Open Side Menu Go to the Top

01-26-2012 , 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Case Closed
It takes a special kind of poster to have me agree completely with DblBarrel. There are a lot of reasons why these numbers can change. Many of those reasons have nothing to do with the quality of police. I don't think the quality of police have gone down over the past couple of generations. I do think the incentives for police have changed. Do you think you could talk about that Dbl? Like, for a rookie cop planning out his career, how have things changed?
Well, I think one of the ways the incentives have changed is that a lot more rookies these days are looking at police work as similar to the way people think of the military, as in they're doing it for training they can use in the private sector, they're not necessarily looking to retire, so where as twenty years ago, cops graduated the academy and attended what little training policy required, today's cops actively seek out training on any number of subjects, such as psychology, criminology, evidence collection, constitutional law, interview & interrogation etc.

Many Depts also offer financial incentives and incentives for sworn staff to work part time toward a bachelors or masters degree as well.

I recently left law enforcement as the consulting/investigation business I've been operating on the side for five years grew to a point where my cop job was costing me more money than I was earning being a cop.
$25m Guaranteed WPM on CoinPoker
Join the action now
Daily Rewards • Splash Pots • CoinRaces
01-26-2012 , 04:44 PM
You guys in this thread remind me of the douches that say insert random RB's name "was just as good as Emmitt Smith but he didn't have the line,the threat of Aikman and Irving on the field,Their D forced lots of 3 and outs so Emmitt was constantly facing tired defenses,blah blah blah."

I give up. I'm sure this group of cops that solves 30% of murders is collectively every bit as smart as a group of cops that solves 80% of murders despite having less technology to work with and twice as many murders to solve. They are just unlucky.

If I was a detective and was solving 30% of my cases I wouldn't get fired because I would have the decency to admit I wasn't doing my job and quit. I would be ashamed to accept a paycheck for such poor performance.
01-26-2012 , 04:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daryn
is that even true? i thought it was NYC.
There's elements of NYC in nerd Gotham, sometimes they call it NYC at night- but there's also Chicago stuff. Enough at least for the purposes of that joke.
01-26-2012 , 04:47 PM
I disagree steam. I think you'd frame people to up your stats. I'm almost sure of it....
01-26-2012 , 04:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DblBarrelJ
I disagree steam. I think you'd frame people to up your stats. I'm almost sure of it....
No I would admit that I wasn't doing my job and make a career change.
01-26-2012 , 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the steam
No I would admit that I wasn't doing my job and make a career change.
O rly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by the steam
I have absolutely no problem with a boss being sued for getting involved(or trying) romantically with a subordinate,he's an idiot and deserves what he gets. The problem is holding the boss accountable for the actions of coworkers or customers. It's a crappy situation when a woman comes to you and tells you a male coworker behaved inappropriately,you ask if there are any witnesses she says no. You call the male in and confront him and he says she's a liar(if he admits anything then it's an easy fire). Then you have to fire the female,I'm in the restaurant business so it's real easy,the next week you just have a friend call in and complain to the manager about her service,manager documents it and terminates her. It's a crappy situation to be in and either the accuser or the accusee has to be fired.
01-26-2012 , 05:05 PM
Is that an actual quote of his? Link to thread plz?
01-26-2012 , 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DblBarrelJ
Well, I think one of the ways the incentives have changed is that a lot more rookies these days are looking at police work as similar to the way people think of the military, as in they're doing it for training they can use in the private sector, they're not necessarily looking to retire, so where as twenty years ago, cops graduated the academy and attended what little training policy required, today's cops actively seek out training on any number of subjects, such as psychology, criminology, evidence collection, constitutional law, interview & interrogation etc.

Many Depts also offer financial incentives and incentives for sworn staff to work part time toward a bachelors or masters degree as well.

