F.O.P pays Bisard's bill....... wow

[UncleMike]

I have a general problem with Union dues, how they are used, the fact that public sector workers can unionize in the first place especially the Police force.

I know that's not the topic of this thread and I don't want to start chasing rabbit trails.

To get back on topic, if there is any type of subsidies that go to the dues, tax reduction for the dues of any type then I do not think that they should be able to use them for this.

If not and it is totally the other officers money then they should be allowed to use it as they wish. But like I said I do not believe the police should be allowed to unionize (nor any other civil servant for that matter)

I've been an FOP Member for over thirty five years.
Just for the record!!!
The FOP is NOT a union!
It is a Fraternal Organization ONLY!!
The money comes entirely from the Membership Dues, and donations.
As such, the use of that money is NOT subject to scrutiny by ANYONE outside of the Organization.
If you've heard otherwise, you've been lied to.

 

[Bondhead88]

I've been an FOP Member for over thirty five years.
Just for the record!!!
The FOP is NOT a union!
It is a Fraternal Organization ONLY!!
The money comes entirely from the Membership Dues, and donations.
As such, the use of that money is NOT subject to scrutiny by ANYONE outside of the Organization.
If you've heard otherwise, you've been lied to.

First please don't yell. I asked a question and made some statements because "Union" was said a few times including by other LEO's.

I do not tolerate being spoken down to by any LEO anytime never mind on here.

Second, It can be scrutinized, for instance churches and other non profits spending and donations can be scrutinized if they are a 501 c registered non profit or charity.

There are other types of non profit licensing done by states and the federal government and those also would be open to scrutiny by either the members, the government or by those making donations.

For instance, if you sell tickets to a Policeman's Ball or do other fundraisers or have other times where people are contributing to the "Fraternal Order"

Now there are ways of keeping money separated so it can be used for different purposes, this also keeps "scrutiny" out of areas where someone would not want prying eyes.

But I am sure your 35 years with the FOP has taught you this information.

 

[UncleMike]

First please don't yell. I asked a question and made some statements because "Union" was said a few times including by other LEO's.

I do not tolerate being spoken down to by any LEO anytime never mind on here.

Sorry.
I'll try to remember that!

 

[CarmelHP]

First please don't yell. I asked a question and made some statements because "Union" was said a few times including by other LEO's.

I do not tolerate being spoken down to by any LEO anytime never mind on here.

Remember, they're superior beings. They are above the law. Thou shalt not question them at all, to do so is "cop bashing." They may hide everything they do without question, if you do the same, you are guilty of something. Remember that, please.

 

[Compatriot G]

I did a little bit of Googling on the FOP. It would appear it is not a non-profit organization. The state FOP website had a PAC section and a list of candidates they endorsed for various national and state offices. Wikipedia said that the FOP is more like a trade union.

 

[UncleMike]

Remember, they're superior beings. They are above the law. Thou shalt not question them at all, to do so is "cop bashing." They may hide everything they do without question, if you do the same, you are guilty of something. Remember that, please.

Whatever .

 

[Bondhead88]

I did a little bit of Googling on the FOP. It would appear it is not a non-profit organization. The state FOP website had a PAC section and a list of candidates they endorsed for various national and state offices. Wikipedia said that the FOP is more like a trade union.

Then their funds would be open to scrutinizing!

 

[UncleMike]

Wikipedia said that the FOP is more like a trade union.

You might actually learn something if you go to The FOP web site for your information instead of a site that allows any uninformed person to edit the information.
Just saying.

 

[Bondhead88]

You might actually learn something if you go to The FOP web site for your information instead of a site that allows any uninformed person to edit the information.
Just saying.

Why? Because all organizations who have a political agenda are totally honest and objective on what they do?

I mean they (any organization) wouldn't be biased on it's goals would it?

 

[UncleMike]

Why? Because all organizations who have a political agenda are totally honest and objective on what they do?

I mean they (any organization) wouldn't be biased on it's goals would it?

Oh, I don't know.
Maybe it's that American trait of wanting to know the truth instead of believing any old crap that's shoveled in front of me.

 

[Bondhead88]

Oh, I don't know.
Maybe it's that American trait of wanting to know the truth instead of believing any old crap that's shoveled in front of me.

My point was not that Wikipedia (which I rarely if ever use) is no better or worse than asking an organization about itself.

Both are unreliable. I see no American trait through the way you describe getting the information.

Researching multiple sources (including the FOP website) and looking for information from other groups would be a proper way of finding the truth.

I don't mean this to be rude. But aren't you a LEO, wouldn't your training tell you this is how you gather evidence and information so you can make a wise judgment.

 

[UncleMike]

My point was not that Wikipedia (which I rarely if ever use) is no better or worse than asking an organization about itself.

Both are unreliable. I see no American trait through the way you describe getting the information.

Researching multiple sources (including the FOP website) and looking for information from other groups would be a proper way of finding the truth.

I don't mean this to be rude. But aren't you a LEO, wouldn't your training tell you this is how you gather evidence and information so you can make a wise judgment.

A judgment is an opinion!
I was educated to base decisions on facts, not opinions.
Garnering information from the acknowledged source is always preferable, whether said information is entirely factual or not. The untruths can be eliminated by further investigation and verification. The new data can then be used to arrive at a fact based decision.

That means that you shouldn't believe whatever crap is shoveled in front of you.

 

[mconley]

cuz..you know, there's no EVIDENCE he was intoxicated....cuz they kinda accidentally on purpose BOTCHED that one! I can only hope that happens to me if I ever happen to kill someone at a stop light in my tax-payer funded vehicle while sending emails drunk...

This, I agree, there is no EVIDENCE, period. The blood draw as done wrong, and he deserves his union rep.

