Have you noticed how TV news likes to promote itself? How TV news anchors like to boast about the other TV anchors on the same station? What's with that anyway?
TV anchor Joe talks about all the great attributes of TV anchor Jane. Then TV anchor Jane, in a different spot, tells what a great guy TV anchor Joe is.
He's really involved in his community, she says about him. She really digs deep to find all the facts about a story, he says about her.
Why are they telling us this? If we didn't like what we were seeing, we wouldn't be watching. Can't we decide who we like and don't like without them helping us figure it out? Apparently they think we need convincing. They must suffer from lack of confidence if they feel it necessary to tell us over and over how wonderful and devoted they and their colleagues are.
Come on, just read the news. I'll decide if I like you or not.
And what about the way they promote their newscasts.
We do it best on Channel X.
Channel X, first on the scene, first with the news, first with the weather, first with this and that. You saw it first on X.
Apparently I already like Channel X. I'm watching it, aren't I? If I weren't watching it, I wouldn't be seeing all these promotion spots, so it wouldn't matter.
What Channel X should do, if it wants to convince non-Channel X viewers to watch Channel X, is to run commercials on Channels Y and Z. And Channels Y and Z could so the same on Channel X.
Just give me the news at five and six. I don't care what you guys think of each other, and I doubt others do either. I don't care where you buy your clothes, get your hair done, or what kind of deodorant you use.
Just read the news! That's all we want.
That's the way I see it. How about you?
Breck
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Come To Galveston Island, But B.Y.O.C.
I recently had a flashback to the billboard we all saw a couple of summers back, of Galveston Mayor Lyda Ann Thomas astride a Harley Davidson Motorcycle, all decked out in a bandana, black leather jacket, motorcycle boots, the whole nine yards. The billboard, at the causeway, faced incoming traffic and beckoned the 200,000 or so expected bikers to the Lone Star Motorcycle Rally. And they came.
Of course, part of the Mayor's job is to stimulate the local economy. It's the job of all city officials and park board officials and convention and tourist bureau people, and they will go to any limit to keep a steady flow of tourist dollars coming over to the south side of the big bridge. Their hopes and their missions are to coax the mulitudes to the island, leaving a good share of their assets and personal fortunes when they finally depart back to their homes on the north side of the big bridge. And this happens in more ways than one.
To be successful at enticing people to Galveston, these same officials must be very careful not mention some of the not-so-fun things these visitors may experience while enjoying the sun and fun on this exotic island.
We mustn't let them know that the crime rate on the island is at an all time high. They leave it to the media to sniff out these details. And we mustn't let them know that the number of policemen are at an all time low, less than three cops for every 1,000 residents. That's residents, people who actually live on the island. In the summer, when the beaches are full and the strand is busy, and the cars are bumper-to-bumper on the causeway, the ratio of cops to citizen is even further fractionalized.
About 45,000 of Galveston's pre-hurricane Ike residents still live here, down by 15,000, according to somebody in the press. We have about 153 cops on the island, so that means there are about two point something police for every one thousand islanders. Jamaica Beach has more than that. So does every other city in the county at last count, but those cities aren't trying to funnel hundreds of thousands of tourists into their cities.
It was recently announced that home and business burglaries have soared in Galveston. One would expect that the last thing a city would want to do when crime is soaring is to get rid of some of it's cops. Not so in Galveston. In Galveston, as crime increases, cops get hit with pay cuts and there is a great likelyhood that in April, some of them will be sent packing, in search of jobs elsewhere. What a welcome invitation to burglars, thieves and others in the crime business. I said, "crime business" not "anti-Crime business." Surely they will be delighted to see the steady flow of blue going north as they convoy into town with their burglar tools, guns, knives, hotwires, and whatever devices they use to pillage and plunder a defenseless island.
I picture a new billboard on the causeway of Lyda Ann on her motorcycle, all decked out in leather, waving people onto the island, with the caption, "Welcome to Galveston Island. B.Y.O.C.", Bring Your Own Cop.
