I don't know what is like where you live, but in my part of NJ, the next town over was in the list:
How much does a Police Patrol Officer in Edison, NJ make? The median annual Police Patrol Officer salary in Edison, NJ is $62,127, as of June 24, 2016, with a range usually between $51,746-$73,318 not including bonus and benefit information and other factors that impact base pay. However, the salary for someone with the title Police Patrol Officer may vary depending on a number of factors including industry, company size, location, years of experience and level of education. Our team of Certified Compensation Professionals has analyzed survey data collected from thousands of HR departments at companies of all sizes and industries to present this range of annual salaries for people with the job title Police Patrol Officer in Edison, NJ. Not super rich, but if you take in consideration that they have Cadillac healthcare and a pension after 25 years ... not a bad gig ... if I was to redo my youthful choices, i would either be a teacher or a cop!!! On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 5:26 PM, geoffrey theist <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe they'll take the opportunity to take responsibility for the sad > state of their neighborhoods. self policing and ridding themselves of the > criminal element that keeps them in the quagmire of desperation and > despair!!!!!! NAH. they could do that now. The one leader they have > preaches self reliance is the most reviled Louis Farrakhan. > > On Jul 10, 2016 2:17 PM, "Keith In Tampa" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hey Perp! > > > > The long term effect could in fact be more devastating.....Law > Enforcement is not all that well paying in the first place; it takes a > certain type of individual to even consider wanting to do this type of > job. I tend to think that it may be harder to fill vacancies down the > road..... > > > > On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 10:13 AM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Good morning, Keith. > >> > >> I think the obvious short-term impact of this week will be that fewer > and fewer cops will bother to patrol the high crime and high violence black > neighborhoods all over America. Their black-on-black violent crime rates > (including murder) will probably skyrocket. And this sucks, as we've all > seen the completely innocent 6-year old kids who get murdered by the > savage, murderous thugs in cities all over America. > >> > >> On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 9:26:30 AM UTC-4, KeithInTampa wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks for providing accurate data Perp! > >>> > >>> I also find it a bit ironic (as well as astonishing!) that > Libertarians and active members of the progressive left can label > conservatives as, "hyperventilating diptards"; or make such a claim as: > "There's No War On Cops" after what we've witnessed since the "Trevyon > Martin/Michael Brown/Black Lives Matter" hate groups have sprung up, > advocated a "tit-for-tat" killing spree mentality; and these hate groups > have been flaimed by the Secular Progressive left of centeer Democratic > Party. > >>> > >>> My God Man! There were at least eight law enforcement officers this > past week gunned down and murdered (predominately based on false narrative > media stories!) and at least another ten who were shot but survived their > wounds, across the Nation just this past week! The audacity of the liberal > left never ceases to amaze me. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 10:21 PM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> The data cited in your article is quite outdated. Most of it only > goes through 2012 and this is 2016. The militant black movements didn't > start getting support from the mainstream media, NFL players, celebrities, > and every dumbass democrat in the House of Representatives until late 2014 > after months of the "hands up don't shoot" bs lies they all pushed to the > mobs. > >>>> > >>>> According to the FBI there were 27 murdered on the job in 2014 and 51 > (yes, FIFTY-ONE) murdered on the job in 2015. > >>>> > >>>> There have been at least 26 police officers killed on the job using > guns so far this year. That means we will no doubt lose at least 50 by the > end of the year even if it doesn't get any worse. That's more than TWICE - > and almost THREE TIMES the number of blacks who were killed by cops who > weren't doing something to warrant being killed. > >>>> > >>>> So what there isn't is a war or open season on black people. THAT is > the lie that needs to stop being told. There IS, however, an ALARMING > increase in the number of cops being shot by murderous thugs doing so based > on the PACK OF LIES being fed to them by disgusting democrats, a dishonest > media, and black activists. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Saturday, July 9, 2016 at 5:45:37 PM UTC-4, MJ wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Karen DeCoster "Let Radley Balko's article shut up all of the > hyperventilating diptards. Facts are more powerful than your state-worship > and ignorance-based cliché recitals. " > >>>>> > >>>>> September 10, 2015 > >>>>> Once again: There is no ‘war on cops.’ And those who claim otherwise > are playing a dangerous game. > >>>>> By Radley Balko > >>>>> > >>>>> Here’s Fox News earlier this week, shamelessly exploiting a tragedy > to gin up outrage. > >>>>> http://youtu.be/x9uJHbXpMoU > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> They certainly aren’t the only ones. Here are some more examples of > media outlets and politicians spreading the hysteria: > >>>>> “War On Police Sparks National Crime Wave” > >>>>> “Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick: There’s A War On Cops And Media ‘Are Not In > Police Officers’ Corner'” > >>>>> “Police face recruiting shortage due to war on cops” > >>>>> “Do Cops’ Lives Matter to Obama?” > >>>>> “[New York Police Chief] Bratton warns of tough times ahead due to > ‘war on cops'” > >>>>> > >>>>> As I’ve noted here before, we’re seeing similar rhetoric from > politicians, particularly from GOP presidential hopefuls, including Donald > Trump, Ted Cruz, and Scott Walker. > >>>>> > >>>>> All of this fact-free fearmongering is having an effect. A Rasmussen > poll taken last week found that 58 percent of respondents now believe there > is now a “war on police.” Just 27 percent disagreed. > >>>>> > >>>>> So let’s go through the numbers. Again. So far, 2015 is on pace to > see 35 felonious killings of police officers. If that pace holds, this year > would end with the second lowest number of murdered cops in decades. Here’s > a graph depicting annual killings of cops with firearms from Mark A. Perry > at the American Enterprise Institute: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> But these are just the raw numbers. If we look at the rate of > killings of cops, the trend is more pronounced. There are two ways examine > the rate of police killings. The first is to look at the rate of killings > of cops per 100K cops on the street. This figure is somewhat difficult to > calculate because there are widely varying estimates of how many cops are > on the street. It depends on how you define “police officer,” who is doing > the estimating, and various other factors. But if you use consistent > sources, the number of police has generally gone up, while the number of > officers killed has generally gone down. So your graph looks something like > this one, from Dan Wang: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> The other way you could measure the rate of killings of police > officers is to look at the number with respect to the overall population. > Here’s another graph from Perry that plots those figures: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> As you can see, by this measure 2015 is shaping up to be the second > safest year for police ever, after 2013. > >>>>> > >>>>> Speaking of which, it’s important to note again here that 2013 was > an abnormally and historically low year for police fatalities, as this > graph from University of South Carolina law professor (and former police > officer) Seth Stoughton shows. > >>>>> > >>>>> [Tweets @ link] > >>>>> > >>>>> So when police advocates say that 2014 saw an 80+ percent increase > in homicides of cops over 2013, remember a few things: First, 2013 wasn’t > just an all-time low, it was an all-time low by a significant margin. > Second, the 2013 figure was so low that even a small increase will look > large when expressed as a percentage. Third, the figure for the following > year, 2014, (51 officers killed) was essentially consistent with the > average for the previous five years (50 killed), and still lower than any > five-year average going back to 1960. ( See this graph, also from Wang.) > Fourth, again, 2015 is on pace (35 killings) to be lower than any year but > 2013. Another common response from police organizations and their advocates > is that the reduction in fatalities is due to better medical care and > improvements in protective gear such as bulletproof vests. Both things are > undoubtedly true. But assaults on police officers are in decline as well. > That is, not only are fewer people killing police officers, fewer people > are trying to harm them. These graphs from Stoughton show the raw numbers > of assaults on police: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> As you can see, at best you could argue that assaults on police with > firearms are about even with where they’ve been for most of the last > decade, save for a dip in 2009 and 2010. But these too are raw figures. > When we look at the rate of assault on cops, from either the perspective of > total cops or total population, the downward trend once again becomes more > pronounced. From Daniel Bier, here are two graphs looking at the assault > rates on police officers. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Any murder of a police officer is a tragedy. (As is any murder of a > non-police officer.) But media outlets, politicians, and police advocates > do real damage when they push this false narrative about a rising threat to > law enforcement. First, this sort of propaganda weights the public debate > and discourse. When there’s a fictional “war on cops” blaring in the > background, it becomes much more difficult to have an honest discussion > about police cameras, police militarization, use of lethal force policies, > police discipline, police transparency, training, police accountability, > and a host of other issues. Of course, that’s precisely the point. > >>>>> > >>>>> But there’s also a much more pernicious effect of exaggerating the > threats faced by law enforcement. When cops are constantly told that > they’re under constant fire, or that every interaction with a citizen could > be their last, or that they’re fortunate each time they come home from the > job in one piece, it’s absolute poison