Why We Need To Stop Exaggerating The Threat To Cops

[level.eleven]

To be fair, I've never got the feeling the Rambone nor mrjarrell wished me ill will for being an LEO. There are issues that I agree with them on and some that we do not see eye to eye. I think their issues are with administrations and some really knuckled headed police from chief on down. Fair enough. I don't classify them as "haters". The real haters we had were booted and the few currently we have I had placed on ignore. I did not read the article, it's contents don't mean much to me. I think the premise mrjarrell is trying to convey is that hysteria of ANY type is bad policy and this example is directed at LE policy based on hysteria. I don't want that either. We have a dangerous job, but it is FAR from the ONLY one. This is not a d**k measuring contest with other professions. Example, I have GREAT respect for the extreme fishermen. They do a dangerous job to support their families, same as I do. The danger is different but I am not a better person than them and vice versa...we are just different. Let's just calm this thread down a bit. I still don't like national stats as they have little to do with my specific department and/or my particular district even.

You are forcing me to do this. This has to be at least the 5th time I have laid into one of your hair-brained comments.

Chief Denny?

The dick measuring contest comment is spot on. Immediately someone went for that silly top 10 dangerous jobs line and it derailed the thread. That list doesn't serve a purpose outside of insurers. I also think the point about stepping into a situation is well presented. If someone who isn't a cop sees some S going down, they flee. If a cop sees some some S going down, he investigates.

I won't lie, however, and say that I don't see aggression, and what has been called, militarization. Again, I see a connection to the War on Drugs. I don't like what it has done to the 2nd and 4th amendments.

 

[Oresti]

No...
YOU are wrong.
Indiana specifically prohibits Police and Fire personnel from joining a Union for the purpose of bargaining wages, working condition, or any other aspect of their jobs.
The FOP, PBA, or other FRATERNAL organizations may be involved in NON BINDING negotiations ONLY and their proposals are often dismissed summarily by the City or Town Governments.

You better tell that to Terre Haute. Board of Public Works OKs new police contract » News From Terre Haute, Indiana

 

[Oresti]

No...
YOU are wrong.
Indiana specifically prohibits Police and Fire personnel from joining a Union for the purpose of bargaining wages, working condition, or any other aspect of their jobs.
The FOP, PBA, or other FRATERNAL organizations may be involved in NON BINDING negotiations ONLY and their proposals are often dismissed summarily by the City or Town Governments.

This sounds like it will be pretty binding to me. Contract Proposal 12/04/12 | Fraternal Order of Police

 

[phylodog]

This sounds like it will be pretty binding to me. Contract Proposal 12/04/12 | Fraternal Order of Police

Yeah, I thought that too. Then the raise I was to receive via contract in January was postponed.

Nope. Not all that binding I guess.

Police are not allowed to join unions in Indiana. Police are not allowed to go on strike in Indiana.

Look it up.

ETA: I looked at your link. I guess if the media calls it a union then it must be a union. Kind of like their definition of an assault rifle or an arsenal.

 

[pitbulld45]

Thats why we at the Sheriff's Office never tried to join a Union. County Counsil doenst have to collective bargain. It would be a waste of Union dues.

 

[phylodog]

Here is a list of the Indiana unions. You'll notice that the FOP appears at the bottom of the page as a national union but not in the list of Indiana unions. The reason is that it isn't a union in Indiana.

http://www.unions.org/unions/indiana/14

 

[UncleMike]

You better tell that to Terre Haute. Board of Public Works OKs new police contract » News From Terre Haute, Indiana

This sounds like it will be pretty binding to me. Contract Proposal 12/04/12 | Fraternal Order of Police

The FOP is NOT a Union.
It is a Fraternal Organization.
The FOP is allowed to sit in on Police wage and benefit negotiations but the City or Town may tell them to **** off at any time.
The results of their presence at such meetings are NOT binding no matter what the dumb ass news agency reports.
I've been an FOP member for over thirty eight years and I've been in on the so called "negotiations" at the top level.
Police may have any group represent them in negotiations but like I said the City/Town can reject anything that the representing group proposes.
Here's the Statute spelling out that the City/Town can do ANYTHING to a Police Employee short of having them executed.


