|
| |
09/26/05
After-The-Fact Policing
 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| On the surface, it appears someone in the City Manager's Office is
gradually converting the Dallas Police Department into
an "after the fact" form of policing with DPD
officers responding to
most events long AFTER someone else gets there, or
long after an incident has occurred with no one else having responded. At that
juncture, the evidence is stale, the criminals are long gone (or victims in an
auto wreck will have been transported), and only the paperwork will remain.
That form of policing does not lead to a high percentage of "case closures".
|
|
|
09/27 JC:
It's called a shakedown.
Go ahead, say it --
S-H-A-K-E-D-O-W-N.
Cut or change an essential service and you'll have the
hapless, hopeless sheep finally give in and give you a bigger slice of
their checkbook.
Once again,
I call for neighborhoods to hire their own police force and arm
themselves.
When city bigwigs see that the
those that pay the bills are withholding their
Benjamin's from City Hall's greedy little hands,
you'll see why the second amendment should have been the first.
|
|
You would think that law enforcement would want to
arrive at a scene in time to prevent a crime, or in time to catch criminals in
the act. If beat elements were on their beats, response to calls for assistance
should be a matter of a few minutes, and not 30 minutes or more. It is a fact
that I was quoted a TWO hour response when I called in concerning a suspicious
person parked in front of my residence. The fire department responds to calls,
as a rule, in less than five minutes, and they are often several patrol beats
away. True --- the fire department travels at code
speeds, but those big trucks do not perform like NASCAR vehicles on the side
streets of Dallas.
The City Manager's Office should sit back and plan forward looking. Regression
styles of planning do not stimulate progress. Budgets do not decrease by not
responding to problems --- they grow. And, with backward style planning, the
citizens of Dallas get angrier as performance goes down and taxes go up.
That's why I sent the following letter to the city council:
Hello Honorable Mayor Miller and
Council Members:
It appears Dallas taxpayer receipts are being utilized to design, prepare and
distribute handouts at various public meetings which support DPD not answering
residential burglar alarm calls. The handouts were prepared by the "Dallas
Commission on Productivity & Innovation", who have an address at Dallas City
Hall. The program must be funded from DPD budget money, since DPD contributes
to the preparation of the material. This appears to be some form of advertising
campaign funded with public money.
I don't believe the Commission mentioned above has a clue as to where the
certified security guards, vehicles, radios, equipment, etc. would come from.
Those services are NOT available in Dallas at this time in a
quantity that could cover three shifts plus relief, and provide the
accompanying overhead and fringe benefits to its workers. What would all the
alarm company guards do when not answering alarm calls? Who would pay for them
doing nothing at those times? Whereon earth are all those resources at now, or
where will they come from? How can the Commission advertise such a position
with nothing on hand to facilitate their propaganda (much of which is not
truthful). How can the City Council sit back and let all this "smoke and
mirrors" campaign take place? Secondly, how can the City conduct public
hearings on a proposal that is not backed by available resources nor fact?
If at all possible, the City Council should postpone the 12 October 2005 hearing
until a bona fide proposal is on the table with true FACTS as to how the plan
would be placed into motion with REAL verified resources and equipment. How can
the City Council conduct such a hearing in good conscience?
Regards,
Rad Field
Council Dist.11
| |
|
