The official "Ask a cop/deputy anything!" thread

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

....
And Sedan had already acknowledged that private industry probably had at least the same or better plans than police. You both seem to be saying the same thing, but you don't seem to believe that.

Clan said that some in private industry had better medical than him.
Indicating that he is perturbed that he isn't getting the ne plus ultra from public employment.
Indicating a little naivete?

Murf

PS: Excuse me, but I have to go make a quiche lorraine now....

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

It was a pretty obvious metaphor!
You are I assume, a capitalist to some degree. And you are surprised that someone in private industry has a better medical plan than you???????
Bulletin: And someone has a bigger house too. Some have Master degrees in various areas.
I guess you have some reading comprehension, but I think you need to work on your 'idea' comprehension.

So like I posted earlier, any unions job is to represent it's members. If they get them a decent pension and benefits than they are doing their job. Why so much anger at this?

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by PandaM3

What if a similar situation.

I'm with my wife eating Shabu Shabu at this spot here in the OC. Since it's a Friday night I decide to take my M3 out for the night which is nice therapy after driving my electric car all week. It's lowered, rims, big brake kit, etc etc but everything in the engine and emissions wise is all legal.

So since it's my M3 I have it parked in a nice corner spot. When during the middle of dinner the parking lot gets increasingly crowded full of modified cars (revving and doing donuts).

So the cops come and start rounding up everyone and impounding cars... can the cops potentially try and get my wife and I along with my car? What if I stay in the restaurant... can they potentially impound my car thinking it was part of the illegal car show?

A car wouldn't be subject to impound simply for being parked there, especially in a busy business plaza full of other patrons.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

Clan said that some in private industry had better medical than him.
Indicating that he is perturbed that he isn't getting the ne plus ultra from public employment.
Indicating a little naivete?

Murf

PS: Excuse me, but I have to go make a quiche lorraine now....

What? Perturbed?! Yeah, you truly do have a comprehension issue. I'm over it. You're a lost cause.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

What? Perturbed?! Yeah, you truly do have a comprehension issue. I'm over it. You're a lost cause.

It's clear that he has a pretty strong anti police bias, there really isn't much point in exchanging with him as you try to have a reasonable conversation with him and he doesn't want to engage civilly. Not the first time, he's been ramped up like this.

[rebekahb]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

Clan said that some in private industry had better medical than him.
Indicating that he is perturbed that he isn't getting the ne plus ultra from public employment.
Indicating a little naivete?

Murf

PS: Excuse me, but I have to go make a quiche lorraine now....

I just caught up and I don't think he was perturbed. I think it was just a statement. It seemed to me as he was just stating what he views from his experience. I could be wrong:

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Murf993

So like I posted earlier, any unions job is to represent it's members. If they get them a decent pension and benefits than they are doing their job. Why so much anger at this?

Don't act like it's just me. This is why I post learned articles.
Did you read the articles?
Some of the tactics promoted by the Texas lawyer are pretty gross & improper.
Many, including those in Suffolk Co., resent what they see as a shakedown by corrupt elected officials & police, as stated in that story.
But public corruption is a very hard nut to crack, often. Many elected in Suffolk have been arrested or accused of wrong.
So make what you can, but pls without threatening the welfare of citizens with slowdowns, untruths, or whatever.
Serve.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by TiMSport

Sorry for cutting in as I've been watching this thread the past couple of hours or so and may have not read up on earlier discussions.

What is going on up there in Canada regarding this quarantine stuff that requires private security personnel to be visiting houses??

If you fly into Canada you must have a clear covid test, plus book a hotel room at a government approved facility for 3 days as you will require a second clear covid test after you land, then you must quarantine at your home for 14 days. The federal government can't possibly have police check every single person so they have hired private security companies. It has been a monumental cluster.....!

