While channel surfing yesterday for news about Ike, I noted in an interview of the Bryan Police Chief that his uniform contained Five Stars, apparently as an indication of his high rank.

I then noted that the Police Chief of Houston only had Four Stars.

Naturally I became curious about how municipalities arrived at the number of Stars to award their Chiefs. Is the number based on longevity in the position? On law enforcement qualification? Or personal preference of the Chief?

I have not noticed how many Stars the COCS Chief sports. Is there any limit to the number of stars a chief or his city may choose? I can see where this could become a real subject of contention between competing municipalities.

Clancey only had 3!

Actually, I imagine this depends on the uniform policy of the police department. I saw online that Colorado Springs has the following

quote:

---

Sergeant: three stripes

Lieutenant: one bar

Commander: one star

Deputy chief: two stars

Chief: three stars

---

Has anyone ever even seen the CSPD chief?? I see Morrow all the time: at Texas Reds, when I'm just driving around, when I'm at lunch, etc. I used to cee Clancy quite frequently.

No, but I ran into the BPD asst. chief. and he wears 2 stars.

Take a look at the dress uniforms for some police and fire departments. They have so much gold braid, stars, bars, and epaulets they look like a convention of Bolivian admirals.

The number of stars a chief wears correlates directly with the size of his ego.

Some years ago, the college station chief limited himself to "just" one star; his next-in-command were majors, and they wore the appropriate oak leaves to be consistent with the military rank of the same name. Even this one star was probably somewhat over the top, as a one-star general in the military will normally be commanding 5,000 or so troops.

I mean, the only real reason to have a rank at all is to distinguish one person from another - and to ensure the chain of command is understood and respected. If you have 5,000 men under you, then you need them to all instantly recognize your authority whether they know you personally or not. In a 100-plus-man department where you all work in the same building... come on. It's a safe bet your men will know who you are.

So that leaves public grandstanding as the secondary reason to wear some impressive-looking rank.

At some point, CSPD did away with the majors and gave them stars. Of course the chief had to be even more striking a figure so his apparent rank had to rise as well, like in Clancey's photo above.

I think the current chief wears either four- or a five-star general rank, I'm not sure. Either way it's outlandishly gaudy and insulting to those in the military, who have to do a lot more than hold down a public sector job in one town for fifteen or twenty years to ever dream of getting just one star. In the entire U.S. Army, for example, there can only be 12 4-star generals at any one time. No 5-star generals exist unless we are in a fully committed war and we have to commission a "general of the army." (Or a navy fleet admiral.) Think Dwight D. Eisenhower or Douglas MacArthur, for example.

Pretty egotistical to devise a rank system that puts you on par with men like that, when at full strength your little one-town police department MIGHT approach a couple of hundred people. including civilian staff. To put that in perspective, a military officer with a couple of hundred people under him would probably be a captain.

But hey, all those stars sure look good on TV.

Doubletap is right - Most chiefs just do their own thing to their uniform to distinquish him/herself. I worked for a Chief who decided to put a cluster-like emblem pin on his shoulders instead of stars, he was a real egomaniac.



[This message has been edited by RunSilentRunDeep (edited 9/14/2008 4:13p).]

Well if you think it is an ego issue, why don't you go speak to the local chiefs and give them your opinion on the size of their egos. I personally don't care how many stars they have, a leader is built on much more than the amount of stars they have, it's the type of person they are.

At some point the number and shape of stars on the collars and epaulets of police chiefs go beyond the acceptable range emblematic of organizational rank ... and sinks to the level of gaudy bling.

The stars to signify top level of rank had its origin in the military. Other non-military organizations over time adopted the idea from the military since the military rank structure was almost universally recognized, i.e. stripes, bars, oak leaves, eagles, and stars.

In World War II, the US Army had only five officers designated by Congress to the Five Star General rank ... Marshall, MacArthur, Eisenhower, Arnold, and Bradley. Bradley, in 1950, was the last to be awarded 5-star rank. The US Army has had none since 1950.

I think it is the height of hubris for a podunk police chief to choose for his own adornment such a historic and honored emblem.

[This message has been edited by fossil_ag (edited 9/14/2008 7:49p).]

It's just based on whatever that Chief wants to wear.




photo courtesy of The Eagle

Why is the PD being compared to the military? Can't they have their own rank system?

Apparently not. There must be SOME offense taken to the act.

Run out of the things on which to bash PD?

[This message has been edited by Nom de Plume (edited 9/15/2008 8:48a).]

Not sure how much of a difference it makes but Chief Morrow from BPD served in the US Army - Military Police Corps; he also holds a Master Degree in Public Administration. In my opinion he can wear as many stars as he sees fit.

They could always use moons and diamonds....

Wow ... In the two photos above the Chief went from 3-Star to 5-Star, or was it the other way around.

But all in all, whatever emblem the Chief of Police in Bryan chooses to adorn his collar, shoulder boards and hat makes not a whit of difference ... to anyone but himself.

fossil, those pictures are of two different chiefs, from two different PDs.

quote:

---

to anyone but himself and the others in the organization.

---

fify

Seriously, I'm not sure why this is such a big deal or why you guys are so down on it.

quote:

---

Either way it's ... insulting to those in the military

---

Wow - those that I know in the military don't have self-confidence low enough to let this insult or bother them.



Honestly, this is ridiculous - who really compares the two (police and military) and thinks they are on the same level and do the same things? - do you really think the police chief thinks he is equivalent to a 5-star general - or do you really believe that an Army captain is equivalent to a police chief?

[/torbush]

---------------------------------------------------
Americans for Fair Taxation!

quote:

---

police chief thinks he is equivalent to a 5-star general

---

Only during times of declared war on parties.