The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Albany Police Officers Union President Chris Mesley says that, regardless of the faltering economy, a no-raise new contract is unacceptable.

And to hell with the public.

"I'm not running a popularity contest here," Mesley said. "If I'm the bad guy to the average citizen . . . and their taxes have go up to cover my raise, I'm very sorry about that, but I have to look out for myself and my membership."

Mesley added: "As the president of the local, I will not accept 'zeroes.' If that means . . . ticking off some taxpayers, then so be it."


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/what_union_bosses_think_Em4qoD4qx9ei7QLeYk8v6I#ixzz0fnwi02Ks

The stupidity in this country that is coming from people that are suppose to serve the people is mind-boggling.......

It's no worse than the Tulsa FOP forever yanging about public safety, then voting for layoffs that actually affect its ability to promote that public safety.

It's no worse than our two Tulsa cops on this forum who are always yanging about their being conservative, but forgetting their ideals when the mayor tries to do honest-to-God conservative things such as balance a budget, cutting spending and making smaller government.

I don't recall anyone saying the contrary....

Just think how lucky the Tulsan citizens are to live in a state where the Right to Work was passed and is enforced where the city is now controlled by the unions.  Course they have found a cash cow that gives stimulus money now instead of milk.

Then by placing the tariffs on pipe imported from China used in drilling operations, with the near quarter of a trillion dollar balance of payments last year, all the citizens may be lining up for stimulus money soon.  ;D 

124 fewer officers and still no crime wave.   

If anything, a slight decrease.
Same thing with turning off expressway lights.
This "cutting excesses" stuff just might catch on.

You might want to hold off your excitement till warmer weather arrives.

Warmer weather always brings about more activity, including criminal.
Has been that way regardless of how many or few police we have.
The FOP would be foolish to point to warmer-weather crime spikes and claim it's due to layoffs, but then they know there are also lots of foolish people that might believe that.

It is also foolish to believe that one of the worst winters in decades has not slowed down petty crime. You think stealing cars in 8 inches of snow is easy? :)

Honestly, you think crime will remain unaffected by a decrease in patrolmen? If so, how low should we go?

All I know is the cold weather has kept me indoors drinking Marshall's so I have not been out wilding.  There I did it, I managed to incorporate the hallowed beer into this discussion.

Conversely, would you think that adding 100 or 200 police to the force would do the trick in solving Tulsa's crime?
If not, how many police would it take to satisfy everyone?

I thought of you when I was listening to the news this morning on the way to work.  A TPD officer got dragged by a drunk when she reached in the car to try and take the keys last night.  When are they going to learn?  That guy is probably lucky they didn't bust a cap in his donkey.

She was holding onto the wheel and allowing herself to be "dragged" until her ride-along just reached up and pulled her free, so she wasnt able to get a legal shot off.  She probably wont be taking any ride-alongs again.
The drunk cop recently busted for waving a gun in a bar lost his previous job with Sand Springs after killing a shoplifter this way, so I dont think many good cops approve of this controversial technique.

No, but unlike you, I didn't imply as much. Your animosity towards TPD is well noted.

There simply is no correlation between current low levels of crime and the amount of patrolmen on the street. There is a correlation with severe winter weather and hot summer weather. If you had any hard info showing that reducing the number patrolmen had no effect on crime you would have presented it. I just called you on it.

So it's her fault a drunk was trying to drive off and he is now her victim ?  WoW, that might the sh!Tiest comment ever in my book.  Glad you or someone you care about wasnt in one of those cars (or a bystander) the driver was running into before she got to him.

Well, the comment was from Mr. I Hate Cops and Street Lights ... a two-trick pony.

You keep saying that, ignoring my well-established apprehension of any individual or entity that exercises power disproportionate to their accountability.  Why you choose to take it personally when the conversation involves TPD is puzzling, and unhealthy to friendly discussion. 


Im afraid your victory may be a hollow one, since I only agreed with another poster's observation that the crime wave the FOP promised didnt immediately appear after the layoffs.
 

You are walking down the street.
As you pass me, I suddenly stick out my foot in such a way that you end up unable to avoid stepping on it.
As I roll in the street wailing loudly, people gather around to hear my tearful story of how your brutal assault has crushed my foot.

You have injured me.
...there were witnesses who saw me collapse in pain, and a bruise.
I can legally take action against you on that alone.

Yet none of the material evidence nor witness accounts reflect that my status as victim was engineered, that my injury at your hands was precipitated by a calculated tactic on my part.

There is no reasonable expectation that a person of average strength can stop a motor vehicle by grasping a steering wheel through a driver's window.  Such a reasonable person would know that such an action on their part would likely result in harm to themselves, and if such harm were imminent, would be immediately remedied by releasing their grasp of the moving vehicle.

Any other course of action would either be unreasonable, or a calculated tactic. 

The cop that was arrested by fellow officers for being drunk and threatening people with a gun, had left his previous department after his use of this tactic resulted in the death of a person in police custody, even though it was publicly presented that his actions were "legal".

Let's see, an officer takes an oath "I will protect the lives, rights and property of all citizens . . . with my life if need be" so it is her job to put herself in harm's way to protect others.  You may think that's stupid, but she's doing the job she swore to do. 

Well, Patrick, I don't ever remember responding to any of your posts, especially that you are a cop hater. I only remember noting that you seem to have great insights about wasteful spending on PSO's behalf by the city and that you resent authority, specifically TPD.

My only purpose on this forum anymore is to point out inconsistencies of logic or outright misunderstandings of things I know something about. Kind of like you and streetlights. I don't have time to argue about differences of opinion or politics. I am not a member of the fraternity, I'm a past alum.

When a cop reaches in to a drunks car to turn off the ignition, there is no plausible defense for dragging him/her in an effort to thwart the action. The cop is legitimate. The drunk is not. To use your contrived situation of tripping, imagine that the innocent pedestrian was about to pull the trigger of a gun aimed at another pedestrian when the cop found that her best move was to trip the pedestrian and thereby diffuse the situation. A drunk in a car is a loaded weapon aimed at the public.

I may have blurred your comments with Conan's baiting in my haste -- sorry to have insulted you in such a way  ;)
Also, if you knew me better you would find the term "cop hater" to be uncharacteristic, and inaccurate to say the least.

I'm not that thin skinned. I share with you a distrust of abusive authority, especially authorities who carry weapons and a bad attitude.