|
Associated Press – January 23, 2008:
|
When police in this Cincinnati suburb respond to an accident in which an out-of-town driver is at fault, the city plans to start issuing a bill: $14 for the first 30 minutes that an officer is on the scene and an additional $7 for every 15 minutes thereafter. Use of a police car brings an additional $154 charge.
|
|
How to boot tourism in a country with a failing economy:
1. Finger print everyone upon entering the country
2. Charge people for using the police
3. Decide that all the legal protections your afford citizens aren’t afforded to foreigners allow you to haul them off to prisons for no reason and torture them.
The city just east of me (Stow, OH) tried this last year. It was a colossal flop and was soon abandoned.
…and if you refuse to pay, they send the police and then they send you another bill and if you refuse to pay that bill, they send the police and then they send you another bill and…
By the way, can you got to jail for not paying your police bill and if so, do they send you a bill for your jail time, which you can then simply refuse to pay and then…
I hope you can see where I’m heading with this because I can’t…
I don’t think they’ve thought this through. Sure, that comes out to about $58 K a year in salary for the cops but what about recovering the revenue for all the forms the cop will fill out? That could add another four or five bucks per incident. $25 to replace the prongs on a taser? $2 per bullet if they have to shoot you…
Gee, I wonder what they’ll charge “real” criminals for “real” crimes? Oh! that’s right, silly me, they won’t mess with real criminals because they may get shot or stabbed…
It’s Robocop. Remember they had to charge citizens for services. Well scratch that city off my list of ones to see ( not that it was on my list in the first place. )
Just what we need….
Privatized police.
Will they be a division of Halliburton, or Blackwater?
Privatized Police would be ok if we had NO public servants. However, this is double-dipping in my opinion.
Just because you don’t live in a city doesn’t mean your taxes aren’t helping fund them. The federal gov gives money to local police forces to fund their operations.
The gov can’t figure out how to keep funding itself the traditional way so it just starts billing people. A tax is a tax is a tax.
I wonder if you could request a cop from your hometown to come and handle the accident? If I am going to pay someone, I would prefer it be my local community.
Sounds like a violation of 14th Amendment or equal protection to me. This gives the cops a motive to stop out of towners. Bad civics.
this crap about charging for police services is a desperate cry for help. our cities are so screwed right now it’s not funny.
the problem is that some people actually believe that government can be cheap, but that is because they are stupid
consider: do you have any idea how much it cost just to salt the roads in winter? plow them? how about just paying someone to sweep them once in a while? keep schools open? clear the roads after an accident or storm? have firehouses? put police on the street? house criminals in jails? send out building inspectors? hold elections? run courts? pay off extortion money to the NFL/MLB/NBA/ETC. and build them lavish new stadiums and watch them leave town anyway? pay off extortion money to lure and keep companies who promise jobs then leave anyway? implement policies enacted, but not funded by politicians in washington who are looking for headlines? good grief man! imagine the bill just to gas up cars for the average city police department!
our cities are getting screwed from every angle — it’s no wonder that anyone who can afford the suburbs run there.
He who has the deepest pockets will get the biggest bill and the best service. If you look like services are beyond your budget you don’t get help, you bleed out on the corner. Better not drive a Yugo.
This would be a super plan for nuts in San Francisco. They are already more than willing to tackle anything that will ban people from the city.
Take a look at how San Francisco tried to prevent the Blue Angels during Fleet Week which is a huge financial windfall for the city.
Remember their refusal to provide a homeport for the retired battleship Iowa, which would be turned into a tourist attracting museum.
If the plan to fine non-city dwellers takes off, it will be just one more reason for sane people to avoid major down-town cities, like San Francisco, and conduct their business in safer suburban areas.
yeah we need more tax breaks ans abatement plans to help our cities along.. nothing like less revenue to make things better…… it is a race to the bottom and america is alost there…….
#12 – If the plan to fine non-city dwellers takes off, it will be just one more reason for sane people to avoid major down-town cities, like San Francisco, and conduct their business in safer suburban areas.
This story is about the ultra-right wing Cincinnati, Ohio. Not the liberal (and beautiful) San Francisco. It’s a typical conservative idea.
And, the notion that suburbs are safer is a myth.
In the first year, the system is expected to generate about $100,000.
I wonder how much the city will pay out in lawsuit settlements.
This is one reason no one should ever travel to a city…
Fourteenth Amendment,
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
***
From the article
Agents for Kentucky Farm Bureau, the largest property and casualty insurer in the state, usually refuse to pay the charges.
“Insurance policies will cover you when you’re liable or negligent. But in this situation, unless there’s some sort of hazardous spill or something, there’s no liability,” spokesman Greg Kosse said.
So, I’m wondering how they can collect this “debt”
The administrative overhead will easily exceed the revenues generated. The folks supporting this know that.
This is just a foot in the door. First they charge the out-of-towners (folks who can’t vote them out of office), then they shift to charging everyone.
Taxes, the argument will go, provide a public safety (police or fire or paramedic) presence. If you use those services (or cause them to be used), that’s extra.
The same model is used by utility companies today. How much of your electric bill pays for electricity and how much for infrastructure and overhead? Same idea.
This will result, in effect, in public safety for the rich, and the threat of an additional bill for all others. Those who cant afford it won’t call, even when they clearly are the victim. What do they gain if the system sees it otherwise and their call changes nothing but results in a bill?
This lowers public service a form of animal husbandry.
Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
- Monday’s PC Magazine Column Online and print columns posted for online viewing
- Spam! End it! Here’s How.
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