The thing that city officials want us all to know is, they are running out of money. Hurricane Ike washed away the city treasury and even though the feds are sending money to stimulate the economy and save jobs, the jobs being saved are not cop jobs or firefighter jobs or jobs of many other city employees. Apparently, even though the President has announced these federal funds are specifically to prevent the layoff of cops and firefighters and other first responders, that does not apply in Galveston. Galveston instead will fix potholes, and make the beaches beautiful for all those tourist dollars they hope will return.
Oh, what summer fun the crooks will have. They will be back on the Seawall, watching and waiting as visitors leave their cars unattened and lay out on the beach for hours, or visit restaurants and shops, pouring money in the Galveston economy. They probably won't discover until a day or two later, when they are back home in Houston or Pasadena or Baytown or Louisiana, that the contents of their gloveboxes or center consoles are empty. Whatever valuables were left in their cars have been transferred to pawn shops and fences on the mainland or somewhere.
And the people who live in Galveston, dare not venture from their homes or businesses for very long periods of time for surely the burglars will come visiting, departing with their treasured belongings.
Where are the cops when all this is happening? Well, the cop assigned to that beat was probably busy with one of the other 333 people assigned to him. Actually, more like 999 since it's summertime and the population has tripled.
The invitation is open. Come to Galveston Island, where we are getting rid of cops as fast as we can, so we will have money to entertain you and your pocketbook, but you should B.Y.O.C.
Of course, part of the Mayor's job is to stimulate the local economy. It's the job of all city officials and park board officials and convention and tourist bureau people, and they will go to any limit to keep a steady flow of tourist dollars coming over to the south side of the big bridge. Their hopes and their missions are to coax the mulitudes to the island, leaving a good share of their assets and personal fortunes when they finally depart back to their homes on the north side of the big bridge. And this happens in more ways than one.
To be successful at enticing people to Galveston, these same officials must be very careful not mention some of the not-so-fun things these visitors may experience while enjoying the sun and fun on this exotic island.
We mustn't let them know that the crime rate on the island is at an all time high. They leave it to the media to sniff out these details. And we mustn't let them know that the number of policemen are at an all time low, less than three cops for every 1,000 residents. That's residents, people who actually live on the island. In the summer, when the beaches are full and the strand is busy, and the cars are bumper-to-bumper on the causeway, the ratio of cops to citizen is even further fractionalized.
About 45,000 of Galveston's pre-hurricane Ike residents still live here, down by 15,000, according to somebody in the press. We have about 153 cops on the island, so that means there are about two point something police for every one thousand islanders. Jamaica Beach has more than that. So does every other city in the county at last count, but those cities aren't trying to funnel hundreds of thousands of tourists into their cities.
It was recently announced that home and business burglaries have soared in Galveston. One would expect that the last thing a city would want to do when crime is soaring is to get rid of some of it's cops. Not so in Galveston. In Galveston, as crime increases, cops get hit with pay cuts and there is a great likelyhood that in April, some of them will be sent packing, in search of jobs elsewhere. What a welcome invitation to burglars, thieves and others in the crime business. I said, "crime business" not "anti-Crime business." Surely they will be delighted to see the steady flow of blue going north as they convoy into town with their burglar tools, guns, knives, hotwires, and whatever devices they use to pillage and plunder a defenseless island.
I picture a new billboard on the causeway of Lyda Ann on her motorcycle, all decked out in leather, waving people onto the island, with the caption, "Welcome to Galveston Island. B.Y.O.C.", Bring Your Own Cop.
The thing that city officials want us all to know is, they are running out of money. Hurricane Ike washed away the city treasury and even though the feds are sending money to stimulate the economy and save jobs, the jobs being saved are not cop jobs or firefighter jobs or jobs of many other city employees. Apparently, even though the President has announced these federal funds are specifically to prevent the layoff of cops and firefighters and other first responders, that does not apply in Galveston. Galveston instead will fix potholes, and make the beaches beautiful for all those tourist dollars they hope will return.
