Calgary police begin mandatory alcohol screening at Checkstops

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by Rando

Maybe if the Calgary Police budget would prioritize check-stops and drunk driving instead of million dollar mobile command units and half a million armored vehicles they could combat the problem more effectively.

(still salty about the 12 year old one being "heavily used" )

There's more information behind that decision that that you're just not privy to, so maybe dial back the salt and let the people who are in charge of making those decisions make them

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Aleks

There's more information behind that decision that that you're just not privy to, so maybe dial back the salt and let the people who are in charge of making those decisions make them

You don’t get that luxury with public money.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

You don’t get that luxury with public money.

That’s ridiculous. There are numerous govt departments who have expenditures and operations that the public is not privy to.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

That’s ridiculous. There are numerous govt departments who have expenditures and operations that the public is not privy to.

They have professional oversight. Generally elected.

They also have procurement rules.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

They have professional oversight. Generally elected.

They also have procurement rules.

As I said, many departments and operations expenditures are not available to the public.

[Rando]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

I'd say that it's a priority for them. Apparently the CPS is the only force in Canada that runs them four times a week and more during Stampede/Christmas/New Years.


And at 500 calls last year, we are probably getting good value out of the armored truck. Although the old one looks cooler

Would love to see a run down of those calls.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Rando

Would love to see a run down of those calls.

Having 'under-utilized' SWAT gear is something that should be celebrated. At the same time, I'm also pleased to know that the City is erring on the side of over-prepared/staying current.

There are certainly issues with over-militarization of police, but at the end of the day, police officers are real human beings with real families at home - I'm okay if it costs a few more bucks to ensure they have the best chances possible of going home at the end of the day. Obviously it all needs to be within reason, but this doesn't sound particularly crazy.

Are you also mad when you go 5 years without having to file an insurance claim? Think of the money you've wasted on your premiums!!!!

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Having 'under-utilized' SWAT gear is something that should be celebrated. At the same time, I'm also pleased to know that the City is erring on the side of over-prepared/staying current.

There are certainly issues with over-militarization of police, but at the end of the day, police officers are real human beings with real families at home - I'm okay if it costs a few more bucks to ensure they have the best chances possible of going home at the end of the day!

What if increased police militarization lead to no decrease in crime, no increase in officer safety and a decrease in public trust of police forces in general? One mad max truck is not going to do much either way. But you can see people already rolling their eyes.

[jmac98]

The checkstop bus is used approximately once a week and only when available resources allow. It does pick up over holidays or events but otherwise generally operates as noted.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Aleks

There's more information behind that decision that that you're just not privy to, so maybe dial back the salt and let the people who are in charge of making those decisions make them

What a crappy appeal to authority response. If there's more information that makes the need for the equipment required, the CPS should do a better job of getting that information out. Alleviate concerns from the tax-paying public that their money isn't being wasted on unnecessary shiny new toys. Although transparency and the CPS have never gotten along.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

What a crappy appeal to authority response. If there's more information that makes the need for the equipment required, the CPS should do a better job of getting that information out. Alleviate concerns from the tax-paying public that their money isn't being wasted on unnecessary shiny new toys. Although transparency and the CPS have never gotten along.

You're just plain wrong. There's plenty of feel good acquisitions, like the hawcs helicopter program which came about from an unfortunate incident, and those can be perfectly public and reasonable. To be frank, you don't even know a fraction of the CPS operations and reach, locally and even internationally, so to assert that you need to be counting their pennies because you're a tax payer because you want to count the black cars on the road is really just being obtuse. Suffice to say, the new vehicle was a very sound purchase. Whats next, you going after the horses?



Maybe you should focus your rage at the Fire department who continues to build 8-15 million dollar buildings to house 4-8 guys to play pickle ball and wash their cars for 12 hours instead of the guys out in the cars actually doing work all day.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Suffice to say, the new vehicle was a very sound purchase.

