Rate My Cop.
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=174424
Printed Date: 06 December 2025 at 12:43pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Rate My Cop.
Posted By: .357 Magnum
Subject: Rate My Cop.
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 12:16pm
|
Similar to that site for teachers ? http://ratemycop.com/ - Link ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Susan Storm
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 12:24pm
|
Looks interesting, but there are no live buttons when I load it, so it doesn't work. ------------- "No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable." |
Posted By: .357 Magnum
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 12:32pm
Site worked for me 
-------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 12:54pm
|
That site is idiotic.
You know it's just going to be a bunch of people who give their local police officers a bad rating because they got arrested. It's also kinda sketchy to have a database featuring the names and locations of all the police offers in the US. |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:24pm
|
I disagree with the site on general principal. However I don't want it taken down because that would just be paving the way for other sites to be taken down, thus violating Net Neutrality.
------------- 
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:26pm
The question that brings up is if it could be puttig police officers in danger? If it actually does, than it should be brought down. (though I'm personally not saying it does or does not. |
Snake6 wrote:Posted By: Da Hui
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:27pm
|
Don't work in Firefox or IE for Me.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:31pm
Its only displaying information that is readily aviliable from the police department. Even if it does put police in danger it should not be taken down by force, there should be a lawsuit and it should be handled in civil court. The government should not ever touch the internet. -------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:35pm
I must disagree. Though I think net neutrality is great, it should as with any right have reasonable limitations. There is a point (and I'm not saying that it is here) that the authorities must step in and shut a website down. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:36pm
|
It doesn't give anything other than the officers name, so what is the problem? Most of the ones I read were fair reviews. ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: Susan Storm
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:37pm
|
So... Kiddie porn is ok so long as it is only on the internet? ------------- "No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable." |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:38pm
I disagree. Because once you shut one website down, you pave the way to get more and more sites shut down. It sets a precedent and once you do that it is very hard to reverse that precedent. -------------
|
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:39pm
|
...
I would imagine that if someone was arrested and was smart enough to figure out the officers name, they would also be smart enough to figure out which law enforcement agency the officer worked for and remember where the arrest took place. ------------- 
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:46pm
Other than susan's kiddie porn point which is oh so valid: Think of it this way: One day, the FBI discovers a hidden terrorist forum operating out of a server in the US. This is a forum where every terrorist in the world comes to post where they live and what they are planning to attack next. There is no doubt that the shutting down of this website would hinder terrorist activity worldwide. It is hidden in such a way that it is impossible to see any of the information displayed there. Also, any attempt do shut it down will result in the media being notified. You find a way to shutdown the website. To avoid a public relations nightmare, the shut down would have to be done legally with a warrant. This would set a legal precident. Do you shut it down? |
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:51pm
|
If "it is hidden in such a way that it is impossible to see any of the information displayed there," how did the FBI find it? -------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:02pm
Don't try to argue semantics. |
Posted By: You Wont See Me
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:03pm
|
Or they could just let it be and nab the terrorists since they all say where they live. Edit Carls too quick ------------- A-5 E-Grip JCS Dual Trigger DOP X-CORE 8 stage x-chamber Lapco Bigshot 14" Beadblasted Optional setup: R/T Dead on Blade trigger |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:04pm
No they don't so no they can't. |
Posted By: Snake6.
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:04pm
If there is a violation of the law occuring on a server within the US, the Federal Government can and will raid a datacenter. The Foonet raid is a prime example of this. What we are talking about here is not a violation of the law, it is just a site that some people don't agree with. It is a first amendment problem, not a legal one. There are other very contreversial sites on the internet some with alot greater violations of privacy than this site. Should every site that is contreversial be taken down? ------------- 
http://paintballchat.org - Paintball Chat I'm at work, Leave me alone!!! |
Posted By: Susan Storm
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:06pm
|
That's the distinction we were getting at. I don't think anybody here is arguing that a site that is "controversial" but not otherwise illegal should somehow be disabled. On the other had, if a regular off-line law is being broken on-line, the same rules apply. Whether this site is illegal is arguably an open question, but has relatively little to do with the webbiness of the site. ------------- "No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable." |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:07pm
No but the argument that I am making leads in a different way than the origional site. Sorta a tangent but not really. (like every other thread on this site) |
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:11pm
I still dont get how the FBI knows what is being discussed on the unreadable webpage. Maybe the terrorist are discussing soccer... -------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:17pm
|
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:24pm
|
It isnt about semantics.
Your creating a make believe scenario and trying to apply it to reality. -------------
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:28pm
|
This was on the news about a week ago, big uproar about it because it has their full names and badge numbers. Many cops go through many hoops to get their names out of the phone books, and this doesn't help.
Thankfully the creators were competent enough to not include under-cover cops. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Man Bites Dog
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:29pm
|
Most if not all of the information on the website is public record. I don't see the argument. ------------- 
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:32pm
It does apply exactly to the argument. |
Posted By: bravecoward
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 3:52pm
I just had the best image of terrorist flaming each other and calling each other noobs  ------------- 
|
Posted By: procarbinefreak
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 4:05pm
i don't get it... the first thing i ask for when a cop is talking to me is their name and badge number... never had a problem getting it from them. |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 4:52pm
Uh....no. |
Posted By: Evil Elvis
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 5:52pm
Actually they have to give you their Name and Badge Number. The only time they are allowed to conceal the Number is when wearing mourning bands. Or of course when in a Undercover or Plains Clothes Detail. ------------- 
|
Posted By: procarbinefreak
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 6:09pm
i know... they also take you more seriously when you specifically ask. 
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 2:45am
From officer.com http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85918&highlight=rate+cop - Discussion
While it MAY be public info, does not mean the public should have access to it. (I realize that makes little sense, but it's 2 AM so oh well) So yes, he has the right to have the site, but that doesn't mean it can't cause some sort of harm. Plus, who's to say false information won't be put up about the cops? -------------
|
Posted By: Man Bites Dog
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 3:30am
Ehhhh... -------------
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 3:42am
|
Hence the edit, almost a full hour before your post.
Example: You want your number taken out of the phone book so it's not open to the public. After it's taken out, should the general public still have access to it if they want it? You guys (generalization) always proclaim how the government should not be privy to some of your info, yet when it comes to private citizens doing it back, you don't care. Makes sense to me. -------------
|
Posted By: The Guy
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 7:07am
| You can get a lot more information than tat site offers through FOIA. |