You know that's for wildlife and not policing right?US Park Police: requires 4 years of college or some combination of work and college
Upvote
0
You know that's for wildlife and not policing right?US Park Police: requires 4 years of college or some combination of work and college
Good. Let’s resolve to fund schools in a way that doesn’t look like they “holding-cells” until enough prisons can be built?There is no doubt that the way schools are funded is an issue.
Right mainly dealing with animals.You know that's for wildlife and not policing right?
I don't think going to college makes you any better of a cop. Criminal Justice training doesn't train you haw to be a police officer. You could go to school and get a biology degree and not learn a thing about being a cop.NY State Police requires ~4 years of college. MD State police requires a high school diploma.
I don't think these IGs are worth a fig. Most agencies do a good job of investigating internal issues.For most local police forces, there is no outside auditor or inspector general. They're on the hook for investigating themselves. At the federal level, however, those IG's are everywhere.
I don't think they do have more restrictive rules. That's baloney. The cops are bound by the courts, rhe constitution, the constitution of their state as well as the laws of their state.Yes, their purpose is to "commit war," yet they have more restrictive rules of engagement and more oversight of their use of force.
How's that going?
It might surprise you to know that property taxes do go toward police funding. People can vote for mil levies to spend more money on a schools and police if they want to.Good. Let’s resolve to fund schools in a way that doesn’t look like they “holding-cells” until enough prisons can be built?
How’s about the same funding-mechanisms for schools as for police departments?
(Of course, if we funded police departments via property tax (like we do with schools), poorer areas would have less of a police presence instead of more.
I don't disagree. Now if you can just convince the government of that and to fork out the money for it that would be great!Right mainly dealing with animals.
Of course, dealing with the craftiest animal should require something more than a willingness to do the job.
For comparisons sake, police officers in England and Wales have fatally shot less people in 24 years than US officers have killed in the first 24 DAYS of 2015:But don't think that there will be no more people killed or injured by cops if they had more de-escalation training. I think there would be fewer uses of force with it. But I'm not convinced yet that the affect would be dramatic.
If we’re going to allow money to come in between us having a just system, and having educated children, them we’ll likely get exactly what we’ve paid for.It might surprise you to know that property taxes do go toward police funding. People can vote for mil levies to spend more money on a schools and police if they want to.
It all comes down to tax dollars baby. And if you'd rather spend the money on schools then the money isn't going to the cops for training. You need to convince more people.to fork out more money if you want the cops to train more. You know firefighters train a lot. Police don't have the time. They are too busy running from call to call. Training comes with a serious cost for them because it's overtime and they have to have specialized instructors. Or you need a lot more cops so that you still have cops working the streets while others train. Firefighters all come into the station and train. Cops can't do that.
No, that’s not correct.You know that's for wildlife and not policing right?
Thank you for your unsubstantiated claim.I tried, but could not find precise numbers
Thank you for your unsubstantiated claim.
View attachment 346928
This was the start - followed by police - followed by people living in cities. Regardless - ZERO gun regulations - lots and lots of guns - High poverty rates and no spike in crime.
ppssst - the conversation is not about taxes on machine guns, but the readily available weaponry combined with a high poverty rate of the depression that did NOT result in a rise in crime.Regardless of whether the overall crime rate went up, the nature of certain crimes was a big driver behind the imposition of high taxes on automatic weapons.
Poverty is the biggest driver of crime.
I gave you the information I could find and I looked it up before posting the first time. If I had had exact numbers I would have used them. Your "counterevidence" is to post an *advertisement*. No one said that there weren't any Tommy guns in private hands or that they hadn't been acquired legally. They are iconic as the guns of the prohibition gangsters.Thank you for your unsubstantiated claim.
View attachment 346928
This was the start - followed by police - followed by people living in cities. Regardless - ZERO gun regulations - lots and lots of guns - High poverty rates and no spike in crime.
ppssst - the conversation is not about taxes on machine guns, but the readily available weaponry combined with a high poverty rate of the depression that did NOT result in a rise in crime.
Thank you for your opinion.Arguing that Tommy Guns were "readily available" is like arguing that Lamborghinis are readily available. Sure, they might be in some sense, but not a practical one.
Well that's certainly true to a point. Money us needed for certain things. More money does not akeays equate to better things where government is concerned. Education is evidence of that. We spend more money on education in the US than the EU does oer child. Yet they constantly grade higher than we do. Chile spends a lot but has one of the lowest education systems. You could go state by state and see that more money does not a I ways equate to better education. There are things we could right now that wouldn't cost us more money. In fact it would save us money. And the savings could go into the teachers pockets. Also evening out the the expenditures would help certain areas.If we’re going to allow money to come in between us having a just system, and having educated children, them we’ll likely get exactly what we’ve paid for.
It is for Fish Wildlife and Park people. How do I know? We have a university here where people go four years foe education and it's for wildlife.
It is for Fish Wildlife and Park people. How do I know? We have a university here where people go four years foe education and it's for wildlife.
It sounds like you are talking about a different type of parks department. Here is what I found regarding Park Rangers.
If you look at the types of degrees they want it's mostly all wildlife and environmental degrees, biology ecology etc. Just like I said.
How to Become a Park Ranger | State and Federal Park Ranger Education
Park rangers are often said to be the keepers of our nation’s natural resources and protected public lands. Their mission it is to preserve and protect our nation’s local, state and national parks for public use and enjoyment today, and for many years to come. Park rangers are there to educate...www.parkrangeredu.org
Now if you are talking about national monuments, landmarks etc then they don't need any education.
Welp, you’re right. 60 hours is 4 semesters, not 4 years. My mistake.Previous experience as a law enforcement officer is enough. Without experience they so need some college credits but it's not four years and it's not LE education.