Minnesota Police disbanded

[4BillsintheBurgh]

29 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I don't have a problem with that. I would love to see the Dems support the same thing with the Teacher's Union...

 

Camden is no beacon of "transformative thinking." They essentially increased the police force by 56%.The violent crime rate fell from 2012-2014 and has remained fairly constant since then. However, that violent crime rate is awful.

I think this would also work well with many areas of ineffective government agencies. There has been a stagnation that cries out for a reset in a lot of places. I was hoping that the last couple of presidents would take something like this to heart.

[Tiberius]

6 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said:

 

Yeah, We used to call it E-0, since you wore no rank. I knew a guy who got busted all the way from E-6 down to E-1.

 

Let me guess, alcohol related incident? 

35 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I don't have a problem with that. I would love to see the Dems support the same thing with the Teacher's Union...

 

Camden is no beacon of "transformative thinking." They essentially increased the police force by 56%.The violent crime rate fell from 2012-2014 and has remained fairly constant since then. However, that violent crime rate is awful.

The teachers unions are going to have a lot of issues with this new distance learning and budget cuts, so they might be in the cross hairs too 

[bilzfancy]

12 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said:

 

Yeah, We used to call it E-0, since you wore no rank. I knew a guy who got busted all the way from E-6 down to E-1.

 

I once got busted from e-3 to e-2 simply for not saluting an officer

[billsfan1959]

7 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The teachers unions are going to have a lot of issues with this new distance learning and budget cuts, so they might be in the cross hairs too 

 

I think they should be. There are two real systemic problems, not only in policing, but across all government agencies: Rewarding mediocrity and an inability to get rid of employees who can't even reach that low standard of performance. We have allowed it to reach a point where it is almost impossible to get rid of the bad apples.

[Beast]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Thanks for this. So true that education resources are not equal. But I can't say that fixing that will be a magic bullet that solves poverty. All problems and solutions start in the home. If a child grows up around violence, ignorance and substance abuse then the chances of that child growing into a solid citizen diminish greatly. The black experience in America has not been one to foster healthy social environments. The weight of history on the backs is pretty heavy and you don;'t just unring the bell of oppression overnight. The racist love it that blacks have so many social problems and want to use their favorite ploy of blaming the victim. Hopefully the times are changing and there will be more room for trial and error where every failure won't automatically be a successful tool for the right to scream their heads off and have people listen to them. Let them scream, but ignore them. 

 

But how the hell do you break the cycle of poverty? Education is important, yes. So is decent affordable housing which is a situation wildly difficult to deal with for so many reasons in a city. The countryside can just lay out some more trailer parks.

 

The war on drugs has been a disaster for many Americans. Once you have a police record many doors for advancement are closed to that person. More experimentation with dealing with the drug problem needs to happen. 

 

Every child born in America needs to a healthy and safe environment to grow. That is not happening right now. There should be a New Deal for children and have a huge investment in social services. This would not be easy or clear cut, but through trial and error they could create a system that could do a better job of keeping an eye on children at risk, promoting reading, nutrition, exercise and better parenting practices. 

 

The military has been a great anti-poverty program. Over the last five decades or so millions of young people have left home to see a new world and gained mightily from the experience. There should be something else like a jobs corp to get at the young people and do the same building a better America. 

 

 

You know, your arguement, as far as I'm concerned, holds no merit.

 

Republicans LOVE when people are employed and have success. ALL people. That means a better and safer country for all of us. Republicans do not celebrate minority unemployment and woes in life like the Left want people to believe. That's pure BS.

 

Democrats love social programs. We need this, we need that....all it really is is keeping people dependent on the system. The cycle is never ending for most. That's where Democrats prey on people...get those that depend on government to vote for them.

 

Ultimately, it comes down to personal responsibility. If you can't raise a child to even graduate high school, or even care that your child graduates high school, you shouldn't be bringing kids into this world. It's not all that hard to use birth control.