Oh, what summer fun the crooks will have. They will be back on the Seawall, watching and waiting as visitors leave their cars unattened and lay out on the beach for hours, or visit restaurants and shops, pouring money in the Galveston economy. They probably won't discover until a day or two later, when they are back home in Houston or Pasadena or Baytown or Louisiana, that the contents of their gloveboxes or center consoles are empty. Whatever valuables were left in their cars have been transferred to pawn shops and fences on the mainland or somewhere.
And the people who live in Galveston, dare not venture from their homes or businesses for very long periods of time for surely the burglars will come visiting, departing with their treasured belongings.
Where are the cops when all this is happening? Well, the cop assigned to that beat was probably busy with one of the other 333 people assigned to him. Actually, more like 999 since it's summertime and the population has tripled.
The invitation is open. Come to Galveston Island, where we are getting rid of cops as fast as we can, so we will have money to entertain you and your pocketbook, but you should B.Y.O.C.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Term "Rich Police" Stirs Emotions
Thursday, Feb. 5th, The Police News published two stories in which Galveston Police Officers were referred to as 'rich, overpaid police.' Both stories were about incidents in which the officers were involved which do not happen everyday.
One story involved officers rescuing a potential suicide jump from the 75 foot high Galveston Causeway into Galveston Bay. The other was about detectives and crime scene investigators at the scene of a brutal murder and probably savage sex assault.
Needless to say, our use of the terms 'rich and overpaid', brought an immediate assault from readers. "Are you stupid?" asked one reader.
Here is our explanation for our use of these dreaded words. On Jan. 25th, the publisher of Galveston's only newspaper, produced an editorial with the title line "Rich police bleeding island dry." We wanted to see what readers, and yes, the officers themselves, would have to say if we referred to them as 'rich and overpaid' in a story about their lifesaving and investigative performances in these two stories. Well, we found out. The emails began coming in immediately in a steady stream. One police officer even called by phone. He couldn't believe The Police News would do that.
This morning there is another editorial in the only newspaper in town, trying to sooth the wounds left by the first editorial and denying the use of specific words that were insinuated, but not used.
The paper denied using the word, 'overpaid' but said, "The city has a finite amount of money to spend on all Galveston's needs. So, every dime paid to the police and other employees affects what it can spend to fix potholes, improve drainage and repair broken traffic lights."
So, wouldn't the average reader take that to mean the police are 'overpaid' since we still have potholes, drainage pipes and traffic lights that are broken and not working? Wouldn't that mean that if we take enough money away from fire and police, we could fix all those things? Doesn't it sound like these cops are being overpaid?
Then the publisher unleashed an assault on police and fire unions and the fact they bargain with the city for wages and benefits. According to him, nothing good can come from this kind of system. Apparently that newspaper doesn't believe city officials and police can be trusted to bargain in good faith and reach an agreement that does not abuse the public treasury.
The median income in Galveston is $34, 153 according to the newspaper. Cops shouldn't make more than the people they serve apparently.
These police and firefighters are the same police and firefighters that remained on Galveston Island as Hurricane Ike assaulted the city, destroying property and killing people. They stayed on the island and protected the property of wealthy newspaper editors and publishers. They stayed on the island as newspaper employees ran for higher ground.
These rich police officers pulled a distraught woman from the top of the Galveston Causeway before she leapt to her death.
These rich cops are desperately trying to find and arrest the savage killer of a woman on Broadway who was beaten to death and probably raped.
Twenty of these rich cops are in graveyards around the city, having been killed while working the streets of Galveston. None of them died sitting in an air conditioned office writing letters to the editor or reading the newspaper.
These rich cops are also citizens. Citizens who get together every three years, sit down with their employer, and talk about such things as how much pay they can get in the next three year cycle, what of of insurance benefits the city can provide for their families, what kind of pension they can expect 20 or 25 years from now. They talk about the same issues that many other citizens talk about with their employers. Do newspaper employees have that privilege? I don't know, but what would be wrong with it if they did?
