Defund the Police?

[Koko78]

9 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

and ?


 

 

 

911: "9-1-1, what's your emergency?"

Victim: "I'm at 123 4th Street. There's an armed intruder in my home. I'm hiding in the closet. I think he's going to rape and murder me! Please help!"

911: "We will dispatch a social worker right away to discuss your feelings on the matter."

[Chef Jim]

4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The trick they're trying to pull with this media coverage is to make the majority opinion feel as if they're in the minority. 

 

Information warfare 101. 

 

 

And the liberal politicians are falling for it.  Keep it up libs.  It's a beautiful thing to watch.  

 

[B-Man]

 

 

If You Want To Know What Disbanding The Police Looks Like, Look At Mexico

[B-Man]

 

 

THESE ARE THE POLICIES OF A LUNATIC FRINGE: 

 

Basically nobody supports cutting funding for police. 

 

Just 16% of Democrats, 15% of Republicans, and 17% of Independents support funding cuts.

 

 

 

This is no doubt why people are rushing forward to tell us that “defunding” doesn’t mean funding cuts, and “abolishing the police” doesn’t mean getting rid of the police.

 

 

 

 

[B-Man]

 

L.A. City Council President wants to DEFUND THE POLICE, just not the ones standing ’round-the-clock’ watch outside her home

[B-Man]

 

 

OH, BALTIMORE: 

 

Following Riots 5 Years Ago, One U.S. City Defunded Its Police Force in 2015; How Did That Turn Out?

 

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

Could those who are talking about dismantling the police address the problem of violence against women?

 

 

[JetsFan20]

“Defund” means that Black & Brown communities are asking for the same budget priorities that White communities have already created for themselves: schooling > police,etc.

People asked in other ways, but were always told “No, how do you pay for it?”

So they found the line item.

[sabrecrazed]

2 hours ago, JetsFan20 said:

“Defund” means that Black & Brown communities are asking for the same budget priorities that White communities have already created for themselves: schooling > police,etc.

People asked in other ways, but were always told “No, how do you pay for it?”

So they found the line item.

bull####

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GregPersons]

"Defund" is still too nice. This is just focused on budget. Cops don't realize we're letting them off easy right now, and they're pushing their luck. "Abolish" is also too nice. 

 

First of all, Defund just makes plain sense. Look at ANY POLICE BUDGET. They are ridiculous. This is taxpayer money for morons who don't have soldier training to pretend they're in Call of Duty on whoever they can get away with, specifically Black people. Often explicitly coded into the marching orders, and always implicitly. The conversation needs to start from 0 and work up from there to what is actually necessary.

 

We don't need to negotiate down from 300 gazillion. Basic negotiation tactic. And look at what they're offering. LA's mayor took out a 300 million or something but the budget is still near the trillions; whatever the numbers, look it up, it's preposterously inflated, everywhere. 

 

The other thing, is that -- again -- this conversation is only about budget. When we talk about removing police immunity, then it's time to start talking about "Imprison the police."

 

Because if held to the same laws, if held accountable as much as they've done to others — hooo boy.  Imagine suing a cop for assault and winning. That's half of reparations right there in those settlements.

[GregPersons]

On 6/8/2020 at 8:47 AM, SoCal Deek said:

If we defund the military will war go away?

 

If we defund NASA do the stars disappear?

 

If we defund social safety net programs will we solve poverty? 

 

Hey Deek. This is a post that several people celebrated! I just wanted to let you know why this is stupid, specifically.

 

Defunding the police will reduce crime, simply because -- there will be fewer arrests. Will there be more murders? More burglaries? Let's find out. Because when the NYPD went dark in protest a year ago, things were fine in NYC. Nobody noticed. Life went on. You got fewer tickets for an expired meter. 

 

Defunding the military actually would mean we would instigate a lot less. Do you have any idea the amount of fights the US military instigates? Like on a daily basis? How about throughout history? How often has it worked out for us? 

Overfunding the military hasn't worked out so well in stopping war, has it Deek? 

