Defund the Police?

[Chef Jim]

Just now, GregPersons said:

 

You are garbage. This is you, also. 

 

Again -- you're trash. I was hoping you were behaving unusually toward me. If you were not White, you'd be in jail if you acted like this in public. Again -- you are human garbage, Jim

 

 

 

 

I'd be in jail???  Bwahahahahhaha!!  

 

Under what charges sir?  

 

Come and get me copper. 

 

 

[GregPersons]

Just now, TakeYouToTasker said:

When you say “stupidest” (Which isn’t a word by the way.  The term you’re looking for is “most stupid“.   When you’re trying to insult someone’s intelligence, you may wish to consider using real words to do so.) I can only assume you mean something else entirely, given your standard insistence that language is like water, and nothing really means anything anyway.

 

You’re fun to play with.

 

Oh is that the objective truth, Tasker? Hey thanks for bringing up vocb again. Where are those definitions for "Racism" and "Objectivity"? 

 

Can you tell me why Racism isn't systemic, as you insist? And record yourself saying it? I'll pay you. Offer still stands, coward. 

[Chef Jim]

Just now, GregPersons said:

 

That's just based on your content here. Seek professional help. You are trash. Based just on the content of your character. You are a drag on society. You are useless. Please go support the Jets or the Pats or anyone else. 

 

What's the longest romantic relationship you've ever had?  You have a strong "incel" vibe. Tasker too.

 

Jets?  Pats?  What do they have to do with this?

 

And now you want to know about my love life?  Now you're getting creepy.  

[GregPersons]

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

 

I'd be in jail???  Bwahahahahhaha!!  

 

Under what charges sir?  

 

Come and get me copper. 

 

Do you think Black people are arrested fairly? 

 

Do you think Black men are allowed to behave angrily in public without some White person getting nervous and calling the cops?

 

 

 

Are you an incel also

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Jets?  Pats?  What do they have to do with this?

 

And now you want to know about my love life?  Now you're getting creepy.  

 

I just think you might behave a lot differently if you got laid or had some love in your life. You seem really really lonely and I wonder if you have any women in your life that aren't related to you? Are you on any apps? Got any leads?

 

What is the longest relationship you've ever had (I assume with a woman)? How recently was it? Innocent question to figure out what's wrong with you exactly

[Chef Jim]

Just now, GregPersons said:

 

Do you think Black men are allowed to behave angrily in public without some White person getting nervous and calling the cops?

 

 

Yes.  All the time.  

 

Again with my love life.  Pathetic. 

 

 

 

[Nanker]

The Left want to make the Feds responsible for the police. It’s a dream come true for them. We’ve seen their dreams come true before. 
 

The Left are Nazis through and through. 
 

 

[GregPersons]

Just now, Chef Jim said:

 

Yes.  All the time.  

 

Again with my love life.  Pathetic. 

 

Pretty simple question. When is the last time you had the love of a woman in your life? Do you know what "incel energy" is and what it looks like?

[billsfan1959]

10 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

So incidents involving someone from the middle east or north Africa are typically classified as white? Or is that at the discretion of the officer?

 

Unless there have been updates I don't know about, I believe they are classified as white.

 

Individual departments may have more classifications; however, everything that gets passed on to the FBI and DOJ pretty much mirrors the census classifications. That way, at least there is some uniformity, which enables better analyses of the numbers.

 

Do you think there should be an expansion of the classifications?

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by billsfan1959

[Chef Jim]

Just now, GregPersons said:

 

Pretty simple question. When is the last time you had the love of a woman in your life? Do you know what "incel energy" is and what it looks like?

 

Every day for the last 40 years.  Sounds like you need to get laid yourself.  You should try it.  It's fun. 

 

I have no idea what incel was until I looked it up just now. Question.  Why do you know so much about it? 

[Johnnycage46]

7 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Jets?  Pats?  What do they have to do with this?

 

And now you want to know about my love life?  Now you're getting creepy.  

 

NOW?????

[Chef Jim]

2 minutes ago, Johnnycage46 said:

 

NOW?????

 

Before he was a pathetic #######.  He just now slipped into creepy. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by Chef Jim

[Johnnycage46]

Just now, Chef Jim said:

 

Before is was a pathetic #######.  He just now slipped into creepy. 

 

Gotcha.  I got the "creepy" vibe from him about 8ish last night.  An unpleasant, creepy, racist, piece of *****.

[Chef Jim]

Just now, Johnnycage46 said:

 

Gotcha.  I got the "creepy" vibe from him about 8ish last night.  An unpleasant, creepy, racist, piece of *****.

