Being refered to as a "Civilian" vs Citizen

[Rule3]

Please do not take this the wrong way (LEOS) as I have great respect for those that are in that profession and have several friends and one who was killed.

I see it in the News and on forums, non LEO's being refered to as "Civilian's". I am a Citizen not a Civilian. In Military terms perhaps, but not for individuals. This would denote LEO's as Military.

Opposite for civilian

[NMPinNYC]

As the term "civilian" is used in combination with the term "soldier", perhaps that should be the term used in return, if one is referred to as "civilian" .

[kraigwy]

Does it matter??

Frankly you can call me anything but "late for dinner". It dosn't bother me.

[David LaPell]

I always preferred "sir" or Ma'am" when addressing the general public (talk to alot of them on the phone and see alot during visitations) the inmates I always referred to as Mister or Miss when I addressed them (unless it was one of the regulars) and they always addressed me as Officer LaPell. I see some of that civilian and citizen BS going on now, and I blame the way the new officers are being trained in the academies, which is giving these new people too much of a "us" versus "them" mentality.

[Rule3]

Originally Posted by kraigwy

Does it matter??

Frankly you can call me anything but "late for dinner". It dosn't bother me.

Well from your Icons, you are Military and a LEO so it shouldn't bother you

[PA Reb]

Originally Posted by Rule3

Please do not take this the wrong way (LEOS) as I have great respect for those that are in that profession and have several friends and one who was killed.

I see it in the News and on forums, non LEO's being refered to as "Civilian's". I am a Citizen not a Civilian. In Military terms perhaps, but not for individuals. This would denote LEO's as Military.

Opposite for civilian

It bothers me also and here's why ~ 98% of the local LEOs, sheriff deputies, and just as many of the "mall cops" around here definitely have a "better than thou" attitude nowadays while walking around with their military styled buzzed heads (what's that all about?). I feel I am able to say this because, as you can see, I have a (former) LEO badge beside my screen name and am all for good law enforcement. I also think that forum member "David LaPell" has hit the nail square on the head as I too believe they are being trained this way for some odd reason.

[feralmerril]

I remember those old superman comic books in the 40s and 50s where superman always told some milktoast type people he saved to rest easy, citizen, I am on duty! Maybe thats where some of this BS started?

[oldman45]

Rule, no offense is meant by using civilians. LEO are also citizens, taxpayers and other things. Among those things is being Sworn. Therein is the difference. Civilians are not sworn to serve, protect or other such.

Military, politicians, firemen and others are also sworn and not considered civilians, although they are.

[Rule3]

When I or another call, say 911 and the call goes out to the Police, is it Citizen has a complaint about xyz (whatever) or is it Civilian has a complaint???

As I mentioned one of my best friends was a Sgt in the Sheriff Dept, I am friends with the former Chief Deputy (Under Sheriff) and have several friends in the Fire Dept. I am not offended, just inquiring on the choice of words.

[walnutred]

Personally I feel that everyone other than Active Duty Military are civilians. Well, Reserves when acting in official capacity would also be non-civilian.

[bitstream]

Originally Posted by walnutred

Personally I feel that everyone other than Active Duty Military are civilians. Well, Reserves when acting in official capacity would also be non-civilian.

Yep, I laugh when I hear a LEO refer to others as civilians. They are civilians to me. They may take an oath, but their oath is water compared to the oath military takes. They have no duty to defend the Constitution with their lives. The Supreme Court made it clear they have no duty to defend. While many have indeed given their lives, they were not under an Oath to do so.

Note: I have plenty of respect for LEO, but they are civilians.

[oldman45]

Originally Posted by bitstream

Yep, I laugh when I hear a LEO refer to others as civilians. They are civilians to me. They may take an oath, but their oath is water compared to the oath military takes. They have no duty to defend the Constitution with their lives. The Supreme Court made it clear they have no duty to defend. While many have indeed given their lives, they were not under an Oath to do so.

Note: I have plenty of respect for LEO, but they are civilians.