I recently left law enforcement as the consulting/investigation business I've been operating on the side for five years grew to a point where my cop job was costing me more money than I was earning being a cop.
Seems like these incentives would draw people away from working a job like homicide detective. Less money, more work, more stress, worse work environment than other fields.
01-26-2012 , 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the steam
You guys in this thread remind me of the douches that say insert random RB's name "was just as good as Emmitt Smith but he didn't have the line,the threat of Aikman and Irving on the field,Their D forced lots of 3 and outs so Emmitt was constantly facing tired defenses,blah blah blah."

I give up. I'm sure this group of cops that solves 30% of murders is collectively every bit as smart as a group of cops that solves 80% of murders despite having less technology to work with and twice as many murders to solve. They are just unlucky.

If I was a detective and was solving 30% of my cases I wouldn't get fired because I would have the decency to admit I wasn't doing my job and quit. I would be ashamed to accept a paycheck for such poor performance.
Since this thread sucks enough already I will say this. Emitt Smith sucks. I don't think he's in the top ten RBs of all time list.
01-26-2012 , 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the steam
You guys in this thread remind me of the douches that say insert random RB's name "was just as good as Emmitt Smith but he didn't have the line,the threat of Aikman and Irving on the field,Their D forced lots of 3 and outs so Emmitt was constantly facing tired defenses,blah blah blah."

I give up. I'm sure this group of cops that solves 30% of murders is collectively every bit as smart as a group of cops that solves 80% of murders despite having less technology to work with and twice as many murders to solve. They are just unlucky.

If I was a detective and was solving 30% of my cases I wouldn't get fired because I would have the decency to admit I wasn't doing my job and quit. I would be ashamed to accept a paycheck for such poor performance.
The logical conclusion of "2.66 times as many murders were solved before with worse technology" is that either the data is faulty or with no other data available it isnt that cops are worse now, its that more solves were frame jobs.
01-26-2012 , 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vael
Is that an actual quote of his? Link to thread plz?
Really? It was quicker to post that than copy/paste three words into search and answer your own question? Here ya go:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...stcount=10736w
01-26-2012 , 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vael
Is that an actual quote of his? Link to thread plz?
Link
01-26-2012 , 05:16 PM
I know what I will be doing today, now that I know this information.

Last edited by smooth101; 01-26-2012 at 05:16 PM. Reason: Solving murders obv.
01-26-2012 , 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DblBarrelJ
ETA: Slow Pony
01-26-2012 , 05:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Case Closed
Seems like these incentives would draw people away from working a job like homicide detective. Less money, more work, more stress, worse work environment than other fields.
Not necessarily. If one is attempting to work as a fraud investigator for a large corporation, having "Detective" on your resume is always a major plus. And by and large, Homicide guys are considered the best of the best.

I will concede the incentives to be a 20 yr homicide veteran may not be as strong, but the incentives to do it are definitely still there.
01-26-2012 , 05:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brons
Maybe the cops 20 years ago just framed more people?
This is what the CPD did all the time. They would talk to a couple people then go grab someone and beat the **** out of them until they confessed to the crime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissileDog
And cops are no-way dumber now. In fact, in every major metropolitan area that I've visited, today's cops are head and shoulders smarter, more professional, and harder working. Here in SoCal, the SDPD and LAPD have improved their hiring, training, and supervision so much its like night and day. A below average cop of 20 years ago couldn't even get hired by today's PDs.
LOL at harder working. The majority of the cops in Chicago range from fat to obese. The bullet proof vests look more like bibs. After they pass the physical to get the job they never have to take it again.

People are also way dumber now. The city has been trying to move cops from the precincts north side of the city where there is significantly less crime to the south and west sides of the city. People on the north side raise hell every time this tries to happen because they think it will make them less safe.
01-26-2012 , 05:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the steam
Why are the Chicago police of today unable to solve 80% of murders like the police of 20 years ago were able to do. That's what it means
The article does not say the murders are never solved.

It says that "clearance rate" is the number of murders that are solved the same year.