 

I don't want to know what you and @GregPersons were doing last night that was creepy and unpleasant.  

[Johnnycage46]

Just now, Chef Jim said:

 

I don't want to know what you and @GregPersons were doing last night that was creepy and unpleasant.  

 

You definitely do NOT.

[TakeYouToTasker]

20 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Oh is that the objective truth, Tasker? Hey thanks for bringing up vocb again. Where are those definitions for "Racism" and "Objectivity"? 

 

Can you tell me why Racism isn't systemic, as you insist? And record yourself saying it? I'll pay you. Offer still stands, coward. 

Ah, but you’ve made the positive assertion here.  It falls to you to prove the argument you are making, not to others to accept your claims as verboten, and then to disprove them.
 

That’s the argument of a child.

 

As for volcabulary, it’s hilarious how little responsibility you’re willing to accept for something as insignificant as not knowing that “stupidest” isn’t actually a word.

 

Ironically it’s just about the most Trump-like trait imaginable.  You look at Trump, and you hear him say something that’s obviously a lie, but it’s such a stupid lie that you can’t actually figure out why he’d say it.  It can’t possibly help him in any way because everyone knows it’s a lie.  It can only do him harm if he tells it, but he does it anyway, and then lies about the lie.

 

That’s exactly how you behave in regards to personal responsibility.  That you can’t actually see this is my favorite thing about conversing with you.  You and the President are two peas in a pod intellectually.

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by TakeYouToTasker

[Sig1Hunter]

51 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Maybe it's a question best left to @Sig1Hunter @LeviF91 or @billsfan1959, but do law enforcement agencies use the same racial definitions in their reports as the US Census? Or is their a wider selection with different definitions? I'm curious about the impact that potential disparity might have on many of the widely circulated stats.

I believe the UCR calls for white/Hispanic, black/Hispanic, Asian, other. That’s what our traffic stop data reporting calls for, at least (a report that we fill out after every stop indicating race, gender, age, ethnicity, reason for stop, if searched, if arrested, dispositions).

[Unforgiven]

Nah not really defund defund, just pussyfoot around with the concept until after the election.

[Sig1Hunter]

3 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I read the entire article. MY opinion is if he came into the force wanting to do the right thing, he would have done it. What he describes is not the experience of the vast majority of officers. You don't become bad, to the degreee we are talking about, if that potential is not already within you..

 

 

I went through three diffferent academies in my career. There was never an emphasis "that everyone in the world is out to kill" us. The training is typically split between physical fitness (which also includes self defense/how to conduct arrests/ etc), firearms qualification, and classroom (Rules, procedures, the law, etc.). There is an emphasis on self protection, but only from the perspective that it can be a dangerous job and you have to always be prepared.

 

I would also ask @Sig1Hunterwhat his experiences have been.

 

My question to you is, why are you so willing to believe the guy in this article over others who say differently?

 

My experience was similar to yours. I went through a state patrol academy about 20 years ago. It was highly regimented, and very paramilitary. Beds had to be made to certain regs, furniture certain distances apart, lots of PT. 
 

Indoctrinated to think everyone is a threat? Hell no. Did you know that everyone could be a threat? Yes. The crazy old man that shot and killed Kyle Dinkheller. The unassuming Mexicans that killed the Texas State Trooper. We watched those videos. But we weren’t indoctrinated that everyone was out to hurt us. To the contrary, we we taught to respond to threats when they present themselves. As a result, cops get killed because action is always quicker than reaction. That doesn’t mean that I need to be staring down the barrel of a gun before I take action, so long as that action is articulable and reasonable. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by Sig1Hunter

[muppy]

I'm going to try this one more time. this after reading this tasker characters scathing rebuke of me personally. What a self righteous supposed know it all.  Just because I dont choose to take the most radical interpretation of "defund the police" doesn't mean that every protester did as well.  How is it that a few posters here presume to know the intent and thought processes behind each and every protest sign out there. I refuse to accept that He does or anyone CAN  accept a premise that to "defund the police" means to remove police period and let the chips fall as they may. RIDICULOUS.  I took some time and found an article in a publication I would hope folks would read as not politically inclined either way forbes magazine. Here is what they had to say"  https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2020/06/09/the-defund-the-police-movement-is-sweeping-the-country-heres-what-it-really-means/#4a068e394d9b

 

I hope this clears up the matter. Never did I ever infer that I knew what every protester meant  by defund, Only MY opinion which in no way shape or form aligns with radical inference. To take the radicals interpretation to me is the idiotic take and I personally give folks more credit than that even in the heat of protest.    

 

to that tasker character or  whatever his name is Go Pound sand.