And by the way. Last month police and firefighters took a voluntary pay cut of 3% in an effort to help their city recover from the devastation left by Ike.
Did the price of the local newspaper go down, or is it still the same as before Ike?
These rich cops are sitting across the table with people we elect to take care of this for us. Do we not trust them to represent us fairly in these talks? Are we so stupid that we elect people to represent us that we can't trust? I think not.
I don't know about you, but if some deranged idiot bangs on my door in the middle of the night, or if some savage freak rapes and murders someone in my family, I hope some of those 'rich cops' take enough time away from counting their money to come help me and my family.
Breck Porter, Editor/Publisher
The Police News
editor@thepolicenews.net
One story involved officers rescuing a potential suicide jump from the 75 foot high Galveston Causeway into Galveston Bay. The other was about detectives and crime scene investigators at the scene of a brutal murder and probably savage sex assault.
Needless to say, our use of the terms 'rich and overpaid', brought an immediate assault from readers. "Are you stupid?" asked one reader.
Here is our explanation for our use of these dreaded words. On Jan. 25th, the publisher of Galveston's only newspaper, produced an editorial with the title line "Rich police bleeding island dry." We wanted to see what readers, and yes, the officers themselves, would have to say if we referred to them as 'rich and overpaid' in a story about their lifesaving and investigative performances in these two stories. Well, we found out. The emails began coming in immediately in a steady stream. One police officer even called by phone. He couldn't believe The Police News would do that.
This morning there is another editorial in the only newspaper in town, trying to sooth the wounds left by the first editorial and denying the use of specific words that were insinuated, but not used.
The paper denied using the word, 'overpaid' but said, "The city has a finite amount of money to spend on all Galveston's needs. So, every dime paid to the police and other employees affects what it can spend to fix potholes, improve drainage and repair broken traffic lights."
So, wouldn't the average reader take that to mean the police are 'overpaid' since we still have potholes, drainage pipes and traffic lights that are broken and not working? Wouldn't that mean that if we take enough money away from fire and police, we could fix all those things? Doesn't it sound like these cops are being overpaid?
Then the publisher unleashed an assault on police and fire unions and the fact they bargain with the city for wages and benefits. According to him, nothing good can come from this kind of system. Apparently that newspaper doesn't believe city officials and police can be trusted to bargain in good faith and reach an agreement that does not abuse the public treasury.
The median income in Galveston is $34, 153 according to the newspaper. Cops shouldn't make more than the people they serve apparently.
These police and firefighters are the same police and firefighters that remained on Galveston Island as Hurricane Ike assaulted the city, destroying property and killing people. They stayed on the island and protected the property of wealthy newspaper editors and publishers. They stayed on the island as newspaper employees ran for higher ground.
These rich police officers pulled a distraught woman from the top of the Galveston Causeway before she leapt to her death.
These rich cops are desperately trying to find and arrest the savage killer of a woman on Broadway who was beaten to death and probably raped.
Twenty of these rich cops are in graveyards around the city, having been killed while working the streets of Galveston. None of them died sitting in an air conditioned office writing letters to the editor or reading the newspaper.
These rich cops are also citizens. Citizens who get together every three years, sit down with their employer, and talk about such things as how much pay they can get in the next three year cycle, what of of insurance benefits the city can provide for their families, what kind of pension they can expect 20 or 25 years from now. They talk about the same issues that many other citizens talk about with their employers. Do newspaper employees have that privilege? I don't know, but what would be wrong with it if they did?
And by the way. Last month police and firefighters took a voluntary pay cut of 3% in an effort to help their city recover from the devastation left by Ike.
Did the price of the local newspaper go down, or is it still the same as before Ike?
These rich cops are sitting across the table with people we elect to take care of this for us. Do we not trust them to represent us fairly in these talks? Are we so stupid that we elect people to represent us that we can't trust? I think not.
