 |
 |
 |
 |
#1336998 - 04/07/12 12:03 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: VM Smith]
|
Top Dog
Senior Member
Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 1524
Loc: On the Dog House.
|
I am going to agree with you at this point. An accredited county police force and a group of Troopers that have been nothing but class whenever I have dealt with them.
It would be nice to have a better picture than what was drawn up in the dissolution. That read, "take all of our assets and our employees". The real discussions didn't seem to start until after the vote.
The other thing to remember is, like it or not, the County Sheriff becomes the person in charge. I happen to like Jack. It is an elected position. People might want the Townies gone and should remember you might not always get the man in charge you want after the election results are in.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
#1337011 - 04/07/12 02:34 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: Top Dog]
|
VM Smith
Diamond Member
Registered: 11/28/05
Posts: 34300
Loc: Reality
|
I happen to like Jack. It is an elected position. People might want the Townies gone and should remember you might not always get the man in charge you want after the election results are in.
I happen to like him, too, although I can't claim to know him that well.
It is elected, and thus subject to change, but that might not always be a bad thing. OTOH, with an appointed position, sometimes you can't get a person out of there with dynamite, even if the need for a change has become apparent. It might not be technically a civil service position (I think CS may be just national; IDK), but if not, then it's similar, I guess.
IOW, there are hiring and firing rules, or maybe conventions, and the firing party may have to show proper cause, and render due process, etc., etc.; by the time you finally are able to get rid of the person, he may be retired.
What I remember about the pre-dissolution info that was put out was that the Sheriff gave a quote for taking over the SFPD's duties, which was in addition to the SCSD policing that was already being done in SF, and that the quote was for less than the projected costs of the SFPD expansion. And since then, it seems that the SFPD is engaging in rampant mission creep, involving both personnel and equipment, so that the comparison would come out even more advantageously on the side of the Sheriff's quote, if done under present circumstances, and those to come.
I think that perhaps the SFPD were...not quite fully disclosing what its budget would need to be, let's say, in order to hang on to their fiefdom and jobs.
I want to remind everyone that it's not just a matter of personnel numbers, but also how much the personnel of the respective cop shops are paid. Some argue that the SFPD are good people, doing a good and necessary job, and that they deserve it. Well, true, but aren't we, and don't we, all?
More money's always nice, but government workers, in general, have been the "top rail" for some time, and that always ends up in revolution, as in the orderly electoral revolution against the spendthrift village government. The people who pay, the taxpayers, most of whom aren't government workers, won't put up with the disparity for long, or at least not willingly.
But, instead of fully embracing the seminal cause and purpose of dissolution, and getting rid of one of the prime examples of the prior spendthrift mismanagement, the problem has now been exported to the entire town. That's both stupid and wrong.
And, while I can see why two levels of government are not needed in a unit as small as the ToSF, it remains true that the affected TooV residents were disenfranchised, and are now more heavily taxed without representation, and that is just plain wrong.
I realize that state law both prescribed and proscribed various actions regarding dissolution; what was to be done with the pd, upon dissolution, FI, but I think the pols used that as a fig leaf, and that both Mr. Nozzolio and Mr. Same could have fought harder for those who were ultimately, in this case, disenfranchised. They threw up their hands and said, "Nothing I can do; it's the law!".
I believe that many, or even most, politicians, initially, anyway, intend to serve the the voters, who are people, of course. But being human, and readily captured by the siren song of power, politicians too often end up merely counting the votes, which in this case were heavily concentrated in the village, and which are merely means to the end of gaining and keeping power.
They'll tell you that it's a democracy, and that they're only serving the people, but I'm old enough to view that with a jaundiced eye, and just because it might be true, it's not that simple, and it's not a complete description. The people who seek power are also people who enjoy exercising power over others, and ordering their affairs, with or without their permission, and that's not just a mere variation of thought; it can be described as pathological:
: being such to a degree that is extreme, excessive, or markedly abnormal <a pathological liar> <pathological fear>
It's as if the very type which goes into politics is the very type that shouldn't; it's not good for us, or even them; it only encourages their worst aspects and instincts.
