Neverending **** the Police thread.

striker42 said:
I wonder if there will be another walkout at the Times over printing another op-ed that falls way below the standards of the paper.

There would be if it was really about standards. But it's not, it's about ideology.
Click to expand...

It is one of the more incoherent op-ed pieces they've run in a while.
 
sturg33 said:
[Tw]1271787344132288512[/tw]
Click to expand...

Hey look, Mr. Weed Makes you a Psychotic Killer is passing more fake news.

Using the powers of the internet I found the article, and it's shocking that what they're talking about isn't that radical

"Why on earth would we think the same reforms would work now? We need to change our demands. The surest way of reducing police violence is to reduce the power of the police, by cutting budgets and the number of officers.

But don’t get me wrong. We are not abandoning our communities to violence. We don’t want to just close police departments. We want to make them unnecessary.

We should redirect the billions that now go to police departments toward providing health care, housing, education and good jobs. If we did this, there would be less need for the police in the first place.

We can build other ways of responding to harms in our society. Trained “community care workers” could do mental-health checks if someone needs help. Towns could use restorative-justice models instead of throwing people in prison."
 
While studying as a poli-sci major I encountered one of the most nonsensical political ideas I'd ever seen, unilateral disarmament. The idea would be for a country to do something like give up their nukes or even their entire military. This is supposed to automatically make the country safer by reducing the risk of accidents, making diplomacy more important, and preventing a leader from going rogue.

It's also nonsense.

This only works in a world full of angels or if there's another super power whose skirts you can hide behind.

The same is true with defunding the police. The idea that it will automatically make people safer only works in a world full of angels.

Moving some resources to other means of addressing issues is one thing. Blowing up law enforcement is another.
 
zitothebrave said:
Why? You do realize the whole world is very different than it was in the 50s and 60s. The world of th esingle income house has gone down. And women and men are capable of being single and having a kid.
Click to expand...

Financially capable is not all there is for development and breaking it down by race you'll see a different picture economically.
 
tumblr_ps9vzlVNP51xshu2fo7_540.gifv


- Do The Right Thing
1989
 
striker42 said:
I'm fine with having alternatives. I just don't want to see police not responding to other emergencies where they might be able to arrive quicker and render first aid.
Click to expand...

I don't see why a medic and mental health professional team responding to calls would be slower. If anything it should be faster. I could also see using hybrid teams with a cop having the MHP or Medic as a partner. So often Insee videos of calls where the situation just escalates because a cop is involved. Makes the subject scared and defensive.
 
cajunrevenge said:
I don't see why a medic and mental health professional team responding to calls would be slower. If anything it should be faster. I could also see using hybrid teams with a cop having the MHP or Medic as a partner. So often Insee videos of calls where the situation just escalates because a cop is involved. Makes the subject scared and defensive.
Click to expand...

Cops are often first on the scene because they're on patrol while paramedics dispatch from a set location. If a cop is patrolling closer, they'll get there first.

A problem with not having a cop there is what happens when the subject gets defensive with the mental healthcare professional.

There won't be enough mental health professionals to go 1 for 1 with cops but I do think special response units with one of each are a good idea.
 
thethe said:
Financially capable is not all there is for development and breaking it down by race you'll see a different picture economically.
Click to expand...

It is a leading move. It's not the only one. For example, many people acknowledge they can be together without a marriage certificate.

It's a big number to look at, but consider a number of things are involved. What you're insinuating a "breakdown in the family structure" is silly. So what if people are being born outside of shotgun weddings, does that really matter? I am thinking through my thoughts here, and personally I know a few people who have kids out of wedlock. One of them had a ****bag baby daddy, but she's a rock solid parent. Her issues with her baby daddy likely stem from issues with her parents who were in a crappy loveless marriage. They're still married even though they live miles apart and are seeing other people. Because they were shotgunned together. THe other one is a family member who has 3 kids, one was a college whoopsie baby, the other 2 are with the same man, they're not married, but they've been together for nearly a decade. The whoopsie baby daddy was a college boyfriend who they mde a mistake and the 2 weren't compatible at all. If they shotgunned together both their lives would be worse and the kid would be so much worse.
 
We should be discouraging everyone from having children, wed or not. Disasters like this outbreak are only going to get worse and more frequent as we pack ourselves in like sardines.
 
sturg33 said:
Growing up with a father and mother is probably the best privilege you can have in this country
Click to expand...

I would agree to growing up with two good parents being the best privilege, for sure. Some of us would be even worse off if both our parents were around more often. I left home at 13.
 
Speaking on the issue of qualified immunity, a legal doctrine activists say shields law enforcement from accountability, Senator Tim Scott said it's something "that most Republicans don't like at all, to include myself."

"The question is, is there a path forward that we take a look at the necessity of eliminating bad behavior within our law enforcement community? Is there a path forward? I think we'll find that. I'm not sure that it's qualified immunity, it seems like it won't be de-certification," he said.

Scott also said in a Sunday interview with CBS that qualified immunity is a "poison pill to our side" and noted that President Donald Trump has signaled it's "off the table."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...of-force-standard/ar-BB15t2K2?ocid=spartanntp
 
Dalyn said:
I would agree to growing up with two good parents being the best privilege, for sure. Some of us would be even worse off if both our parents were around more often. I left home at 13.
Click to expand...

And my father left home when I was 4 and that was a very positive development.
 
If I did what Rayshard Brooks did I would expect to be at least shot. Outstanding warrants? He was calm and normal until he went berserk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top