I don't know about you, but if some deranged idiot bangs on my door in the middle of the night, or if some savage freak rapes and murders someone in my family, I hope some of those 'rich cops' take enough time away from counting their money to come help me and my family.
Breck Porter, Editor/Publisher
The Police News
editor@thepolicenews.net
Monday, January 19, 2009
Police Have A Language of Their Own
If you don't listen to a police scanner regularly and pay close attention to those "police spokespersons" on TV, you may not have noticed how cops talk and the language they use.
For example. Have you noticed that hardly anyone ever 'dies' anymore, or how no one is ever 'dead' anymore? The new word for the afterlife used by the police department talking heads is 'deceased.'
"The man was flown to the hospital where he was pronounced DECEASED." It used to be DOA for Dead On Arrival but at some point or the other, someone decided that DEAD or DIED is no longer an acceptable way to refer to someone who is either DEAD or DIED. Now they are DECEASED.
Remember when people used to GET out of their cars? Cops used to GET out of their cars too. But today, they EXIT their VEHICLES. The police spokesman on TV stands in front of the camera and says, "When the officers arrived on the scene, they immediately exited their vehicles." What's up with that? We didn't expect that when they arrived on the scene they would just sit in their cars. We expected them to get out of their cars, but instead they exited their vehicles.
How long has it been since we heard the police spokesman on TV say, "The officer drew his pistol and shot the bad guy." They don't draw and shoot anymore. Here is the standard, by-the-book statement the police spokesman repeats for the cameras everytime a cop shoots a bad guy.
"The officer, fearing for his life or the life of others, discharged his service weapon at the suspect, striking him five times in the liver." Then he may follow that up with, "The man then hit the ground deceased."
So why do all these so-called Public Information Officers talk the same? No matter from which department or area of the country, we see them day after day in front of the TV cameras, repeating the same phrases over and over. Why does TV continue to interview them? We know what they're going to say.
It is standardized phrasing. With these prepared scripts, departments can send anyone, with minimum training, before the media to talk without ever really saying anything of subtance. A department can assign someone as it's Public Information Officer to rattle off these memorized phrases for the media, who really has no knowledge of the incident. He/she can show up at the scene of a news event and be briefed in a matter of minutes, comb his hair, straighten his tie, and stand in front of the cameras. And when he is through talking, the public knows no more than they did before he/she recited.
The next time you see this on TV, watch and listen carefully. You'll see.
That's the way I see it.
How about you?
For example. Have you noticed that hardly anyone ever 'dies' anymore, or how no one is ever 'dead' anymore? The new word for the afterlife used by the police department talking heads is 'deceased.'
"The man was flown to the hospital where he was pronounced DECEASED." It used to be DOA for Dead On Arrival but at some point or the other, someone decided that DEAD or DIED is no longer an acceptable way to refer to someone who is either DEAD or DIED. Now they are DECEASED.
Remember when people used to GET out of their cars? Cops used to GET out of their cars too. But today, they EXIT their VEHICLES. The police spokesman on TV stands in front of the camera and says, "When the officers arrived on the scene, they immediately exited their vehicles." What's up with that? We didn't expect that when they arrived on the scene they would just sit in their cars. We expected them to get out of their cars, but instead they exited their vehicles.
How long has it been since we heard the police spokesman on TV say, "The officer drew his pistol and shot the bad guy." They don't draw and shoot anymore. Here is the standard, by-the-book statement the police spokesman repeats for the cameras everytime a cop shoots a bad guy.
"The officer, fearing for his life or the life of others, discharged his service weapon at the suspect, striking him five times in the liver." Then he may follow that up with, "The man then hit the ground deceased."
So why do all these so-called Public Information Officers talk the same? No matter from which department or area of the country, we see them day after day in front of the TV cameras, repeating the same phrases over and over. Why does TV continue to interview them? We know what they're going to say.