What don't the rest of us know that makes that new vehicle a very sound purchase? What tangible facts do you have to contribute to the discussion that puts the accusations leveled to rest? What are we missing?

[activeStick]

I don't see how any of these cases won't get thoroughly defeated in court by defense lawyers leading to major revisions to the law. A very poorly thought out law that will end up leading to a lot of wasted money.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I think the difference is, outside of driving, drinking is bad for you individually. Smoking is not just bad for you, but those around you. No one has ever gotten second hand drunk.

The effects of second-hand smoke have been vastly exaggerated, with the only link to increased cancer rates being found in people who shared a home with a heavy smoker for 30+ years. Vaping has even less impact on non-smokers, and yet it's just as maligned. Does anyone really think if studies found no significant health risk from second-hand exposure to vaping, it would become socially acceptable?

Health advocates push the empirically dubious risks of exposure to second-hand smoke because their goal is to stop all people from smoking, period. Given the serious health consequences of drinking, they'll do the same with alcohol.

From yesterday's Guardian:

How secondhand drinking ruins lives: 'Every family has been touched by this'

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Aleks

You're just plain wrong. There's plenty of feel good acquisitions, like the hawcs helicopter program which came about from an unfortunate incident, and those can be perfectly public and reasonable. To be frank, you don't even know a fraction of the CPS operations and reach, locally and even internationally, so to assert that you need to be counting their pennies because you're a tax payer because you want to count the black cars on the road is really just being obtuse. Suffice to say, the new vehicle was a very sound purchase. Whats next, you going after the horses?

How can I be wrong when my intent is having the CPS better communicate? Especially when your argument is that I don't understand. Cool, we agree I don't understand because the CPS has done a poor job trying to explain and rationalize their budget spending.

Read what I wrote. Then read it two more times. Did I say that the equipment wasn't needed? Go ahead and reread it once more. Because I didn't. I said that it's on them if people don't believe their purchases have been justified, that the police should do a better job at communicating why the purchases are justified. Not just the "It's needed end of discussion" type crap you're spewing. If it's so obviously needed, you won't have a hard time explaining and providing facts. Should take less effort than being an arrogant twat.

[nik-]

If you start questioning the police budget is there really any difference between you and a criminal?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Maybe you should focus your rage at the Fire department who continues to build 8-15 million dollar buildings to house 4-8 guys to play pickle ball and wash their cars for 12 hours instead of the guys out in the cars actually doing work all day.

I guess we found the cop (which is fine, don’t be mad).

But, as for your fire dept review.... it’s just plain wrong. And THAT statement is accurate.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

As I said, many departments and operations expenditures are not available to the public.

Not directly to the public, no. That’s not what I said. They have a responsibility with public money that is different than private companies. What part of this are you missing?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by nik-

If you start questioning the police budget is there really any difference between you and a criminal?

You're basically a Terrorist and potentially even a Satanist.

A Satanist Terrorist.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The effects of second-hand smoke have been vastly exaggerated, with the only link to increased cancer rates being found in people who shared a home with a heavy smoker for 30+ years. Vaping has even less impact on non-smokers, and yet it's just as maligned. Does anyone really think if studies found no significant health risk from second-hand exposure to vaping, it would become socially acceptable?

Health advocates push the empirically dubious risks of exposure to second-hand smoke because their goal is to stop all people from smoking, period. Given the serious health consequences of drinking, they'll do the same with alcohol.

From yesterday's Guardian:

How secondhand drinking ruins lives: 'Every family has been touched by this'

I won't bother debating medically, I'll concede the study because that's not my only concern. As a non-smoker with sensitive breathing who went into some of those really smoke heavy bars, my eyes swelled up, I coughed, I smelled the smoke until I couldn't smell anything. I still have issues with people smoking outside near the doors (against bylaws! ) so there's nothing you can say to convince me that smoking doesn't have an affect on me. Unlike someone drinking a beer from a coffee mug where, as long as they don't get belligerent drunk, I likely wouldn't be able to tell the difference.