One of my pet peeves is that in many jurisdictions, police officers have become little more than revenue agents. Tax collectors, if you will. Here's a typical rant:

You go 75 (which nearly everyone does, and which you have to do to keep up with traffic), and you're vulnerable, because sooner or later, some damnable uniformed revenue agent (euphemistically called a "Highway Patrol Officer") will pull you over and ticket you. Often the bastards use unmarked cars, so there's no way to rely on the rear view mirror to avoid them.

It is beyond dispute that the primary purpose of these unmarked cars in speed traps is purely to raise revenue, but what really fries me (and what insults my intelligence) is the claim that they are protecting the public. As if it's "dangerous" to go 75 when everyone else is going 75 on highways designed to be safe at much greater speeds. They are preying on ordinary people whose only crime is trying to get from point A to point B. Maybe they're going to work, or maybe they're going to visit relatives. Traveling is stressful, and IMHO, preying on travelers (by lying in wait so you can extort money under threat of official force) is about as low as you can get. I don't know how these revenue officers can live with themselves. I could not do that for a living. I would rank them even lower than trial lawyers, and I consider the IRS more honest, for at least the latter don't make the dishonest claim that they're protecting the public.

We do not respond to blog postings. If we were to respond to blogs we would need to create a new position just to keep up with all of the comments. Legitimate questions posed to the department by our citizens will be answered. Responding to opinions and computer chatter will not change perceptions or opinions.

It seems like you can't go more than a few miles without the police circling like vultures to give people traffic tickets. I was out yesterday and saw people left and right being pulled over for what looked like routine traffic stops for going a few miles over the speed limit. The limits are so low in our area that if you don't "speed," you almost get rear-ended. It's a tough choice to decide which one is worse, a ticket or an accident. Has anyone else noticed an increase in cops in your area? I understand that the states and counties need revenue but is this the way to get it? Can citizens fight back?

If he didn't know, then he wasn't doing his job:

The Knoxville Police Department's Public Information Office is a 24-hour a day, 7 day a week operation. Darrell DeBusk oversees one of the most advanced PIO offices in the country. Darrell has 17 years experience in television both as a photojournalist and most recently as the Assignment Manager for one of the top NBC affiliates in the country. He is a member of the National Information Officer's Association. The KPD has twenty-seven Assistant Public Information Officers spread throughout the department. Because of this staffing, the KPD is able to respond to media calls for service at a moment's notice. These officers respond to calls for media assistance while on duty only. The Public Information Office is assigned to the Police Chief's office and is physically in the Chief's suite. Darrell answers directly to Chief Sterling Owen and is considered a member of his Command Staff.

The Public Information Office is structured to support the entire Knoxville Police Department. Its main function is to promote the department in a positive manner to both the general public and the news media. One way in which that goal is obtained is through periodic meetings with local media outlets to address their questions or concerns. These meetings allow them to have input on the media guidelines or to offer suggestions for fostering positive police / media relations.

But even after Michael Silence persisted, DeBusk dug in his heels and invoked irrelevant stereotypes:

Michael,
You didn't ask the KPD to respond to you. You asked us to address her posting. You know as well as I do that everyday people post opinions and all sorts of rhetoric on blogs and the majority of them do so anonymously. If the blogger or anyone else has a question concerning activity in their neighborhood or community, all they have to do is contact us and we will be more than happy to respond. As far as responding to blogs, we never have responded as a department. City Council members know how and who to contact at the KPD to get answers to their questions. And believe me, they have never been shy about requesting information or clarification on our policies, practices and crime incidents.

Considering the way he touts his MSM background ("17 years experience in television both as a photojournalist and most recently as the Assignment Manager for one of the top NBC affiliates in the country") I suspect that Darrell DeBusk does not like -- and does not respect -- blogging or bloggers, and that is reflected in his swipe at Dr. Helen. I think he has to know full well who she is, but he is dissing her for being a blogger. However, it would not surprise me that were he confronted further, he would explain that he didn't mean to disrespect her personally, but meant to say that it's her medium he deems unworthy of respect.

He may even think that blogging is so inherently illegitimate that a citizen's concerns are nullified by being expressed in a blog post, and that Dr. Helen delegitimizes and therefore cheapens herself by blogging. After all, as he says, bloggers are just anonymous spewers of all sorts of rhetoric. The questions we raise are not "legitimate," but constitute "computer chatter" which is unworthy of any response by those who belong to the legitimate classes.

Does that mean we peons would be taken more seriously if we just shut up entirely?

You know, the way they used to take us seriously in the old days before blogging?