 

Do you think NASA invented the stars? What point are you making here? If you defund NASA, we will explore the stars less; we will know less about them. Elon Musk might go. Hopefully he remembers to send a text. 

 

Defunding social safety nets -- aka "tax cuts" -- is where we're at right now. Imagine swapping the funding between police and social safety net programs -- Universal Healthcare would be affordable just on the police budgets in major cities. Expand unemployment to simply be Universal Basic Income. Everybody gets 2000 a month, period. If you choose not to work to make additional money, that's fine. There would likely be an expansion of volunteer social programs to use skillsets on citizen-led social projects to address any number of things.

 

Imagine everybody being allowed to focus on their hobbies full-time. Some people would just be bored losers or partiers; that's fine and no different from now, anyway. But afforded the space to breathe — to not be in panic mode every month about "will I be able to feed my children?" — the most Prosperous Nation In History could some of that wealth to invest in the citizens and therefore invest in the future. That's how you think of it. This is an investment in people, not weapons. 

 

Even just on TSW you can see people demonstrate far more value than is probably being extracted from them by their employment. I wonder how many people on TSW would feel that they aren't being utilized as well as they could be by their employers. Automation can expand without concern and eliminate menial jobs, since they're no longer needed to simply support people's basic needs & health. From there, ingenuity would lead to ... who knows what. 

 

But I don't think it would lead to more fighting. Because people would be generally more content. There would be less anger. Every citizen would essentially become "middle class." If you have a job on top of the UBI, you can make it to upper middle class pretty easily. If you do very well, perhaps you make it to the upper class.

 

But there should be nothing beyond "upper class." There should be a ceiling. There should absolutely be a wealth cap. It's absurd that there are billionaires. Teddy Roosevelt would not have ***** stood for this. We need a bully pulpit instead of a bunker baby (I don't think Biden is that guy, so either way POTUS isnt going to be ***** here probably). Once you reach, idk, 100 million in today's world -- that's it. You've beat the game. Anything on top of that is directly poured into society and funding the programs.

 

This should be close to a libertarian's wet dream, what I am describing. It is essentially socialism + libertarianism. Americans would love it if they gave it a chance.

[GregPersons]

31 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said:

And why do you think the budgets are like that in white communities?

 

Because white communities have lower crime.

 

Because there's fewer police.

 

It's not a chicken and the egg problem. It is cause and effect.

 

Black Americans are criminalized, period. Do you know about the Broken Windows policy of policing? This is not dissimilar to the laws of Germany in the 20s and 30s toward Jews.

[GregPersons]

1 minute ago, Jaraxxus said:

Camden's numbers don't seem to bear that out, nor do Baltimore's. Guess we'll find out won't we?

 

Not sure what point you think you're making with either. As for finding out, yeah. Also I can't wait until qualified immunity is removed and every cop is open to being sued for assault.

 

Court TV's whole line up is right there

[GregPersons]

Just now, Jaraxxus said:

Point is both cities are still crime riddled shitholes, despite defunding and disbanding. 

 

Who has defunded? Who has disbanded? 

 

Where has this happened? Only one state has announced an intent to do so. Nothing has been done. Do you know anything you're talking about?

[GregPersons]

1 minute ago, Jaraxxus said:

 

Camden and Baltimore have both defunded and gone to community policing already. Educate yourself 

 

So why is Baltimore still considering defunding as of right now? https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/op-ed/bs-ed-op-disband-baltimore-police-20200609-7dwii2pbmzcfpjb4flcy3namlu-story.html 

[BuffaloHokie13]

1 hour ago, GregPersons said:

 

So why is Baltimore still considering defunding as of right now? https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/op-ed/bs-ed-op-disband-baltimore-police-20200609-7dwii2pbmzcfpjb4flcy3namlu-story.html 

Because it's still run by Democrats?

[GregPersons]

3 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Because it's still run by Democrats?

 

I was just told Baltimore already defunded their police, and were fully community policing. It appears that's not true. Was @Jaraxxus saying something untrue?? Our Jaraxxus??

