I want to be surprised by retirements of officers with "only" 20 years on, but I'm not.
When it's time to walk away, it's time to walk away.
I want to be surprised by retirements of officers with "only" 20 years on, but I'm not.
When it's time to walk away, it's time to walk away.
As of 01/04/19 I have 20 years in my pension. I "could" retire right now but I can't draw my pension for 8 more years (age 52). So unless I find a job that pays as much or more as what I'm making now, I'm not retiring any time soon.
Aint that the fricking truth...52 sneaks up before you know it.
I thought staffing was low because of politicians trying to cut costs so they can blow the money somewhere else.
Another officer was shot in California.
Truly, I have no idea why people would want to be LEOs in California. They just aren't valued, at least from what I can tell.
I'm personally familiar with an officer who was shot and killed in the line of duty in 2005 in the Oakland area, shooter sentenced to death, and the first appeal isn't even over yet.
I'm sure my over-generalization is probably unfair to some people in Cali, but... I just don't get it.
The key point: unfair to some people. This is how the majority there apparently want to live. I suspect California is like Illinois, where there are many moderate or conservative people living in the majority of the state, but their voices are drowned out by the Chicago/St. Louis area voting population.
Frankenstein never scared me
People seemed to like these California officers:
As of 01/04/19 I have 20 years in my pension. I "could" retire right now but I can't draw my pension for 8 more years (age 52). So unless I find a job that pays as much or more as what I'm making now, I'm not retiring any time soon.
From 1968 to 1975 they did, I'm not sure they've really liked anyone since.
Good point.
Wait
There is a conservative presence in California; I spoke with him, once.
He told me the legislature is secretly considering a wall at the border to keep taxpayers in the state.