Ask A Cop: Why would we want a metro police dept?

Why would we want a metropolitan police department?

The main reason, as I see it, is a dramatic cost savings to the residents of the Salt Lake Valley. Second, it would be a more streamlined approach to stopping and preventing crime, and third would be better oversight, hiring and firing practices. And finally, it would be a better pool of resources instead of the fractured one we have now.

Now, the mere mention of a metropolitan police department has people immediately going into a seizure. These are mostly police chiefs, mayors and people with clout in their respective cities. Why would this be? If you were chief or mayor, would you want to give up any power or status? If you're a person with clout (money) would you want to lose your direct phone contact to the chief's office?

People can make every excuse they want, but there is always an ulterior motive:

“Well, when the departments get too big, they stop caring about the small things,“ or "local cities would have no input in policing."

They also bring up horror stories of how the county used to be.

Lets look at the savings.

Right now we have 15 police departments operating in the Salt Lake Valley.

I am only counting the Utah Highway Patrol from the state, although the state has many other law enforcement arms. Im also hoping my count is right on the agencies, I looked at a map and it looked right.

With all these agencies, each one needs a SWAT Team, traffic division (motors, your favorite), detectives, bomb squad, dispatch, uniforms, police cars, and those big “look at how awesome our agency is” mobile homes.

The list goes on and on.

In a time of trying to be fiscally responsible, why has this never been mentioned?

I know that some of the agencies have gotten together to purchase items in bulk, like guns and uniforms. A lot of the agencies also share dispatching centers (VECC). I see some in-roads in attempting to save money and consolidate items related to police but it isn't enough.

I am not going to belittle or talk poorly of any specific agency because I think they do the best with what they have. However, I don't think the citizens of their respective agencies realize what services they are getting. Does your agency have a training division, who's sole job is to continually train its officers throughout the year?

Does your agency have a community detective assigned specifically to your area?

Does your agency have homicide/robbery/gang/property detectives that are specifically assigned to handle only those specific crimes and get training on those investigations? How much experience do your detectives have? One year? Three? What would make you feel comfortable?

I worked at a small agency and we did not have any of the things mentioned above. We also did not have crime lab technicians or an internal affairs. Those investigations were handled by an administrator who handled a bunch other things also. We hired whoever we could, they hired me. I get it.

We also received phone calls from the influential citizens to do special favors, like provide on-duty patrol officers to assist in commercial shoots, or only take our patrol cars to specific businesses with no bid process in place.

I don't think most residents realize that if a crime happened in Sandy and they had a suspect license plate number, Salt Lake City would not know about it if they stopped the vehicle the next day because they operate on two different report writing systems that are integrated into their patrol vehicles. These systems don't have a streamlined way of communicating with each other.

With a metropolitan police agency the communication would be better than it is. There would be a legitimate detective division, a well-trained and streamlined SWAT Team and traffic investigators.

A centralized and professional evidence site along with top of the line Crime Scene Investigators and possibly the ability to do our own DNA testing.

There is also the possibility of air support, which would reduce police related accidents involved in pursuits and increase search and rescue operations. One police vehicle design and uniform, readily identifiable by all. There are many more positives but I hate to ramble on. Plus, I bet the comments will be a hoot.

THE QUESTIONS:

Dear Mr. Cop,

When do I have to show my ID to an officer other than when pulled over during a traffic stop?

Jason

Jason,

You have to provide ID or personal Identifying information on any stop where the officer has probable cause or reasonable suspicion to stop you. If he is just speaking with you with no other reason then to talk, you can walk away from him and not speak.

Dear Mr. Cop,

I am wondering how much training police officers currently receive in dealing with and understanding people with severe mental illness, such as schizophrenia, paranoia, bi-polar mental illness and so on.

What solutions would you recommend in dealing with this problem?

For example, would you support a statewide push for all officers to receive CIT training?

Petra

Petra,

I think CIT is beneficial training and should be taught as part of the curriculum for all new police officers. I think SLC and some other agencies do a good job of putting on classes throughout the state to get other veteran officers up to speed on these trainings.

Dear Mr. Cop,

I realize you are not a highway patrolman, but my question involves speed on the interstate. I do my best to drive the speed limit, not five over or 10 over or whatever others say they can "get away with."

I do not drive in the passing lane, but often am in the middle lane. People seem irritated with me for going the speed limit. Occasionally, when I have two or more in my vehicle, I use the HOV lane, and once again, go the speed limit. Sometimes my passengers say I have to get out of the HOV lane because people like to go "fast" in that lane. My understanding is that it is not a FAST lane but an HOV lane. Since when did going the speed limit (not under the limit) become a no-no? My kids have told me I may get a ticket for going too "slow" and impeding traffic. What is the real scoop?

Ask a Cop:

Got a question or story story you want to share with Officer Anonymous? Email it to askacop@ksl.com.

Thanks,

Anne

Anne,

You have to be going extremely slow to get a ticket for impeding traffic. I feel, however, that the HOV is a benefit to persons who are car pooling AND want to go faster than the other lanes of travel. I don't feel that that means anyone in the carpool lane should go 80. But if you want to drive safe and 60-65, I suggest you just hangout in the two slower lanes (further right lanes).

Dear Mr. Cop,

Just wondering about the guy that shot the dog because it was attacking his puppy. Is that considered self-defense and give him the right to use a gun.