And it says this:

Quote:
“Forensic evidence may need processing time… so it stands to reason that an investigation may extend beyond a calendar year,” a police spokeswoman said.
So DNA processing takes time at labs and maybe back in the 1990s there was more of just grabbing people and calling them guilty and throwing them in jail. Since DNA, I think a lot of alleged Illinois murderers were found not guilty and let out jail and sometimes off of death row iirc. I think IL is the state that the governor stopped the death penalty b/c so many convicted murderers were found not to be guilty.

But I get that you were trying to say that Affirmative Action has let all these unqualified black and brown people become cops and detectives and so the collective intelligence has gone down for the Chicago PD. It's Chicago after all, and there are a lot of black people there, and there are a lot of black cops, and probably a lot of black homicide detectives, so you figured, without any evidence or data whatsoever, that they got their job even though they have these horrible test scores. I've seen this argument, even covertly made as you have, a million times, and it's just standard, two-bit foolishness.

DblbarrelJ showed your foolish statement to be not true, that detectives today are in fact more qualified, and now people are jumping on you for your ridiculous statement.

Well played sir.
01-26-2012 , 05:34 PM
That is completely off topic but the two people can no longer work together right,one must be fired. Saying let's just get back to work and be nice will end badly. Agree or disagree?

You know the cliffnotes but since you want to character assassinate me over it I will tell the whole story. This waitress had been working for me about two or three months and knew she was on thin ice for things like calling off,tardiness,gossiping,friction with other waitresses. She told the manager that the sous chef told her"I wanna put it in your ass."

The accusee was a 5 year employee who had never been complained about. When I asked him he said it was a total fabrication. I called her old boss,who I know but not well and he told me she threatened to sue him for sexual harassment from a customer. When I asked why didn't he tell the manager this when he called for a reference and he said he didn't want to get sued.

I could have told the manager just to fire her because I'm 99% sure she is lying,but I chose to have someone call in and tell him she gave rude and poor service because that is a pet peeve of his and I knew he would fire on the spot and document it. It looks alot cleaner if she would have tried to make anything of it.

I think the real problem is our laws that hold a business owner accountable for the interactions of two separate adults. If you think that makes me a POS so be it. Any other questions you can PM.
01-26-2012 , 06:01 PM
I only brought it up because you stated you'd quit, then, when faced with a real life situation cops face daily, or at least often, you didn't quit, you fabricated evidence.

That was the point, nothing else.
01-26-2012 , 06:24 PM
Lol at Gotham City being Chicago. NYC ainec.
01-26-2012 , 06:28 PM
Have we tied this to Rahm Emanuel and (by extension) Obama yet? Thread's getting long.
01-26-2012 , 06:36 PM
Did the Washington murder rate go down when he became Mayor, cos i think this could be tied directly to Rahm himself if it did
01-26-2012 , 07:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayTeeMe
I thought that too but the number is virtually the same as the 2010 statistics.
Sure. But it just means that these stats are pretty weird and not representative of reality. Better, and more useful, stats would be murder convictions which lag behind several years for obvious reasons. Like, half the solved cases could have ended up with a not guilty verdict or simple variance (or coaxing) could have moved them into the correct year.

I think these stats are pretty worthless to draw conclusions.
01-26-2012 , 07:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DblBarrelJ
Is this post serious?

I can assure you the training, education and experience requirements necessary to be a homicide detective are higher today than 20 yrs ago, in the days prior to standardized testing and minimum requirements, when the main requirement was getting a good recommendation from high ranking police supervisors.
Book smart vs. street smart.
01-26-2012 , 08:14 PM
Pretty much any cop who survives the 4-5 years on the street required to put in for a promotion to detective is going to have pretty decent street smarts.. Then another 3-5 from general crimes detective to homicide, which teaches them to work without the uniform/duty belt and marked car.

Sure not every detective isn't going to have the street smarts of a 45 year old drug dealer who's been dealing since 15, but it's not really like any of them are on the level of a 12 year old Paris Hilton either.

A lot of street smarts can actually be trained as well, it's a learned skill, not one you're born with.
$25m Guaranteed WPM on CoinPoker
Join the action now
Daily Rewards • Splash Pots • CoinRaces

      
m