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

Don't act like it's just me. This is why I post learned articles.
Did you read the articles?
Some of the tactics promoted by the Texas lawyer are pretty gross & improper.
Many, including those in Suffolk Co., resent what they see as a shakedown by corrupt elected officials & police, as stated in that story.
But public corruption is a very hard nut to crack, often. Many elected in Suffolk have been arrested or accused of wrong.
So make what you can, but pls without threatening the welfare of citizens with slowdowns, untruths, or whatever.
Serve.

I did read the articles and I commented much earlier. Just a couple of points, the media tends to have an anti-police bias, that and that is just two articles and you are using this to paint policing and their unions with a pretty broad brush. Sedan_Clan and I have both responded with our experience which is actual first hand real life experience not that of a journalist. We have both qualified that there are problems with some of the things reported. You seem to be pretty upset that police unions work for their members and as a result police officers benefit from better compensation and benefits.

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Murf993

It's clear that he has a pretty strong anti police bias, there really isn't much point in exchanging with him as you try to have a reasonable conversation with him and he doesn't want to engage civilly. Not the first time, he's been ramped up like this.

Murf#2, you cops have leveled this cut on people, & I think even me, before. What a cop-out.
Better would be to try & understand the view point of others, even detractors of our system of policing.
Anyone want to go back & see when Clan lowered this conversation by saying I have no reading comprehension (& then later, that I have no reading comprehension, and later, when Clan said I have no reading....)? Meanwhile, I'm the only one posting real journalism.
I didn't think so.

Murf

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

Murf#2, you cops have leveled this cut on people, & I think even me, before. What a cop-out.
Better would be to try & understand the view point of others, even detractors of our system of policing.
Anyone want to go back & see when Clan lowered this conversation by saying I have no reading comprehension (& then later, that I have no reading comprehension, and later, when Clan said I have no reading....)? Meanwhile, I'm the only one posting real journalism.
I didn't think so.

Murf

I try to post in a polite manner, I try not to use tone but your posts come across full of it. I do understand how other folks feel, I spent over 30 years listening to folks, I have always tried to see the world from the other persons perspective. I responded with all of this in mind, I think you and I and Sedan_Clan will have to agree to disagree. You read some articles, if I recall you have had negative interactions with LE in the past, but I did the job for over 30 years, you haven't walked in my shoes. I have been on the other side though, both good and bad experiences with LE. Not everyone in LE is good, but I'd say in my experience it's in the high 90 percentile that do a good job.

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Murf993

I did read the articles and I commented much earlier. Just a couple of points, the media tends to have an anti-police bias, that and that is just two articles and you are using this to paint policing and their unions with a pretty broad brush. Sedan_Clan and I have both responded with our experience which is actual first hand real life experience not that of a journalist. We have both qualified that there are problems with some of the things reported. You seem to be pretty upset that police unions work for their members and as a result police officers benefit from better compensation and benefits.

If anyone wants a more neutral & informative discussion of these articles, you can go to the NYT website & read the comments.

"Kev Montrose, COMarch 27 Times Pick:
I used to live next door in Nassau County. We left it because of politicians folding to the police union on money.
The police in both counties are overpaid and underworked.
The counties cannot afford the police. The taxes on the people that live their is unaffordable. People that live there can't save enough for retirement, because of the property and school taxes.
It's time for common sense when it comes to what a police officer is worth on the job, and what he gets when he retires.
I'm on Colorado now and you won't believe what the taxes are here.
Maybe it's time to study other police departments around the country."

LDurk Rochester, NYMarch 27:
"The comparison of police or fire unions to the military is an apt one. The rank and file cannot dictate the terms by which they serve. Period. That is not their role. They have been hired to serve not to lead or to rule over their county patch of real estate."

