December 12, 2012
GALVESTON, Texas - In the recent general election the race for county sheriff pitted two deputies against each other, both high ranking veteran deputies.
One was a major who was born a Democrat then reborn a Republican. The other, a captain, was born a democrat and remained true to his birthright. 2012 was the second time the Republicans swept the elections over what for over 100 years had been a democratically controlled county.
The born again major won, even though the incumbent Sheriff, a popular, lifelong lawman in the county, endorsed the true, blue democratic captain.
As sure as the sky is blue, as soon as the votes were counted, those on the loosing side (the captain and those who openly supported him) started looking for other jobs, some probably before the votes were counted. And as sure as the sky is blue, the new high-sheriff let it be known who among the ranks would remain among the ranks and who would be dumped back to the bottom of the pile.
It is no secret in the department that the devoted democratic challenger and his followers will not be welcome among the disciples of the born-again Republican and his band of deputies. The un-elected captain's best buddy, another captain, will wake up a patrol deputy one morning after the swearing-in ceremony.
A lieutenant, chummy with the newly ordained, will replaced the defrocked captain. Others will jump ship in search of paychecks in other, not so political, cop shops, if there are those. A lady member of the command staff is said to be taking over a retiring major's job in the crossbar hotel.
And, as happens when two old warhorses do battle with each other, the loser will gallop off to a far and distant land where he may still pack his pistol and wear the badge, maybe even patrolling the hallways of a high school somewhere.
This sort of thing is not unique to Galveston County, although Galveston County does have it's own brand of politics, and it's merciless.
It makes the case for civil service for law enforcement officers whether municipal or county. Sheriff's deputies, because they work for a politician, are seldom afforded the job protection of civil service. Politicians enjoy the 'strong arm' method of ruling, rather than leading and inspiring.
I have always believed Sheriffs, Constables and judges should be elected on a non-partisan basis. No Democrats or Republicans or green or tea, just good people who can prove to voters they know what the hell they're doing and can get the job done.
That's the way I see it. How about you?
Breck
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Sunday, April 1, 2012
When Did We Become Police 'Subjects'?
When did people become 'subjects' anyway?
There was a time in history, when masters owned slaves, or when kings and queens ruled the land, that people were referred to as their subjects. But today!
Why do police describe us as their subjects? Do they have such limited knowledge of the language they don't know the difference between a man and a woman, or a boy and a girl, that they must use a generic term for us all?
Below is a press release from the Beaumont, Texas Police Department. In it, the man is their 'subject'. He was no longer a man once he got on their radar.
It's not just the Beaumont Police Department, it is, with rare exception, the same will all law enforcement agencies.
Note also, they spell 'officer' with a capital O. Since when? So, the officers, spell their position with a capital O, and the people they are sworn to serve are 'subjects.'
I should feel insulted, but I'm not, because this is a hand-me-down indescrestion that no one in a leadership position has even noticed, much less made an effort to improve.
Posted :03-31-2012 at 09:45 PM Subject:Beaumont Police Attempt To Talk Out A Barricaded Subject.
On 3/31/2012 at 7:45 PM Beaumont Police Officers were dispatched to the 2200 block of Briar Cliff in reference to an intoxicated subject that had barricaded himself in his house. Beaumont Police Officers negotiated with the subject for approximately 2 hours before they were able to convince him to come out and allow Officers to check his well being and seek medical treatment. All ended well.
There was a time in history, when masters owned slaves, or when kings and queens ruled the land, that people were referred to as their subjects. But today!
Why do police describe us as their subjects? Do they have such limited knowledge of the language they don't know the difference between a man and a woman, or a boy and a girl, that they must use a generic term for us all?
Below is a press release from the Beaumont, Texas Police Department. In it, the man is their 'subject'. He was no longer a man once he got on their radar.
It's not just the Beaumont Police Department, it is, with rare exception, the same will all law enforcement agencies.
Note also, they spell 'officer' with a capital O. Since when? So, the officers, spell their position with a capital O, and the people they are sworn to serve are 'subjects.'
I should feel insulted, but I'm not, because this is a hand-me-down indescrestion that no one in a leadership position has even noticed, much less made an effort to improve.
Posted :03-31-2012 at 09:45 PM Subject:Beaumont Police Attempt To Talk Out A Barricaded Subject.
On 3/31/2012 at 7:45 PM Beaumont Police Officers were dispatched to the 2200 block of Briar Cliff in reference to an intoxicated subject that had barricaded himself in his house. Beaumont Police Officers negotiated with the subject for approximately 2 hours before they were able to convince him to come out and allow Officers to check his well being and seek medical treatment. All ended well.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Some People Are Just Rotten
March 22, 2012 - Galveston, Texas
Yesterday I reported in The Police News Online the burglary of a couple's home in Galveston during which $3500 was stolen. The couple just happened to both be Sheriff's deputies and the $3500 was money they raised for the wife's sister, a cancer victim.
