Defund the Police?

[DesertPenguin]

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
then you morons in favor of the idea would support paying the money that was defunded to criminals directly, since they wouldn’t do crime if they were rich. Further that’s what it does-REWARD CRIME LMFAO
YEAH that’s what you want smfh

That’s about the level of rational thinking ability of proponents of defunding.
How ironic the founders of BLM who push this are criminals..lol
You couldn’t make this up!

Are you done?

 

[Joey D]

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

It's not about a lack of law enforcement, some law enforcement is still needed. What defunding the police means is to quit giving them the budget to essentially militarize and waste funds on things that don't matter.

 

[DesertPenguin]

It's not about a lack of law enforcement, some law enforcement is still needed. What defunding the police means is to quit giving them the budget to essentially militarize and waste funds on things that don't matter.

And to send some of those funds to the proper outlets that are designed to handle situations that the police are not.

 

[UKMikey]

I think people have got it in their heads that less funding for police means no police instead of using the vast resources they already have more efficiently.

Case in point...

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
then you morons in favor of the idea would support paying the money that was defunded to criminals directly, since they wouldn’t do crime if they were rich. Further that’s what it does-REWARD CRIME LMFAO
YEAH that’s what you want smfh

level of rational thinking ability

Heh. Heh heh. LOL.

 

[McLaren]

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
then you morons in favor of the idea would support paying the money that was defunded to criminals directly, since they wouldn’t do crime if they were rich. Further that’s what it does-REWARD CRIME LMFAO
YEAH that’s what you want smfh

That’s about the level of rational thinking ability of proponents of defunding.
How ironic the founders of BLM who push this are criminals..lol
You couldn’t make this up!

Play the ball

While you're at it, instead of throwing a fizzy over the motto, dig into what it actually entails. It's been shared in this thread so it shouldn't be hard to find.

 

[DesertPenguin]

It's pretty obvious that Groundfish isn't here for intellectual discussion of any kind.

 

[Dotini]

Let us all remember this important item from the AUP:

• You will not behave in an abusive and/or hateful manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack any individual or any group.

 

[UKMikey]

Let us all remember this important item from the AUP:

• You will not behave in an abusive and/or hateful manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack any individual or any group.

I'd say referring to people as morons fits that bill a lot closer than pointing out the unproductive nature of a poster's discussion when it comes to playing the ball rather than the man.

 

[DesertPenguin]

Let us all remember this important item from the AUP:

• You will not behave in an abusive and/or hateful manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack any individual or any group.

Oh boy...

 

[Dotini]

I'd say referring to people as morons fits that bill a lot closer than pointing out the unproductive nature of a poster's discussion when it comes to playing the ball rather than the man.

All I'm saying is that while it's okay to attack an idea or opinion, it's not okay to abuse or attack another member of the forum, however much you may disrespect that person.

Many of us are miserable due to lockdowns from virus or fires. Here in Seattle, visibility is under 1/4 mile. Tempers are running short. Emotions are running high. Self-discipline, tact and politeness are hard enough to muster when things are going swell. Let's try to keep that in mind.

 

[DesertPenguin]

If you see something that you think is in violation of the AUP then feel free to report it to the mods. That's what the button is for. Posting what you did is essentially whining about it without actually doing anything about it. This has nothing to do with lockdowns affecting emotions.

 

[Dotini]

If you see something that you think is in violation of the AUP then feel free to report it to the mods. That's what the button is for. Posting what you did is essentially whining about it without actually doing anything about it. This has nothing to do with lockdowns affecting emotions.

I'm a fallible human being in a forum with other fallible human beings. I'd like to be part of making this forum a better place for all of us. It takes a village. From the mayor on down to poorest soul on the down-and-out. I think it's within our abilities if not our will to be more polite and supportive of each other.

 

[DesertPenguin]

I'm a fallible human being in a forum with other fallible human beings. I'd like to be part of making this forum a better place for all of us. It takes a village. From the mayor on down to poorest soul on the down-and-out. I think it's within our abilities if not our will to be more polite and supportive of each other.

With all due respect:

1) You're preaching to the choir
2) Look in the mirror

 

[Rallywagon]

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
then you morons in favor of the idea would support paying the money that was defunded to criminals directly, since they wouldn’t do crime if they were rich.

See, this is exactly what I mean. Those inflicted with the "my side is right and normal, any anything that isn't deemed acceptable by the top legion on my side is anti whatever and must be destroyed, nuance is a word I've never learned" ideology will never see beyond that slogan.
A couple of things just kinda struck me here. First, I can't imagine these terms are unintentionally provoking. And it's really unfortunate. It shoots the heart of the movement in the foot honestly. Look at reactions of those like Ryzno, Groundfish and the other vocal right leaning individuals here. Does the liberal side want to converse with them? Because I can't help but feel the intent of these slogans is to antagonize rather than start a discussion. Its like shoulder checking someone but then saying "I don't want to fight". Well, I mean, now you've gone and picked a fight, and picked with people wont understand the nuance, who dont even care now to try and understand it. Now they just want to fight.

