City shouldn't give officers gun allowance

Anonymous
May 7, 2013

My topic this week is the police union contract.

Starting in 2014, police officers will now be able to buy a gun from their uniform allowance. A one-time gun purchase is allowed during the officer’s career. The officer has to be employed on a full-basis for five years before requesting a gun.

Even though the guns will be bought with tax dollars, the guns will become the property of the officers unlike the service revolver that has to be handed back into the city. If the officers believe they need additional backup protection, the city should provide the guns and the guns should become city owned property. If the officer already owns his own second gun, he should not be eligible to apply for another additional gun out of the uniform allowance. Equipment, especially guns, bought and paid for through tax dollars should never become the property of the officer.

When the guns become the property of the officer, could the officer possibly end up reselling the gun at a later date profiting even more off the taxpayer? The resold guns could end up in the wrong hands. They could be involved in crimes in the community or be used to injure one of our own officers. There are 45 officers with a possibility of placing 45 guns on the street. At least if the city owned the guns, it could have better control over the guns, preventing the guns from causing tragic consequences.

Adding guns to the uniform allowance may indicate that the city may be too liberal with the uniform allowance. In the past, $750 would be paid directly to the officer. There would be no documentation of what was spent and whether or not there was any money left over to refund back to the taxpayer if the officer did not use his share of the allowance for the year. Under the new contract, the expenditure of the uniform allowance will now be documented, requisitioned, and the items delivered to the city so the city will be in full control of the expenditure. Carrying over the uniform allowance from year to year is not permitted. A yearly inventory of the officer’s government issued equipment should be done throughout the officer’s tenure with the city.

Until next week, buying guns out of tax dollars so officers can keep the guns as their own and possibly resell them at a profit is not a good use of our tax dollars. The city needs to be more accountable and responsible for decisions they make with our tax dollars. Making poor decisions takes money away from other projects that are needed within the city.

Comments

pavedparadise

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah

Nemesis

Translation: Don't confuse me with the facts, because, OMG!!!! GUNS!!!!
Do you have anything intelligent to offer, Paved?

tonto

This lady doesn't have a clue. Why does the Register allow her to open her mouth on any issue?

J. Hartman

Just thought I would point out, if you agree or disagree with Sharon, she has accomplished what the Register wanted her too. Just look how many(including myself) have read this all the way through and then left a comment. Thumbs up for her accomplishing the goal of discussion(unfortunately always negative) For next weeks topic, I would love to see Sharon talk about how she actually did something positive for the city! How can one say they love anything and then continue to kick it?(does she own a dog?) If you have a complaint and are going to go through all the efforts to find chinks in the amour, it would carry just a little bit of weight if you lead by example(requires action), presented a solid solution, or easiest of all show at least some support for those who do have the manhood to actually put their neck out there! Those who take a chance that they will and are making a difference in the city and the community, that they DO love and they show this through their ACTIONS! Yes, those folks may stumble and they should expect constructive criticism(comes with the actions/efforts) What makes those people great is their positive attitude and belief in knowing their efforts do and will continue to have a positive impact on the WHOLE community! Not only for one section of the city, the whole city! This is because failure is not in their vocabulary! They stumble, they dust off, and they get right back to it! My advice Sharon, is to look in the mirror each morning and ask that person staring back "What did I do positive for the world yesterday?" after whatever your answer is, I would then tell the person in the mirror "Today, I will have a positive impact on the world by....) Hopefully you don't end that sentence with "nit picking on those who actually do care" A positive attitude and a positive approach would do wonders Sharon. Give it a try and you just might find out it's relatively easy to do and is actually fun! S.M.I.L.E. P.S. Let me add, that my character allows me to welcome with open arms any constructive criticism or faults you would like to point out! I will even be kind enough to tell you the things you missed or can't find on a google search just because I'm a nice guy!

zachfromsandusky2

OK first, this woman referring to the cities service weapon which is a semi automatic GLOCK 22 .40 caliber pistol as a "service revolver" shows she knows nothing about law enforcement nor the benefits officers normally receive outside of health and retirement benefits. For starters the officers receive an equipment allowance every 6 months that is payed on their paycheck and is taxed. Officers can use this allowance for footwear or uniforms or new duty gear or anything they decide to use it for. So should we make the city take the officers old boots away when they get a new pair or maybe take their boxer briefs away when they buy a new pack at Walmart? See where I'm going. Show some respect you old hag. I challenge you to take a ride along for a whole 12 hour shift and see what these men and women deal with everyday and I assure you that you would not be so eager to deny them a 500 dollar pistol. Btw with the exception of about 12 or so officer the rest of the full time officers have 10 or more years of service. Show some respect because they have dam Well earned it!

zachfromsandusky2

OK first, this woman referring to the cities service weapon which is a semi automatic GLOCK 22 .40 caliber pistol as a "service revolver" shows she knows nothing about law enforcement nor the benefits officers normally receive outside of health and retirement benefits. For starters the officers receive an equipment allowance every 6 months that is payed on their paycheck and is taxed. Officers can use this allowance for footwear or uniforms or new duty gear or anything they decide to use it for. So should we make the city take the officers old boots away when they get a new pair or maybe take their boxer briefs away when they buy a new pack at Walmart? See where I'm going. Show some respect you old hag. I challenge you to take a ride along for a whole 12 hour shift and see what these men and women deal with everyday and I assure you that you would not be so eager to deny them a 500 dollar pistol. Btw with the exception of about 12 or so officer the rest of the full time officers have 10 or more years of service. Show some respect because they have dam Well earned it!

