Estimated read time: 6-7 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Why so many rescues?
I read the news today with a heavy heart. The article is regarding the heart-wrenching death of Utah Highway Patrol Trooper Aaron Beesley. This officer gave up his place in the helicopter so the two endangered teenagers could be airlifted to safety. Unfortunately, because of the dangerous conditions, Trooper Beesley lost his footing and fell.
This scenario should never happen. Rescuing lost teenagers in the mountains should rarely happen. Yet it seems teenagers and young adults are being rescued throughout the year at great personal risk to rescue personnel. Why does this keep happening and why are we treating the rescued people like heroes for putting themselves in a position where they have to be saved?
People will argue that officers, firemen and other rescue personnel sign up for this and know what they are getting into. I can't argue that, but the more often these dangerous rescues happen, the higher the likelihood that something bad will happen to a rescuer or rescuee. We are required to go into these dangerous locations to rescue people or put out fires, etc. Why do people insist on going to these same dangerous locations?
I don’t think the people being rescued realize how much it costs to save them from their poor decisions and poor planning. Earlier in June, a teenager “got bored” and decided to hike with his friends. He hiked too high and couldn’t get down. Twenty men and four hours later, the teenager was rescued. He was smiling and talking about how scary it was, but that was it for him. It ended there.
Maybe there should be a hiker's awareness class like the driver's education class you can take when you get a ticket. Generally the driver's awareness class is slightly above what a ticket would cost, $100 or $200? So the hiker's awareness class would be slightly above what it would cost to rescue you — $20,000 to $50,000?
We could do the same with fires. The next time Joe Bob and his cousin decide to shoot off their new AK-47 they bought off of KSL classifieds, or light off their homemade fireworks and it starts a huge wildfire, they can go to wilderness fire awareness class. For the low price of $650,000, they can learn what not to do around highly flammable grass, brush and trees.
It appears common sense has left the building. I know we are in this new world of “It's not my fault,” and let's blame, society, government, parents and the economy for why I act the way I do instead of blaming yourself for the dumb decisions you make. The funny part is it's not one bad decision, it's many bad decisions all in a row that wind people up in these situations. Why should they care, the adults will come to the rescue.
Can police work as security?
A lot of people and businesses do not realize that they can hire officers to work security for their event, party or to keep their business secure. I had heard of moonlighting when I was first looking at a career in law enforcement, but it seemed like it was off the books. But places like Unified, UHP and SLCPD are regularly hired by private businesses to provide security in their respective jurisdictions.
You may ask what the benefit is to the person hiring police. There are many. We have direct contact with police and fire dispatch. We are highly trained and are provided current training every year at a minimum of 40 hours a year. Most of us have handled high-stress situations and know how to resolve them effectively. I could go on and on about the value of us over a security company, but that would be bragging … which I am.
Anywhere an officer or officers work, crime goes down because troublemakers know that we are the end of the line. They are going to get arrested or ticketed right there. I’m not trying to slight the security industry, they make great witnesses sometimes and are a decent first line for presence, but when a decision needs to be made, they have to defer to police.
Why am I speaking about this? Two reasons. The first is most every officer I know has another job or three. We work these so we can live in nice areas and provide for our families. The more jobs the better. I would love not to work part time, but it's a necessity if I want to keep up on the payments for my 7-year-old truck and live in an area where the neighbors don’t spray-paint my police car and shoot at it.
The second is that security companies and state legislators are trying to make it more difficult for officers to make extra money in this state. The security companies are lobbying for police to not work any part time. This is actually a detriment to the citizens and businesses of this state. They would lose a cost-effective option to keep their persons and property safe and not have to be stuck in a security contract.
The legislators have altered the retirement system in place and canceled the ability for officers to work in law enforcement or any other government job after they retire. People argue that we were getting rich by “double dipping.” The only people getting “rich” off of that were police chiefs who were retiring in place (retiring from police and then being rehired in their same position). The regular officer was retiring and getting rehired somewhere else whether it was another police agency or an investigator with the state's various enforcement agencies. Ask Unified Police or Cottonwood Heights Police if they are happy with officers they hired who were retired from another agency.
So when you are thinking about hiring security for a rowdy wedding or concert, having someone watch over your residence while you are away, or just want a presence at your business to scare off vagrants and disgruntled employees, think of us, your friendly neighborhood police officer. It's either us or Paul Blart. You make the call.
This is an opinion article only and is for entertainment only or lack there of. This is not and should not be taken as legal advice. I represent no specific agency and am not speaking on behalf of one or on behalf of ksl.com.