IC 36-8-22-10
Employer rights
Sec. 10. This chapter is not intended to circumscribe or modify the existing right of an employer to:
(1) direct the work of the employer's employees;
(2) hire, promote, demote, transfer, assign, and retain employees in positions;
(3) suspend, discharge, or otherwise discipline employees for just cause;
(4) maintain the efficiency of governmental operations;
(5) relieve employees from duties because of lack of work or for other legitimate reasons; or
(6) take actions that may be necessary to carry out the mission of the employer in emergencies.
As added by P.L.48-2007, SEC.1.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Having been in LE for going on 15 years now I've learned that LE rarely sees things coming and acts preemptively to prepare for it. Law enforcement in this country is 95% reactive in nature, very rarely does anything happen proactively. I'll use patrol rifles as an example.

The infamous bank robbery in LA changed the game for LE. It was pretty obvious when the officers on scene had to borrow rifles from a gun store that they were ill equipped to handle such an event. LAPD adopted a patrol rifle program shortly thereafter. You'd think other agencies (at least those policing larger metro areas) would have done the same.

I was on the MCSD back then and we asked for patrol rifles. Our requests were denied. When my friend Jason Baker was killed by a couple of idiots with 7.62 rifles we finally were able to start a rifle program.

Back then we share our jurisdictional borders with IPD. Our agencies worked two halves of many neighborhoods, dealt with many of the same offenders, experienced very similar violent crimes. You'd think that when MCSD finally realized it was time for patrol rifles that IPD would do the same. Nope. It took Jake Laird getting murdered by a nutjob with a 7.62 rifle before IPD would be allowed a patrol rifle program.

What enemy does LE fight? The enemies of our society. Those who will rape, rob, burglarize, murder and brutalize whomever they wish. I applaud any citizen who decides to defend themselves when facing one of these parasite but we have many in our society who won't. When these slugs surface these folks expect the police to step in and handle it. Those of us who choose this profession don't complain about this, all we ask is for the ability to fight (when necessary) on at least equal ground.

The night Jason Baker was killed the suspects shot two helicopters and bounced many rounds off of an armored vehicle which contained the officers who were willingly attempting to end his rampage. They don't ask for recognition or to be called heroes but I don't think it's too much to ask to be provided the equipment to avoid making these tasks nothing more than suicide missions.

I am sorry that your friends were murdered. But your points all relate to not being supplied effective tools to do your job, which is something you should take up with your superiors. If you can make a convincing case that you really need armored vehicles and Level IV ballistics armor and flashbang grenades, and fully-automatic weaponry, then I not only think that you should have them, but that I should have them too. Also, every other decent person I know. The problem is that you deal with indecent people.

Unfortunately, however, we live in a reactionary society with reactionary police forces, as we must to preserve a free Republic. It is pre-emption and pro-active government that have brought about this near-total surveillance society, as well as every other State-sponsored atrocity in the course of written history. Pre-emptively reducing the exercise of liberty because someone might abuse it - or even because a small percentage do abuse liberty - does nothing to make us, not you and yours nor me and mine, even the least bit more safe. Merely less free.

Even more unfortunately, we were warned of this outcome by everyone from Washington and Jefferson and Madison to Orwell and Heinlein and Bastiat. Everyone saw this outcome save those in a position to prevent this slow and steady erosion of our rights. But despite my sympathies - and make no mistake, you do have my sympathy, and my respect (and the number of those whom I grant respect is few) - I will not sit idly by and watch as my local police force transforms itself into something of a paramilitary force without comment. As a tax-paying citizen who well understands the nature of Man and Government and Law, I wish for you to have all the tools necessary to perform your job within the confines and structure of the law. Every single tool.

But not a single tool more.

 

[jbombelli]

Personally, the only limitation I would put on gear for the police is this: If I can't buy it, they can't buy it either. If I can buy it, they can too.

That's fair.

I can buy a .50 BMG or 20mm rifle if I want one and have the money. I can buy an armored vehicle if I want one and have the money. I can buy Level IV armor if I want it and have the money.

But I can't buy a new machine gun.