Edited June 10, 2020 by Margarita

[Capco]

51 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

When you say “stupidest” (Which isn’t a word by the way.  The term you’re looking for is “most stupid“.

 

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/is-stupider-a-word/#:~:text=Stupider is the comparative form,stupidest or the most stupid.

[TakeYouToTasker]

11 minutes ago, Margarita said:

I argue like a child.

 

Words mean whatever I want them to mean whenever I say them.

 

It’s everyone else’s fault that they don’t understand what I’m talking about because everyone else should be mind readers who intuitively know that I mean “cheeseburger” when I say “spaceship”...  except for times it means “the” or “chartreuse” or “the Mona Lisa”.

 

So there.

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by TakeYouToTasker

[billsfan1959]

6 minutes ago, Margarita said:

I'm going to try this one more time. this after reading this tasker characters scathing rebuke of me personally. What a self righteous supposed know it all.  Just because I dont choose to take the most radical interpretation of "defund the police" doesn't mean that every protester did as well.  How is it that a few posters here presume to know the intent and thought processes behind each and every protest sign out there. I refuse to accept that He does or anyone CAN  accept a premise that to "defund the police" means to remove police period and let the chips fall as they may. RIDICULOUS.  I took some time and found an article in a publication I would hope folks would read as not politically inclined either way forbes magazine. Here is what they had to say"  https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2020/06/09/the-defund-the-police-movement-is-sweeping-the-country-heres-what-it-really-means/#4a068e394d9b

 

I hope this clears up the matter. Never did I ever infer that I knew what every protester meant  by defund, Only MY opinion which in no way shape or form aligns with radical inference. To take the radicals interpretation to me is the idiotic take and I personally give folks more credit than that even in the heat of protest.    

 

to that tasker character or  whatever his name is Go Pound sand.

 

I think the issue here, Margarita is that the word "defund" literally means to cease funding. If somebody says "defund the police" and they do not mean that funding for the police should be withdrawn and stopped, then they should use another word or phrase that more accurately represents what they mean.

 

If we start to apply arbitrary meanings and endless interpretations, the word itself then becomes meaningless.

 

Words do have meanings and should be used accordingly. 

[muppy]

4 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

whatever you say Kreskin

[Capco]

A couple more questions if you have a moment, @billsfan1959 and @Sig1Hunter.

 

The author mentions Dave Grossman:  

 

One of the most important thought leaders in law enforcement is Col. Dave Grossman, a “killologist” who wrote an essay called “Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs”. Cops are the sheepdogs, bad guys are the wolves, and the citizens are the sheep (!). Col. Grossman makes sure to mention that to a stupid sheep, sheepdogs look more like wolves than sheep, and that’s why they dislike you.

 

This “they hate you for protecting them and only I love you, only I can protect you” tactic is familiar to students of abuse. It’s what abusers do to coerce their victims into isolation, pulling them away from friends and family and ensnaring them in the abuser’s toxic web. Law enforcement does this too, pitting the officer against civilians. “They don’t understand what you do, they don’t respect your sacrifice, they just want to get away with crimes. You’re only safe with us.”

 

I was wondering if either of you have read this essay (https://www.killology.com/sheep-wolves-and-sheepdogs), been exposed to Dave Grossman's work either in print or in person, and what your opinions were of his view on law enforcement.  

 

I find many of his views to be extreme, and it troubles me that he contributes to law enforcement theory around the country through his seminars and books.  What about you?

[Deranged Rhino]

This man is running for Congress in NY. 

 

 

(posting for the vid)

[muppy]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

 

I think the issue here, Margarita is that the word "defund" literally means to cease funding. If somebody says "defund the police" and they do not mean that funding for the police should be withdrawn and stopped, then they should use another word or phrase that more accurately represents what they mean.

 

If we start to apply arbitrary meanings and endless interpretations, the word itself then becomes meaningless.

 

Words do have meanings and should be used accordingly. 

I think the folks who are so steadfast in holding on to the most radical inference of this word are zealot idiots. Did you read the link I posted? If that is the ONLY reference to that term word Yes i agree another term should have been used it not being fully demonstrative of the effect hoped for.  Do you agree with me there? I'd Much rather discuss this with you than kreskin 

[Sig1Hunter]

1 minute ago, Capco said:

A couple more questions if you have a moment, @billsfan1959 and @Sig1Hunter.

 

The author mentions Dave Grossman:  

 

One of the most important thought leaders in law enforcement is Col. Dave Grossman, a “killologist” who wrote an essay called “Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs”. Cops are the sheepdogs, bad guys are the wolves, and the citizens are the sheep (!). Col. Grossman makes sure to mention that to a stupid sheep, sheepdogs look more like wolves than sheep, and that’s why they dislike you.

