The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not At My Table - Political Discussions => Local & State Politics => Topic started by: RecycleMichael on February 07, 2010, 11:24:30 PM

Title: monthly charge for police
Post by: RecycleMichael on February 07, 2010, 11:24:30 PM
I was used as an example of high water bills in another thread and then I was reading how a councilor was trying to get a monthly charge on my utility bill to fund public safety.

I then tried to calculate what I am already paying for police protection.

Someone help me if my math is wrong.

The Tulsa Police have a $86 million budget. There are now an estimated 399,520 people living in the city limits. That works out to an annual charge for police of $215 per resident.

I have a family of four. That works out to $860 per year for me or $71 a month.

My police bill then is more than my water bill, my sewer bill, my trash bill, my stormwater fee, and my EMSA fee combined.

I am not sure I can afford any more.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: tulsa_fan on February 07, 2010, 11:30:27 PM
It's voluntary, don't pay it if you don't want.  There are people who want to help at least the council is listening to their citizens.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Conan71 on February 08, 2010, 07:17:56 AM
Quote from: tulsa_fan on February 07, 2010, 11:30:27 PM
It's voluntary, don't pay it if you don't want.  There are people who want to help at least the council is listening to their citizens.

So this is like the "Light A Life" program that AEP does on the electric bills?  Check the box and add an extra amount to help with other's electric bills?

We could denote this on our water bills the "Feed A Cop" program ;)
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: sgrizzle on February 08, 2010, 08:16:09 AM
It's voluntary, meaning likely only about 10% of households will participate (especially if you look long term)

$5 x about 10,000 homes = $600,000 a year or about 7-10 officers.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Breadburner on February 08, 2010, 08:20:08 AM
Thats a hell of alot better than a 2 to 5% entertainment tax........
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: sgrizzle on February 08, 2010, 08:21:45 AM
It wouldn't collect enough money to be worth anything unless "voluntary" is code for "you can opt out"
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Red Arrow on February 08, 2010, 08:58:05 AM
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 08, 2010, 08:21:45 AM
unless "voluntary" is code for "you can opt out"

I hate that method but it is effective.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: tulsa_fan on February 08, 2010, 12:26:19 PM
or not put a limit on the amount that can be added, maybe some business would want to pay more . . . . right now 7 - 10 officers sounds pretty good.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: shadows on February 08, 2010, 03:26:33 PM
How about when an official is suspended "with pay" place that pay in escrow until a jury of the citizens decide on the guilt factor of the accused. The present system of paying vacations to accused officials would under normal circumstances be considered as voluntary contributions already being made by the citizens.

Any government function that would depend on citizen voluntary contributions would be a gross failure before it started.  How in hell would departments budget future contribution when they cannot manage the mandatory flow from sales taxes?  Where were the high wage planners when the burbs were establishing the retail outlets that was by design was to establish incomes for government infrastructures at the expense of Tulsa. It is time to install the air pads at the bottom of the cliff as if the cost of Tulsa government is not reduced they will be needed.         
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Conan71 on February 08, 2010, 06:58:24 PM
Quote from: inteller on February 08, 2010, 06:51:44 PM
sure I'll pay $71 a month as long as I get to drive as fast as I want on city streets and get a get out of jail free card every month.

Join the FOP instead. Then you can have the additional benefit of drawing full salary while on compulsory vacation after drunkenly pointing a loaded weapon at civilians.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: MH2010 on February 08, 2010, 07:17:26 PM
You could always become a police officer and then join the FOP.  Of course this could also happen to you.


http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/2010/01/18/ignatius-piazza-stop-screaming-start-shooting/#video

click the video in the middle. I've watched the video before but this is the only link I could find for the video. Be warned it is disturbing.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Conan71 on February 08, 2010, 08:05:08 PM
I can't believe the LEO didn't use force on this guy when he charged him, that took a lot of restraint.  I couldn't see an excuse for not unloading on the guy when the driver started reaching into his truck and it was apparent he was grabbing a weapon.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Breadburner on February 08, 2010, 08:16:24 PM
Thats a very unfortunate situation......The officer completely let the suspect control the situation and I assume it cost him his life......The media and general public has to share some blame......Officers are always under the microscope when using force.....And I think it causes them to second guess themselves and their training....I wonder if this video was shown on the national media spotlight........
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: sgrizzle on February 09, 2010, 07:14:57 AM
Deputy Kyle Wayne Dinkheller
Laurens County Sheriff's Office
Georgia
End of Watch: Monday, January 12, 1998

Biographical Info
Age: 22
Tour of Duty: 4 years
Badge Number: 37

Incident Details
Cause of Death: Gunfire
Date of Incident: Monday, January 12, 1998
Weapon Used: Rifle; .30 caliber
Suspect Info: Sentenced to death

Deputy Dinkheller was shot and killed after pulling over a man on a rural road about 6 miles north of Dublin, Georgia. During the traffic stop he called in for backup. Before the backup arrived he was shot by the man with a rifle. He was able to return fire, striking the suspect in the stomach. The suspect was found during a search the next morning and taken into custody.

The entire incident was videotaped by a camera in Deputy Dinkheller's patrol car. On January 28, 2000, the suspect was found guilty of murder and was sentenced to death two days later.