Edited June 9, 2020 by Beast

[Tiberius]

4 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I think they should be. There are two real systemic problems, not only in policing, but across all government agencies: Rewarding mediocrity and an inability to get rid of employees who can't even reach that low standard of performance. We have allowed it to reach a point where it is almost impossible to get rid of the bad apples.

Education just got a real kick in the azz from corona. Change is coming whether people like it or not. 

5 minutes ago, Beast said:

 

You know, your arguement, as far as I'm concerned, holds no merit.

 

Republicans LOVE when people are employed and have success. ALL people. That means a better and safer country for all of us. Republicans do not celebrate minority unemployment and woes in life like the Left want people to believe. That's pure BS.

 

Democrats love social programs. We need this, we need that....all it really is is keeping people dependent on the system. The cycle is never ending for most. That's where Democrats prey on people...get those that depend on government to vote for them.

 

Ultimately, it comes down to personal responsibility. If you can't raise a child to even graduate high school, or even care that your child graduates high school, you shouldn't be bringing kids into this world. It's not all that hard to use birth control.

Social responsibility 

 

One really good development of the emerging Democratic majority is that they will not have to rely on people like you who are totally chained to the status quo 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

Minneapolis Manufacturer Leaving After Plant Burned During Riots: ‘They Didn’t Protect Our People’

 ▪  June 9, 2020

"The fire engine was just sitting there, but they wouldn't do anything."

Edited June 9, 2020 by B-Man

[muppy]

2 hours ago, GG said:

 

Did you & the other disband/defund police proponents read the article?

 

Everyone is applauding the precedent, but it was more of an administrative move to disband the union and get MORE cops on the street.   Here are the operative punchlines:

 

 

why are your panties in such a bind over what you inferred we are to have said or understood regarding the article? By disbanding you Guess folks mean eliminate police. Maybe it never meant that at all and you Inferred it did. Ever think of that? 

Ive posted recently regarding even police being sickened and disgusted by that scumbag cop in Minneapolis. If the unions are so strong that the governments hands are tied relating to removing those kinds of cops I'd think you'd be in favor of a way to weed those guys out. Just sayin'.

[GG]

5 minutes ago, Margarita said:

why are your panties in such a bind over what you inferred we are to have said or understood regarding the article? By disbanding you Guess folks mean eliminate police. Maybe it never meant that at all and you Inferred it did. Ever think of that? 

 

Thanks for confirming that words only matter when they are applied to conservatives?

 

What else should people assume when the slogans are "disband the police" and "defund the police?"   I'm guess that "Take administrative action to disband the police union and add more cops on the beat" doesn't have the same ring to it, or are you not in step with the leaders of the movement whose public goal is most certainly disbanding the police departments?

[muppy]

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Thanks for confirming that words only matter when they are applied to conservatives?

 

What else should people assume when the slogans are "disband the police" and "defund the police?"   I'm guess that "Take administrative action to disband the police union and add more cops on the beat" doesn't have the same ring to it, or are you not in step with the leaders of the movement whose public goal is most certainly disbanding the police departments?

the words you are putting into peoples minds are what don't matter. Maybe it takes eductating ourselves and not coming to snap judgments? Just a thought.

[GG]

Just now, Margarita said:

the words you are putting into peoples minds are what don't matter. Maybe it takes eductating ourselves and not coming to snap judgments? Just a thought.

 

I'm trying to interpret what the words mean.  But don't listen to me, listen to the movement's leaders.   

 

Words matter.  Not only when a conservative says something.

 

Quote

Some supporters of divestment want to reallocate some, but not all, funds away from police departments to social services. Some want to strip all police funding and dissolve departments.

 

[Taro T]

24 minutes ago, Margarita said:

why are your panties in such a bind over what you inferred we are to have said or understood regarding the article? By disbanding you Guess folks mean eliminate police. Maybe it never meant that at all and you Inferred it did. Ever think of that? 

Ive posted recently regarding even police being sickened and disgusted by that scumbag cop in Minneapolis. If the unions are so strong that the governments hands are tied relating to removing those kinds of cops I'd think you'd be in favor of a way to weed those guys out. Just sayin'.