Sorry but the oath I took each time has mentioned upholding the Constitution, as well as to protect & serve.

[old bear]

Way back in the day, when used by working cops, the term civilian was not an insult but neither was it a term of endearment either.

[Texas Star]

"Citizen" was a worthy title in ancient Rome, and was used in the French Revolution. I like the word.

"Civilian" seem more condescending, more an "us" vs. "them" mentality.

Rome took that "citizen" thing pretty seriously, from wearing the toga and an iron ring, to defending and advancing their civilization.

Alas, our civilization has too many aliens and general deadwood and trash people. I wish that some were "citizens" elsewhere.

[bitstream]

Originally Posted by oldman45

Sorry but the oath I took each time has mentioned upholding the Constitution, as well as to protect & serve.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/po.../28scotus.html

FTA: "The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation. "

I don't know what Oath you took, but the Supreme Court says you don't have to give your life to protect others.

The Oath I took as an Officer in the military was pretty clear. I did take a duty to selflessly give my life to defend others.

The difference seems clear.

[kraigwy]

I don't know what Oath you took, but the Supreme Court says you don't have to give your life to protect others

Cops don't risk their lives because any court told them to, they do it because they are "cops", its what they do, protect people, same as the military.

I have taken both, the Oath as an Army Officer (and enlisted prior to OCS) and I've taken the Oath as a LE officer. Both include DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

An Oath is an Oath, and one needs to horor any oath he takes, military or LE, or he's not a man.

[Hobie1]

Civilian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Citizenship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

FWIW, it is Wiki.

Someone who has taken an oath to protect their citizens are not civilians per se while being active duty. But they are still citizens. As in "citizen soldier".


I'm afraid of the direction it's going. Watch the news from other countries and their "police" forces doing crowd control. If this country doesn't watch out, we're not too far from being on the news.

Hobie

[jbull380]

I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and to protect and serve even if it means my life. No court ruling can change that. I am cop and it's what I have sworn to do.

[cmort666]

Originally Posted by David LaPell

I always preferred "sir" or Ma'am" when addressing the general public (talk to alot of them on the phone and see alot during visitations) the inmates I always referred to as Mister or Miss when I addressed them (unless it was one of the regulars) and they always addressed me as Officer LaPell. I see some of that civilian and citizen BS going on now, and I blame the way the new officers are being trained in the academies, which is giving these new people too much of a "us" versus "them" mentality.

Most of it's probably just unthinking repetition of what one's heard or been taught. Observation tells me that some part of it is disdain or contempt for the non-LEO community by a few.

There used to be a moderator on another forum who was a cop somewhere in downstate Illinois. His general attitude was that anybody not a trained LEO was barely able to hold a firearm without shooting himself, much less defend himself or others with it. That came through in pretty much everything he said to non-LEOs. He seemed to be an extreme case, at least for firearms related message boards.

[RonJ]

I was in the military in the mid to late sixties. Excluding older folks it was a sort of hippies vs soldiers thing. In that context civilian was equivalent to outsider. Even today I feel the same way when I hear the word.

[cmort666]

Originally Posted by bitstream

I don't know what Oath you took, but the Supreme Court says you don't have to give your life to protect others.

Actually, SCOTUS says no LEO has to PROTECT you (outside of EXTREMELY limited circumstances), period, regardless of risk.

The being said, I've seen cops who wanted to protect the public. I've seen cops who couldn't care less in general. I've seen cops whose desire to protect was predictable by the color of the victim's skin. None of that really matters in the greater scheme of things.

What DOES matter is that in virtually no case will the police be ABLE to protect you from an imminent deadly force attack. Any threat the police ARE able to "protect" you from either isnt:

1. imminent.
2. a real danger to life and limb.

Good cop, bad cop, it doesn't matter. When your life is in danger RIGHT NOW, if you're not ready and willing to protect YOURSELF, you're just not going to get protected AT ALL. Any claim to the contrary is of a kind with belief in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I guess it's Hayakawa time, even if I kind of disagree with him in other cases. "Words don't mean; people mean."

