TexasCHLforum.com

texanjoker wrote: Me - no and it is a waste of tax payer money. I am very careful to what I do and anybody that knows me in the 'real world' knows I do not violate peoples rights. In fact I will speak out if I see an issue at work. Having many years in the business it is my job as a senior officer to teach the next generation. After all we take an oath and that oath is very imporant.

I am happy to hear this. This post reads, to me, much different than claiming over and over that we don't know anything was done wrong. Even if it isn't letter of the law wrong it was spirit of the law wrong. If you are saying that you would not take this job and that you do not violate peoples rights, I'll take that.

I truly and honestly salute your 'real world' persona. Thank you.

mojo84 wrote:I'll take the chief's words at face value and know that he has to limit what he says as far as overtly admitting wrongdoing due to potential liability reasons. You don't get to be chief by being a dummy.

He didn't issue his statement because he thought they did it right.

texanjoker wrote:

goose wrote: Not calling for firings, just asking if all those examples above (or the ones you gave) are the same as directing a streets traffic into a business/private venture, in your opinion. Would you take a job diverting traffic into a store at the request of a store?

(Admittedly this isn’t a direct correlation as Burger King and Best Buy would quickly get hit in the pocketbook. The federal government is less directly concerned with monetary penalties, however.)

They would be different situations and wouldn't happen. I don't know of any legal authority to block a road and force one into a BK parking lot nor could I see an agency approving that.

It appears that FWPD, for all intents and purposes, did approve it (substitue survey for BK) and are now reviewing their proceedures and policies. The federal governmant shouldn't have that authority either, which is why folks are upset. FWPD has stated in so much as this was a poor choice. At a minimum you said it was a waste of tax payer money. Do you agree with FWPD that it was a poor choice? Would you take the survey job to divert traffic with all we know today?

sjfcontrol wrote:I find it inconceivable that some on this forum see no difference between blocking/controlling a public road to alleviate an unsafe condition (transport of mobile homes, turbine blades, or other oversized objects, or directing traffic for temporary heavy traffic condition around an event letting out) -- and redirecting traffic in order for somebody to perform a survey.

I think the calls for heads to roll is a bit much, but I do think this activity should cease.

Oh, believe me, plenty of us see the difference. Not all, it would seem.

gigag04 wrote:This is highly entertaining for me during an otherwise slow start to a holiday week. First - thanks to all the participants for making the slow, pre-holiday, and last workday of the week much more enjoyable.

And to address the minor point:
LEOs block roads for private sector companies all the time. Many times they are windmill blades and I think that wind power is a waste of tax payer dollars and am strongly against their use. I am no more seized under 4A by diverting around a windmill blade escorted by privately paid, "off duty" motorcycle officers than I would be under the actions described in the original article. it is also done for mobile homes, funerals, oversized O&G equipment, cranes, tanks, and marathons. This is part of life.

I don't think this is the minor point at all. I think that this is the point.

A very simple question has been asked that you and texanjoker have both chosen not to respond to, as best as I can tell. If I missed it I apologize. Is redirecting traffic for a funeral or construction or oversized load the same as directing traffic into a Burger King or Best Buy at the direction of said Burger King or Best buy? These strike me as very different situations, maybe you do not.

Not calling for firings, just asking if all those examples above (or the ones you gave) are the same as directing a streets traffic into a business/private venture, in your opinion. Would you take a job diverting traffic into a store at the request of a store?

(Admittedly this isn’t a direct correlation as Burger King and Best Buy would quickly get hit in the pocketbook. The federal government is less directly concerned with monetary penalties, however.)

Did any of the LEO playing along respond to the use of officers with flashing lights to divert a street's traffic through a comercial enterprise? Burger King was mentioned. I'd like to hear a response to the validity of that scenario. Would the LEO playing along feel comfortable taking that gig?