10512

As far as getting rid of cops? They do, NYC is down 6,000 cops since 2002, so, yes, they do get rid of cops. I will let my original statement stand on its own and not even address your reasoning as to why, how and who decides reductions. If you really believe that cutbacks are decided by one company beating another to a call, then I cannot argue your logic.

His personal pride and pride in his company have nothing to do with the amount of companies, then or now. That has more to do with politics than anything else. It is not something an individual company officer has any say or influence in. A work ethic like that is rarely seen anymore, but it is sorely needed. Calling them "morons" is uncalled for.

Some of the SUV's will be assigned to "general" patrol. This in not an "all-inclusive" list, but it gives an idea where SUV's may end up on routine patrol. One or two will go to Precincts that have beaches, such as Orchard Beach (45 Pct), the Rockaways (100, 101 Pct's) and Coney Island (60 Pct). Precincts that have large parks, such as Pelham Bay Park (45 Pct), Van Cortlandt Park (50 Pct), Central Park (CPP Pct) and Prospect Park (I think the 76 Pct) may also see one or two each.

I am posting only one more comment and then I am done with this topic. If 7 out of the 17 FF's you are referring to as responding are High School students, then your department is in big trouble. I am not knocking HS age FF's, that's when I got my start.

Did you ask them why? The FD instituted the policy, not the school. Why are you assuming the school is behind it?

According to the way your post reads, the local Fire Department implemented the policy, not the school.

I am sure there will be a lawsuit, but that may take a long time, possibly years to settle. But, while it plays out in court, they may have to put up with that nonsense.

The article said an Arbitration Board determined this. When things go to arbitration, there can be many factors that end up on the table, not all may be things you want changed.

Why is this news?

Sadly, I do not think a class on etiquette would have much impact. This situation has more to do with common sense, or the lack of.

CNN is reporting an active shooter incident at Fort Hood.

I do not know much about the FD/EMS standards, but in NYS, any felony conviction is an automatic bar from hiring for a Police Officer position and any felony conviction is an automatic dismissal for any Police Officer position. As far as felonies go, in Law enforcement in NYS, there is no second chance, first strike and you are out!

I cannot fault the Journal News for this article. This is a broken system. I say this and I am a member of the pension system but I am also a taxpayer. The system is broken. But, as the previous poster states, the NYS Legislature will never correct this. The Legislature takes the definition of incompetance to new heights every time it meets. This, and almost every other problem NYS has will continue to fester.

First off, find out how wide the median is. You posted that you believe the median is only about 20 feet. If you go into court and tell the hearing officer you "think" or "believe" the median is about 20 feet, you may lose. If you can measure it, or look up somewhere to find out exactly how wide it is, you can now tell the hearing officer exactly how wide it is. You then have a much better chance of winning. In the street view, I know that it looks less than 30 feet, but you have to convince a hearing officer, if he hears exactly how wide it is, it just sounds better. "Thinking" or "Believing" something in court is not going to win it for you. The 2nd thing you have to do is see if there is a "stop here on red" sign at that location. Looking at Google street view is not going to do it. That image might be two years old. Take several wide angle photos of the intersection with identifiable landmarks, such as a street sign and numbers on the buildings, the ascending/descending numbers will show which way is northbound/southbound. These cops may be well aware of the law and use that specific intersection every day because it has a sign. If you are thinking of fighting this, you have to eliminate that possibilty. If you can answer those two questions to your favor, and you do not mind going to Manhattan for the hearing, go for it.

