I'll defer answering Wiggy's first question ("...which half is right?") but leave you to speculate whether it's the top or the bottom half.
Meantime, he's on another tangent:
Let the state patrol roam the freeways (consolidation!) and get rid of
the sheriff’s department. Milwaukee County taxpayers would be better off
without the extra layer of government inefficiency.
As Grim sagely observed in the combox, appointed LEO's are the preferred choice of statists everywhere.
Some are far more comfortable with a State Patrol which--coincidentally--is run by an appointed head, in preference to local Sheriffs who, in Wisconsin, are elected. Police chiefs are also appointed.
One may argue that any given Sheriff is not managing his resources well. Fine. That's what "elections" are for. But mis- or mal-management by a political appointee? Yah--it's another election, but only indirectly.
But one cannot argue that the State Patrol is an unalloyed good. They are not even full-bore LEO's, as their powers to arrest are limited.
We've argued before, and still maintain, that the State Patrol's highway-patrol operations should be eliminated in favor of county Sheriff's departments. The Patrol's truck-inspection business should be maintained; otherwise, the Patrol should be dismantled. It's an expense which is needless.
THAT should demonstrate that my name is not Fitzgerald, eh?
By the way, Jim: "inefficiency" is having 8 police chiefs instead of one, and 24 captains instead of 3, and 72 lieutenants instead of 24. Not to mention 8 multi-million dollar communications installations, 8 maintenance facilities (etc., etc., etc.)
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment