By Paul Daquilante • Staff Writer • 

Noble: 'The goal should be to rid ourselves of what we have seen'

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Click here for one-day access.

For all other subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please .



No offense Rep Noble, but you tried to “weed out those that no longer deserve to wear a badge” and with the resulting decision is the exact problem of why the public has diminished trust of law enforcement.......


The proposed plan by Sen. Boquist might just be what we need right now going forward: A better citizen representation with an oversight mandate in the affairs of "our" law enforcement departments. However, the one glaring problem in this proposed plan is how to keep the oversight positions from becoming politicized? Then we would be right back to what we were hoping to avoid in the first place.


While I like both of these legislators recommendations, Are any of these being considered by the Joint Special Committee? They started meeting today. They voted in their rules that only the Senate President and Speaker of the House may advance bills out of the Committee.


Thank you Rep. Noble for being willing to speak that is very admirable. To be honest I believe people become officers for two main reason.

1) Power: by that I mean to use as a tool over people. It's altruistic to believe the great majority of officers get into law enforcement for the right reason.

2) Passion: and by that I mean having a great love and care for the community. They do see policing as a way to love and protect our families and theirs. "Law Enforcement" has destroyed policing and the "Public Safety Officer" to go forward we need to go back.

We already have a military we don't need another.


So officers have “great love and care” for the community but the great majority get into law enforcement for the wrong reason....?
Your post makes no sense....


Are you suggesting people should erase what they witnessed--out of sight, out of mind? Absolutely not.

Bill B

Well thanks Tagup for telling us the public has diminished trust in law enforcement, however, this member of the public has no diminished trust. Clearly there is distrust in some areas but I don't believe that represents the general public's view.


My hunch Bill, is that you haven’t been exposed to the extra police scrutiny that certain segments of the “general public “ the very least, police departments need the ability to get rid of guys that don’t measure up without being blocked by an arbitration decision..

Bill B

I agree Tagup. My point is that I do not believe that the public in general has diminished trust of law enforcement.


Living in the right demographic has its advantages...

Bill B

Tagup - yes it does and I say thanks every day.


There is no empirical data to support the claim that independent citizen oversight alone is effective in reducing instances of police violence and abuse of citizens. However "independent" and regardless of background, the people on any oversight body remain bound by the law and by the collective bargaining agreements.

As part of a comprehensive transformation of collective bargaining agreements, and state and federal laws governing police conduct and certification of law enforcement, independent citizen oversight is probably a great idea. But on its own it is not likely to produce any change in conduct.

Web Design and Web Development by Buildable