Sometimes LEOs use "civilian" to mean non-LEO. In normal face-to-face conversation in an unofficial setting, it would be impolite to interrupt him or her to make a statement about what the word meant, particularly if it were obvious anyway, and by the time there was a break where the comment could be made, no normal person would care, anyway.

If the LEO clearly used the word in a derogatory or demeaning way, that would be a slightly different issue to address in its own appropriate way, but it is usually not identical with the simple misuse of a word whose meaning is usually pretty clear where perhaps no other word is perfect, either.

[oldman45]

Originally Posted by cmort666

Actually, SCOTUS says no LEO has to PROTECT you (outside of EXTREMELY limited circumstances), period, regardless of risk.

Examine the context of the ruling. People were suing the police for injuries sustained while police were either not there, enroute there or unable to protect at the time (such as riots).

The SCOTUS ruled that police were unable to protect all citizens" all the time. This was a correct ruling since the police cannot protect all. There are more citizens than police. Police are not body guards that are hired to protect.

Police will usually protect a person if they can. However one local area officer was caught leaving a wounded citizen on the ground as her boyfriend was shooting at them. He got in his car and left the area. He was also later fired and sent to prison.

[kraigwy]

Originally Posted by Model520Fan

BTW, I don't particularly care for the use of the word "veteran" for folks that don't have a CIB

I have a CIB, I got mine with the 2/502nd Inf, 101st Abn Div RVN 67-68.
I'm no more a veteran then those in the rear who supported me. The ones who got mortored or rocketed every night but still took the time go get my re-supply to the chopper pad.

I'm no more a veteran then the medics, nurses and doctors who tended to my comrades. Nor the chopper pilots who brought me ammo and carried off the wounded when things got rough.

I'm no more a veteran then the combat engineer, or medic or FO who was by my side while I was earning my CIB.

The paratroopers at Bastonge who carried an infantry MOS were no more veterans then the cooks and clerks they shared foxholes with when surrounded by three German Armored Divisions.

The Marines in the Pacific are no more veterans then the army aircorp, just read somewhere where more army air corp people then Marines were killed WWII.

I'm proud of my CIB, but I totally disagree with your statement that only holders of CIBs are veterans.

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

Strictly speaking, the only people in this country who are not civilians are Active Duty military personnel. LEOs ARE civilians, although "sworn officers" if you want to make that distinction. And they often have to deal with people who are NOT citizens.
A veteran is anyone who raised their right hand, promised to "protect and defend.." and was honorably discharged. I have the CIB but I do not look down on those who don't have it, either due to time and place or just weren't eligible for it.

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Originally Posted by kraigwy

I have a CIB, I got mine with the 2/502nd Inf, 101st Abn Div RVN 67-68.
I'm no more a veteran then those in the rear who supported me. The ones who got mortored or rocketed every night but still took the time go get my re-supply to the chopper pad.

I'm no more a veteran then the medics, nurses and doctors who tended to my comrades. Nor the chopper pilots who brought me ammo and carried off the wounded when things got rough.

I'm no more a veteran then the combat engineer, or medic or FO who was by my side while I was earning my CIB.

The paratroopers at Bastonge who carried an infantry MOS were no more veterans then the cooks and clerks they shared foxholes with when surrounded by three German Armored Divisions.

The Marines in the Pacific are no more veterans then the army aircorp, just read somewhere where more army air corp people then Marines were killed WWII.

I'm proud of my CIB, but I totally disagree with your statement that only holders of CIBs are veterans.

You're right. I'll edit my post and my attitude.

[keith44spl]

I pretty much go with Sir or Ma'am...

Would not an elected LE official, i.e. Sheriff & deputies serve that jurisdiction's 'constituents' ?


The next to the last time I signed on was to serve felony warrants and raid meth labs,
all the whilist trying not to get blown up or kilt.