Well, off my soapbox, and out to the cold sunshine to throw the tennis ball for Robert the Dog...he always makes me feel better.
I love that old guy...I hope he never decides to run for office. It's bad enough, now that he's passed the Bar, that he's always throwing in Latin phrases, and snickering when he puts something over on me...
Edited by VM Smith (04/07/12 02:37 PM)
_________________________
Well I know what's right, I got just one life...
But I'll stand my ground and I won't back down
Petty
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1337076 - 04/07/12 11:18 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: VM Smith]
|
Danny Downer
Member
Registered: 03/23/12
Posts: 28
Loc: Seneca County
|
This is DISGUSTING, to let our law enforcement agencies to be bashed.
There were a few bad apples that were dealt with though the Courts and found to be mostly baseless.
This type of CIVIC abuse of our agencies that protect us is way out of line.
Come on JIM, you really should have shut this thread down once the negativity by anonomous posters started spewing their HATE.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1337089 - 04/08/12 04:59 AM
Re: SFPD
[Re: Danny Downer]
|
back again
Member
Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 259
Loc: ny
|
Really tell us more, you dont say.. Thinmg about forums they are thei for conversations about hot button topics, If the majority opinion is an opinion you dont like dont read it
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1337093 - 04/08/12 07:02 AM
Re: SFPD
[Re: Danny Downer]
|
Top Dog
Senior Member
Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 1524
Loc: On the Dog House.
|
Show me where I bashed the police.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1337137 - 04/08/12 05:23 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: Danny Downer]
|
VM Smith
Diamond Member
Registered: 11/28/05
Posts: 34300
Loc: Reality
|
This is DISGUSTING, to let our law enforcement agencies to be bashed.
There were a few bad apples that were dealt with though the Courts and found to be mostly baseless.
This type of CIVIC abuse of our agencies that protect us is way out of line.
Come on JIM, you really should have shut this thread down once the negativity by anonomous posters started spewing their HATE.
Cops are representative of the general population, in that some are very good, some of them are pretty good, some are pretty bad, and some are really bad. Trouble is, a really bad person, given some power, can do a lot of damage, because the power confers opportunity to do evil. Temptation to do wrong is always there, for all of us; most of us, including most cops, resist the temptation, for various reasons. But a bad person who happens to be in LE has less to restrain him than does the average person.
A somewhat analogous situation is that, among doctors, the rate of morphine addiction has been said to be 30 times that of the general population.
That doesn't mean that doctors are bad, or that they are disproportionately people who were always destined to be junkies; they just have more opportunity and temptation. Same way with some cops, but with the difference that the doc doesn't create a victim by his action.
I do occasionally say various uncomplimentary things about cops, such as when I read about a particularly egregious case of abuse. But, I realize that the abusers are a small % of cops. However, they do a disproportionate amount of damage, not only to society as a whole, but also, sad to say, to the public perception of cops in general.
Two points:
For some purposes, I lump cops together with other government employees and beauracrats, and when that class is taken together, there are too many of them, and they are paid too much, when compared to the remaining population.
Second, I realize that most cops are just doing their jobs. I think humanity could do just fine, and even better than now, without government, but since most people get vertigo just thinking about that possibility, we're going to have government, maybe for a good while longer, and maybe forever.
And if we're going to have government, then that government is going to have its enforcement arm...cops.
Fine. But, while since I was born the US population has approximately doubled, I'll bet that the number of laws has FAR more than doubled since 1950, although I won't search the numbers.
I think, generally, that the only things that should be crimes are those things that actually hurt other people, in any way.
It's not that way anymore, and I think the slide into the pit started, or at least increased exponentially, with Nixon's drug war, and again, with the terrified, shaking in the boots response to 9/11. If you think it's still a free country, just take a plane trip, where you'll be treated like a common criminal, by the TSA, who are, in practice, cops without guns. I predict they'll have those before long.
Everything's a crime nowadays; federal, state, you name it. In the mere course of trying to do their jobs, cops are, of occupational necessity, in other citizens' faces far too much, and to a degree that is not conducive to a free society. It's been said that the average citizen breaks 3 laws a day, and that includes the majority who are trying hard not to break any law..
