do so or not.
Originally Posted by maxdustington
Moral argument. They died working a job where they were paid for taking risks. There's nothing selfless about working a dangerous job where you are compensated for the fact you might get killed. You don't see miners or construction workers get the same amount of hero worship even though those occupations are more dangerous.

Strawman. No one said that the death of an LEO is a "selfless" act. You're quoting an argument that's discussing why society tends to make less of a deal regarding casualties while driving compared to LEO casualties. Also, no one has brought up construction workers, miners, etc. This is an argument you're trying to make for a reason I don't fully understand. No one is denying that those aren't dangerous jobs, but that has no bearing on whether or not being an LEO is one of the most dangerous professions you can have, which has been proven here.
Originally Posted by maxdustington
Moral argument. Building a house or fixing someone's car "helps and protects others" as well.

I'd type out another explanation how this is a continuation of your strawman, but that would just be redundant. See above.
Originally Posted by maxdustington
Strawman. He pointed out how the stats taken out of context can make being a police officer seem a lot more dangerous than it is. Your safe space is one click away.

Strawman?? I don't think this word means what you think it means. He's not making an argument here, just pointing out how while he understands the point he's trying to make, but that what he's typing doesn't read that way. Honestly, it sounds like a few people here need a safe place, but he's not one of them.
 
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
And yet it being a LEO is one of the least dangerous jobs in the United States.


Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

On average, 100-150 officers or so die every year in America. Without protective vest, modern technology, AND modern medical care, that number would be much higher.

How about the thousands and thousands of officers that suffer serious injuries every year that don't die. Must be that totally safe and least dangerous job that they go to...
 
Originally Posted by maxdustington
Moral argument. They died working a job where they were paid for taking risks. There's nothing selfless about working a dangerous job where you are compensated for the fact you might get killed. You don't see miners or construction workers get the same amount of hero worship even though those occupations are more dangerous.


I'm sure D-Day survivors would love you going into the VFW or American Legion and saying that.
 
Let me get to the point. Many people are getting sick of first responder glory.

FIRST RESPONDER GLORY IS DUMB AND A MODERN PHENOMENA. We didn't use to see it 15 years ago.
I respect first responders but all I see is the continuing divide depending on what you do for a living.

You didn't see auto makers pick and choose who they decide to give a better deal on a new vehicle years ago. Now you pay less for a new truck if your a cop or a firefighter
rather than a roofer
 
Originally Posted by skyactiv
Let me get to the point. Many people are getting sick of first responder glory.

This may be, but making incorrect claims to try and diminish the risk first responders (in this instance, LEOs specifically) take is just being petty and insufferable. Following that up with posting links which fly in the face of your claim proves this point.

No one is asking for hero worship of first responders. That said, if you're not fond of "first responder glory", which you claim to be dumb, then maybe clicking on a thread entitled "Remember the Officers" is a fruitless endeavor for you. I don't purposefully seek out things that irritate me as that seems rather stupid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top