 

You are aware that the 4 cops were FIRED before any of the protests started, right?  They were fired the day after George Floyd was murdered.

 

You are aware that the cop that killed George Floyd was charged with 3rd degree murder 4 days after the incident, right?  And that 5 days after that the charge was bumped up to 2nd degree murder and the other 3 officers involved had charges brought as well, right?

 

Just how badly were the "governments hands ... tied?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

[muppy]

9 minutes ago, GG said:

 

I'm trying to interpret what the words mean.  But don't listen to me, listen to the movement's leaders.   

 

Words matter.  Not only when a conservative says something.

 

 

the key word there is SOME.  You can't cop to that even on a message board where there are many views and opinions expressed. You lumped me into a "Pro" group after what a few posts of discussion......I dont presume to know your every view and thought on every political thought unless you really do just kowtow to your partiy leaders line hook line and sinker.

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

You are aware that the 4 cops were FIRED before any of the protests started, right?  They were fired the day after George Floyd was murdered.

 

You are aware that the cop that killed George Floyd was charged with 3rd degree murder 4 days after the incident, right?  And that 5 days after that the charge was bumped up to 2nd degree murder and the other 3 officers involved had charges brought as well, right?

 

Just how badly were the "governments hands ... tied?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

come on man how many infractions did that cop have before he even met George Floyd..? WHY was he still employed is more the question Im curious about. Hmmmm

[3rdnlng]

2 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I don't have a problem with that. I would love to see the Dems support the same thing with the Teacher's Union...

 

Camden is no beacon of "transformative thinking." They essentially increased the police force by 56%.The violent crime rate fell from 2012-2014 and has remained fairly constant since then. However, that violent crime rate is awful.

My guess it was about 15 years ago when I had been doing a lot of site selection and real estate development in NJ I made a wrong turn off (I think) Rt 30 and instead of heading for Haddenfield I turned into Camden. I can honestly say I was never more concerned for my life because of the location I was in than at that moment. I literally did a u-turn using part of a parking lot and never looked back.

[billsfan1959]

12 minutes ago, Margarita said:

the key word there is SOME.  You can't cop to that even on a message board where there are many views and opinions expressed. You lumped me into a "Pro" group after what a few posts of discussion......I dont presume to know your every view and thought on every political thought unless you really do just kowtow to your partiy leaders line hook line and sinker.

come on man how many infractions did that cop have before he even met George Floyd..? WHY was he still employed is more the question Im curious about. Hmmmm

 

I think that is a great question that should be posed to the Democratic Police Chief, Democratic County Attorney, Democratic City Council members, Democratic Mayor, Democratic Governor, or Democratic Attorney General - particularly since they had already had 2-3 high profile unjustified killings by Officers from that department in te last few years.

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by billsfan1959

[GG]

4 minutes ago, Margarita said:

the key word there is SOME.  You can't cop to that even on a message board where there are many views and opinions expressed. You lumped me into a "Pro" group after what a few posts of discussion......I dont presume to know your every view and thought on every political thought unless you really do just kowtow to your partiy leaders line hook line and sinker.

come on man how many infractions did that cop have before he even met George Floyd..? WHY was he still employed is more the question Im curious about. Hmmmm

 

In my time on this board, it's a consistent truism that the conservative side here is far less likely to toe the line of the party leaders.  There's far more diversity of opinion across the right than the straight parroting of the DNC talking points of the day.

 

Reforming the police unions (and all public service unions) is not something that the majority would oppose.  But for most people sitting on the sidelines of this mess are watching with intense interest as this movement can't even get its goals aligned.

[3rdnlng]

Keep in mind people, that although the killing of George Floyd was horrific we average about 10 killings a year (in the U.S.) of unarmed black people by the police. Of those 10 most of them have tried to attack the police physically. Keep things in perspective.

