From: pat@fitz.uucp (Patrick Fitzgerald)
Subject: National Police Force (was Re: National Health Care)
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 03:33:49 GMT

donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:

>In article <1992Aug11.180605.9290@interlan.Interlan.COM>
>urbin@interlan.Interlan.COM (Mark Urbin) writes:
>>  Don't count on any savings on the 100,000 jobs he wants to cut from the
>>federal government.  That money is needed to pay for the 100,000 officer
>>National Police Corps that is part of the Putting People First plan.

Maybe the plan should be called "Putting People First in the Frying Pan,
then in the Fire".  %-)

>What is this "National Police FOrce" you're talking about and how is it
>supposed to work?  How will it be different from the FBI?  How do we
>prevent it from abusing its power, as the FBI has been wont tp do?

Here's what Clinton said about his National Police Corps, in his
economics speech:

-----8<-----begin text-----8<----------8<-----begin text-----8<-----
Fight crime by putting 100,000 new police officers on the streets.
We will create a National Police Corps and offer unemployed veterans and
active military personnel a chance to become law enforcement officers
here at home. We will also expand community policing, fund more drug
treatment, and establish community boot camps to discipline first-time
non-violent offenders.
------>8-----end text----->8------------>8-----end text----->8------

This is frightening.

Here's some more, from the Dem. platform:
-----8<-----begin text-----8<----------8<-----begin text-----8<-----
America's police are locked in an unequal struggle with crime:
since 1951 the ratio of police officers to reported crimes has
reversed, from three-to-one to one-to-three.  We will create a
Police Corps, in which participants would receive college aid in
return for several years of service after graduation in a state
or local police department.  As we shift people and resources
from defense to the civilian economy, we will create new jobs in
law enforcement for those leaving the military.  
------>8-----end text----->8------------>8-----end text----->8------

This is very frightning.  Just what we need:  bunches of unenthusiastic
police officers, being paid diddley-squat, paying X% of diddly-squat for
their college loans.  Training costs alone would be high.

Plus, since these people are not really police officers (they're just
ordinary citizens) they obviously cannot be trusted to wield a dangerous
assault weapon.  They would just end up killing someone in their own
police department by accident. [<-- sarcasm for the Brady bunch]


He later clarified his remarks during an address to the conference of
mayors:
-----8<-----begin text-----8<----------8<-----begin text-----8<-----
But he said, deadly serious, he said, "Governor, where I came
from, in my home country, we were much poorer, but at least we
were free. Now we are not free. My boy can't go to school unless
I walk with him. He can't walk across the street and play in the
park, unless I go with him. So if I do what my boy wants, and I
vote for you, I want you to make my boy free." That's what I want
us to do together, with the National Police Corps. They won't be
national, they'll be your police. But we'll give you the people
you need to do the job.
------>8-----end text----->8------------>8-----end text----->8------

Sounds like a "cover-my-ass" remark.  If they aren't national, why call
them that?  Does anyone know the origin of this NPC?
--
   ______   |o| Patrick Fitzgerald     |o| pat@fitz.b30.ingr.com
  / ___  )  |o| Sr. Software Analyst,  |o| (205) 730-3741
 / __)/ /__ |o| Intergraph Corporation |o| Mailstop GD3002
(_/it(_____)|o| TIM Documentation      |o| Huntsville, AL 35894-0001

But he said, deadly serious, he said, "Governor, where I came from, in
my home country, we were much poorer, but at least we were free. Now we
are not free. SWAT teams burst down my door and shoot my family.  Police
confiscate my home and belongings, though I am charged with no crime.
Violent men threaten me, but I cannot purchase a weapon for defense.  My
dying father cannot receive a life-saving drug, because the 
FDA will not approve it for years.  And strange people on USENET say
things like 'if you have nothing to hide, why do you not let them search
your home'."

Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:2283 talk.politics.guns:19642