Not to mention the lucrative payouts from mob associates. On Jul 10, 2016 4:31 PM, "Brian Bednarek" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. > -- -- 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.
