Private use of official cars ?

[amboy49]

Was traveling around Castleton today ( before the big hurricane ) and had to drive thru some lane restrictions due to work apparently being performed on the sewers. What I noticed was three law enforcement vehicles on traffic duty. (Just sitting in their cars with emergency lights on). As I drove past I noticed one car was from Beech Grove Police and the other two sheriff ( cars were black so . . . . . . Marion County ?)

Not sure I can rationalize how a member of law enforcement can use his publicly owned vehicle to moonlight. I've got no dog in THIS fight since I don't live either in Beech Grove or Marion County - but I've seen similar scenarios where I do live. Although they weren't running lights and siren there is still wear and tear on the vehicle from just sitting there idling. Wonder who covered the fuel costs - out of pocket by the officer or just charged to the department. This certainly isn't a unique practice as I see this quite a bit.

Not trying to badger the "thin blue line" or anything - just seems like a misuse of a department asset.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Was traveling around Castleton today ( before the big hurricane ) and had to drive thru some lane restrictions due to work apparently being performed on the sewers. What I noticed was three law enforcement vehicles on traffic duty. (Just sitting in their cars with emergency lights on). As I drove past I noticed one car was from Beech Grove Police and the other two sheriff ( cars were black so . . . . . . Marion County ?)

Not sure I can rationalize how a member of law enforcement can use his publicly owned vehicle to moonlight. I've got no dog in THIS fight since I don't live either in Beech Grove or Marion County - but I've seen similar scenarios where I do live. Although they weren't running lights and siren there is still wear and tear on the vehicle from just sitting there idling. Wonder who covered the fuel costs - out of pocket by the officer or just charged to the department. This certainly isn't a unique practice as I see this quite a bit.

Not trying to badger the "thin blue line" or anything - just seems like a misuse of a department asset.

More than likely not, as most department require approval for an officer to do off-duty work. They even ask if the position is uniformed or not.

 

[SMiller]

Indiana state police cannot use vehicles to moonlight, other Dept's do allow it, job perk I say.

 

[68NOVA]

With the weather emergency, they were more than likely assisting.

 

[vitamink]

The rational is you get a car in lieu of pay. Cities determined that the wear and tear is less on vehicles that are "owned" by officers instead of drawn from a pool once they get to work. it's similar to a person owning a car And taking it on vacation VS renting a car and doing the same. Every car is 4wd, and the fastest drift car ever...when it's a rental.

It's considered a perk of the job but it isn't. Impd officers pay for their gas...even though when they were hired they were told "free take home car, free gas which is why you get paid less than XXX". the city gets the illusion that they have more cops than they actually do. They can avoid having full time units saving taxpayers millions on salaries (unlike NY/Chicago etc). They can save on having overlapping shifts for officers as officers just go right into work instead of swapping cars and loading/unloading gear. if there weren't off duty guys working broad ripple or downtown on a Saturday, they entire public safety system in Marion county would grind to a halt starting around 2300hrs until 0400. So it's symbiotic not a perk. I have a friend who works for an insurance company. She gets her home and car insurance for 5$ a year. The ins company gets nothing. That's a perk.

 

[CountryBoy19]

With the weather emergency, they were more than likely assisting.

Curious if the following would be an appropriate use of one... a lady that was aspiring to be a photographer was offering free photo sessions to gain experiance so my wife said, "Hey, why not?", so she came to our house to take some newborn photos. She arrived with another male (presumably her husband) in an ISP vehicle. The male was clearly not on duty (sweatpants & shirt) and I don't think his intent was a workout either (he didn't have workout appropriate shoes but he could have planned to change them once he got to the gym?). He dropped her off in the ISP car, then drove to the nearby gas station and presumably waited in the car, ate breakfast, etc, then came back and picked her up. At the time it seemed like a gross mis-use of public funds but I didn't want to seem ungrateful for the photo-shoot so I didn't say anything.

I assume using the vehicle to go to the gym for a workout would be acceptable, but would dropping somebody else off to perform work/job etc, then waiting for them be kosher?

 

[SMiller]

Curious if the following would be an appropriate use of one... a lady that was aspiring to be a photographer was offering free photo sessions to gain experiance so my wife said, "Hey, why not?", so she came to our house to take some newborn photos. She arrived with another male (presumably her husband) in an ISP vehicle. The male was clearly not on duty (sweatpants & shirt) and I don't think his intent was a workout either (he didn't have workout appropriate shoes but he could have planned to change them once he got to the gym?). He dropped her off in the ISP car, then drove to the nearby gas station and presumably waited in the car, ate breakfast, etc, then came back and picked her up. At the time it seemed like a gross mis-use of public funds but I didn't want to seem ungrateful for the photo-shoot so I didn't say anything.