[Taro T]

11 minutes ago, Margarita said:

the key word there is SOME.  You can't cop to that even on a message board where there are many views and opinions expressed. You lumped me into a "Pro" group after what a few posts of discussion......I dont presume to know your every view and thought on every political thought unless you really do just kowtow to your partiy leaders line hook line and sinker.

come on man how many infractions did that cop have before he even met George Floyd..? WHY was he still employed is more the question Im curious about. Hmmmm

 

Have no idea why.  Maybe somebody could ask those in charge.

 

His trial will be very interesting.  The racial angle is obviously getting a ton of coverage, but these 2 knew each other from the cop's 2nd job.  Was there bad blood between them? What made him put his knee to his throat in the 1st place and then keep it there at least 100 seconds after his suspect was beyond subdued?  Expecting this will turn out to be bad blood between the 2 and that their history was why the charge against him was elevated.

 

And while there nearly definitely need to be changes in how the department operates, disbanding it seems to be far beyond what is called for.  (And whether they don't really mean to disband it, that's what they're asking for and people within their movement DO want that.  Until they demonstrate they mean something else, will take their word for it that they want to disband the department.)

[BuffaloHokie13]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

His trial will be very interesting.  The racial angle is obviously getting a ton of coverage, but these 2 knew each other from the cop's 2nd job.  Was there bad blood between them? What made him put his knee to his throat in the 1st place and then keep it there at least 100 seconds after his suspect was beyond subdued?  Expecting this will turn out to be bad blood between the 2 and that their history was why the charge against him was elevated.

This seems to be overblown, but I suppose we'll learn more through the trial. Their overlap of employment was less than a year, ex-officer worked outside security, Floyd worked inside security, and the employer said utilization of both inside and outside was rare and couldn't confirm whether they were ever present there at the same time. 

[Unforgiven]

48 minutes ago, Margarita said:

the words you are putting into peoples minds are what don't matter. Maybe it takes eductating ourselves and not coming to snap judgments? Just a thought.

****projection alert****

as all your allies on this board call the rest of us all racists and nazis.

 

[Motorin']

1 hour ago, GG said:

 

Thanks for confirming that words only matter when they are applied to conservatives?

 

What else should people assume when the slogans are "disband the police" and "defund the police?"   I'm guess that "Take administrative action to disband the police union and add more cops on the beat" doesn't have the same ring to it, or are you not in step with the leaders of the movement whose public goal is most certainly disbanding the police departments?

The head of the Minneapolis city council said their plan is the disband the current department and to reconstitute a new department organized around better principles.

 

Other cities want to reduce funding from the police department and shift that money to community supports.

 

The concept of police abolishment is like a utopia, they both go hand in hand and are not possible and won't happen.

 

 

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Motorin'

[Deranged Rhino]

4 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

Then why do they call it defunding?  

 

Playing games with language, changing the meaning of words, is right out of their playbook. 

 

"Believe all women!" -- uh, until we say so.

"Defund the police!" -- uh, that word doesn't mean what you think it means even though half the people shouting it think it does.

 

38 minutes ago, Margarita said:

come on man how many infractions did that cop have before he even met George Floyd..? WHY was he still employed is more the question Im curious about. Hmmmm

 

I know you have a bigger point (and it's valid about Chauvin's record) but Chauvin worked with Floyd for 17 years at a bar nearby the station. He knew the man for a long, long time before this tragedy. 

[GG]

10 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

The head of the Minneapolis city council said their plan is the disband the current department and to reconstitute a new department organized around better principles.

 

Other cities want to reduce funding from the police department and shift that money to community supports.

 

The concept of police abolishment is like a utopia, they both go hand in hand and are not possible and won't happen.

 

 

 

 

Then it's up to the movement to come up with coherent proposals behind the catchy slogans, wouldn't you think?

 

Don't criticize us for questioning the goals of a ruddeless movement.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Tiberius]

Quote

 The Post reports: “The Democratic legislation, called the Justice in Policing Act of 2020, includes an array of measures aimed at boosting law enforcement accountability, changing police practices and curbing racial profiling.”

