Post Number: 606
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 10:26 pm: || |
This is going to cause a GREAT stir I know.. but I wanted to float the idea.. and see the positive and negatives..
Just like Mt. Clemens and several cities have gotten rid of the local police force.. some were opposed to it.. but for example in Mt. Clemens crime has gone down!
Could this work for the city of Detroit? I never understood why there needs to be 3 levels of police.. local, county and state..
Let the County take over the city police.. could this work? Why won't it? Give some good examples folks.. not a it's our city.. screw you.. think about it...
Post Number: 5211
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 10:40 pm: || |
You really could have asked a more general question about service consolidation, and probably without the "screw you". How old are you?
Anyway, consolidation of things like police and fire services work better for groups of smaller municipalities that border eachother such as what's being proposed for Downriver. Detroit is physically large enough that it needs it own department.
Post Number: 354
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 10:44 pm: || |
the "screw you" pr equivalent is a common response on this forum. I am pretty sure he doesnt need to ask a more general question, he can ask whatever he wants.
You are not King of the Castle
Post Number: 1841
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 10:47 pm: || |
You might want to go back and read about the fights some Washtenaw County municipalities have had with the Sheriff's Department over budgeting and staffing issues. There have been a few times when communities where threatened with having no policing at all, and some only have one deputy assigned to them, because they can't afford what the Sheriff's Dept. is charging.
Post Number: 608
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 10:47 pm: || |
I am 27 actually.. The point of the "screw you" comment was some people do not use logic when answering posts.. they don't do there research that was the point of my comment..
But the point of my post was what can actually be done to make the DPD better.. The same has been said about the city government.. So it has been said the state may take over Detroit when things become bad.. how bad does it have to be before the County Police take over.. it's a valid point.. question is why won't it work?
Post Number: 2120
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 10:50 pm: || |
There is one difference between Police and Sheriff's and the way they patrol:
Police typically do crime prevention work and community policing (often one in the same) as well as the typical response to crimes as they happen. This is one of the reason many cities choose not to contract with the County Sheriff. However Detroit doesn't seem to do much crime prevention or community policing work.
Sheriffs typically only respond to crimes and/or hold people in jail for sentences of less that 1 year. Typically community policing and crime prevention are not things they do (again Wayne Co. seems to be different).
One reason why the Sheriff taking over law enforcement may not work or may not result in crime reduction is the fact that the DPD's staffing levels are already at ridiculously low levels, far below the per capita national standards. The Sheriff may actually charge more money since he'll properly staff.
Another reason the DPD being taken over by the Sheriff might not work is the tremendous staffing need that would occur with a change over. You can't get rid of and then find thousands of law enforcement officers for a city the size of Detroit.
I'm for exploring the idea, but I'd likely go in thinking that it wouldn't work for practical as well as political reasons.
Post Number: 1030
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 10:51 pm: || |
Post Number: 5213
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 11:01 pm: || |
Bvos, that last point is key. You'd essentially have to create a whole new Sheriff's department since the current one has such limited responsibilities, anyway, seeing as how incorporated municipalities with their own departments take up such a large chunk of the county. They'd literally have to do a 180 changing nearly everything about the Sheriff's department to fit its new role. Sheriffs departments in urban counties, just by their nature, are only really responsible for unincorporate township lands. A shift to an urban environment would require a complete overhaul of the department bringing it from a largely rural and suburban footing to patroling all types of environments.
Post Number: 613
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 11:03 pm: || |
Good Point Bvos.. that's the type of posts I was looking for.. The next point would be.. I have seen many posts on this forum about poor DPD performance and response times.. what can be done to improve this..
Your right btw... But I doubt if the County came into take over.. they would fire everybody.. they didn't do that in other cities either.. they took on those former officers as well.. But I am curious.. more staffing.. Could DPD do it? or does it require an act of god to do so?
Post Number: 1842
|Posted on Monday, March 12, 2007 - 11:06 pm: || |
Like almost everything else in western life, it's all about the money
Post Number: 46
|Posted on Tuesday, March 13, 2007 - 12:32 am: || |
Keep the Sheriff out - home rule is better. Presumably the City knows its needs better than an outfit servicing from Lake St. Clair to B.F.E. on the Washtenaw border. Every self-sustaning community should be entrusted to care for its own.