 

[IndyDave1776]

To be fair, I've never got the feeling the Rambone nor mrjarrell wished me ill will for being an LEO. There are issues that I agree with them on and some that we do not see eye to eye. I think their issues are with administrations and some really knuckled headed police from chief on down. Fair enough. I don't classify them as "haters". The real haters we had were booted and the few currently we have I had placed on ignore. I did not read the article, it's contents don't mean much to me. I think the premise mrjarrell is trying to convey is that hysteria of ANY type is bad policy and this example is directed at LE policy based on hysteria. I don't want that either. We have a dangerous job, but it is FAR from the ONLY one. This is not a d**k measuring contest with other professions. Example, I have GREAT respect for the extreme fishermen. They do a dangerous job to support their families, same as I do. The danger is different but I am not a better person than them and vice versa...we are just different. Let's just calm this thread down a bit. I still don't like national stats as they have little to do with my specific department and/or my particular district even.

This is probably the best assessment of the tension between police and non-police I have read.

After reading through this thread I don't know what to think. Maybe some on both sides have An axe to grind or maybe one side taunts the other and the other feels the need to defend themselves which I find to be natural and acceptable. I'm not going to post further in this thread because I don't think any good will come from this thread. but on my exit I do want to say I apologize if anything I said came across as cop bashing because that's not my position on this issue. I simply feel that all people should be treated and respected equally as long as they are productive members of society. I do feel sorry for ones who have jobs that make them feel as if the whole world is against them or their lives or those of their friends where in daily peril. Maybe if I felt that way myself I would seek another career path. I am thankful that some chose to perform jobs that are tough by their definition and take a toll on family life and peace of mind. It is a fact that without our law enforcement officers performing their duties our society would revert to uncontrolled crime and vigilante justice. But of coarse all of my post are simply my own perceptions and opinions and I try to keep in mind what the other sides view might be. I certainly wish none of you LEO's anything but the best and if we find ourselves in another discussion on INGO I hope you will not view me as your enemy because I certainly do not view you as mine. For what it's worth I do appreciate your work more than that of a garbage mans and any sane and reasonable person would as well. Thank you.

Edit: I have never seen through your eyes as law enforcement officers. As a citizen I only hear from and see from a regular guys point of view and the sensationalism of news stories that focus little on truth from either perspective because the truth never seems to sell papers. Maybe if I would have had my eyes open from your point of view it would change the way I look at these issues. All the best.

You will find some of all the above with people. The biggest issue here is that most people take it personally rather than in general terms when a criticism is issued even though we generally have a discussion conducted by the best examples of all groups involved with the rancor stemming from the behaviors of the worst examples.

 

[rambone]

Personally, the only limitation I would put on gear for the police is this: If I can't buy it, they can't buy it either. If I can buy it, they can too.

That's fair.

I can buy a .50 BMG or 20mm rifle if I want one and have the money. I can buy an armored vehicle if I want one and have the money. I can buy Level IV armor if I want it and have the money.

But I can't buy a new machine gun.

I would require that equipment be funded 100% locally and with the consent of the community. No more "free" grants from the Feds, with strings attached. No free drones from DHS. No free gifts from DOD.

If your town can't afford a $250,000 Lenco Bearcat, I don't want the Feds subsidizing it.

 

[jbombelli]

I would require that equipment be funded 100% locally and with the consent of the community. No more "free" grants from the Feds, with strings attached. No free drones from DHS. No free gifts from DOD.

If your town can't afford a $250,000 Lenco Bearcat, I don't want the Feds subsidizing it.

I'll agree with that.

I'm sick of the feds borrowing trillions of dollars for stuff I don't want them to spend money on, and signing my name on the promissory note.

 

[level.eleven]

And this is why you shouldn't pump up the "war on cops".

Sources: JP Eric Williams To Be Charged With Murders In Kaufman County « CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

Turns out it wasn't a prison gang or white supremacists. It was a coworker.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Turns out it wasn't a prison gang or white supremacists. It was a coworker.

Well, the whole "white supremacist gang" cover story was just about moronic.

The whole gang nonsense was just a way to pimp a budget.