Su Amigo,
Dave

[cmort666]

Originally Posted by oldman45

He was also later fired and sent to prison.

That's got to be an outcome so vanishingly rare as to rate right up there with the Patterson bigfoot video.

Fired... in RARE occasions. PROSECUTED? I'd expect to see a flying saucer first. I don't believe that the two Milwaukee cops who gave the naked Laotian kid back to Jeffrey Dahmer were fired, much less prosecuted.

[24spenser]

its no biggie. Also note than many LEOs come from a military background and carry some of that verbiage for life. Civilian = non-LEO and non-military. too old to change that thinking. Doesn't mean I'm going to address a civilian as 'Mr Civilian' or treat them any worse.

[oldman45]

Originally Posted by cmort666

That's got to be an outcome so vanishingly rare as to rate right up there with the Patterson bigfoot video.

Fired... in RARE occasions. PROSECUTED? I'd expect to see a flying saucer first. I don't believe that the two Milwaukee cops who gave the naked Laotian kid back to Jeffrey Dahmer were fired, much less prosecuted.

The officer pulled up on another officer in shots fired / hostage situation. There is a video of it on the internet.

http://arklatexhomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=169356

The officer saw what was happening, ran to his car and got out of Dodge. This was captured on dash cam. Then in court, after being terminated, he denied he was even there although he was shown the video. He was charged with perjury. found guilty and sent to prison for four full years.

Fired Officer Sentenced For Perjury | News - Home

[Bullzaye]

I've always felt it was improper for LEOs to refer to any non-LEOs as "civilians". IMO, all LEOs are civilians...some (or indeed, many) LEOs may be veterans, but they must surely be civilians (with the possible exception of LEOs who are also serving in NG or Reserve units.)

To my mind, regardless of the oath taken, there are enormous differences between Military Members and LEOs. LEOs do not travel thousand of miles to serve and fight on foreign lands. LEOs sleep in their own beds each night, have dinner with their families, see their children daily. If LEOs don't care for the way things are going at some point, they may merely throw down their badges, and walk away. LEOs don't end up buried in foreign lands, where their families may never visit their graves, nor do they end up MIA, where their families may never know their fate, nor are they ever POWs.

This should not be construed in any way as my lacking respect and appreciation for LEOs and the jobs that they do. I have several friends who are, or have been, in LE. I just don't believe that they should place themselves in the same classification as servicemen or women.

Tim

[ogilvyspecial]

Originally Posted by RonJ

I was in the military in the mid to late sixties. Excluding older folks it was a sort of hippies vs soldiers thing. In that context civilian was equivalent to outsider. Even today I feel the same way when I hear the word.

A close friend of mine did multiple tours in Vietnam and right up until he died, about 20 yr's ago, whenever he used the word, civilian, he would spit on the ground.

[feralmerril]

Its hard to convince me that "friend" joined the military to protect the "civilians" that he would spit on the ground when the word come up. Was he a NCO? (No chance on the outside)

[cwo4uscgret]

I usually say Sir or Maam in the line of duty; but for the federal law enforcement agency that I work for we really can't tell if any of the people that we encounter are "Citizens" (of the USA) until we see their passport or other proof of citizenship.

Of course at the international border crossing things are a little different!

For many years (before my time) the non-law enforcement community has been referred to as "civilians" - not as a derogatory term but to distinguish them from law enforcement peronnel.

[StatesRightist]

These posts seem for the most part to be full of over sensitivity and who's Johnson is bigger c.r.a.p. to me. Newsflash for all....We all have the same rights and standing under the Constitution, which was the point of that wonderful document. Check the egos would be my thought......

[OFT II]

I looked at Webster's Dictionary to see how they define civilian. It said that a civilian is anyone who is not military, police or fire fighter. Truth is I'm not bothered by a LEO calling me a civilian. But please don't refer to me as "the accused".

