Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 0:38:39 GMT -5
You have a point Russell. Me and my pals debate things in very small Facebook circles. Not many 'friends'.
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Nov 27, 2014 6:48:53 GMT -5
I agree with you, Doug. I know several Iowans who have moved because they have entered law enforcement and needed to live within a certain distance from their beat as a requirement for their job. Makes sense to me. What I'm saying, however, has nothing to do with an opinion on the outcome of what is being discussed here. Yes and no. This is a done deal, preventing this stuff in the future is what needs to be the focus. Think if all the Vinton cops lived in MN. That's the situation in a big city.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Nov 27, 2014 6:52:04 GMT -5
I think maybe a solution to this type of problem would be smaller political divisions. If police lived in the same neighborhoods they patrolled I don't think you could have this kind of problem. Have to live in the city/county etc is a job requirement for many LEOs already. If the political division were smaller and the same rules applied the police and family would live in the community they patrolled. When I transferred from Detroit to Philly we had to sell our house of course and since we lived in a rundown section of an otherwise well to do town the real estate agent we had thought the police, since they were under paid, would be a good place to start advertising a relatively cheap house. He went to the police station to post an ad but the cops explained that police couldn't live there, it was too dangerous for them. Eventually my company bought the house.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Nov 27, 2014 20:50:52 GMT -5
You have a point Russell. Me and my pals debate things in very small Facebook circles. Not many 'friends'. But, James, likely each of your small circle of friends has friends that are not common to your circle. It is exponential or even worse. You may have 16 friends, but one of them may have 180 friends, one of whom shares your post with his 497 friends, and ad infinitum. The SoundHole has finite number of members and an even smaller number that show up at the table for each discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Nov 27, 2014 20:54:56 GMT -5
Wait--there's a table? You mean I don't have to sit on this stool in the corner?
Is there a place I can stow this pointy hat nearby?
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Nov 27, 2014 21:04:47 GMT -5
Wait--there's a table? You mean I don't have to sit on this stool in the corner? Is there a place I can stow this pointy hat nearby? I wondered why your seat at the head of the table was always empty.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Nov 27, 2014 22:30:31 GMT -5
Wait--there's a table? You mean I don't have to sit on this stool in the corner? Is there a place I can stow this pointy hat nearby? I wondered why your seat at the head of the table was always empty. He hogs all the bacon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 22:38:26 GMT -5
You have a point Russell. Me and my pals debate things in very small Facebook circles. Not many 'friends'. But, James, likely each of your small circle of friends has friends that are not common to your circle. It is exponential or even worse. You may have 16 friends, but one of them may have 180 friends, one of whom shares your post with his 497 friends, and ad infinitum. The SoundHole has finite number of members and an even smaller number that show up at the table for each discussion. Point taken Rob. I don't think I've had a post shared this year. I get you though. Some friends have.
|
|