Bill

Bill,

Under state code 18-1-3 it says the following,

18-1-3.Dogs attacking domestic animals, service animals, hoofed protected wildlife, or domestic fowls. Any person may injure or kill a dog while: (1) the dog is attacking, chasing, or worrying: (a) a domestic animal having a commercial value; (b) a service animal, as defined in Section 62A-5b-102; or (c) any species of hoofed protected wildlife; (2) the dog is attacking domestic fowls; or (3) the dog is being pursued for committing an act described in Subsection (1) or (2).

So no, its not "self defense" but it can be justified to protect his animal.

Dear Mr. Cop,

Hi,

In your latest ask a cop post, there was ranting about people not using their signals, texting, and other bad habits. I know texting is dangerous and wish to exclude it in my question.

My question focuses more on signaling when changing lanes and when turning onto a street turning into the proper lane. I believe signaling and turning into the proper lane is important.

Do you (and the rest of your colleagues) believe that those principles are important? If so, why aren't there more people cited when they fail to do so? Do you think if traffic officers were more picky on this "small stuff" that we wouldn't have an issue with the "large stuff?"

For lack of a better analogy, if you're a basketball coach, if you stress to your players how to shoot the ball and dribble, you don't have to worry about being able to chuck the ball across the court to make the winning basket at the buzzer, do you agree?

Michael

Michael,

I know many officers that cite for the "small stuff."

I also cite for failing to signal quite a bit. I, however, feel that citing everyone for everything does not educate, it instead causes resentment and fear. Picking out the most egregious offenders and citing them can work. As these people have a complete disregard for their fellow drivers and are a great example to show the others drivers.

Dear Mr. Cop,

It is my understanding that if you witness a traffic accident you are suppose to stop and be a witness. What is the expectation if the conditions are unsafe (icy roads on the freeway) to pull over and assist?

Eric

Eric,

If the conditions are dangerous and you feel you could get hurt by staying or are becoming a hindrance, you can leave and call in to police dispatch, advising them that you were a witness to the accident at the location specified. This is only if you are a witness. If you are involved you need to remain depending on the severity.

I think the highway patrol is even pushing to have minor accidents not stop on the freeway at all and instead use the first available exit. I'm sure one of the troopers on here could clarify that.

Dear Mr. Cop,

While driving south on the freeway we came upon a car accident that occurred minutes before. The car hit a deer, veered into the medium, and landed on the opposite side of the freeway going in a north direction.

I wanted to turn around using the U-turn for “authorized vehicles only” to help the vehicle that had just crashed, but the person in the car with me told me it was illegal and I could get a ticket for doing that.

My questions is, in a case of an accident where someone needs help, would it be appropriate to use that area to make a U-turn to go back and help those in the crashed vehicle?

If that is done, at that point would you have to drive back to an exit to turn back around and go on the freeway in the direction you needed to go?

Luckily, a car stopped and helped that was on the same side of the freeway, but I had a professional nurse in my car that could have helped in case the person on the scene didn’t know what to do.

Is there any time U-turns can be used on the freeway by anyone other than police and emergency vehicles?

Wondering

Wondering,

I don't see any problem in using that in case of emergency.

I would doubt that someone would write you a ticket when you are only using that U-turn to assist someone in trouble.

Always remember when helping on an accident especially one on the freeway that you are not causing more harm than good. Stay away from the flow of traffic and realize that by offering assistance you are putting yourself in harms way.

I'm not discouraging you from this, I just want people to weigh the circumstance of stopping based on the dangers of the situation. Police are specially trained on how to respond to accidents and where to put their vehicles and even we get crashed into and killed.

Dear Mr. Cop,

I have a question for you about the no idle law.

You seem to have a beef against it. I can see how this law would be a pain in the rear for police to try and enforce and would probably take their time away from looking into more serious crimes.

However, I’m a supporter of this law, so I feel like I must ask you consider some of the facts on this issue.

An article from the Daily Herald on Sept. 2, 2011, made the claim that Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment say that Utah is one of the worst in the country when it comes to air pollution (which is a fact per various websites on air quality that I’ve read), that the population of the Wasatch Front is going to experience a shortened life span due to the air quality of this state, and that breathing in Utah air is the equivalent of smoking several cigarettes a day.

Asthma has become an epidemic in Utah, and I feel this could be true as I never experienced asthma a day in my life until I moved to this state and lived here just a few short years.

Having to fight to breathe is a very scary thing and it absolutely does adversely affect your health in long-term ways.

How can you not think the no-idle law would be a good thing for the 200,000-and-growing citizens of the state who experience asthma?

Are their serious disadvantages that outweigh the potential benefits of the no-idle law that I’m not seeing?

If not, I wish you hadn’t come out in a public forum against the law. People will read those opinions you posted and run with it, and the no-idle law needs all the support it can get. Something must be done to improve the air quality of this state and help to lessen the pollution so that us nerdy asthmatics can breathe when we walk outside.

Do you think there are other solutions that would work better than the no-idle law?

Amber K.

Amber K.,

I don't disagree that we have terrible air and something needs to be done about it. I, however, do not see how penalizing people who are in their vehicles for basically sitting in their cars "doing nothing" should be ticketed.

I also am not fond of the police becoming the "you-need- to-be-a-better-person" enforcers. Instead of negative reinforcement, how about we try some positive reinforcement?

Why doesn't the state try to assist in carpooling initiatives?

Maybe a website that shows other "carpoolers" in your neighborhood or area. We could continue to increase mass transit.

We could also support residents moving closer to their work so there is much less "commuting." We could do this by offering discounts with mortgages or myriad other residential related incentives.

These are a few ideas off the top of my head.

I do not represent any specific police department and this is not legal advice. This is my opinion and some of my co-workers. Please send questions to askacop@ksl.com.

Related topics