khas143

Goose... your dead wrong here. Interacting with the public is a part of all of our jobs. Hell... some departments have entire divisions devoted to public relations. If people want to take pictures with MOS then go for it. It is great PR!!!. As far as the discussion issue... they did nothing wrong.. if anything they interacted with the public which is part of their jobs. By the tone of your post you seem like you are above repoach... As much as I hate to agree with X635 (j/k bro).. I do agree that it appears arrogant.

What bugs me even more is the fact that the article said the two women requested that the picture be removed. Then then Journal News publishes an article on it. Freggin Rag Journalism.

RIP Bro...

Or.... even worse.... seeing 2083 in a speedo (that would be comedy though)

While the legalization of marijuana may be an option in the future, IT IS NOT LEGAL NOW!!!!!!!!!! Great job by PCSO and WCPD on this one. Hey, while those members on this thread that want it to be legal will voice their concerns on this thread I would ask how many of you have written your elected officals regarding this subject.... Let me guess..... NONE! Anyway, great job getting over $200,000 worth of illegal narcotics off the street... (or field, or whatever).

My prayers are with the familes of those involved... To all those that responded.... thank you!

Chris... with all due respect... this begs the question of Emergency Medical Air Response in general... Where do we draw the line regarding how many "saves" makes utilization of resources worthwhile. I am sure there are several arguments to this (including, but not limited to... what if a patient in more dire straights needs the services of StatFlight) but where do we as providers draw the line. So the question is posed to all of you "HOW MANY LIVES SAVED ARE NEEDED TO BE CONFIRMED AS COMPARED TO HOW MANY LIVES WOULD HAVE SURVIVED IF TRANSPORTED BY GROUND AND NOT AIR?" How many times do we hear that one saved life is priceless (Thanks Doc for your input). Hey, the court system puts a price on a life based on varying factors. (age, income, life expectency, etc.). Should we start evaluating patients based on a system before calling on air resources. Hey the question has been asked in different forms but thats what it is. I don't know what the "answer" is but can somebody here enlighten me. So???? This issue has been raised multiple times here so if you want to make your point..... Give us a number/ratio.

There are a couple of reasons that the exemptions for military personnel are in place. First and I would say foremost would be the fact they served our country. The military gets paid nothing compared to civil service and if military personnel want to further serve their country when they get out we should bend over back-words to accommodate them if they are qualified. Second, military personnel have to maintain a level of physical fitness that we "ordinary" civilians do not. I have NEVER seen a prior military person have any issues with the physical fitness requirements of the Police Academy but I have certainly seen 21 year olds have issues. Is the age extension warranted when it comes to military service, IMHO ABSOLUTELY!!

Barry, Barry, Barry.... It's the same old story here in Westchester... Consolidation is a GREAT idea..... it will save money... better the departments... UNLESS.... it happens in my jurisdiction. This is just another reason/example why government should follow the business model in some cases. The biggest of enemies consolidate to... in this case.... reduce spending. In the case of the governement the result would be.... reduced taxes or increased service. But alas, with all this info out there... we continue to beat our heads into the wall.

You bring up a valid point. This abuse of animals must be stopped. I for one am going to contact the ASPCA and see if criminal charges could be pursued against this abuser of poor innocent fish. STOP THE INSANITY CHRIS!!!!!