"Me MontanaMarch 27 Times Pick:
It's sad that we're all arguing that salaries in the $200,000+ range are proof of the outsize control of the union. Police should be making that much all across the country for the job they do. As should so many other jobs. Even while we rail against the bloat of the 1% and the policies that enable them to hoard money, it seems we also have bought into a narrative they want us to have - that teachers, cops, social workers, firefighters, CNAs (anyone except CEOs, lawyers, reality tv stars and surgeons) should be living on bare bones wages.
That being said, this union seems out of control and dangerous. The performance reviews that garner raises into the high salary range should be for demonstrations of anti-racism, fair treatment of suspects, trauma-informed practices, education and training around implicit bias and other social issues, successful diversion of crime, participation in prevention programs and so on and so on. The peoples plan sounds spot on. We need it in every county. And we need performance reviews of public servants to be public record."

"RickNYC BrooklynMarch 27:
@adam smith funny thing is, I read your comment exactly the opposite of how (I think) you meant it, and agreed immediately! Only after reading some replies did it dawn on me that you might be applauding a job well done by the Suffolk cops.
I took it to mean that there wasn’t much crime in that mostly rural, very wealthy, very white enclave, so why have such well compensated police?
You can place an officer in a rowboat and claim the rowboat has zero percent crime, but it doesn’t mean it’s because the cop was doing a great job. The swagger in which these union heads operate is only comparable to politicians and the mafia."

"AnObserver Upstate NYMarch 27 Times Pick:
One interesting thing to track about police union contracts is arrest rates. A relatively standard provision in contracts is the 4 hour minimum. This means an officer who makes an arrest and goes past end of tour gets 4 hours OT, go to court on their time off (even for a 15 minutes) 4 hours. This give real monetary value to arrests, especially low risk arrests like simple narcotics or solicitation, and it all adds up very quickly. Now, include the fact that this OT, especially in the later years of their career is added into their pensions and in public safety it's not just a pension bomb of unfunded liabilities, it's a nuke. The upshot of this is that to a great degree police contracts have monetized arrests and have contributed in their own way to the mass incarceration problems we have in this country as well as the exploding public pension issues."

Lynn k New YorkMarch 27 Times Pick:
Steve Bellone received $843,000 from police unions in the last election cycle and then negotiated their contract. Nothing more needs to be said."

"Osito commented March 27 Osito Brooklyn, NYMarch 27 Times Pick:
These salaries are absurd. The benefits are probably even more outrageous. Isn't there anything Suffolk County taxpayers can do to cut these insane salaries? They're like 2-3x the average for cops in the tri-state area."

"Dave DiRoma commented March 26 Baldwinsville Times Pick:
I lived in Suffolk County for nearly 20 years. When I first moved there from upstate NY I thought my co-workers were exaggerating when they talked about the levels of corruption in the town and county governments and the huge payouts that retiring police officers could earn by just following the rules in place. It didn’t take long to learn it was all true."

Couple of points:
-The public bends over backwards to support good policing.
-As much of the media as not bend over backwards to support the police.
-I follow Peter Lynch, head of the NYC police union. He is scum. He deals in undermining the positions of the mayor, working dishonest & unneeded distrust of government into the populace. Been there, done that.
-I'm not sure why you are arguing with me.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

If anyone wants a more neutral & informative discussion of these articles, you can go to the NYT website & read the comments.
Couple of points:
-The public bends over backwards to support good policing.
-As much of the media as not bend over backwards to support the police.
-I follow Peter Lynch, head of the NYC police union. He is scum. He deals in undermining the positions of the mayor, working dishonest & unneeded distrust of government into the populace. Been there, done that.
-I'm not sure why you are arguing with me.

I'm not sure I'd be taking the side of the Mayor of NYC given his track record over the last year or so.

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Murf993

I try to post in a polite manner, I try not to use tone but your posts come across full of it.... I recall you have had negative interactions with LE in the past,....

