Talk:National Fraternal Order of Police/Archives/2018

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Copyright Violation?

The History section and the FOP Star section are clearly copies of equivalent sections at the FOP website (http://www.fop.net/ and look at the About FOP pull down menu). Commets? I intend to delete them shortly. Pzavon 01:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

Human rights group Amnesty International has criticized FOP for its vocal agitation for the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal, raising concerns about the political nature of the death penalty in the United States. I'm going to add this section with the link to Amnesty's report. http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAMR510012000

-Andrew (sorry don't have a user account, don't edit too frequently)

Noting the criticism seems entirely appropriate, but the long quote seems to me to verge on non-neutral advocacy and I've removed it, leaving the external link reference. Pzavon 04:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. A lot of the rest of the article reads as though it was copy-pasted from FOP's website, I may make it read more encycopledically when I have some time. -Andrew 3:59, 18 July 2007

Agreed. I've found that at least two sections are direct quotes from the FOP web site. I went in a while ago to make one part more encyclopedic but haven't had time to fiddle with the other. Pzavon 05:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

-TrueHeart Shouldn't Criticism include comments about the organizations considerable telemarketing efforts. At least in my experience in Orlando, Florida, they have been far-and-away the most frequent telmarketers to the numerous phone numbers I've had over the years. Also see their offical position with the FTC regarding their "right to telemarket". http://ftc.gov/os/comments/dncpapercomments/04/glfop.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.170.156.121 (talk) 02:47, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Only two lines of criticism about this ultra-authoritarian, proto-fascist organization? Pitiful. And the FOP shouldn't be a part of the Organized Labor project anymore than the American Legion should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.233.1.78 (talk) 20:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hallelujah, brother/sister. You must have been reading my mind because that was EXACTLY what I was thinking. That and the political advocacy section doesn't even begin to summarize the ultra-right wing/authoritarian legislation the FOP supports, and it doesn't even mention what legislation they oppose (basically anything that would expand liberty and protect people's rights). Speaking of which, what kind of labor organization lobbies against the EFCA? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.53.144.42 (talk) 02:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Links to State FOP organizations

Is this article going to end up with a list of links to each of the state FOP websites? That seems to me to be inappropriate under WP:NOT and I suggest removing those state site links unless othere are a few of particular relevance. Comments? Pzavon (talk) 02:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Danny Faulkner

In a controversial June 1982 court case, Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1981 murder of police officer Daniel Faulkner. The FOP demanded justice for Faulkner, including a nationwide boycott against businesses and individuals that continued to support Abu-Jamal, and condemning the plan of the French city of St-Denis to name a street in honor of Abu-Jamal.

Collective bargaining and labor services

In addition to representing the needs of officers to their employer, the formation of the first FOP lodges allowed officers to socialize with their fellow officers outside of their stressful work environment. In many areas the lodge building served as a private club with little difference from such organizations as the Freemasons^{[citation needed]}.

As more jurisdictions began to recognize police officers’ collective bargaining rights, the social orientation of the FOP diminished^{[citation needed]}. In many jurisdictions, officers voted for the FOP to be recognized as their collective bargaining agent, making the lodge the local union within that jurisdiction. This focused priorities on labor concerns such as benefits, pay, and fair and equal representation, in addition to social and fraternal concerns.

Some critics have argued that the FOP is ill-suited to serve in such a capacity as it has traditionally been open to all ranks of sworn police officers, while labor unions typically are not open to members of management. It is also argued that collective bargaining is too far removed from the original purpose of the organization. For these reasons, in some jurisdictions the FOP has been challenged^{[citation needed]} as a collective bargaining agent. The FOP traditionally fights vigorously any effort to remove it as a collective bargaining agent in jurisdictions in which it has been certified as such.

National Police Week

On May 15, 1982 the FOP held the first ever National Peace Officers' Memorial Service in Washington DC. The FOP has sponsored and hosted this service on May 15 of each year thereafter. This service is now part of an entire week of activities dedicated to honoring America’s fallen law enforcement officers. During National Police Week, thousands of law enforcement officers gather at memorial services across the country to honor their fallen colleagues. More than 25,000 officers, as well as the surviving family members and friends of slain officers, travel to Washington, D.C. to attend the FOP’s National Peace Officers' Memorial Service, which is one of the largest and most prominent memorial service held on behalf of fallen law enforcement officers in the U.S.^{[citation needed]}

The National FOP Foundation

The National FOP Foundation's stated mission is to fund programs specifically designed to honor America's law enforcement officers, foster community involvement, and aid the families of those who have died in the line of duty. Each year, individuals and companies around the world join in partnership with the FOP by contributing to the Foundation.

Irrelevant

In the controversy section - final sentence reads "Donations from these spas also paid for ads in the "The Rhode Island Trooper", the official publication of the non-profit Rhode Island State Police Association, a membership organization of state police "dedicated to the improvement of the law enforcement profession...".[22]" - which has nothing to do with the FOP. I'm deleting it Irish Melkite (talk) 17:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Criticism

It's always nice to have a criticism section. Shows that the organization is big enough for that sort of thing. On the other hand, with the possible exception of the Bloomberg remark, these seem very localized. Maybe they should go into local articles. Amnesty International is important, but criticizing one local FOP for protected speech seems more against Amnesty than against the Philly FOP. If true, it seems that Amnesty is "stretching." My question is why are they stretching so far when there are flagrant abuses of civil rights elsewhere?

Asking for local support from local semi-legal businesses again seems deficient in common sense, but worthy of national attention? Even the Bloomberg remark is from one person. I think the article needs better (higher level) criticism. There has to be something better than these comments! Student7 (talk) 14:12, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

unregistered editor reverted my FIVE year old deletion of this poorly sourced/written subsection. I think it should stay removed, baring the absence of well-sourced, and better examples. Student7 (talk) 21:20, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

You might try a Google search such as "site:washingtonpost.com fraternal order of police" for a more national perspective. --Nbauman (talk)

"Customs and Immigration Inspectors"

While the term "Inspector" isn't officially used any more, the duties of the old "inspectors" are covered by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) not Immigration and Customs Enforcment (ICE). Edited to fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.94.70 (talk) 20:29, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism Concerns

Under "Political Advocacy," the legislation opposed would appear to be copied from the Fraternal Order of Police website, which might indicate particular biases ("undo the progress") in the text. Pastaguy12 ^(Talk) 01:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fraternal Order of Police. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Fraternal Order of Police. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:03, 20 December 2017 (UTC)