I assume using the vehicle to go to the gym for a workout would be acceptable, but would dropping somebody else off to perform work/job etc, then waiting for them be kosher?

ISP trooper can drive his car wherever he likes in Indiana while off duty.

 

[Kutnupe14]

This take home car thing really singes some whiskers, doesn't it. I rarely drive my squad off-duty, because it's a hassle for anything but a quick trip to the store.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I like having marked cars around the community. I think we should go so far as to require officers to do their grocery shopping across town from where they live, just to get more visibility on the street.

 

[red_zr24x4]

I bet if you were one of the guys out working on the road, you'd be glad that squad car was there to slow the idiots down

 

[Kutnupe14]

I like having marked cars around the community. I think we should go so far as to require officers to do their grocery shopping across town from where they live, just to get more visibility on the street.

My neighbors love my marked car. Never had a break-in on my street....but there are three of us in the vicinity.

 

[farmerdan]

We have multiple officer's in our neighborhood and I am sure the marked cars they drive home are a big deterrent. I think they are under payed anyway so driving the squad car never really bothered me much.

 

[amboy49]

With the weather emergency, they were more than likely assisting.

Actually not. This was around 1:30 p.m. and before the bad weather came thru that part of the state. This was a street department performing some type of subsurface repair, presumably to the sewer(s) - at least it sure smelled like they were working on the sewer !

 

[milton]

My take home car is part of my pay. I also have a cap of mileage I can use per month, both on and off duty. All off duty employment has to be approved by my sheriff. Other than that, we can use it for whatever we want. Get groceries, haul your family around, go to the range, as you see fit. No misuse, no wasteful spending. If that officer is in his sweatpants and sees an accident, more than likely he'll at least block traffic and call for the appropriate agency. He also has the ability to respond to other things, clothing permitted.

That being said, I rarely drive mine off duty, due to the "your misusing our money" positions. Our dept also did a study a few years back of the off duty allowance to see how much it would reduce the cost. It was so minute, it was nearly negligible, but you did lose the ability to have an off duty officer in his commission, armed, and possibly able to respond immediately if a crisis emerged. Our take home/off duty policy proved to be fantastic for response when we had an active shooter in our county a few years ago.

It's all about perspective and understanding of the advantages and the possible disadvantages of that allowance. Some departments are all for it, some aren't.

Hope that helps.

 

[churchmouse]

I am OK with this. Having a marked car at a work zone is a serious plus in my eyes. Makes a few more of the inconsiderate idiots look up from the phone and pay the hell attention.....or not.
These guys put themselves out there every day.
Yes, they choose to be there but if a perk like driving the vehicle is a deal breaker we need to look at the original deal.

Also, having all these marked/unmarked cars rolling around gives a much needed presence.

 

[lovemachine]

I was told a long time ago that a police officer is never really "off-duty" anyway. So I could care less if the officer drives his marked car to the grocery store in his sweat pants.

There are bigger problems in this world to get mad about anyway.

 

[churchmouse]

I was told a long time ago that a police officer is never really "off-duty" anyway. So I could care less if the officer drives his marked car to the grocery store in his sweat pants.

There are bigger problems in this world to get mad about anyway.

My Dad and his crew used to get all twisted up about this.
It just turns out to be jealousy that someone is "Getting" something they aren't.
Things like "I have to pay for my car why pay for theirs" kind of thing.
Well, so do I but I see no issues with it.
I think I saw something a year or so ago that it costs each tax payer (tax payer not welfare leach) about $2 annually for this perk. I could be way off on this.
Anybody...???
Beuller........Beuller.....

 

[lovemachine]

My Dad and his crew used to get all twisted up about this.
It just turns out to be jealousy that someone is "Getting" something they aren't.
Things like "I have to pay for my car why pay for theirs" kind of thing.
Well, so do I but I see no issues with it.
I think I saw something a year or so ago that it costs each tax payer (tax payer not welfare leach) about $2 annually for this perk. I could be way off on this.
Anybody...???
Beuller........Beuller.....

I only get jealous because I want to taze someone too

 

[KLB]

I am OK with this. Having a marked car at a work zone is a serious plus in my eyes. Makes a few more of the inconsiderate idiots look up from the phone and pay the hell attention.....or not.
These guys put themselves out there every day.
Yes, they choose to be there but if a perk like driving the vehicle is a deal breaker we need to look at the original deal.

Also, having all these marked/unmarked cars rolling around gives a much needed presence.

I agree in theory. Up here though the trend has been towards cars that are not easily identified as police cars. That kind of negates much of that benefit.

 

[VUPDblue]

Does your position change if the Officer pays for the ability to use the car off-duty?