City Cutting the CPS budget again.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Wait, Yasa's a Cop?

[Azure]

There is no 'program' or department that should be save from cuts if a way can be figured out to make it run more efficiently.

Problem is everytime cuts are talked about, people scream bloody murder.

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Wait, Yasa's a Cop?

Nope. EMT.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by underGRADFlame

Yes and the way to continue that trend is to cut the budget and cut recruits!

Bear attacks have been down too...

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by underGRADFlame

Really? So my interest in CPS receiving the funding it needs to do it's job is selfish? The fact that 300 members of CPS are ready to retire and there will be no bodies to replace them with from new recruiting classes shows my self interest?

Calgary can not afford to sacrifice any of the essential services be it CFD/EMS/CPS. Lets support the funding of a pedestrian bridge that is costing the city 10's of millions above what it should and cut back on policing, because crime rates are down!

I care about a safe community for my family, more people should!

The drama from the OP over the CPS being asked to look for savings of 3% or so is hilarious. The sky is falling, the sky is falling.

OP, if you're typically this hysterical, I don't think you're cut out for police work.

[underGRADFlame]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

The drama from the OP over the CPS being asked to look for savings of 3% or so is hilarious. The sky is falling, the sky is falling.

OP, if you're typically this hysterical, I don't think you're cut out for police work.

At what point was I in hysterics? Maybe I used ! too much, my bad.

I feel that the CPS/CFD/EMS budgets should be going up to match the growth of the city, not being cut. City Hall should look into other area that don't effect essential services. If you don't agree with me that's fine.

[vanisleflamesfan]

Originally Posted by underGRADFlame

There are studies that say different. Just a quick google search show this one from FSU.

http://www.fsu.edu/news/2005/06/24/more.cops/

This study... wow... I don't even know where to start with this one.

Let's just say that I would not put a great deal of faith into this study over the many that come to the opposite conclusion.

First, he is making some ridiculous conclusions (50 to 25% more cops on the street?) from a single factor in a "study" that includes MANY, MANY factors.

Second, he is speaking about actual, physical cops on the street who were not even there to 'walk a beat'. These were additional officers specifically stationed in particular areas during times of elevated 'terror risk'. This is not really something you can use to support the arguement for more police funding in Calgary.

Even if these were cops walking a beat, what is the percentage of cops in Calgary (or any major Canadian city) who walk a beat?

His conclusions were based on an average reduction of 3 street crimes per day during the 4 periods over one year where terror alerts were elevated. Tiny, tiny sample size and again, subject to too many factors to decisively link the increased police presence to the small reduction in crime, particularly when many other factors associated with the raise in the terror alert level have to be considered.