You get what you pay for, no?

Let's hope this trend spreads throughout the nation!

"Don't start building police stations until your city grows a bit." - Prof. Herman Cain, Sim City University

Relatively Obscure: A town of 675 that isn't isolated probably doesn't need its own police department, actually.

This. The idea of contracting out to a neighboring department makes much more sense. Also, WTF is up with this "illegal termination" nonsense, are you telling me that a police office of 4 people had it's own union!?!

Looks like they can just form a posse if they need it.

Relatively Obscure: A town of 675 that isn't isolated probably doesn't need its own police department, actually.

Too bad we can't get rid of more of those scumbags.

Not amused

You could probably reduce the number of cops in the U.S. by half with no discernible impact on crime rates. Not necessarily evenly across the board, but in total. Way too many bloated departments and way too many overlapping jurisdictions.

Legalize drugs and you could reduce by half again.

Relatively Obscure: A town of 675 that isn't isolated probably doesn't need its own police department, actually.


I'm guessing they formed the department primarily to run speed traps and generate revenue. But since none of the 675 people in the city had the experience or organizational knowledge to oversee a police department, the whole thing went to shiat.

Sure am!

CowboyNinjaD: Relatively Obscure: A town of 675 that isn't isolated probably doesn't need its own police department, actually.


I'm guessing they formed the department primarily to run speed traps and generate revenue. But since none of the 675 people in the city had the experience or organizational knowledge to oversee a police department, the whole thing went to shiat.

meh, disband the local police and install red light cameras, generate revenue 1000%

I remember riding through there on a bike path more than a few times.

Very slow speed limits, and cops that liked to roll through town lurking for infractions.

Color me impressed.

I am guessing the nuke plant has it's own security?

EleventyOne: CowboyNinjaD: Relatively Obscure: A town of 675 that isn't isolated probably doesn't need its own police department, actually.


I'm guessing they formed the department primarily to run speed traps and generate revenue. But since none of the 675 people in the city had the experience or organizational knowledge to oversee a police department, the whole thing went to shiat.

meh, disband the local police and install red light cameras, generate revenue 1000%


I'm not sure if they'd be allowed to run red light cameras if they didn't have a police force. All the revenues would probably end up going to the sheriff's office, or whatever other department was covering their area.

Enemabag Jones: I remember riding through there on a bike path more than a few times.

Very slow speed limits, and cops that liked to roll through town lurking for infractions.

Color me impressed.

I am guessing the nuke plant has it's own security?

Ha!

CowboyNinjaD:

I'm guessing they formed the department primarily to run speed traps and generate revenue. .

Let me introduce you to

Nolandville Texas

"At one point during the 1970s, because of its reputation as a speed trap, the commanding general of Fort Hood declared Nolanville off-limits to all military personnel. Maps of routes around Nolanville were posted in all company offices."

Population in July 2009: 2,972

Full-time law enforcement employees in 2010, including police officers: 5 (5 officers)

Indubitably: Enemabag Jones: I remember riding through there on a bike path more than a few times.

Very slow speed limits, and cops that liked to roll through town lurking for infractions.

Color me impressed.

I am guessing the nuke plant has it's own security?

Ha!

Sort of like the nukes next to potatoes: breach a certain perimeter, and you WILL be compromised, compromiser.

Seriously?

Naivete-no-mark.

Relatively Obscure: A town of 675 that isn't isolated probably doesn't need its own police department, actually.

they don't need an own department, but they probably still need police.
so the sane thing would be to merge their police-force with the one in the next town.

One would assume that they can contract the local county cops to do the job for them - how much can that cost if they only currently have 1 cop? Have em drop by on patrol and be empowered to answer calls in the village. Mind you, if they are only paying $10.50 an hour for police, that might not pay for a whole heck of a lot of Sheriff Dept service .....

/A whole lot of Canada polices with the RCMP - most provinces don't have their own police force here. Nor do we generally have a county sheriff's dept either. Most cities and regions do have their own police, but once you get out of the cities the provincial police or the RCMP are the only police you have.

The problem with accounting is that some things are easy to quantify monetarily and other things aren't. For example: you can easily understand the savings of letting staff/police/whatever go, but how do you really put a monetary value to crime rates?

Companies run into the same trouble when they are run by accountants: an ideal company would have no employees on the books, but then you can't actually innovate or create anything new.

