close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Save Money-Hire Police

Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by Patchman, Nov 26, 2011.

  1. From the LA Times Op-Ed page.


    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ridgewayheaton-police-20111122,0,5810908.story

    So the next time someone says "I pay taxes. I pay your salary," it'll be appropriate to tell them that in the long run, it's cheaper for them to pay even more taxes, so more cops can be hired. :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2011
  2. RyanNREMTP

    RyanNREMTP Inactive/Banned

    3,556
    4
    Jun 16, 2007
    Waco, Texas
    That article is going to fall on deaf ears more than anything. It's sad though, most places need more officers on the streets.
     


  3. Brucev

    Brucev

    9,189
    5
    Jul 19, 2009
    Good idea. Cutting essential services such as police and fire is a poor way to deal with budget issues. Better to cut less important areas or raise taxes if necessary.
     
  4. ClydeG19

    ClydeG19

    5,280
    969
    Oct 5, 2001
    Arizona
    I've heard from a few cities/towns that want to hire more officers, but have a lack of qualified applicants. In some places, it's a financial problem and in others it's a talent pool problem.
     
  5. Has been a consistent challenge for us as well.

    And no, taxes won't be raised in this deeply divided nation right now nor will leftists demand more cops on the streets. And citizens will continue to be caught in the crossfire.
     
  6. CAcop

    CAcop

    19,710
    2,335
    Jul 21, 2002
    California
    We have a success rate of applicants of 3-4% for entry level and 10% for academy grads/laterals. That means for our current 6 openings and only testing laterals/academy grads we need to have 60 people apply. We get about 1/2 of that when we test. In the time it will take use to get the 6 we will loose about that many due to attrition. We have been trying to get to authorized levels of staffing for two years now.

    I think the city likes it that way because they budget for X but they only have to pay X-5%. Then they can use that 5% as a savings account to spend on ther things throughout the year.

    Also this city is very liberal and it gets a bad rep in LE. We had two cadidates for SJPD turn us down when we gave them job offers. Only one had a solid offer from another agency.

    They also cut our pay to rediculous levels. Anyone who reads the fine print who is willing to relocate looks elsewhere.
     
  7. Mayhem like Me

    Mayhem like Me Semper Paratus

    17,852
    3,738
    Mar 13, 2001
    Behind the Green door
    Bruce I do agree with you on some things, as long as the police/Sheriff are not spending it on the flavor of the day social programs, if your community is affluent enough for the cops to babysit kids playing basketball you should have a real low violent crime index....

    Unfortunately voter like parks and we see that politicians need to budget like they live I first pay for necessities , then for frills ,so a city should look at Police, Fire, med units and sanitation, then the rest can get in line after the important things are paid for.. Parks should be at the bottom in tough times.
     
  8. rookie1

    rookie1

    742
    0
    Mar 3, 2009
    Iowa

    My Sgt. gave me this response to use when someone says that they pay taxes, or pay my salary. "If you pay my salary, your the one I need to talk to about a raise." I hate it when college students from another state say that. They don't pay for anything, let alone any tax within my state or city.
     
  9. janice6

    janice6 Silver Member

    31,051
    11,619
    Apr 4, 2006
    minnesota
    I don't believe cutting essential services has anything to do with saving money. I firmly believe it is a local/federal politicians way of telling the voter that he will be punished for not giving them the money they want (not need).

    If you (the voter) will not give us what we want, by god you can go without essential services and see what that's like.

    (I cannot see any good argument for cutting essential services for any reason. That's what Government is for).
     
  10. fastbolt

    fastbolt

    11,145
    2,367
    Jun 9, 2002
    CA Central Coast
    So, are they planning to pay them with the savings on future money saved by crimes averted?

    If keeping LE employed is saving so much money, why are states, counties and municipalities having to lay off so many of them?

    Probably due to budgets in the 'here & now'.

    Essential services are ... well, essential, right?

    Sometimes people may have strange ideas, or at least conflicting ideas, of what's an essential service, perhaps. Dunno.

    I feel badly for the young cops who have been losing their jobs.

    If I were a young person looking to enter LE nowadays, I'd give careful thought to the stability and funding of whatever government agency interested me before applying. Ditto the retirement system. I consider myself very fortunate indeed for my career choice in LE, since I didn't think of any of those things back then.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2011