[7shooter]

Here is the oath that I and other Federal employees took when hired :

"Oath
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

5 U.S.C. §3331"

BTW, I like the term citizen as opposed to civilian. I agree with others who see civilian in the context being discussed as problematic as it reinforces the us versus them issue which is acceptable when differentiating between cops and crooks but is inappropriate when describing law abiding citizens. I always liked it when Joe Friday called us citizens.

[ogilvyspecial]

Originally Posted by feralmerril

Its hard to convince me that "friend" joined the military to protect the "civilians" that he would spit on the ground when the word come up. Was he a NCO? (No chance on the outside)

The way he had been treated by some civilians when he returned home left a bad taste in his mouth. Being called things like "baby killer" & getting spit on while wearing his uniform & "green beenie" didn't help matters any.

He said he wasn't lookin' for any thanks, just being left alone would have been thanks enough.

He was wounded 5 times over in Vietnam, with what he called "the big one", an AK47 round to the right hip in 1968.

He sacrificed for his Country & look at the thanks he, as well as many others, got. (my words)

[ladder13]

My cop friends call me Mike.

[walnutred]

In the second section of the Declaration of Independence is a list of grievances against King George III. One of the listed grievances is: He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. To me this clearly divides military from civilian and Civil power would include both politicians and LEOs.

Unless you're subject to the UCMJ your Civilian. IMHO

[mbnatt]

Reading this post, I realized this has always bothered me. I am a prior service SP4, MP, and an Ex 1LtODUSARNG officer. If I am a civilian these officers have no jurisdiction on me due to the "Posse Comitatus Act". I have lost friend who were "Police Officers", one who I am still pissed at because he did something stupid and got killed. My son is a Federal Law Enforcement Officer, I am a citizen. Not a civilian!

[Alk8944]

Originally Posted by OFT II

I looked at Webster's Dictionary to see how they define civilian. It said that a civilian is anyone who is not military, police or fire fighter.

Such a simple question, why did it take 35 replies before it was correctly answered?

The reference to "Citizen" has nothing to do with Civilian. Everyone who is not in the Military, Police or Fire service is a "Civilian", whether they are a "Citizen" or not. Prior service in any of these does not change the fact that someone not currently in any of these services is a "Civilian". In most jurisdictions, to be eligible to be either a Police Officer or Fireman you must first be a "Citizen". Aliens are not eligible.

[KJM]

Originally Posted by Rule3

Please do not take this the wrong way (LEOS) as I have great respect for those that are in that profession and have several friends and one who was killed.

I see it in the News and on forums, non LEO's being refered to as "Civilian's". I am a Citizen not a Civilian. In Military terms perhaps, but not for individuals. This would denote LEO's as Military.

Opposite for civilian

Law Enforcement Officers are CIVILIANS/CITIZENS as much as some of them LIKE to think otherwise.
Military can refer to us as Civilians... POLICE cannot and should not. They are civilians/citizens with a badge and arrest powers, but CIVILIANS/CITIZENS none the less.

[cmort666]

Originally Posted by oldman45

The officer pulled up on another officer in shots fired / hostage situation. There is a video of it on the internet.

Jury finds former SPD officer guilty of perjury

The officer saw what was happening, ran to his car and got out of Dodge. This was captured on dash cam. Then in court, after being terminated, he denied he was even there although he was shown the video. He was charged with perjury. found guilty and sent to prison for four full years.

Fired Officer Sentenced For Perjury | News - Home

Your clarification makes it a horse of a different ballgame.

He wasn't prosecuted for running away. He was prosecuted for LYING about it, UNDER OATH. Of course it's pretty rare for cops to be prosecuted for perjury as well. Witness the recent Harless case in Canton, Ohio. Not only did Harless lie in his report of the incident, the prosecutor suborned perjury from Harless's partner Diels, who in turn lied under oath on the stand. There isn't the slightest indication that ANY of these clowns is EVER going to be prosecuted for ANYTHING.

On the other hand, Jon Burge, the leader of the Chicago PD torture ring that operated for decades, is doing FEDERAL time for perjury.