It didn't used to be that way, but that's what's happened to "Officer Friendly"; he's been buried under a blizzard of laws, and the "thin blue line' has become a fortress wall, dividing "us" from "them", in the manner a similar wall divides most of us from government workers in general. There's the public sector, and the private sector; them and us.
It doesn't have to be that way, and it shouldn't be, but it will be increasingly that way; government, once having claimed any power, never gives it up willingly, and usually tries to increase the degree of control and coercion.
You're right, Mr. Downer; there are only a few bad apples, but over the years, that small % of bad apples, doing bad things, has added up and run together in my head until I can hardly remember them all.
I do remember one, though. There was a jail CO who was trading cigs, cokes, breaks, etc., with female prisoners for sex. We took testimony from prisoners and former prisoners. They appeared, mostly, to be persons of low economic status. You know, just the kind of people whom the state routinely chews up and spits out, partly because of circumstance and what the person's done, and partly because it can get away with it. But that's a separate discussion.
Sometimes I'm of two minds about a general principle, and I think that this particular opportunity and temptation should have been easy to resist, if the perp had an ounce of class.
My point is that this worthless piece of crap was preying upon relatively powerless people, from a position of trust, authority, and power, who were, most of them, in the throes of nicotine withdrawal. As a former smoker, I know how persistently nasty that can be, and if it can make me take a dirty, short, used butt out or an ashtray and smoke it, I can see how some women would trade sex for a butt.
We were happy and proud to return a true bill; we knew we were taking a predator out of circulation, for a while at least, and giving him at least some punishment.
He was punished for that, but do you know what? I don't think most people fundamentally change over time, in their basic natures, and so I think that former CO is probably still a real piece of human trash. And do you know what else, Mr. Downer? That miserable excuse for a human being is just exactly the type of bad actor that has harmed the reputation of LE, and that's sad. He's not fit to hold a good cop's coffee cup.
Are you familiar with that case, Mr. downer? That little incident at the jail? Ah...it was a while ago...perhaps you've forgotten all about it, as most have, if they even knew of it then. Many wouldn't even consider it a significant event. Some would.
I don't think I owe you anything, Mr. Downer, including an explanation. I didn't bash cops in the prior post, and I don't care what you think about anything. You're just whining and agitating. I simply felt that I should clarify some of my positions to anyone else who may care.
Edited by VM Smith (04/08/12 07:08 PM)
_________________________
Well I know what's right, I got just one life...
But I'll stand my ground and I won't back down
Petty
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1338113 - 04/12/12 08:07 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: VM Smith]
|
Town Resident
Member
Registered: 04/22/10
Posts: 184
Loc: Seneca Falls
|
Simple question.
WHY CAN'T THE PEOPLE OF THE TOWN OF SENECA FALLS HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE TO KEEP THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR DISBAND THEM?
The taxpayer has the right to vote on this and has the right to see the true proposals including future budgets. This includes when the pd officers start putting in for the overtime they are not allowed to put in for yet.
The taxpayer deserves an honest proposal from the state police and the sheriff. If a town officer comes to my door begging to keep his job like they did with dissolution, i will be on the phone with the attorney general's office.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1340606 - 04/24/12 08:17 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: cwanky]
|
educated voter
Member
Registered: 08/29/11
Posts: 117
Loc: ny
|
How much does this TOWN PD cost us?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1340611 - 04/24/12 08:36 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: educated voter]
|
Town Resident
Member
Registered: 04/22/10
Posts: 184
Loc: Seneca Falls
|
1.3 Million with a capital MMMMMMMMMM
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1340612 - 04/24/12 08:44 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: Town Resident]
|
outwithsfpd
Member
Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 116
Loc: Seneca Falls, NY
|
Haha that is laughable. That was the village budget. The town force is double the officers and we have to pay for the chief's gas from syracuse to our joke of a town daily. Would not be surprised at all if it is now around 3-4 MILLION but we will never know cuz they wont tell us.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1340708 - 04/25/12 11:25 AM
Re: SFPD
[Re: cwanky]
|
VM Smith
Diamond Member
Registered: 11/28/05
Posts: 34300
Loc: Reality
|
How about complaining about all those county cars I see parked at private homes day and night.