[BuffaloHokie13]

Just now, GregPersons said:

 

I was just told Baltimore already defunded their police, and were fully community policing. It appears that's not true. Was @Jaraxxus saying something untrue?? Our Jaraxxus??

Beats me. I don't know much about Baltimore except that I like their aquarium and the harbor area with the sports stadiums. But would it really be surprising to see the same party that's been in power there continue trying the same fruitless strategies?

[GregPersons]

3 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Beats me. I don't know much about Baltimore except that I like their aquarium and the harbor area with the sports stadiums. But would it really be surprising to see the same party that's been in power there continue trying the same fruitless strategies?

 

I don't know much about Baltimore either. But if they're considering defunding the police (something Jaraxxus told us already happened), then that would actually be very different from the same fruitless strategies. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, GregPersons said:

 

Black Americans are criminalized, period. 

Greg? That’s actually an interesting point: Blacks are ‘criminalized’? How exactly? Is it your position that having lots of police around somehow increases crime? Or is it your position that the legislature has written laws that make certain crimes more apt to be committed by black people? 

[GregPersons]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Greg? That’s actually an interesting point: Blacks are ‘criminalized’? How exactly? Is it your position that having lots of police around somehow increases crime? Or is it your position that the legislature has written laws that make certain crimes more apt to be committed by black people? 

 

Yes to both questions. Both are true. 

 

"The War on Drugs" is exhibit A, and the fact that marijuana is now legal, but there are still hundreds or thousands, a horrifying amount of Black/POC Americans still imprisoned, even in states where it's legal, and the group profiting from the legalization is White people.

 

"Stop and Frisk" would be exhibit B. 

 

There is money made on maintaining levels of criminality, in all kinds of ways. Are you aware of For-Profit Prisons?

Edited June 10, 2020 by GregPersons

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Yes to both questions. Both are true. 

 

"The War on Drugs" is exhibit A, and the fact that marijuana is now legal, but there are still hundreds or thousands, a horrifying amount of Black/POC Americans still imprisoned, even in states where it's legal, and the group profiting from the legalization is White people.

 

"Stop and Frisk" would be exhibit B. 

 

There is money made on maintaining levels of criminality, in all kinds of ways. Are you aware of For-Profit Prisons?

Good examples Greg. So your real problem is actually with the legislature, not the police. Lawmakers make laws. The police are like robots. They go where they’re told to go, and answer the phone when it rings. So wouldn’t you think it would serve the black community to stop voting for the same lawmakers every two, four or six years that have inflicted upon them the same results you’re now standing in the streets to loot and rail against? 

[GregPersons]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

Good examples Greg. So your real problem is actually with the legislature, not the police. Lawmakers make laws. The police are like robots. They go where they’re told to go, and answer the phone when it rings. So wouldn’t you think it would serve the black community to stop voting for the same lawmakers every two, four or six years that have inflicted upon them the same results you’re now standing in the streets to loot and rail against? 

 

Pretending the law as written is the only problem is ignoring reality. Police are not like robots. Police are human beings. You're not going to waste both of our time suggesting the problem is just "a few bad apples," right Deek? 

 

I am against looting! Are you? If you're concerned about looting, are you aware of Civil Asset Forfeiture? 

[BuffaloHokie13]

4 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Yes to both questions. Both are true. 

 

"The War on Drugs" is exhibit A, and the fact that marijuana is now legal, but there are still hundreds or thousands, a horrifying amount of Black/POC Americans still imprisoned, even in states where it's legal, and the group profiting from the legalization is White people.

 

"Stop and Frisk" would be exhibit B. 

 

There is money made on maintaining levels of criminality, in all kinds of ways. Are you aware of For-Profit Prisons?

I don't think that the conclusion of more cops causes more crime is correct,  but on exhibit A we generally agree from a couple angles. Sentencing disparity for crack vs powder cocaine shouldn't really exist. And if I get a ticket for going 65 in a 55, and on my way to court the road is now 65 the ticket should be dropped.