A similar problem happens with ecology -- it is easy to count the tax money made by a local factory, but difficult to account for the cost of the pollution.

If you're going to run a town/company/country based on financials it is key that you come up with a reasonable valuation for the non-monetary things you care about, otherwise you're not properly harnessing capitalism to protect or drive towards those things.

See, that's not what it is about. Whenever there is a budget crisis, politicians will start cutting essential services first. It seems counter-intuitive, until you realize that it's a bluff. Of course, everybody wants a police department... and they're more willing to pay for it than they might admit. Of course, you could start cutting non-essential programs (And in a small town like this, there might not be any, but I think the point stands), but it's more effective, from the politician's perspective, to go 'Well, if we can't raise taxes, you can't have police'.

Just my thought on it, anyhow. Maybe I should be crafting a tinfoil hat?

rosonowski: See, that's not what it is about. Whenever there is a budget crisis, politicians will start cutting essential services first. It seems counter-intuitive, until you realize that it's a bluff. Of course, everybody wants a police department... and they're more willing to pay for it than they might admit. Of course, you could start cutting non-essential programs (And in a small town like this, there might not be any, but I think the point stands), but it's more effective, from the politician's perspective, to go 'Well, if we can't raise taxes, you can't have police'.

Just my thought on it, anyhow. Maybe I should be crafting a tinfoil hat?

Nope. North Korea has been conducting foreign policy this way for decades. Get everyone terrified enough and they'll give away the store at the negotiating table.

Meh. I live in a town of 25,000 thats pretty close to some much larger cities, a good size one right next to us. We use the county sheriff. Everyone complains that there isnt enough traffic enforcement. City next over has hundreds of city police. People drive just as badly there, but the city does get to write tickets and they write plenty. The city then pisses its money away on completely stupid and unnecessary things like pedestrian overpasses that are 4x the distance of just crossing the street so nobody uses them, and new parks when the city already has 30+ and on most days you could drive by all of them and find some kids in maybe two or three of them.

On that basis, I think the town council probably made the right decision, unless they're the types that like to use a local PD to steal money from people so they can waste it, to no benefit of the community either way.

/The future of Traffic Light Cameras
//"Speed enforced by Predator Drone"

Sounds like they had tons of problems with their police and that's why they're disbanding. Saving money is just gravy.

If they disband the police, who will pepper spray the occupy protesters?

Superluminal Perineum: [img683.imageshack.us image 304x450]

/The future of Traffic Light Cameras
//"Speed enforced by Predator Drone"

Awesomely scary.

And true.

No more officers.

We could save billions.

Enforce with an Eye in the Sky.

Guys look guilty? AND Brown?

*Hellfire launch*

...

Policing made easy, Eye in Sky, said EiS, and that's what we do, EiS it. Cold. Shut down and iced...

some.old.lady.: Step#1: Shut down police department.

Step#2: Allow the entire civilized world to hear about your chaotic city admin.

Step#3: Listen to the sound of millions popping their popcorn while "job seekers" make their way to your town.

(yes, I know, I know)

Yer paranoid.

Grow up.

So the police in Cordova won't be there, be there, be there this Sunday, Sunday, Sunday?

Cordova? Meh.

When they layoff half the police force in a cesspool like Camden, NJ it's time to panic.

Oh wait, they already did that.

/panic

some.old.lady.: Indubitably: some.old.lady.: Step#1: Shut down police department.

Step#2: Allow the entire civilized world to hear about your chaotic city admin.

Step#3: Listen to the sound of millions popping their popcorn while "job seekers" make their way to your town.

(yes, I know, I know)

Yer paranoid.

Grow up.

..... Oh Hi there, indub! Haven't seen you in a while.

Having fun?

YES!

Apologies.

I r bad?

;(

Came for the Mortimer references, leaving dissatisfied. Good day, sir. I SAID 'GOOD DAY.'

El Ojo: So the police in Cordova won't be there, be there, be there this Sunday, Sunday, Sunday?

Sunday will never be the saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmmme....................

Considering how well this has worked throughout history, there should surely be no unintended consequences of disbanding a group of armed thugs and leaving them to their own devices...

rosonowski: See, that's not what it is about. Whenever there is a budget crisis, politicians will start cutting essential services first. It seems counter-intuitive, until you realize that it's a bluff. Of course, everybody wants a police department... and they're more willing to pay for it than they might admit. Of course, you could start cutting non-essential programs (And in a small town like this, there might not be any, but I think the point stands), but it's more effective, from the politician's perspective, to go 'Well, if we can't raise taxes, you can't have police'.

