The term third cop was coined by police officers around the world to refer to the “officer on the beat,” who patrols the streets or is assigned to provide support to the police.
The idea was born in the 1970s and 80s when the advent of digital cameras allowed police to see more of their encounters with citizens.
These cameras have been used for years by police departments to collect information about citizen behavior, and in some cases to record it.
While the concept is still in its infancy, the concept has gained a certain notoriety among many in law enforcement circles.
The term, in fact, was first coined by the National Institute of Justice, which is tasked with policing the digital revolution, and was also used by a U.S. Army unit.
The department that coined the term was the U.C.L.A. Police Department.
But in a recent op-ed for The Guardian, author and attorney Patrick Loughran, who was also the U,C.A.,L.C.,LAPD’s former chief, called the term “anachronistic.”
In his piece, Loughrand called the concept “an embarrassment to the LAPD” and accused the department of “overusing and misusing” the term.
“The idea that it’s acceptable for the police department to refer, in the future, to officers as ‘third policemen’ has a long history, starting with the 1970’s when we coined it,” Loughnan wrote.
“It is anachronistically used now to describe officers that work in the field and in the community, and has little to do with what is required of them to work effectively as police officers.”
Police departments across the country are increasingly using the term to describe non-law enforcement personnel who work for the department.
For example, the department in Los Angeles, which operates the Los Angeles Police Department, uses the term third police to refer only to the city’s two full-time officers and the officers who support them.
“They are not third officers.
They are non-police officers,” said LAPD Deputy Chief Steve Whitmore.
“That’s not their job.”
“Third officers are there to assist us,” Whitmore continued.
“If there’s a citizen that needs help, they’re there to help them.”
The department does not have a specific policy regarding the use of the term, and Whitmore said the term is “unfortunate.”
“It’s a misnomer to say, ‘Third policeman,'” Whitmore told Ars.
“I would not use that term.”
But he added that he does use the term when there is an officer who is doing “good work,” which includes interacting with citizens, “but is not performing the duties that are assigned to him or her by law.”
As for why the term has become an issue, Whitmore cited concerns that it is used to dehumanize police officers.
“We see it as an attempt to portray us as criminals, and that is completely not the case,” he said.
“When people see police officers, they see a person that is in a way more dangerous, a person who is dangerous, that is more dangerous to society, a violent person, and it’s a derogatory term.”
He added that the department is using the phrase because it is perceived as “more appropriate” to describe the role that police officers play in policing.
“This is an area where we are trying to make an important change in how we are being seen and how we’re being treated,” Whitwell said.
The LAPD is not alone in using the word.
In June, The Washington Post reported that the NYPD had stopped using the terms third and second cop because “they do not meet current department policies.”
The report came amid a broader trend of police departments using the “third cop” concept.
“A third cop is an auxiliary member of the force, who does not perform the duties of a full-fledged police officer,” the NYPD’s Deputy Commissioner of Communications, Peter Donald, wrote in a letter to The Post.
“He is a member of our enforcement and investigations divisions, but he is not a member in the police force.”
The use of this term was criticized by law enforcement advocates and a spokesperson for the UCC, the National Association of Police Organizations.
“There is a growing need to have accurate, complete, and impartial data to ensure that officers are working as hard as possible and protecting our communities,” said Marc Randazza, a spokesperson at the National Police Accountability Network.
“By adopting the term ‘third policeman,’ we are implicitly acknowledging that we are not adequately trained, and this creates a disincentive for officers to actually work their jobs.”
Randazze said the use, in particular, is “disheartening” and that “it makes no sense.”
The Department of Justice recently issued a report detailing the use and misuse of the phrase “third policeman.”
Randazzza said that the DOJ’s report “does not address the specific use of third