DGMutley

"Show some respect you old hag. ..." <<< zachfromsandusky2

Huh?

Nemesis

Let's just say zach isn't Sharon's biggest fan.

Then again, it doesn't look like anyone is.

SummerhomenSomrnot

I don't know about Sharon, but, a discount offered to our leo's would be the best

four

police free Sandusky,the Register won't have a bi.tc.h the dopers and junkies can come and go where and when ever they want stupid people.

pavedparadise

Right on DarkHorse Wed, 05/08/2013 - 10:50am

I always get a kick out of those folks (pots) calling the kettle black.

I for one do not see Ms. Johnson's posts as bashing the City-rather offering enhanced conversation on City issues impacting our tax dollars. Those "pots" bashing Ms. Johnson are attempting to silence her out of fear of the truth. Well "pots'--it isn't working.

Oh, my private work buys me tools but I don't get to keep them for use or resale when I quit or retire. Why should my tax dollars go to purchase a gun for future private use?

Do officers keep their shotguns, tasers, handcuffs, bullet proof vests or laptops at careers end?

Julie R.

Like.

zachfromsandusky2

Kevlar is only good for five years, many department do give officers their service pistol along with their retired badge and credentials, most officers buy their handcuffs and duty gear.

Nemesis

Paved, an enhanced conversation would involve an actual understanding of the situation, knowledge of the facts, and a logical approach. This column has none of that.

If your employer is able to keep you happy without offering that additional benefit, that's fine - it's your job, and you and your employer apparently have reached mutually agreeable terms that don't include keeping your tools. That doesn't have any relevance to anyone else's employment. Each employment relationship has its own terms based on what the parties are willing to give and what they expect to get in return. You say you object to your tax dollars being spent in this manner - would you prefer that MORE of your tax dollars were spent on direct wages to offset the loss of this benefit?

Why should your tax dollars go to purchase ANYTHING police officers might buy with their paychecks? Maybe because they earned them? An intelligent, informed taxpayer who cared about how his taxes were spent would focus on the cost of the overall compensation package, rather than how it was broken down. The real question is how much does it cost to keep an officer on the force for a year; whether that amount is transferred in cash, gun vouchers, Amazon gift cards, or cheese sandwiches is irrelevant.

Oh, wait, I forgot, you're blinded to that by "OMG!!!! GUNS!!!"

Kottage Kat

I am a nurse, I cleaned puke, crap took a lot of abuse, scratched,bit etc. No one paid for my uniforms or equipment. The job was a choice, knew what my unifonrm would be and that I would be required to pay for that.
LE makes a good wage, like many other? uniformed occupations, they should pay for their equipment
Just more entitlement ?

zachfromsandusky2

Sandusky pd start at 29k! You call that a good wage?

zachfromsandusky2

How about you research a standard duty gear rig for LE then price it. Between your duty belt to hold your gear and your holster is 200 -250 dollars. I doubt you pay 250 bucks for 2 pieces of your uniform.

pavedparadise

From a prior Register article, the average wage of Sandusky PD is $57,746 and this includes wages of auxiliary and rookies.

Nemesis

Kottage, some hospitals do provide a uniform allowance for nurses. If yours doesn't, maybe you should seek employment with one that does. It's all a question of supply and demand, and my understanding is that demand for nurses has been exceeding supply. If that's still the case, then you should have little trouble. I've always provided my own wardrobe, but a friend in a similar job at another company was provided dry cleaned white dress shirts from Cintas to wear to work. One person's employment terms do not dictate those of another.

Then again, maybe you'd rather have something else instead of a uniform allowance, like a higher salary. That's your choice. For reasons known only to the police officers, they find this uniform allowance to be a valuable benefit.The union wouldn't seek it if the members didn't want it, and since it's something they strongly desire, it's a safe bet that any alternative would cost more.

Everyone makes their own deal. Some deals are better than others. These are basic principles of economics that you, Paved, Sharon, and Grandmasgirl are failing to grasp.

Kottage Kat

Nemisis,
Retired
Just MHO
Thanks for yours

Kat

Nemesis

Everything I said still applies. Demand for nurses has exceeded supply for at least 20 years - everyone makes their own deal, and if yours wasn't good enough, then you should have done something to change that.

Kimo

What Kelly said.....

Pages