 

The measures include reducing the requirement necessary to hold police officers accountable (lowering the standard needed to pierce the shield of qualified immunity for police officers from “willfulness” to “recklessness”); limiting transfer of military weaponry to police; increasing transparency by creating a national register of police misconduct; banning chokeholds; designing a national standard for use of force; requiring independent investigation of police abuse; ending racial profiling; and granting subpoena power to the civil rights division of the Justice Department for “pattern and practice” investigations.

 

[Unforgiven]

If I had a business there I would get outta dodge quick too

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2020/06/09/minneapolis-manufacturer-outta/

[BuffaloHokie13]

51 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I know you have a bigger point (and it's valid about Chauvin's record) but Chauvin worked with Floyd for 17 years at a bar nearby the station. He knew the man for a long, long time before this tragedy

Latest I've seen is significantly less overlap and possibility of never crossing paths. Might want to look into that further. He didn't even move to Minneapolis until 2014, so definitely not 17 years overlap. 

[muppy]

1 hour ago, GG said:

 

In my time on this board, it's a consistent truism that the conservative side here is far less likely to toe the line of the party leaders.  There's far more diversity of opinion across the right than the straight parroting of the DNC talking points of the day.

 

Reforming the police unions (and all public service unions) is not something that the majority would oppose.  But for most people sitting on the sidelines of this mess are watching with intense interest as this movement can't even get its goals aligned.

ahem....agree to disagree that this board isn't overwelmingly Pro Republican/Trump talking points just my view of what I read. To the second this is the Only post Ive read to this effect but again I dont claim to know everyones innermost thoughts on every subject like some people do......

 

the fact that the goals aren't aligned means the process is in flux do you honestly expect 100% agreeance on something seen as so controversial wether it be breaking up a union or defunding police come on......

[GG]

1 minute ago, Margarita said:

ahem....agree to disagree that this board isn't overwelmingly Pro Republican/Trump talking points just my view of what I read. To the second this is the Only post Ive read to this effect but again I dont claim to know everyones innermost thoughts on every subject like some people do......

 

the fact that the goals aren't aligned means the process is in flux do you honestly expect 100% agreeance on something seen as so controversial wether it be breaking up a union or defunding police come on......

 

Again, it is not up to us to provide an explanation of what the slogans mean. 

 

The words are pretty clear - Disband the Police and Defund the Police.

 

I do not see anything that says, Reform the Police or Disband the Police Unions.

[muppy]

1 hour ago, Jaraxxus said:

 

Ah yes. Education.

The cause of and solution to all of life's problems.

 

oh yes lets keep the polulace dumb uninformed and unwilling to learn..........BINGO problems solved. BRILLIANT. I'll match your sarcasm to mine.

[Figster]

From a policing perspective one way to help seperate racism from the equation is to have both white and black police officers working in pairs  with an interchangeable officer in charge status corresponding by color with the person or persons the police are engaging with IMO. Do the same with all ethnic groups and have a police force designed to keep everyone in the community comfortable in their surroundings. 

 

Myself personally, It wouldn't hurt my feelings If every cop on the planet was of a minority. 

[muppy]

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Again, it is not up to us to provide an explanation of what the slogans mean. 

 

The words are pretty clear - Disband the Police and Defund the Police.

 

I do not see anything that says, Reform the Police or Disband the Police Unions.

SMH mind reading and declaring a persons sole intent off of a 2-3 word slogan now thats fooking briliant too. Maybe just MAYBE its a jumping off for discussion and positive changes?

[GG]

2 minutes ago, Margarita said:

SMH mind reading and declaring a persons sole intent off of a 2-3 word slogan now thats fooking briliant too. Maybe just MAYBE its a jumping off for discussion and positive changes?

 

I'm sure the same courtesy will be applied to the intent off a simple 4 word slogan behind the MAGA acronym?

[muppy]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Playing games with language, changing the meaning of words, is right out of their playbook. 

 

"Believe all women!" -- uh, until we say so.

"Defund the police!" -- uh, that word doesn't mean what you think it means even though half the people shouting it think it does.