Deputy Dinkheller is survived by his expectant wife and 22-month-old daughter. Deputy Dinkheller's son was born in early September 1998.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Breadburner on February 09, 2010, 08:02:14 AM
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 09, 2010, 07:14:57 AM
Deputy Kyle Wayne Dinkheller
Laurens County Sheriff's Office
Georgia
End of Watch: Monday, January 12, 1998

Biographical Info
Age: 22
Tour of Duty: 4 years
Badge Number: 37

Incident Details
Cause of Death: Gunfire
Date of Incident: Monday, January 12, 1998
Weapon Used: Rifle; .30 caliber
Suspect Info: Sentenced to death

Deputy Dinkheller was shot and killed after pulling over a man on a rural road about 6 miles north of Dublin, Georgia. During the traffic stop he called in for backup. Before the backup arrived he was shot by the man with a rifle. He was able to return fire, striking the suspect in the stomach. The suspect was found during a search the next morning and taken into custody.

The entire incident was videotaped by a camera in Deputy Dinkheller's patrol car. On January 28, 2000, the suspect was found guilty of murder and was sentenced to death two days later.

Deputy Dinkheller is survived by his expectant wife and 22-month-old daughter. Deputy Dinkheller's son was born in early September 1998.

I hate to say this but that officer was to young to being doing that job alone.......
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: shadows on February 09, 2010, 07:59:55 PM
The video shows a very similarity to other dashboard cam videos that were made by the group in Vegas that were forwarded on the internet.  The driver  doing a jig seems always to have been in the pictures.  Believe they were for amusement only.    
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: MH2010 on February 09, 2010, 10:11:11 PM
No. This video is not fake. The officer was killed.  See the above post By sgrizzle for his information.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: shadows on February 10, 2010, 02:07:02 PM
I do not question the officer loosing his life.   The loss of life in pursuit of enforcing the laws is not acceptable under any circumstances.  My questing is centered on the video as to its similarities to other videos that have been placed on the internet.  In the video as in others the officers are never placed full view in the picture.  Using the recent video of the paramedic/OHP incident as a rule this video shows a gross of errors on the part of the officer.     
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: Hoss on February 10, 2010, 03:30:58 PM
Quote from: shadows on February 10, 2010, 02:07:02 PM
I do not question the officer loosing his life.   The loss of life in pursuit of enforcing the laws is not acceptable under any circumstances.  My questing is centered on the video as to its similarities to other videos that have been placed on the internet.  In the video as in others the officers are never placed full view in the picture.  Using the recent video of the paramedic/OHP incident as a rule this video shows a gross of errors on the part of the officer.     


You think? 

He was 22
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: buckeye on February 11, 2010, 03:33:51 PM
Quote from: MH2010 on February 08, 2010, 07:17:26 PM
You could always become a police officer and then join the FOP.  Of course this could also happen to you.

<brutal video link>

Or (more likely) you could get killed in a traffic collision.  Don't go into retail either, especially not as a manager:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.toc.htm (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.toc.htm)

and a handier summary of the same data:

http://www.careerbuilder.com/Article/CB-1340-Job-Search-Americas-Most-Dangerous-Jobs/?ArticleID=1340&cbRecursionCnt=1&cbsid=394fdbd5e08a4425837f04dc622252d3-319221052-JI-5&ns_siteid=ns_us_g_bureau_labor_statisti_ (http://www.careerbuilder.com/Article/CB-1340-Job-Search-Americas-Most-Dangerous-Jobs/?ArticleID=1340&cbRecursionCnt=1&cbsid=394fdbd5e08a4425837f04dc622252d3-319221052-JI-5&ns_siteid=ns_us_g_bureau_labor_statisti_)

But that's really not the point.  Fees was previously nailed for some shenanigans involving selling pseudoephedrine online as well as a couple other fairly silly things:

http://dailyme.com/story/2010021100002551/officer-faced-discipline-times-incident-involved.html (http://dailyme.com/story/2010021100002551/officer-faced-discipline-times-incident-involved.html)

I don't think any of us civilians would be afforded the relative luxury of paid leave in the same circumstances.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: nathanm on February 11, 2010, 04:27:10 PM
Quote from: buckeye on February 11, 2010, 03:33:51 PM
I don't think any of us civilians would be afforded the relative luxury of paid leave in the same circumstances.
We would have been provided an all expenses paid vacation to McAlester for the pseudoephedrine bit. It's unlikely we would have had the chance to point a gun at somebody at Oscar's Gastro Pub 3 or 4 years later.

Oh, and we'd be back in jail right now on a parole violation if we had somehow gotten paroled that shortly.

I don't begrudge officers a little PC when it comes to minor things like speeding or noise complaints, but this and the officer's previous issues go far beyond that.
Title: Re: monthly charge for police
Post by: shadows on February 12, 2010, 04:50:05 PM
Quote from: Hoss on February 10, 2010, 03:30:58 PM
You think?  

He was 22
The officer in the traffic stop had a gun in hand and ordered the person to come toward him (under normal procedure would be "place your hands on your head) and watch him do a jig, go to the cab and get a rifle, and walk around the pickup and shoot the officer.   A 22 years old with gun in hand is a very dangerous age as they have a tendency to shoot first and think about it later.  Look at the video real closely to the actions of the driver and think that a officer did not even fired a warning shot when the driver did the jig or when he emerged from the cab with the rifle, then would be the time for the officer to empty his gun.

The recent event of the drunken police officer in Tulsa surely does not represent highly educated police officers that are sworn to protect the citizens.  He seems to have a key to the inter sanctuary after sufficient evidence was available for the arrest, released on bail, without even a reduction in his salary until a determination of guilt at some future date.   The mayor if he was acting in good faith with the citizens should have released him from the PD at the same time and let him start the appeal procedures.