This is from a NY Post article. This is why you are paying $24! "But 11 staffers at the National September 11 Memorial & Museum each pulled down more than $170,000 in total compensation in 2009, according to the most recent filings. Four execs took home more than $320,000. Foundation President Joseph Daniels, 38, pocketed $371,307 after receiving hefty raises three years in a row — 28 percent in 2006, when he was promoted from acting president, followed by 12 percent and 6 percent. Museum director Alice Greenwald made $351,000, and capital planning Vice President Joan Gerner soaked up $337,143 before leaving last spring. Development director Cathy Blaney raked in $322,292. The full-time foundation employee also worked last year as a fund-raiser for Gov. Cuomo’s election campaign." This whole museum and memorial is an embarrassment, and it has been since it was first proposed. There is no reason for this other than the politically connected handing out these jobs. It has nothing to do with the funding. The money is being squandered. I will not spend a dime of my money to go there. This should have been operated by the United States Park Service. Look at other things the US Park Service runs, take a look at Ellis Island, the Statue of Liberty, check out the many sites in Philadelphia, or Boston, they do an excellant job without the ridiculous salaries/patronage. It is probably the only thing the US Government does good.

Good or bad? Drinking: Yes or no? It really does not matter what people think the answer is. There are two "new" problems to consider. The first problem has been addressed in other threads. A few years ago, what happened at the parade, would stay at the parade. But, as other threads show, nowadays people feelings get hurt and they complain. Whatever happened to being an adult about it. It seems that train left the station a while ago. The second problem, which I have not seen a thread on, but I am sure there will be one soon enough, deals with what happens when someone's antics are caught on tape or confessed on social media? I am sure it has happened already, but if one of those incidents ends up with a bit of airplay on Youtube, you can bet the bosses and Insurers will have something to say. It is only a matter of time. If some department gets embarrassed, or worse, once or twice, you may see different attitudes and rules towards alcohol.

He goes off because two FF's did not march in the Parade and then were socializing? He is taking himself way too serious. What would this guy do if something serious had happened?

It has to do with the different retirement systems in NYS. Your retirement depends upon the system and title you are in.

Everybodygoes is correct. It occurred while out of city limits, I think it was on Long Island for a LOD funeral, PC Kelly saw a radio car and for some reason wanted to know who it was. He only saw it from the rear, but could not ID what department it was from because most cars are white with the same blue letters on the trunk only saying "POLICE", he only saw it for a second. It was then decided to add "NYPD" to enhance ID of his cars.

This is a classic example of something, that if you do not look very far, that looks good on paper. Like I said, it looks good if you do not look too far into it. For a politician, it is good because it looks like you are doing something and it generates publicity. If you look more than one layer into it, it is asinine. But, if you think back, how many ideas that politicians have come up with that have been asinine? This fits right in. Remember, this was the city that re-elected Marion Barry.

The only Fire Service to use the Sergeant Rank in this area that I know of was the New York Fire Patrol. They disbanded in 2006.

It remains to be seen what Bill Bratton will do. I do like him and I worked under him during his first term. But, we must remember that during Bratton 1.0, he was working under Rudy Giuliani, a Pro-Police Mayor who wanted results and really did not care what others thought of how he did things. He set the Police free to to a job. Rudy was not afraid of how things went, he wanted results and would deal with the blow back later. Even then, Bratton only lasted two years. (The term "pro-police" regarding Rudy is used loosely, meaning he wanted crime reduced, he was not, necessarily, very "pro-police" to the cops themselves) DeBlasio is a different kind of Mayor. I do not think he will be the "pro police" mayor that Rudy was. Deblasio wants the Police reigned in. It remains to be seen if he will let Bratton do whatever he wants to get the job done. During Bratton 2.0, I think there will be a bit more answering to what this new City Hall wants and the way it wants it done. I do not think the "new" Bratton will be the same as the "old" Bratton. I could be wrong, but lets see what happens.

The Journal News is reporting the Mayor has reversed his decision.

That looks like it is a Bill, it does not appear to have been passed into law. If so, than it cannot be any "agreement". Unless this agreement is based on something else, it does not appear it is actionable based solely on a Bill

The Chief allowed the Media to talk to him. The media did not force him to do an interview. He could have said no, or later or whatever. He did not do that, he did the interview. The Department I worked for had rules regarding Media. Basically, only certain members were allowed to do interviews. Why only certain members? Because the big bosses were pretty sure these certain members would not make the department look bad. A professional image is 3/4 of the public relations battle.