It is standardized phrasing. With these prepared scripts, departments can send anyone, with minimum training, before the media to talk without ever really saying anything of subtance. A department can assign someone as it's Public Information Officer to rattle off these memorized phrases for the media, who really has no knowledge of the incident. He/she can show up at the scene of a news event and be briefed in a matter of minutes, comb his hair, straighten his tie, and stand in front of the cameras. And when he is through talking, the public knows no more than they did before he/she recited.
The next time you see this on TV, watch and listen carefully. You'll see.
That's the way I see it.
How about you?
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Same Song, Second Verse
In La Marque, Texas residents are complaining before city council about crime in their neighborhoods. Some say they are afraid to walk down their own streets. And they should be.
Robberies in this Gulf Coast city nearly doubled in 2008.
The police chief says while most major crime in the city of 13,000 decreased last year, other crimes spiked. Police responded to over 3,000 more calls in 2008 than in 2007. There were more arrests, and more traffic stops.
Of course we always hear the citizens complain about lack of police protections. "Where are the cops?" is a familiar outcry.
In the case of La Marque, the police force has remained at the same manpower strength for the past five years as the crime rate has increased. Who's fault is that?
In each of those five years Police Chief Richard Price has urged the city council to provide money for more police officers. In each of those five years they have denied his request.
Criminals, like jungle animals, prey on the weakest. They go to the place of least resistence, where there is the best chance they will not be caught. So when the population continues to grow, there are more potential victims to prey on and police manpower fails to keep pace, the criminal moves in.
The La Marque City Council is not the only council in the country guilty of ignoring this problem. Politicians everywhere throw the money at projects they can point at in the next election cycle. They want to tell voters about the streets and sewers they fixed, the new street light, stop signs, schools zones, curbs and gutters, things the people can see. They can't tell a voter, "I kept you from being murdered last year by voting for more police."
In most places where people are screaming about the lack of police services or police protection, it's not the police at blame, it's the lack of police.
That's the way I see it.
breck@breckporter.com
Robberies in this Gulf Coast city nearly doubled in 2008.
The police chief says while most major crime in the city of 13,000 decreased last year, other crimes spiked. Police responded to over 3,000 more calls in 2008 than in 2007. There were more arrests, and more traffic stops.
Of course we always hear the citizens complain about lack of police protections. "Where are the cops?" is a familiar outcry.
In the case of La Marque, the police force has remained at the same manpower strength for the past five years as the crime rate has increased. Who's fault is that?
In each of those five years Police Chief Richard Price has urged the city council to provide money for more police officers. In each of those five years they have denied his request.
Criminals, like jungle animals, prey on the weakest. They go to the place of least resistence, where there is the best chance they will not be caught. So when the population continues to grow, there are more potential victims to prey on and police manpower fails to keep pace, the criminal moves in.
The La Marque City Council is not the only council in the country guilty of ignoring this problem. Politicians everywhere throw the money at projects they can point at in the next election cycle. They want to tell voters about the streets and sewers they fixed, the new street light, stop signs, schools zones, curbs and gutters, things the people can see. They can't tell a voter, "I kept you from being murdered last year by voting for more police."
In most places where people are screaming about the lack of police services or police protection, it's not the police at blame, it's the lack of police.
That's the way I see it.
breck@breckporter.com
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
It's The Cop's Fault, Sue'em, Sue'em
Last Saturday in Houston a 17-year old delinquest stole a pickup truck, then ran from police when they got after him.
As the pursuit progressed, the pursuing officer broke off as the speeding truck entered a residential neighborhood. In fact the fleeing truck was completely out of sight of the officer when it crashed into another vehicle, killing one of it's occupants and injuring the other.
Immediately the family of one of the victims began blaming the police. By Monday they had hired a lawyer and were threatening to sue the officer, the police department and the City of Houston.
Family members were on all the local TV stations critisizing the police department's pursuit policy, even though they had no idea what the policy is.
