Text 20563, 113 rader
Skriven 2006-05-30 15:53:00 av LEE LOFASO (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av JOHN HULL
Ärende: Iraq News
=================
Hello John,

>LL>The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program was one of the
>LL>hallmarks of the Clinton administration.  And what a great achievement
>LL>it was!  This federal program added more than 100,000 cops to local
>LL>police forces, and helped to cut crime to the lowest levels in history.
>LL>Now that is what I would call $8 billion dollars well-spent.  These
>LL>funds paid for all or part of entry-level officers' salaries during
>LL>their FIRST THREE YEARS of work, with agencies receiving those grants
>LL>required to keep those oficers for a FOURTH YEAR.

JH>Bull hockey.  Crime rates were down because of the aging of the baby boomers
JH>who grew out of the age bracket that most crime is perpetrated by.  The FBI
JH>has shown that crime rates have been declining steadily as boomers aged.  Yo
JH>can expect rates to start back up again as X-Gen kids grow into that age
JH>bracket.

Even Bush administration officials acknowledge that the COPS program
put over 100,000 cops on the streets.  And you know as well as everyone
else that the more cops on the streets means less crime.  Of course, the
fewer cops on the streets means less reported crime...

JH>And they still didn't put 100,000 actual cops on the pavement.  What's
JH>on so bureaucrats desk on paper don't mean diddly on the street.

Why is it that even Bush administration officials agree that over
100,000 cops were added to the rolls?  Could it possibly be that
John Hull is WRONG?

>JH>Great solution, eh?

>LL>Yes indeedy.  :)

>JH>Typical pie-in-the-sky feel-good liberal bullshit.

>LL>Especially for those 100,000+ cops who had jobs as a result.  :)

JH>Are you nuts?  A very large percentage of those who got hired were first tim
JH>cops, right out of training with no experience.  How effective were they?  M

Very effective.  After all, they were on the force.  You see, John, when
criminals see cops on the street, they tend to flee, not wishing to go
to jail.  And those that do get caught tend to be taken off the streets
and given a warm place to stay.  At taxpayer expense.

JH>small departments couldn't afford to hire them even with the Feds paying the
JH>salary because of the training and equiping costs of rookies.

The COPS programs enabled governments to hire more police officers and
equipment.  And for small departments, that was a godsend.  Of course,
with Bush cutting the funding (only $22 million on COPS proposed in
2006), that means fewer cops and less equipment.  Meaning a less safe
America.

>JH>Spray it around thick, make everybody feel good, and then steal away
>JH>through the back door when nobody is watching.

>LL>U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton blew a gasket when Bush decided to end the
>LL>program, demanding that funds be restored.  But Bush was not interested
>LL>in protecting the American people...

JH>You lyin' dog.  Bush has done far more, in every way, to protect this
JH>country than Hillarity will ever do.

Lemme see if I got this right.  Bush proposed $22 million in 2006
for COPS, which is far higher than the $1.5 billion a year the Clinton
administration allocated for the COPS programs.  The way I looks at
things, $1.5 billion puts more cops on the streets than a paltry
$22 million.  But I could be wrong.  After all, I have never been
very good at math...

>JH>Makes you proud to be an American, right, Lee?

>LL>It makes me VERY PROUD that President Clinton took steps to protect
>LL>American citizens from harm.  :)

JH>And you bought that schuck-n-jive BS hook, line, and sinker.

More cops means more protection for the American people.
Fewer cops means less protection for the American people.

>JH>Proud to be a piece of shit liberal!

>LL>Especially that "piece of shit liberal" journalist for the USA Today.
>LL>Check out this url -

>LL>http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-12-01-cops-cover_x.htm

>LL>Imagine that.  Everything I posted supported by a reputable cite.  :)

JH>Yeah, nothing like citing a three year old article.

The COPS programs did not end when Clinton left office.  But for all
practical purposes, Bush essentially ended it (through underfunding).

>LL>Of course, the above cite also totally refutes your statements
>LL>that "Clinton never even got close to 100,000 cops" and "only funded
>LL>them for one year", etc.

JH>Crap.  The cops that got hired in my hometown under that program got
JH>laid off due to "budget constraints" when the Fed money ran out.  Fat
JH>lot of good it us, leaving us short three officers.

You can thank your beloved George W. Bush for cutting the funding for
COPS programs, leaving your community with fewer cops.  Makes you feel
real safe from crime, doesn't it?

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * --T-A+G-L-I+N-E--+M-E-A+S-U-R+I-N-G+--G-A+U-G-E--
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)