QUOTE(bvfdjc316 @ Feb 7 2009, 11:55 PM) What I mean is that the statement "if have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear" is nothing more than police propaganda/mind tricks in-order to have suspects/members of the public to wave their constitutional rights. The right being waved is the forth amendment, the right against unusual search and seizure. The forth amendment is designed to protect American citizens from the government going in with little or no evidence from searching and seizing property in search of evidence without probable cause. The above statement implies that one should wave their rights because they have nothing to hide, which then completely ignores the 4th Amendment. While I know trickery and twisting words are part of police work, all it takes is a police officer to exploit the ignorance of one member of society who thinks "they have nothing to hide" when they do and dont know it and someone goes to jail. For the record, an officer quoted "if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear" to me when asking to search my person and my belongings and I promptly told him to get a warrant otherwise I was leaving and you know what, I left and the officer was stuck with a nothing but a waste of his own time. Hey BVFD.... with all due respect, were you trying to show off you legal knowledge???? I too was in a similar situation when I was young (young as you that is) and I said "Go ahead.... search my car" and you know what... they did... and found nothing.. because I had nothing to hide.... funny to add that as a more senior(greater that 25 years old) adult I too let the police search my vehice in another state upon their request... why... because I had nothing to hide and they were doing their job!!! They profiled me and in fairness to that particular police agency they had a reason (because it works) to do so!!!! You are well within your right to refuse a search request within New York State but... my young brother... beware... that case law does not exist all over the U.S.... My advice is simply this.... If you want to be an ACLU lawyer by all means pursue your goals.... If you want to be participate in the public safety community, pick your battles wisely and SUPPORT THOSE THAT ARE DOING THEIR JOBS!!!!!!! Don't be a roadblock but a willing participant to prevent "bad things" from happening to your community... (In your case, the officer was obviously concerned that illegal narcotics were present.. don't you think that in that situation, as a member of a public safety organizataion you should have been more concerned about those illegal narcotics getting out on the street!!!)... Enough of that... the point of this thread is the license plate reader... It is legal becuase there is no personal information displayed unless there is a "crime" (misd. or felony)... this has been confirmed in court cases dating back to 1983. In addition, all "hits" must be confirmed to NYSPIN or similar state databases... So boo hoo to all those that whine about being a criminal...

I wasn't going to say anything BUT.... I would think that a certain 2X X-chief would have handled it better.... No offense Remember

I actually just returned from a meeting in New York City where this requirement was brought up. Apparently, NIMS compliance has been inconsistent at best, not just in this region but throughout the country. Here is the bad part; we all know that technically NIMS compliance is required to obtain federal grant funding. (This includes funding that is administered by state and local agencies but funded by the feds) In the past, grant recipients have only been required to "swear" that their organizations are in compliance with NIMS. According to DHS, this will now be a mandate and will require documentation in order to receive any DHS funded grants. The problem is that most agencies that have received grant funding are not really in compliance with NIMS. These new NIMS requirements are not only going to be needed to be technically in compliance but agencies will be required to submit documentation to support their "claims" of compliance. This is a great opportunity for the FEDS to impart their requirements on us. Homeland Security grant funding has been decreasing steadily for years and this is their opportunity to force us to do what they want us to in order to comply. By instituting these new standards during an economic downturn, they have us bent over the preverbal "barrel".

While your overall points on calling for a bird are warranted, (I once heard a chief call for one on a call that was 1.5 miles from WCMC with no prolonged extrication) what is the problem with putting the bird on standby. If this was going to be a very prolonged extrication, wouldn't having STATFLIGHT on standby reduce their response time if they were needed? I may be a little ignorant in this but I was under the impression that STATFLIGHT crews could provide a higher level of care than a paramedic on scene. In addition, I would think that the crew on the bird would have a higher level of experience than a ground medic. (Obviously this is not in all cases but I would think most) Anyways, great job by all involved especially Remember585 for his News12 interview.

Yeah... just what Chris needs another "Chief" in front of his name.... Let's not give him too big a head!

RIP Sgt.

Well first and foremost.... this is the first bomb tech LODD in the CONUS since 9/11..... My prayers and wishes are with the family.... That being said.... something does not seem right based on the media reports..... Rule #1 in basic bomb tech school... don't move the package. There has to be more to this story. All Bomb Techs in the US are trained at the same school and there is something missing here. I wish I knew what but ??????. Anyway... RIP brother...... To all others..... STAY SAFE!!! If anybody wants additional info PM me... I will provide what I can.

Same argument can be made for pilots... it's an "exclusive" position in the P.D.??? Don't you agree?

Not to state the obvious but it is just that... it is the CE's protection detail. The VAST majority of police officers that are assigned to protection details are detectives. This is due to the fact that it is plain clothes detail and it does require some additional training in regards to the protection aspect of the detail. The FBI, Secret Service, U.S. State Department, and Capital Police all perfrom protection details and all of the above named LEO's are considered investigators (except for the capital police and they are considered investigators when detailed to a protection detail). To put this in general terms.... it is an industry standard... As for the need for a detail for the CE of Westchester County... well.... that's up for debate.... but, I have witnessed the CE almost attacked at a certain event a few years back. So.... yes I do think he needs a security detail!!! Those that were there would agree.