Family members plan to appear before the city council to ask for a policy change. They haven't said what part of the policy they want to change, neither has their lawyer, but it makes good TV.
Houston City Council member James Rodriquez, who represents the district in which the crash occurred has sided squarely with the police department. He blames the crook. How strange?
A police spokesman told TV cameras the officer involved complied with department policy regarding police pursuits.
No one wants to see someone die or be injured in a tragic event such as this one, but it happens. So long as crooks are allowed to roam free, raping, robbing, stealing, killing and plundering, and police don't chase them down for fear of loosing their jobs, the crooks win.
For some, the opportunity to sue, in hopes of getting a quick and easy cash settlement, is just too tempting to pass, and this sure looks like another one of those temptations.
As the pursuit progressed, the pursuing officer broke off as the speeding truck entered a residential neighborhood. In fact the fleeing truck was completely out of sight of the officer when it crashed into another vehicle, killing one of it's occupants and injuring the other.
Immediately the family of one of the victims began blaming the police. By Monday they had hired a lawyer and were threatening to sue the officer, the police department and the City of Houston.
Family members were on all the local TV stations critisizing the police department's pursuit policy, even though they had no idea what the policy is.
Family members plan to appear before the city council to ask for a policy change. They haven't said what part of the policy they want to change, neither has their lawyer, but it makes good TV.
Houston City Council member James Rodriquez, who represents the district in which the crash occurred has sided squarely with the police department. He blames the crook. How strange?
A police spokesman told TV cameras the officer involved complied with department policy regarding police pursuits.
No one wants to see someone die or be injured in a tragic event such as this one, but it happens. So long as crooks are allowed to roam free, raping, robbing, stealing, killing and plundering, and police don't chase them down for fear of loosing their jobs, the crooks win.
For some, the opportunity to sue, in hopes of getting a quick and easy cash settlement, is just too tempting to pass, and this sure looks like another one of those temptations.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Following my commentary on The Police News website recently in which I agreed with a new policy of Galveston Police Chief Charles Wiley which prevents off-duty police officer's from accepting extra jobs in businesses which derive more than 55% of it's income from alcohol sales, I received this unsigned e-mail:
"Bar jobs are not all slop joints or buckets of blood. If you think the City has a liability problem with officers working the bars wait until the officers are pulled out. The fights will become more violent and shootings inside the bars will increase. Many shootings and stabbings have been prevented by the uniformed officer at the door of the bar. No one ever talks about the violent crimes that did not happen because of an uniformed officers presence. Dealing with drunk, drugged and mentally disturbed people is a business that invites lawsuits. Most people who spout off have never had to put their hands on anyone or stand up for anything. There are good cops and bad cops. Let's create an atmosphere that rewards the good cops and roots out the bad. The theory that bad things happens in bars and the city get sued so let's pull the cops out of the bars can be expanded to bad things happen in poor neighborhoods and the city gets sued so let pull the cops out of there too."
I hope this unsigned letter was not from a police officer. If it was, I am concerned for his sense of reasoning and understanding.
There are cities and counties all over the country that do not allow it's officers to work in the establishments which we have described. I have yet to hear that police have lost control of the beer joints, honky tonks, and dives, to the drunk and disorderly.
State laws, on the books for years, have given police authority to inspect these places at will. It used to be that beat cops would get out of their patrol cars occasionally and walk through the dives which were known trouble spots on their beats. This was always a great deterrent, but we seldom see it anymore because bar owners claim harrassment when they do.
I suspect that if there were no other way to control these places and maintain peace in these places, municipal and county government could refuse to issue them a business permit. The state could refuse to issue them a liquor license. In fact, local law enforcement may now petition the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission to suspend the license of any establishment deemed to be a public nuisance. We need not station an armed guard or police officer in these places.
Those in positions of leadership in police agencies will rush to tell you that the presence of an armed police officer in the place where people are on a mission of becoming drunk and obnoxious, is just asking for trouble. Sooner or later there is bound to be either a confrontation, either by the officer to the drunk or vice versa.