 

On exhibit b, absolutely. Bloomberg is a racist and he admitted as much when discussing stop and frisk. F that guy.

[GregPersons]

4 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

I don't think that the conclusion of more cops causes more crime is correct,  but on exhibit A we generally agree from a couple angles. Sentencing disparity for crack vs powder cocaine shouldn't really exist. And if I get a ticket for going 65 in a 55, and on my way to court the road is now 65 the ticket should be dropped.

 

On exhibit b, absolutely. Bloomberg is a racist and he admitted as much when discussing stop and frisk. F that guy.

 

When you have more cops, they need to justify their jobs. They need to justify the salary increases. They need to justify the budget increases. 

 

More crime results. And Stop and Frisk is the perfect example. Cops will find crime. It's what they do. But a lot of what has been considered "criminal" in effect is just "being black in public." Which is just the modern continuation of Jim Crow.  It's all in a continuum. This never actually ended, it's just changed shape and taken different forms.

 

Also, agreed on ***** Bloomberg but I don't know if I'm giving him credit that he admitted it was racist. Maybe he did. My recollection off-hand was that it was a mealy-mouthed apology with a lot of passive language and dodging any actual responsibility and didn't offer any corrective actions. I could be misremembering his statements on it. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by GregPersons

[SoCal Deek]

17 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Pretending the law as written is the only problem is ignoring reality. Police are not like robots. Police are human beings. You're not going to waste both of our time suggesting the problem is just "a few bad apples," right Deek? 

 

I am against looting! Are you? If you're concerned about looting, are you aware of Civil Asset Forfeiture? 

We were getting somewhere and then here we go again. You apparently skipped right over the part about lawmakers. You didn’t want to go there? It’s just easier to blame the police you can see, than the lawmakers who sit laughing at you from their security guarded offices? 

[GregPersons]

5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

We were getting somewhere and then here we go again. You apparently skipped right over the part about lawmakers. You didn’t want to go there? It’s just easier to blame the police you can see, than the lawmakers who sit laughing at you from their security guarded offices? 

 

What did I skip? We have at least some agreement that laws are and have been racist. What else should we talk about? Which laws are more racist? I gave you some pretty good examples. What are you supplying this conversation?

 

It seems like the easy opinion here is that the police have no culpability in this. You told me police are like robots. That's where we're at with it.

Edited June 10, 2020 by GregPersons

[SoCal Deek]

4 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

What did I skip? We have at least some agreement that laws are and have been racist. What else should we talk about? Which laws are more racist? I gave you some pretty good examples. What are you supplying this conversation?

 

It seems like the easy opinion here is that the police have no culpability in this. You told me police are like robots. That's where we're at with it.

The police do not write the laws. They are in fact supposed to be like robots. Simply responding when called. I have just as much of a problem with the lenient officers as the overly strict ones but it’s clearly a tough gig. I’m guessing you’ve never been a police officer, and neither have I, but it looks like really tough job to me. Are there officers that don’t do their job very well? Yep! But the same can be said for teachers...and nobody is protesting to ‘Defund Education’.

[GregPersons]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

The police do not write the laws. They are in fact supposed to be like robots. Simply responding when called. I have just as much of a problem with the lenient officers as the overly strict ones but it’s clearly a tough gig. I’m guessing you’ve never been a police officer, and neither have I, but it looks like really tough job to me. Are there officers that don’t do their job very well? Yep! But the same can be said for teachers...and nobody is protesting to ‘Defund Education’.

 

"Supposed to" is not the world, though. 

 

Actually, there are people protesting to "defund education" — Republican lawmakers. They just don't call it that. They call it "tax cuts."

 

What if we tried swapping Police and Education budgets? Imagine!

[SoCal Deek]

6 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

"Supposed to" is not the world, though. 

 

Actually, there are people protesting to "defund education" — Republican lawmakers. They just don't call it that. They call it "tax cuts."