 

This “they hate you for protecting them and only I love you, only I can protect you” tactic is familiar to students of abuse. It’s what abusers do to coerce their victims into isolation, pulling them away from friends and family and ensnaring them in the abuser’s toxic web. Law enforcement does this too, pitting the officer against civilians. “They don’t understand what you do, they don’t respect your sacrifice, they just want to get away with crimes. You’re only safe with us.”

 

I was wondering if either of you have read this essay (https://www.killology.com/sheep-wolves-and-sheepdogs), been exposed to Dave Grossman's work either in print or in person, and what your opinions were of his view on law enforcement.  

 

I find many of his views to be extreme, and it troubles me that he contributes to law enforcement theory around the country through his seminars and books.  What about you?

I’m well versed on LTC Grossman and have read both On Combat and On Killing. They are very interesting, and provide a TON of evidence to back up his point of view. 
 

The sheepdog metaphor doesn’t say, to me, “only I can protect you”. I actually quoted an excerpt from it in a different thread. I believe it is important, and it is accurate. Have you actually read it? Or better yet, read any of Grossmans books? If not, I suggest you do so you can make up your own mind about what he is saying, instead of taking someone else’s word for it.

[Chef Jim]

48 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

Ah, but you’ve made the positive assertion here.  It falls to you to prove the argument you are making, not to others to accept your claims as verboten, and then to disprove them.
 

That’s the argument of a child.

 

 

 

And that is the "debate" style of so many.  

 

Them: You smoke crack!!

Me: That's absurd.

Them:  Prove you don't

Me: No that's not how it works.  Prove I smoke crack.  You made the assertion now back up your claim

Them: Ok.........YOU SMOKE CRACK!!

Me:  Sigh...........

[BuffaloHokie13]

1 hour ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Unless there have been updates I don't know about, I believe they are classified as white.

 

Individual departments may have more classifications; however, everything that gets passed on to the FBI and DOJ pretty much mirrors the census classifications. That way, at least there is some uniformity, which enables better analyses of the numbers.

 

Do you think there should be an expansion of the classifications?

 

I don't much care if it's expanded personally, though I am glad to hear it sounds mostly consistent. I think a lot of the identitarian folks would classify Middle East & North Africa as 'POC' or 'Brown'. Honestly, I'm surprised someone hasn't already been outraged by this.

[Taro T]

12 minutes ago, Margarita said:

I think the folks who are so steadfast in holding on to the most radical inference of this word are zealot idiots. Did you read the link I posted? If that is the ONLY reference to that term word Yes i agree another term should have been used it not being fully demonstrative of the effect hoped for.  Do you agree with me there? I'd Much rather discuss this with you than kreskin 

 

Margarita, your post is very well potatoes.  Thank you for trglgumpfhing our riboflavin.  We are in your monkey chow.

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

22 minutes ago, Margarita said:

whatever you say Kreskin

What a bizarre choice of... insult?

 

Stop being pouty, and accept responsibility for poorly communicating your ideas.

 

Again, I am actually in favor of abolishing police.  I’m happy to make that argument in another thread.

 

I was actually pleased to hear the term “defunded” used, because I know what the word “defunded” means, and I thought, for a fleeting moment, that the extreme left and principled libertarians might have found a singular common purpose.

[BillsFanNC]

 

[Chef Jim]

30 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

This man is running for Congress in NY. 

 

 

(posting for the vid)

 

You're going outside and ***** destroying the same police cars you ***** paid for!  I love that. 

 

I would love to see him in congress. Someone that Nancy Pelosi would probably lock her car doors if she saw him walking towards her.  

[TakeYouToTasker]

3 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said:

. what's your alternative?

Localism.  
 

Sheriffs and deputies.

 

Private security.

 

Abolition of all gun laws.

 

Neighborhood defense.

 

Not the thread for this though.

[3rdnlng]

4 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said:

I could get behind that.

 

Though in commonwealths like PA there are no sherriffs, IIRC.

I believe they have a different purpose that would include serving warrants, eviction notices, etc. , but yes there are sheriffs in PA. 

[muppy]

56 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

What a bizarre choice of... insult?

 

Stop being pouty, and accept responsibility for poorly communicating your ideas.

 

Again, I am actually in favor of abolishing police.  I’m happy to make that argument in another thread.

 

I was actually pleased to hear the term “defunded” used, because I know what the word “defunded” means, and I thought, for a fleeting moment, that the extreme left and principled libertarians might have found a singular common purpose.

no Kreskin wasn't an insult it was an observation..he was a "mentalist" something you pretend to be.