Again..... that's why the numbers need to be laid out... I was just going with what was compared to New Rochelle... We need to stop guessing at what the numbers would be we need bring in a consultant and find out what is in the community's best interest. (As an example... the 60 f/f's and officers was an arbitary number.... lets get a number that would be realistic).... We as a public safety community need to take a step back and look at what is best in the long run. Sometimes, it takes an outside entity to point it out and we need to be open-minded.

Spin... your telling me that a "gear" room, HVAC/Electric upgrade, elevator, and handicapped accesible bathrooms will cost 6.5 mil..... Guess that's why both LI counties almost went bankrupt.. Come on bro... I'm not saying not to give these guys a break room but 6.5 mil is a big nut to ask for... Like u said, "the NEED it"... well give them what you mentioned but how is that 6.5 mil???

I have got to admit I am a little annoyed by the statements by people on this board who DARE say that I can afford a tax increase of a couple hundred dollars. I am a Bedford Hills resident and I take offense to being compared to Martha Stewart and people who make millions of dollars a year (FYI... for all those that are ignorant to this part of the county as it is very confusing, Martha Stewart lives in the Town of BEDFORD but not in BEDFORD HILLS). How dare you tell me what I can and cannot afford. This would be in addition to a school budget increase of 7.x% (one that was voted down twice and we still had a 7.x % increase). How can taxpayers continue to get tax increases that are above what they are getting in pay raises? It has got to stop somewhere. In addition, as a taxpayer of the Bedford Hills Fire District, I find it interesting that the per capita cost per resident appears comparable to that of the City of New Rochelle. Of course they have more residents to spread out the cost but why does it appear that the Town of Bedford has about 3 more rigs per capita than the City of New Rochelle and THEY HAVE TO PAY LESS in homeowners insurance than the residents of Bedford. (FYI... I was told by my insurance company when I moved in that the rating of the fire department was low and there were too many lawsuits in Bedford Hills and that is why the insurance rates are among the highest in Westchester) I am greatful that we are serviced by volunteers but given the option of paying 6.5 mil and paying more for homeowners insurance I think that we need to revisit consilidating services and possibly even a career department for all of the Town of Bedford. I can currently hear 3 fire whistles from different firehouses from my house. I am not downplaying the VFD that covers my home but it is not acceptable to be told that we should be 6.5 mil for a new firehouse simply because having a VFD is cheaper..... GIVE ME THE NUMBERS.... PROVE IT!!!! Nobody has done that as of yet. These are hard financial times and before we, the taxpayers (I currently pay $326 per year for my fire district coverage) agree to this, the town should look at all the options available to it and present those options to the taxpayers. I do not believe that is asking for too much.

Interesting topic... Most PD's respond "hot" for a burglar alarm but as for the PD side of the house (concerning continuation of response), I have been cancelled once the homeowner talks to the alarm company and supplies the required password. If that happens, not only do we not continue going in hot, we stop responding all together. My question is why is the FD protocol for fire alarms any different this any different that the PD protocol for burglar alarms. (Set off in error is set off in error on both the PD and FD side of the house). It also appears there are significant differences between various FD's response protocols. Maybe this is something to standardize across the board??

That would have required you to wake up and we all know nobody wants to do that on a midnight!!!

Date:8/31/08 Time: 1710 Location: 2 miles north of the tappen zee Frequency: Fire 14 , Fire 12 Units Operating: Sleepy Hollow, Irvington, Tarry Town, Yonkers, Rockland depts Description Of Incident: Tug boat on fire in the hudson river north of the tappen zee Writer: oilflame 1730 yonkers is not needed and sent home 1734 Batt 12 reports fire k/d 2 lines in opp and crew is off the tug 1740 2312 reports tug capt has anoter tug on the way to pick up the now drifting barge This post has been edited by oilflame: Today, 03:41 PM No offense but this is a very unprofessional statement.... NOT NEEDED AND SENT HOME... Please stick to the facts of the incident. BTW.... anybody have any additional info????