 

What if we tried swapping Police and Education budgets? Imagine!

Education is a state, not federal budget issue. And Police are a local, not State budget issue. The swapping you’re dreaming about isn’t really possible. 

[BuffaloHokie13]

32 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

Also, agreed on ***** Bloomberg but I don't know if I'm giving him credit that he admitted it was racist. Maybe he did. My recollection off-hand was that it was a mealy-mouthed apology with a lot of passive language and dodging any actual responsibility and didn't offer any corrective actions. I could be misremembering his statements on it. 

The below leaked audio is what I'm referring to. Seriously, F that guy. 

https://twitter.com/BenjaminPDixon/status/1227067093692055553?s=19

 

[GregPersons]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Education is a state, not federal budget issue. And Police are a local, not State budget issue. The swapping you’re dreaming about isn’t really possible. 

 

I was referring to local/city budgets specifically, where it is very much possible. Also — let's not bother with getting into the weeds here, because there's no accepting "nothing can be done" as the answer. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

The below leaked audio is what I'm referring to. Seriously, F that guy. 

 

Ohhhh yeah, this. 

 

But yeah, again, can't be said enough. Bloomberg can bite my butt.

Edited June 10, 2020 by GregPersons

[SoCal Deek]

4 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

I was referring to local/city budgets specifically, where it is very much possible. Also — let's not bother with getting into the weeds here, because there's no accepting "nothing can be done" as the answer. 

I didn’t say nothing can be done. My point is that many don’t understand how their tax dollars are collected and spent. The lines have been blurred so much that citizens don’t understand where and to who they should address their grievances. Screaming at the federal government to change local policing is like yelling at the TV hoping the Bills Coaches will hear you (I know because I’ve tried.) 

[GregPersons]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I didn’t say nothing can be done. My point is that many don’t understand how their tax dollars are collected and spent. The lines have been blurred so much that citizens don’t understand where and to who they should address their grievances. Screaming at the federal government to change local policing is like yelling at the TV hoping the Bills Coaches will hear you (I know because I’ve tried.) 

 

Yes, I agree. That's why I have consistently rejected people's claims this is a Trump issue, or a Democrat or Republican issue. This is much wider, deeper, and bigger than that.

 

It is not one bad city, or one bad state, or one bad administration. It is a rotten foundation. This is why the calls are to "Defund." It is more productive if the conversation starts from a blank slate, and builds up from there, rather than taking what is and taking things out piece meal. 

 

It is everybody's issue because it is all of our tax dollars. We may not live in the same city (or we might depending where in SoCal) but the point is that we all have over-funded police, and under-funded education, and all that equation is doing is maintaining the "school to prison" pipeline. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by GregPersons

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Yes, I agree. That's why I have consistently rejected people's claims this is a Trump issue, or a Democrat or Republican issue. This is much wider, deeper, and bigger than that.

 

It is not one bad city, or one bad state, or one bad administration. It is a rotten foundation. This is why the calls are to "Defund." It is more productive if the conversation starts from a blank slate, and builds up from there, rather than taking what is and taking things out piece meal. 

 

It is everybody's issue because it is all of our tax dollars. We may not live in the same city (or we might depending where in SoCal) but the point is that we all have over-funded police, and under-funded education, and all that equation is doing is maintaining the "school to prison" pipeline. 

Inland Empire 

[GregPersons]

21 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Inland Empire 

 

Then you know what I'm talking about exactly.

[Buffalo_Gal]

Nadler is up on committee making sure that people know police are horrible and wonderful. He's actually doing a semi-decent job of walking the line. If anyone wants to watch, tune into c-span.org.

Justice and policing act.  The bill would ban choke holds, no qualified immunity for law enforcement, new community program to "re-imagine policing."

George Floyd's brother is going to testify, too.

[GregPersons]

What a great way for Democrats to show they aren't listening, and still aren't getting it. He's so close with addressing the problem. The solution is stupid as *****.

 

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Karen Bass (CA) - No-knock drug warrants will be banned.