When those deputies pull out of their drives to head to work in the patrol cars, at least it isn't attempted to be justified by saying that they are patrolling as soon as they hit the road...but two counties away from the area that pays them.
I mean, at least the Sheriff has a little fig leaf patched onto that one, although I consider it as a hidden benefit, disguised as a necessity. It's not even-handed, either; the deputies who live the farthest from work get more of a benefit, in saved gas and wear and tear on their own vehicles, which goes against the "same pay for the same job, if in the same locale, and assuming the same employer" fairness rule.
Maybe the sheriff really does have the patrolling aspect uppermost in mind; I'm just saying the policy effect is broader than that, and that it doesn't look good.
It might be a fair policy IF the cop doesn't also have to report in, in person, directly at the shop, ASAP, after leaving the house, and so stays on patrol. If he does have to show up there, he should pick up the car there.
In general, I say to keep the budgeted pay and bennies simple and clear, rather than have even the appearance of a sneaked-in-under-the-radar perk.
I could also go for having some of the Sheriff's cars based out of the South County jail, FI, and picked up there at shift start. Maybe they are already, but I'm assuming that they're all based in Waterloo.
That would not only save personal time, for some personnel, but might save some of the public expense and time of picking up in Waterloo, and then heading south to patrol. I'm assuming, while any car can be sent anywhere, that they try to divide up the county, for patrol, into n & s areas. There's always the middle, but the n & s county do meet there.
Most shift start meetings, if necessary, and/or customary, could be done by video conference.
_________________________
Well I know what's right, I got just one life...
But I'll stand my ground and I won't back down
Petty
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1340726 - 04/25/12 12:38 PM
Re: SFPD
[Re: VM Smith]
|
cwanky
Member
Registered: 06/29/07
Posts: 196
Loc: new york
|
How about complaining about all those county cars I see parked at private homes day and night. When those deputies pull out of their drives to head to work in the patrol cars, at least it isn't attempted to be justified by saying that they are patrolling as soon as they hit the road...but two counties away from the area that pays them. I mean, at least the Sheriff has a little fig leaf patched onto that one, although I consider it as a hidden benefit, disguised as a necessity. It's not even-handed, either; the deputies who live the farthest from work get more of a benefit, in saved gas and wear and tear on their own vehicles, which goes against the "same pay for the same job, if in the same locale, and assuming the same employer" fairness rule. Maybe the sheriff really does have the patrolling aspect uppermost in mind; I'm just saying the policy effect is broader than that, and that it doesn't look good. It might be a fair policy IF the cop doesn't also have to report in, in person, directly at the shop, ASAP, after leaving the house, and so stays on patrol. If he does have to show up there, he should pick up the car there. In general, I say to keep the budgeted pay and bennies simple and clear, rather than have even the appearance of a sneaked-in-under-the-radar perk. I could also go for having some of the Sheriff's cars based out of the South County jail, FI, and picked up there at shift start. Maybe they are already, but I'm assuming that they're all based in Waterloo. That would not only save personal time, for some personnel, but might save some of the public expense and time of picking up in Waterloo, and then heading south to patrol. I'm assuming, while any car can be sent anywhere, that they try to divide up the county, for patrol, into n & s areas. There's always the middle, but the n & s county do meet there. Most shift start meetings, if necessary, and/or customary, could be done by video conference.
Yes i get it but the point is the poster used as a basis for his rant the $$$$ involves and thus thrust upon him as a tax payer whn the SFPD chief takes a car out of county.
I just wonder why the same rant doesn't happen when several SCSD cars are on personal transportation. there is $$ wasted by the poster's point of view. What he is saying primarily is it is OK to burn $$ with SCSD metal off duty but not SFPD metal off duty.
i would submit there is more than a little hypocrisy there.
there is no such thing as a LITTLE PREGNANT you is or you you is not no grey areas.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator: FL1 Staff, FL1 Mod, FL1 Tek Deluxe, FL1 Mod 2, FL1 Office, FL1 Mod 3
|
|