 

He may have been a dick too then  you'd have that in  common with him but I cant speak to that .. he may or may not have been one....Now that is both an observation AND an insult TWOFER

 

How''s that sand pounding going MENSA? Now that's not an insult or an observation,.... that's a sneer,  insult AND a joke. TRIFECTA

 

Glad we cleared that up. Back on ignore you go. 

 

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by Margarita

[Sig1Hunter]

30 minutes ago, Capco said:

A couple more questions if you have a moment, @billsfan1959 and @Sig1Hunter.

 

The author mentions Dave Grossman:  

 

One of the most important thought leaders in law enforcement is Col. Dave Grossman, a “killologist” who wrote an essay called “Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs”. Cops are the sheepdogs, bad guys are the wolves, and the citizens are the sheep (!). Col. Grossman makes sure to mention that to a stupid sheep, sheepdogs look more like wolves than sheep, and that’s why they dislike you.

 

This “they hate you for protecting them and only I love you, only I can protect you” tactic is familiar to students of abuse. It’s what abusers do to coerce their victims into isolation, pulling them away from friends and family and ensnaring them in the abuser’s toxic web. Law enforcement does this too, pitting the officer against civilians. “They don’t understand what you do, they don’t respect your sacrifice, they just want to get away with crimes. You’re only safe with us.”

 

I was wondering if either of you have read this essay (https://www.killology.com/sheep-wolves-and-sheepdogs), been exposed to Dave Grossman's work either in print or in person, and what your opinions were of his view on law enforcement.  

 

I find many of his views to be extreme, and it troubles me that he contributes to law enforcement theory around the country through his seminars and books.  What about you?

To further elaborate on the specific portion of the essay (which wasn’t his, actually. He quoted it as told by someone else to him) that you referred to, and actually was the same portion I quoted in a different thread.

 

He isn’t saying that only cops are sheepdogs. There are plenty of sheepdog civilians, and unfortunately there are some sheep cops. The metaphor is basically saying that evil exists (the wolf). There are sheep (people that don’t believe the evil exists, are far removed from it, or just don’t believe it will ever effect them), and there are people that choose to believe evil exists and are willing to stand between the sheep and the wolf - with their life, if necessary (the sheepdog). Grossman expresses that it’s ok to be a sheep. A lot of people are sheep, and they live without a lot of stress because they are oblivious to the dangers around them. Being a sheep isn’t a bad thing...until the wolf shows up. When the wolf shows up, the sheep better find a sheepdog. Again, that doesn’t just mean the cops..or, the military. Your neighbor might be a sheepdog. You might be one. Would you give your life for your family? If yes, then you are their sheepdog. Grossman defines a sheepdog as someone with a capacity for violence and a concern for his fellow man. One willing to put themselves in peril for someone else. A wolf is someone with a capacity for violence, and no concern for their fellow man. A sheep is someone who just mosies along nibbling at the grass without a care in the world, except for themselves. The sheepdog looks like the wolf because they both have a capacity for violence (big fangs). One uses it to destroy the wolf, the other uses it to destroy the sheep. Grossman explicity states that any sheepdog that harms a sheep must be punished and removed - that’s the only way for our system to work. Sheep are people who would freeze or run when they would be forced to act to help someone else.

We need more sheepdogs. In uniform, and out of it.

 

That’s just my view on the essay.

 

[Chef Jim]

11 minutes ago, Margarita said:

no Kreskin wasn't an insult it was an observation..he was a "mentalist" something you pretend to be.

 

He may have been a dick too then  you'd have that in  common with him but I cant speak to that .. he may or may not have been one....Now that is both an observation AND an insult TWOFER

 

How''s that sand pounding going MENSA? Now that's not an insult or an observation,.... that's a sneer,  insult AND a joke. TRIFECTA

 

Glad we cleared that up. Back on ignore you go. 

 

 

 

Says the snowflake who took offence for me calling her Orwellian.  

[KD in CA]

1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

What a bizarre choice of... insult?

 

Stop being pouty, and accept responsibility for poorly communicating your ideas.

 

Again, I am actually in favor of abolishing police.  I’m happy to make that argument in another thread.

 

I was actually pleased to hear the term “defunded” used, because I know what the word “defunded” means, and I thought, for a fleeting moment, that the extreme left and principled libertarians might have found a singular common purpose.

 

In this case it quite clearly means, "give someone else's money to me instead".

[muppy]

21 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Says the snowflake who took offence for me calling her Orwellian.  

correction: I acknowledged it was an insult nowhere did I type I was offended big difference  twin sons from different mothers  another kreskin in the house.