Bwahahahahahaha!!!!!  Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

Phoenix's Chief of Police has a ZERO tolerance policy and he has a double zero fan base.  

Anyone who has ever been a "boss" knows that you're not always the most popular guy on the block.  But when cops publically turn on their commander in chief;  that says a LOT!  

I'm talking about that "Thin Blue Line" that all cops align themselves with.  You may not respect your boss, but you respect his/her rank.

But not in Phoenix!!  

Reading the board here for several months, seeing this community fed one shit sandwich after the other with all of these ridiculous busts (for lack of a better term),  not even giving one of their own a professional courtesy, etc... has prompted me to think more than once how awful it must be to be a cop in this area.  

Seriously, think about this???  You go through everything it takes to become a cop, now you've got your uniform and you're going to go out and protect the public.  Instead you end up dishing out tickets to blue hairs for going 1 mile over the speed limit in a school zone and arresting a bunch of middle age people for having sex.

Gawd, it must just SUCK to be a cop right now.  Dragging your ass in for line up, listening to shift command drone on about all of the critical incidents from the previous shift.  "Attention troops, we had 16 arrests of men in their 50’s trying to get blow jobs.  Five lewd and lascivious women were taken down for excessive salivation.  The Edith Bunker look alike investigation was finally concluded after two grueling years.  Okay now, go out there and git em!!  Look out for those rebel rousers with tennis balls on their walkers, you know how rowdy they are!  Stay safe troops!"

If they don't do it, the Chief of Police will ensure he sees their head on the chopping block.

It takes a LOT to get two unions to make an official decision to seek a No Confidence recall.  

That's bunch of miserable fucks right there....they all need to get a shot of ass and tell the muckity mucks to piss off.  

Not sure how this turned into a rant, but it did.  I feel much better!!!  lol....

Carry on peeps...

Well we all know you can trust the "unions" because they care about their members not their dues and political power. LMAO!

The union is saying the recent death of a police officer is the last straw and wants the Chief of Police to resign.  I'm not sure what the union expects from the Chief of Police.  The union blames the Chief of Police for the resent death of an officer who committed suicide because he leaves a note that says the department let him down.  The officer was fired because he had a dui.  If my job was to uphold the law and I turn around and break that law that I am sworn to uphold don't you think he should have been fired.  

The police officer's exwife says the officer had trauma from an incident where the police officer had to shoot and kill a criminal.  Which I would think you knew could happen when you signed up for this kind of work. I'm just curious if she's so supportive now why is she an exwife.  Who by the way is also a police officer.    

What kind of support did the union offer this police officer?  I am sure the union filed a complaint when the officer was fired for cause but did they do anything else to help the officer.  

The media loves a conflict like this.  Since it seems to me that there is more to this story than the media is willing to tell.  I don't like the recent activity that's going on in Phoenix either, but to me it's all politically driven.  Everyone wants to look good because they are fighting against exploitation of children or women in the business who are forced into it.  It is going to get worse with the super bowl and all eyes on Arizona.  

Emily has the right to her opinion but I don't blame the Chief of Police for all that's going on.

I read about this story online, and it seems that this is really just some unions getting angry over one of their own police officers who was arrested for DUI, who was fired by the chief, who the union couldn't defend, and then that terminated police officer subsequently committed suicide.  So now the union is publicly trying to put the blame on the chief for this guy's suicide.

Long story short, the union is angry that the chief fired one of their members for cause, now they are resorting to union thuggery to try to get the chief fired.  What they appear to want is another chief who will look the other way whenever the unions' own members are caught breaking the law.  

I am only a pawn in the game of life, but I actually have to side with the chief on this one.  People with DUIs are normally fired from jobs that require them to drive company fleet vehicles, this is common knowledge.  For an employer to keep an employee like that would constitute gross negligence.  

This appears to have absolutely nothing to do with the chief forcing police officers to bust people who are engaging in P2P, forcing them to issue speeding tickets to old people, or anything else like that.  If that was ever a concern with the unions, they would have been speaking up about that 50, 40, 30, 20, (and so on) years ago.  I don't recall them ever speaking up about stuff like that.

END OF MESSAGE

Thanks to you and AZlarry for stating what I was thinking.

Nor do I think that the department failed because a P. O. killed himself.  

I do think that it takes a LOT for two unions to agree to basically ask for the chiefs head on a platter. Unions normally can't agree on anything.  

It's possible to be a leader that can enforce policy and not have your support troops want to lynch you.   The guy must be a total prick.  

It'd be interesting to know the truth,  but we never will.  

Being a cop in that environment would suck

You are confusing union chiefs with the rank and file officers. Just because a union takes issue with something does in no way mean the majority of their members support it. Their own power. If you think it takes a lot for unions to agree on something then you are simple naïve.

Just look at all the teachers nationwide that are suing the unions that they are compelled to pay dues too because they disagree with the way their dues are spent concerning political issues etc. Unions care about only one thing. Their own power.

I thought a union was comprised of several stewards (voted into position by rank and file employees)  that would have to cast a consenting vote before two separate union presidents would agree to take an issue outside of collective bargaining.  More naïve because I believed that not all union stewards who represent the rank and file staff are in the game for power only.  

I learn something new every day!  Thank you BJN :-