The story didn't say why the couple had the money in their home, but it didn't seem important. The focus of the story was that the money was for the suffering sister. But guess what many readers focused on.
Online comments, both on The Police News and in the forum of Galveston's local newspaper, were critical of the couple for having the money in their home, for not putting it in the bank, and for not hiding it in a secret place in their home? "Stupid cops," exclaimed one writer, "of all people, they should know better."
This went on and on. The local newspaper elected to publish them. The Police News didn't. We considered it just one more opportunity for people to 'pile on' some cops when they see an opportunity.
Some of the decent comments asked how they could help the sister, where they could send a contribution to help replace the stolen money.
Just to explain why the money was in the couple's home, here it is. The benefit at which the money was raised was on a weekend and banks were closed. So the money was taken home to wait until Monday to deposit it. So there! You jerks! Should they have buried it in the backyard, or what?
Some people are no damned good.
Read the original story: http://thepolicenews.net/default.aspx?act=Newsletter.aspx&category=News+1-2&newsletterid=32183&menugroup=Home
Yesterday I reported in The Police News Online the burglary of a couple's home in Galveston during which $3500 was stolen. The couple just happened to both be Sheriff's deputies and the $3500 was money they raised for the wife's sister, a cancer victim.
The story didn't say why the couple had the money in their home, but it didn't seem important. The focus of the story was that the money was for the suffering sister. But guess what many readers focused on.
Online comments, both on The Police News and in the forum of Galveston's local newspaper, were critical of the couple for having the money in their home, for not putting it in the bank, and for not hiding it in a secret place in their home? "Stupid cops," exclaimed one writer, "of all people, they should know better."
This went on and on. The local newspaper elected to publish them. The Police News didn't. We considered it just one more opportunity for people to 'pile on' some cops when they see an opportunity.
Some of the decent comments asked how they could help the sister, where they could send a contribution to help replace the stolen money.
Just to explain why the money was in the couple's home, here it is. The benefit at which the money was raised was on a weekend and banks were closed. So the money was taken home to wait until Monday to deposit it. So there! You jerks! Should they have buried it in the backyard, or what?
Some people are no damned good.
Read the original story: http://thepolicenews.net/default.aspx?act=Newsletter.aspx&category=News+1-2&newsletterid=32183&menugroup=Home
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Listen for 'hedge words' in media reporting
March 21, 2012
Read this headline and see if you get it the same way I do.
"Thieves allegedly steal cancer patient's money from Galveston deputies"
That comes from one of the 3 major TV stations in Houston reporting on the home of a Galveston couple, both deputy sheriff's, which was burglarized. Inside the home was $3500 which they had raised in a benefit for the woman's sister, a cancer victim.
Now, this TV station says the 'Thieves allegedly steal" the money. To me, it means that TV station has doubts about the money being stolen. Or, they don't believe their source of the story, which was the daily newspaper in Galveston.
I am amazed everyday at the writings of some of these so-called 'news professionals' who throw in an 'allegedly' every other line and refer to everyone, regardless of circumstances, as a suspect.
If a robber is shot and killed by police running out of a convenience store with a bag of money in one had and a blazing gun in the other, wearing a mask, and the store clerk chasing him, the so-called 'major media' will call that dead gunman a 'suspect', rather than a 'dead gunman' or 'robber'.
What is it with these media types? Are they so paranoid? They profess to be all this and all that, yet they hedge in their reporting.
They like to claim, "Only this channel or that channel" has the story. Then they dice it with 'allegedly' and 'suspect' and other hedge words.
Listen closely. See how many times you can count the 'allegedly's' and 'suspects' in one story when it is clearly a hedge word.
Breck Porter
www.ThePoliceNews.net
Read this headline and see if you get it the same way I do.
"Thieves allegedly steal cancer patient's money from Galveston deputies"
That comes from one of the 3 major TV stations in Houston reporting on the home of a Galveston couple, both deputy sheriff's, which was burglarized. Inside the home was $3500 which they had raised in a benefit for the woman's sister, a cancer victim.
Now, this TV station says the 'Thieves allegedly steal" the money. To me, it means that TV station has doubts about the money being stolen. Or, they don't believe their source of the story, which was the daily newspaper in Galveston.
I am amazed everyday at the writings of some of these so-called 'news professionals' who throw in an 'allegedly' every other line and refer to everyone, regardless of circumstances, as a suspect.
If a robber is shot and killed by police running out of a convenience store with a bag of money in one had and a blazing gun in the other, wearing a mask, and the store clerk chasing him, the so-called 'major media' will call that dead gunman a 'suspect', rather than a 'dead gunman' or 'robber'.
What is it with these media types? Are they so paranoid? They profess to be all this and all that, yet they hedge in their reporting.
They like to claim, "Only this channel or that channel" has the story. Then they dice it with 'allegedly' and 'suspect' and other hedge words.
Listen closely. See how many times you can count the 'allegedly's' and 'suspects' in one story when it is clearly a hedge word.
Breck Porter
www.ThePoliceNews.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