Re, your first point, this is often an 'eye of the beholder' thing, but nobody want their ass handed to them. I spent ~25 yrs in advertising; I know how to use, and comprehend (!), language.
It's true, too many of those tax-men-in-cute-uniforms do pester me, but what do I do, 15mph above in good weather?
next, I've also said what good & extensive relations I've had with police (you don't remember?). Like the Captain & two Lt. who played so much Running Bases on the beach with Gramps & a dozen kids; took us fishing for Snappers (baby bluefish); watched us in the surf, etc. Or Jerry, our small-town cop (had two!), who was always in my nabes garage the night before the dirt track race, watching the tuneup. Or the cops that loved to hang with us in the lifeguard shack on the weekends; or how we coddled them when they brought a pittie they had shot into the emergency room;.....
Cops are often OK, but they put their pants on one leg at a time.

Murf

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Murf993

I'm not sure I'd be taking the side of the Mayor of NYC given his track record over the last year or so.

Our mayor is an easy target. But he doesn't try to rip down the system.

[Joekerr]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

Clan said that some in private industry had better medical than him.
Indicating that he is perturbed that he isn't getting the ne plus ultra from public employment.
Indicating a little naivete?

Murf

PS: Excuse me, but I have to go make a quiche lorraine now....

Please read it again. I'm pretty good at picking up on tones and subtleties generally, and I read nothing that suggested he was perturbed.

Quite the opposite actually. I think he was pointing out / debunking the premise that police had plans much better than anyone else, and to that end, he used the example that there were definitely individuals / companies in the private sector that offered better plans. I detected no animosity.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by rebekahb

I just caught up and I don't think he was perturbed. I think it was just a statement. It seemed to me as he was just stating what he views from his experience. I could be wrong:

Originally Posted by Joekerr

Please read it again. I'm pretty good at picking up on tones and subtleties generally, and I read nothing that suggested he was perturbed.

Quite the opposite actually. I think he was pointing out / debunking the premise that police had plans much better than anyone else, and to that end, he used the example that there were definitely individuals / companies in the private sector that offered better plans. I detected no animosity.

You two are spot on! MahaloM3 is another So.Cal cop who debunked some of the stuff in Texas article (...at least as it pertains to California agencies) and Littlebear completely elided over it because it didn't fit his narrative.

[TiMSport]

Originally Posted by Murf993

If you fly into Canada you must have a clear covid test, plus book a hotel room at a government approved facility for 3 days as you will require a second clear covid test after you land, then you must quarantine at your home for 14 days. The federal government can't possibly have police check every single person so they have hired private security companies. It has been a monumental cluster.....!

Got it, thanks for explaining.

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

You two are spot on! MahaloM3 is another So.Cal cop who debunked some of the stuff in Texas article (...at least as it pertains to California agencies) and Littlebear completely elided over it because it didn't fit his narrative.

Clan & JoeKerr both like that word, 'perturbed' eh? I will admit to poetic license, but my point still stands (which is that it is naive to think a public employee will have benefits like the best of private companies give). But that is a very minor, not even peripheral point of our discussion. Get over it!
And I did not totally 'elide' your points! I am very happy to hear we are not speaking of your place of employ. But for the what, 5th time(?), the authors did not once mention your haunts. I'm sorry, it is not about you!

Murf

[Joekerr]

Originally Posted by Littlebear

Clan & JoeKerr both like that word, 'perturbed' eh? I will admit to poetic license, but my point still stands (which is that it is naive to think a public employee will have benefits like the best of private companies give). But that is a very minor, not even peripheral point of our discussion. Get over it!
And I did not totally 'elide' your points! I am very happy to hear we are not speaking of your place of employ. But for the what, 5th time(?), the authors did not once mention your haunts. I'm sorry, it is not about you!

Murf

You used the word 'perturbed' first, in the quote I replied to. In order for me to relate to you on your level (which, the lower you go, is becoming increasingly difficult), would it not be fair to use similar language?

You pointed out an article. Sedan read it. Sedan pointed out that he disagreed with a point in the article (a few actually), but one was the idea that the police had "cadillac health plans" and suggested that was in fact not the case. He pointed out that many private companies offer similar or better plans.