for police-community relations. That > kind of reminder on a regular basis would put anyone on edge. We’re putting > police officers in a perpetually combative mindset that psychologically > isolates them from the communities they serve. Incessantly telling cops > that they’re under fire can condition them to see the people with whom they > interact not as citizens with rights, but as potential threats. That not > only means more animosity, anger and confrontation, it can also be a > barrier to building relationships with people in the community the sorts > of relationships that help police officers solve crimes and keep > communities safe. > >>>>> > >>>>> It also just makes for a miserable work life. If you’ve been trained > to think your job is getting progressively more dangerous, and that a > significant percentage of the people you encounter on a daily basis want to > do you harm, you’re going to be less tolerant of dissent. You’re going to > constantly be on-guard, on-edge, and jumpy. That isn’t a state of mind > that’s conducive to de-escalation, that opts for persuasion over brute > force, or seeks out peaceful conflict resolution. It’s a state of mind > ruled by the limbic system, not the frontal lobe. And yes, it’s a state of > mind that makes an officer more likely to reach for his gun. Again, this > isn’t a comment on cops. It’s a comment on human beings in general. > >>>>> > >>>>> An over-emphasis on and obsession with a “war on cops” would be > dangerous and counterproductive even if it were true. But by every > imaginable measure, it just isn’t true. When this false narrative comes > from police organizations and their supporters, it’s at least somewhat > understandable. When it comes from politicians, it’s grandstanding and > demagoguery. When it comes from media organizations, it’s journalistic > malpractice. And it’s almost certainly getting people killed. > >>>>> > >>>>> One last point: I’ve seen some police officials and their advocates > respond to these statistics by pointing out that even if assaults and > killings of cops are down, anti-police rhetoric is increasing. Therefore, > they say, they’re justified in proclaiming that there’s a war on the > police. This is nonsense. Police agencies are government agencies. They’re > government agencies in whom we entrust the power to detain, arrest, and > kill. Yes, it’s true that some people are demanding more of those agencies. > It’s true that personal technology is enabling people to create an > independent video narrative of their interactions with police. It’s true > that those videos have sometimes revealed police misconduct and brutality, > and that police officers, like all people, sometimes mis-remember, > misstate, and outright lie when recounting contentious, traumatic, > high-stakes incidents. And it’s true that because of all of this, the > public as a whole today finds police officers as a whole less trustworthy > than in the past. It’s also true that some activists, pundits, and > politicians are demanding more accountability, transparency, and training > for police. > >>>>> > >>>>> None of these things are indicative of a “war.” On the contrary, all > of this new skepticism, criticism, forced transparency, and mistrust of the > police is again coming even as violence against police officers is > reaching historic lows. This is how a democracy is supposed to work. It’s > something worth celebrating. > >>>>> > >>>>> Instead, police groups and their advocates are claiming that the > mere act of criticizing a government entity is akin to declaring war on it, > and that therefore, police critics are culpable every time a police officer > is murdered. (And given the way they ignore and abuse statistics, those > critics are also apparently culpable for a lot of murders that never > happened.) They’re essentially saying that exercising constitutional rights > and participating in democracy are in and of themselves acts of violence. > And in many cases, this is coming from the very people that the government > empowers to use actual violence. > >>>>> > >>>>> That is something worth worrying about. > >>>>> > >>>>> > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/09/10/once-again-there-is-no-war-on-cops-and-those-who-claim-otherwise-are-playing-a-dangerous-game/ > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> -- > >>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > >>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > >>>> > >>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > >>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > >>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > >>>> > >>>> --- > >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "PoliticalForum" group. > >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to [email protected]. > >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> -- > >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > >> > >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > >> > >> --- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "PoliticalForum" group. > >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to [email protected]. > >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > > > --- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "PoliticalForum" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to [email protected]. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- brine http://brineb.blogspot.com/ -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