Sure the he and the city should pay for the death of the man, but should IMPD officer really be thrown in jail for only being accused? What if he was not OWI, there is that chance as well. We will never know. I would hate to throw a man in jail , that was not drunk, for just a accident. Maybe thats all it was, a accident. There should have been a PBT done on scene as well, since there was not, we will never know the TRUTH.

 

[Bondhead88]

A judgment is an opinion!
I was educated to base decisions on facts, not opinions.
Garnering information from the acknowledged source is always preferable, whether said information is entirely factual or not. The untruths can be eliminated by further investigation and verification. The new data can then be used to arrive at a fact based decision.

That means that you shouldn't believe whatever crap is shoveled in front of you.

I think you need to go back to cadet school. Maybe 35 years has deluded your thinking.

To say I am right and I know I am right because here is a source that I agree with and it supports my theories is ludicrous.

Garnering information from the acknowledged source is always preferable,

First who says it is an acknowledges source, You, well of course because it agrees with your philosophy. So it is not an acknowledged source if you are part of the source trying to prove your point.

Second

whether said information is entirely factual or not.

You then take evidence and make it fit your theory. This here is one of the reasons our society is falling to the ground. None of what you explain is how you come to the truth, it is however the way you make your opinion the meta truth.

For instance you keep passionately shoveling crap in front of me trying to make that which is not true to be true by constantly repeating the same thing. Trying to use your organizations words as fact because you already accept it as fact.

You say it is trust worthy so I must agree with you. And remember I already said I did not trust Wikipedia. I said several sources including yours would need to be checked, but your source could not be the prime source because by nature it is neither impartial or neutral.

 

[Bondhead88]

I think you need to go back to cadet school. Maybe 35 years has deluded your thinking.

To say I am right and I know I am right because here is a source that I agree with and it supports my theories is ludicrous.

Garnering information from the acknowledged source is always preferable,

First who says it is an acknowledges source, You, well of course because it agrees with your philosophy. So it is not an acknowledged source if you are part of the source trying to prove your point.

Second

whether said information is entirely factual or not.

You then take evidence and make it fit your theory. This here is one of the reasons our society is falling to the ground. None of what you explain is how you come to the truth, it is however the way you make your opinion the meta truth.

For instance you keep passionately shoveling crap in front of me trying to make that which is not true to be true by constantly repeating the same thing. Trying to use your organizations words as fact because you already accept it as fact.

You say it is trust worthy so I must agree with you. And remember I already said I did not trust Wikipedia. I said several sources including yours would need to be checked, but your source could not be the prime source because by nature it is neither impartial or neutral.

One of our biggest issues in any society is giving the police too much power and control.

I hate the phrase they are there to protect us. Protection is the responsibility of the individual.

We have given too many liberties up in the name of security. Yes we need police, yes we should respect them but they also need to understand they need to respect their employer which is the people.

They have the power and authority we give them. they are to enforce the laws we create. Everone must realize that the law is for everyone, that even when enforcing the laws we allow them to enforce that they are still serving us.

I have had some police officers as very good friends of our family. When our children were young we had them dress up and come over to our house where we taught our children to respect the police that they were not our enemies.

I have pictures of my daughter and son sitting on their laps (when they were very young and later on the floor) in our living room as they listened to the police speak about right and wrong.

It has broken my heart as I have seen other police act as though they did not need to explain themselves to anybody, watching young men with little to no life experience have a chip on their shoulder because they have a badge on their chest.

I think of a dear friend who spent his life on the force, whose character was so well known that it proceeded him, a man who as cancer took him faced both life and death with dignity not just for himself but for others.

He was a man who would have told you that there was desperate change needed with the attitude if the average (not all) officer.

Being in a position of authority is really being in a place of service. It is only when you understand that you are there to serve the public that you will begin to lead.

 

[phylodog]

Phylo,

I know you asked before and I don't think it's been answered. I'm pretty sure a "burn phone" is a prepaid cell phone. IE, you buy a throw away phone and set it up so that it's anonymous.

Thank you for the clarification Hornadylnl.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Actually, the whole premise here is invalid.

The FOP isn't paying for his defense. I am. The FOP dues come from wages that come from taxes.

So, either I pay for his lawyer through the FOP and taxes or I pay for his lawyer through a public defender and taxes or I pay for his lawyer through Bisard's own government salary.

In any case, we the electorate still get to pay.

 

[paddling_man]

Actually, the whole premise here is invalid.

The FOP isn't paying for his defense. I am. The FOP dues come from wages that come from taxes.

So, either I pay for his lawyer through the FOP and taxes or I pay for his lawyer through a public defender and taxes or I pay for his lawyer through Bisard's own government salary.

In any case, we the electorate still get to pay.

Wait a minute... so, if in the course of doing his job for the municipality, Frank-n-stein uses his wages to buy a Playboy and Phylodog uses his wages to buy a bottle of J&B - are you suggesting your tax dollars are paying for porn and booze?

I agree that municipal law enforcement are paid by public dollars. Once those officers are paid - the money they've earned is theirs to do with as they wish. They pay FOP from their wages. Their cash. Personal.

I can't begin to leap the gulf and empathize with the view that an officer's personal cash somehow still falls under the bailiwick of public funds.

 

[phylodog]

Well golly gee ATOMonkey. Perhaps you'd like to pay for the new roof I need on our house or for the oil changes our vehicles need since you've obviously got such a huge investment in what we've purchased with our money.

It's been pointed out before that your argument serves zero purpose other than a weak attempt to devalue to opinion of the police officers who may post in a thread.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Now now, don't get all butt hurt about it.

People are all up in arms about how this guy is going to fund his legal defense.

I'm simply pointing out that it's a shell game regardless of where the funds come from they all initiate in the private sector.