Just my thought on it, anyhow. Maybe I should be crafting a tinfoil hat?

That's a wonderful story, but the problem isn't as cut and dried. They fired one police officer and the chief of the department quit in protest. Then ANOTHER officer tried to rough someone up he shouldn't and got arrested, fired and is awaiting trial. They have two others who were already on part time pay but no chief and probably nobody qualified to run law enforcement and no funds to attract someone from outside the community. The only thing they have to attract a new chief of police is his own fiefdom to run, and the City Council obviously is fine without having to compete with someone for power and influence in the community.

There is a difference between a city and a village. I imagine a small village can probably get by on an occasional state trooper passing through.

Relatively Obscure: A town of 675 that isn't isolated probably doesn't need its own police department, actually.

My town of 2,000 disbanded it's police department like 15 years ago and just relies on the county sheriffs. Everyone raised a big stink but no one has noticed any differences in services or crime.

Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: You could probably reduce the number of cops in the U.S. by half with no discernible impact on crime rates. Not necessarily evenly across the board, but in total. Way too many bloated departments and way too many overlapping jurisdictions.

Legalize drugs and you could reduce by half again.

No facts? Check.
Phrased in a way that we can all pretend someone else gets the three hour state police response time? Check.

Convenient.

Absolutely reductions could be made. Between training time and turnover, it generally behooves a station to have more than the bare minimum.

I know the cop haters crowd usually uses the claim that bazillions of violations occur but are hushed up. What's the excuse on this one? Cops controlling statisticians performing nation-wide tracking studies on public information?

Smackledorfer
Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: You could probably reduce the number of cops in the U.S. by half with no discernible impact on crime rates. Not necessarily evenly across the board, but in total. Way too many bloated departments and way too many overlapping jurisdictions.
Legalize drugs and you could reduce by half again.
No facts? Check.
Phrased in a way that we can all pretend someone else gets the three hour state police response time? Check.
Convenient.
Absolutely reductions could be made. Between training time and turnover, it generally behooves a station to have more than the bare minimum.
I know the cop haters crowd usually uses the claim that bazillions of violations occur but are hushed up. What's the excuse on this one? Cops controlling statisticians performing nation-wide tracking studies on public information?

I love this. You know you are asking for counter statistics on already stacked information. Granted not all police departments are the same, but too many are pursuing the low hanging fruit and stacking the stats.

Listen to this and tell me that some police departments are not taking the easy way out. It will take five minutes of your time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt7Sxy7gAPE (new window)

Evil Canadian: One would assume that they can contract the local county cops to do the job for them - how much can that cost if they only currently have 1 cop? Have em drop by on patrol and be empowered to answer calls in the village. Mind you, if they are only paying $10.50 an hour for police, that might not pay for a whole heck of a lot of Sheriff Dept service .....

/A whole lot of Canada polices with the RCMP - most provinces don't have their own police force here. Nor do we generally have a county sheriff's dept either. Most cities and regions do have their own police, but once you get out of the cities the provincial police or the RCMP are the only police you have.

Canadian socialist commies

Smackledorfer: Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: You could probably reduce the number of cops in the U.S. by half with no discernible impact on crime rates. Not necessarily evenly across the board, but in total. Way too many bloated departments and way too many overlapping jurisdictions.

Legalize drugs and you could reduce by half again.

No facts? Check.
Phrased in a way that we can all pretend someone else gets the three hour state police response time? Check.

Convenient.

Absolutely reductions could be made. Between training time and turnover, it generally behooves a station to have more than the bare minimum.

I know the cop haters crowd usually uses the claim that bazillions of violations occur but are hushed up. What's the excuse on this one? Cops controlling statisticians performing nation-wide tracking studies on public information?

It has nothing to do with cop-hating and everything to do with diminishing returns, political patronage and the natural tendency of bureaucracies to expand. It's compounded when you don't have an overall strategy and allow each of those jurisdictions to grow on their own.

As for the reduction in crime that would accompany drug legalization (or at least decriminalization), do we really have to go through the litany of things which should be obvious to any serious observer? And if you think it's just a bunch of pot-smoking hippies who think that way I'd turn you on to LEAP but I'm sure you'll just dismiss them as a bunch of self-loathing LE officials who are betraying their fellow officers.