I believe there is some misunderstanding about the policy. It does not prevent officers from working in restaurants, hotels, concerts, fairgrounds, or other places where adult beverages are sold or consumed. It applies to places where booze is the main commodity, ice houses and the like where people just sit around and poor booze down their gullets.
What about hotels that have sitdown bars inside and officers are hired for security on the hotel premises. Police departments I am familiar with specify the officer is not to enter the bar or lounge unless he/she is called by management. In that case, the officer calls for an on-duty officer for backup before he/she even enters the bar.
The unsigned writer is correct when he/she says, "No one ever talks about the violent crimes that did not happen because of a uniformed officer's presence."
No one ever talks about airplanes that didn't crash either. We don't talk about car wrecks, or fights, or shootings, or stabbings, that didn't happened. We don't talk about cops that don't get sued, or shot or stabbed or arrested. But we DO talk about the one's that DO!
And that is my point. And I'm sure that is also the point of those that must take the flack for these incidents, and defend the lawsuits that result.
Breck Porter
"Bar jobs are not all slop joints or buckets of blood. If you think the City has a liability problem with officers working the bars wait until the officers are pulled out. The fights will become more violent and shootings inside the bars will increase. Many shootings and stabbings have been prevented by the uniformed officer at the door of the bar. No one ever talks about the violent crimes that did not happen because of an uniformed officers presence. Dealing with drunk, drugged and mentally disturbed people is a business that invites lawsuits. Most people who spout off have never had to put their hands on anyone or stand up for anything. There are good cops and bad cops. Let's create an atmosphere that rewards the good cops and roots out the bad. The theory that bad things happens in bars and the city get sued so let's pull the cops out of the bars can be expanded to bad things happen in poor neighborhoods and the city gets sued so let pull the cops out of there too."
I hope this unsigned letter was not from a police officer. If it was, I am concerned for his sense of reasoning and understanding.
There are cities and counties all over the country that do not allow it's officers to work in the establishments which we have described. I have yet to hear that police have lost control of the beer joints, honky tonks, and dives, to the drunk and disorderly.
State laws, on the books for years, have given police authority to inspect these places at will. It used to be that beat cops would get out of their patrol cars occasionally and walk through the dives which were known trouble spots on their beats. This was always a great deterrent, but we seldom see it anymore because bar owners claim harrassment when they do.
I suspect that if there were no other way to control these places and maintain peace in these places, municipal and county government could refuse to issue them a business permit. The state could refuse to issue them a liquor license. In fact, local law enforcement may now petition the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission to suspend the license of any establishment deemed to be a public nuisance. We need not station an armed guard or police officer in these places.
Those in positions of leadership in police agencies will rush to tell you that the presence of an armed police officer in the place where people are on a mission of becoming drunk and obnoxious, is just asking for trouble. Sooner or later there is bound to be either a confrontation, either by the officer to the drunk or vice versa.
I believe there is some misunderstanding about the policy. It does not prevent officers from working in restaurants, hotels, concerts, fairgrounds, or other places where adult beverages are sold or consumed. It applies to places where booze is the main commodity, ice houses and the like where people just sit around and poor booze down their gullets.
What about hotels that have sitdown bars inside and officers are hired for security on the hotel premises. Police departments I am familiar with specify the officer is not to enter the bar or lounge unless he/she is called by management. In that case, the officer calls for an on-duty officer for backup before he/she even enters the bar.
The unsigned writer is correct when he/she says, "No one ever talks about the violent crimes that did not happen because of a uniformed officer's presence."
No one ever talks about airplanes that didn't crash either. We don't talk about car wrecks, or fights, or shootings, or stabbings, that didn't happened. We don't talk about cops that don't get sued, or shot or stabbed or arrested. But we DO talk about the one's that DO!
And that is my point. And I'm sure that is also the point of those that must take the flack for these incidents, and defend the lawsuits that result.
Breck Porter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
