[najida]

And the bank can say, we have our reasons for not following your recommendations and here they are-—

OR, we have our on things in place to prevent a robbery which are different from yours.

Lastly, the cop is expressing an opinion no more valid than that of those who own the bank.

Is it the correct one to the bank? No, and they tell him so.

Will he jump up and down and yell “I told you so” if the bank is robbed? Probably.

Will the bank president take him off his Christmas Card list? Fer sure.

Will he be correct in his original assumption? Maybe not....
-— again, it was his opinion, and maybe the bank still had valid protections in place, but just not the ones he wanted.

Besides, you're talking about a cop who's robbed a bank himself and is shady about his credentials as a cop.

[MrB]

Yeah, a lot of people don’t like it when objective standards are promoted,

and seek to invalidate them by attacking the person espousing them. That’s what’s happening here.

I really don’t care what a person’s past is, or whether in the past they have failed to meet those objective standards, it doesn’t in any way invalidate the correctness of those standards.