You then come along and suggest that "my point still stands (which is that it is naive to think a public employee will have benefits like the best of private companies give). But that is a very minor, not even peripheral point of our discussion. Get over it!"

This is precisely what Sedan has said. Further, you appear then to disagree with the article you posted, which suggests that in fact, public employees have benefits like the best private companies. Have you been as vociferous in contacting the author of that article to express your disagreement as you have been here, attempting to make a mountain out of what isn't even a molehill? Given that both of you agree on this point?

As to your claim that the authors are not speaking about Sedan's place of employ, fair, but then are you only confining your comments to precisely that geographic region of which the authors are focused? Because you've used a lot of general, broad sweeping words like "police" that suggest you are not limiting yourself. And if not, why should Sedan be limited?

Come now, you can do better. Give me something logical and we can argue.

[Littlebear]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

You used the word 'perturbed' first, in the quote I replied to. In order for me to relate to you on your level (which, the lower you go, is becoming increasingly difficult), would it not be fair to use similar language?

You pointed out an article. Sedan read it. Sedan pointed out that he disagreed with a point in the article (a few actually), but one was the idea that the police had "cadillac health plans" and suggested that was in fact not the case. He pointed out that many private companies offer similar or better plans.

You then come along and suggest that "my point still stands (which is that it is naive to think a public employee will have benefits like the best of private companies give). But that is a very minor, not even peripheral point of our discussion. Get over it!"

This is precisely what Sedan has said. Further, you appear then to disagree with the article you posted, which suggests that in fact, public employees have benefits like the best private companies. Have you been as vociferous in contacting the author of that article to express your disagreement as you have been here, attempting to make a mountain out of what isn't even a molehill? Given that both of you agree on this point?

As to your claim that the authors are not speaking about Sedan's place of employ, fair, but then are you only confining your comments to precisely that geographic region of which the authors are focused? Because you've used a lot of general, broad sweeping words like "police" that suggest you are not limiting yourself. And if not, why should Sedan be limited?

Come now, you can do better. Give me something logical and we can argue.

Joe, if you don't find it amusing when Clan compares his benefit package to the best private ones (like Goldman?), to his public package, I wonder who is the socialist now. Notice nobody took up the comparo with the benefit packages of health pros or teachers.

But this health care discussion is still a distraction. Go back & read about how the police unions make control of pols, hiways, towns, etc. possible.
Was it my first post in this series where I asked why do you think the military has no unions? Clan said, "Because they are the military!". Is anyone blaming me for the shallowness of this exchange?

Murf

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

You used the word 'perturbed' first, in the quote I replied to. In order for me to relate to you on your level (which, the lower you go, is becoming increasingly difficult), would it not be fair to use similar language?

You pointed out an article. Sedan read it. Sedan pointed out that he disagreed with a point in the article (a few actually), but one was the idea that the police had "cadillac health plans" and suggested that was in fact not the case. He pointed out that many private companies offer similar or better plans.

You then come along and suggest that "my point still stands (which is that it is naive to think a public employee will have benefits like the best of private companies give). But that is a very minor, not even peripheral point of our discussion. Get over it!"

This is precisely what Sedan has said. Further, you appear then to disagree with the article you posted, which suggests that in fact, public employees have benefits like the best private companies. Have you been as vociferous in contacting the author of that article to express your disagreement as you have been here, attempting to make a mountain out of what isn't even a molehill? Given that both of you agree on this point?

As to your claim that the authors are not speaking about Sedan's place of employ, fair, but then are you only confining your comments to precisely that geographic region of which the authors are focused? Because you've used a lot of general, broad sweeping words like "police" that suggest you are not limiting yourself. And if not, why should Sedan be limited?

Come now, you can do better. Give me something logical and we can argue.

He's not going to get it. We might as well move on from it bro.