 

 

I know you have a bigger point (and it's valid about Chauvin's record) but Chauvin worked with Floyd for 17 years at a bar nearby the station. He knew the man for a long, long time before this tragedy. 

the fact he knew this man makes kneeling on his neck while he was  handcuffed proned out on the ground justified??? im not buying that for a minute. You're really going to defend that cop???

To the first this is a Message board FCOL and again I'll elaborate on what I said just before can all matters of philosophical thought be 100% cut and dried in one instant? I guess only you have that ability SMH

3 minutes ago, GG said:

 

I'm sure the same courtesy will be applied to the intent off a simple 4 word slogan behind the MAGA acronym?

abso-freakin-lutely

[billsfan1959]

6 minutes ago, Margarita said:

the fact he knew this man makes kneeling on his neck while he was  handcuffed proned out on the ground justified??? im not buying that for a minute. You're really going to defend that cop???

 

How in the world did you arrive at these conlusions from his post? He didn't defend Chauvin or justify his actions. That is not what his post said.

 

Actually, I have not seen one post from anyone that even comes close to defending Chauvin or what happened.

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by billsfan1959

[muppy]

12 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

How in the world did you arrive at these conlusions from his post? He didn't defend Chauvin or justify his actions. That is not what his post said.

 

Actually, I have not seen one post from anyone that even comes close to defending Chauvin or what happened.

 

Quote

I know you have a bigger point (and it's valid about Chauvin's record) but Chauvin worked with Floyd for 17 years at a bar nearby the station. He knew the man for a long, long time before this tragedy. 

•  

what difference does it make that they knew each other.........does that justify what Chauvin did even if he knew Floyd to be a bad actor? bolded is Rhinos post

12 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said:

 

In which alternate universe?

 

so you all mind readers know each and everyone elses every thought regarding donald trump....such great mind readers y'all are.  Why wouldnt everyone want America to be great? This is a rabbit hole that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Margarita

[GG]

1 minute ago, Margarita said:

what difference does it make that they knew each other.........does that justify what Chauvin did even if he knew Floyd to be a bad actor? bolded is Rhinos post

 

If there was a previous history between the two, it would provide a more clear motive for the grossly unnecessary use of force.  No different than in determining intent in every other murder case. 

 

Nobody ever excuses a murderer for knowing his victims.  In most cases, it's used to impose a harsher sentence.

[billsfan1959]

2 minutes ago, Margarita said:

what difference does it make that they knew each other.........does that justify what Chauvin did even if he knew Floyd to be a bad actor? bolded is Rhinos post

 

I'm sure he can answer for himself; however, in reading the post, I believe he was saying that the fact that Chauvin had a history of complaints is a valid point, but there could be other motives for Chauvin's actions regarding Floyd. He certainly wasn't defending or justifying what happened, just talking about a possible motivations.

 

Honestly, you can't arrive where you are at from that post.

[muppy]

Just now, GG said:

 

If there was a previous history between the two, it would provide a more clear motive for the grossly unnecessary use of force.  No different than in determining intent in every other murder case. 

 

Nobody ever excuses a murderer for knowing his victims.  In most cases, it's used to impose a harsher sentence.

that reads to me like justification NOT buying it SMH his motives will be decided at court he has ZERO rationale to do what he did in my book...proned out, handcuffed.......come on.......

1 minute ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I'm sure he can answer for himself; however, in reading the post, I believe he was saying that the fact that Chauvin had a history of complaints is a valid point, but there could be other motives for Chauvin's actions regarding Floyd. He certainly wasn't defending or justifying what happened, just talking about a possible motivations.

 

Honestly, you can't arrive where you are at from that post.

other motive other than race but no justification to do it zero zilch NONE

[GG]

Just now, Margarita said:

that reads to me like justification NOT buying it SMH his motives will be decided at court he has ZERO rationale to do what he did in my book...proned out, handcuffed.......come on.......

 

Then by this standard, if two people get into an argument and one shoots the other, then pointing out that the argument led to the shooting is excusing the shooter?

 

Is that what you are saying?

 

Nobody is excusing Chauvin's actions.  The new information could provide the motive for WHY he used grossly unnecessary force