I'm glad they're going after criminals, rioters, thieves, rapists, mass murderers - and yeah, even those folks who think they can drive 60 mph in a school zone.
I am tired of paying police departments to babysit certain high crime areas - and strongly feel neighborhoods should pay for police protection based on usage. We don't 'share' a collective water bill - and there's no reason we should have to pay a 'shared' bill for police protection when some people use a lot more than others...
Some people have lived in a home for more than a decade and seen individuals move into the area that eventually necessitated greater police presence. In that situation, was it the individuals fault for living there and not having the means to pick up roots and move? Should they have to pay more for the threat that befell them simply because They were minding their own business and had the bad luck of poor neighbors moving in?
BTW, I don’t think the police are there to protect you - they are generally there to file paperwork and look into things (if you’re lucky) after the fact. If you find an officer that actually takes the “to Protect and Serve” motto to heart, then you have found the exception...
I’m not trying to argue with you, that’s not my intent.
Legally and practically, the sheriff seems to be a better choice than a police dept., much less the HSI, etc.
http://www.ice.gov/about/offices/homeland-security-investigations/
The type they have in Mexico and most Banana Republics. They are also corrupt, but they accept small bribes, whereas the U.S. cops try to destroy you and your livelihood and to seize whatever property you have.