 

[Groundfish]

Well, I mean, now you've gone and picked a fight, and picked with people wont understand the nuance, who dont even care now to try and understand it. Now they just want to fight.

How is telling it like it is about fighting?
It’s not about fighting it’s just about differing ideology.
For most here seeing ideas that differ from the echo chamber means it’s time to go to war, which is sad, why not try to remain rational and discuss?
Someone thinking differently than yourself isn’t a call to war it’s just a different way of thinking and, I would argue one that correlates better to Reality.

 

[Tornado]

Maybe you can break down what part of your original post was an attempt at remaining rational in order to promote discussion. I'd be particularly interested in hearing the true discussion to be had about this part

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
then you morons in favor of the idea would support paying the money that was defunded to criminals directly, since they wouldn’t do crime if they were rich. Further that’s what it does-REWARD CRIME LMFAO
YEAH that’s what you want smfh

Try to do it without posting an internet meme.

 

[Rallywagon]

How is telling it like it is about fighting?
It’s not about fighting it’s just about differing ideology.
For most here seeing ideas that differ from the echo chamber means it’s time to go to war, which is sad, why not try to remain rational and discuss?
Someone thinking differently than yourself isn’t a call to war it’s just a different way of thinking and, I would argue one that correlates better to Reality.

Tornado asked the first question that I was thinking. That is a whole lot of frustration expressed in that first run on paragraph. And it also seems you are letting that frustation blind you to what I am saying. There are a few, but they are a small minority, that mean verbatim "defund the police". The majority seem to think changing the current paradigm of policing is what's needed. That this for example.

"Denver is now sending mental health professionals instead of police to respond to non-violent 911 calls. According to Adler, none of the calls in Denver have required police backup. This frees up officers for other police work."

That I believe is a great first step. Let's make police Civil servants rather than our law enforcers. Police aren't here to lord over us.

 

[Groundfish]

There are a few, but they are a small minority, that mean verbatim "defund the police". The majority seem to think changing the current paradigm of policing is what's needed. That this for example.

The paradigm (if you choose to call it that)
of enforcing laws is logically supported by law abiding citizens, like me.
If you are law abiding, logically you must support more police funding as long as crime exists.
In a theoretical utopia there would be no crime, and the people come to consensus on the law.
Criminals are the ones who would logically support less police.
More chance to break laws with impunity.
Lookup “Seattle is dying” on you tube. I already posted that leftist trash storm gone bad as an example of what actively not enforcing the law means.

Sad reality-the world is filled with crime and violence and bad people.
In cases like that you NEED strong police to ARREST AND INCARCERATE lawbreakers to prevent those folks from trampling on the rights of the law abiding.
Chris Rocks rule 1
“OBEY THE LAW”
Look it up Chris Rock how to not get your ass kicked by the police.
I’m not gonna post it.
People don’t understand that there’s truly garbage people that exist and it’s often violence and physical force that’s required to subdue that to SERVE AND PROTECT the law abiding people.
Is the irony not lost on you of who BLM founders ARE?
That should be all you need to know!

 

[Joey D]

If you are law abiding, logically you must support more police funding as long as crime exists.

That's not logical at all. You can be law-abiding and think the police are too heavily funded, the same is true for the opposite of that as well. Plenty of the "Blue Lives Matter" crowd breaks the law. All you need to do is look at a Trump Truck with it's defeated emission controls for rolling coal, illegal lighting, and unsafe lift-kit to see that they at least don't obey simple vehicle laws.

 

[Tornado]

I'm assuming that the founders of BLM are black people, so not sure where irony comes into play.

of enforcing laws is logically supported by law abiding citizens, like me.
If you are law abiding, logically you must support more police funding as long as crime exists.

Nah, I'm a law abiding citizen and I don't see much logic in unilaterally acquiescing to all financial demands of police departments because of fear of society breaking down if all cops don't have access to their own AR-15. In fact it's kind of hard to claim you're making a logical argument at all.

 

[ryzno]

Look at reactions of those like Ryzno,

I might have my different views of things but I don't know how you can compare me to him.
Just cause I like some of his posts doesn't mean I agree with him on everything.

 

[Sage Ages]

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
then you morons in favor of the idea would support paying the money that was defunded to criminals directly, since they wouldn’t do crime if they were rich. Further that’s what it does-REWARD CRIME LMFAO
YEAH that’s what you want smfh

That’s about the level of rational thinking ability of proponents of defunding.
How ironic the founders of BLM who push this are criminals..lol
You couldn’t make this up!

Do you ever have anything productive to say here...

 

[GranTurNismo]

Do you ever have anything productive to say here...

I have a sneaking suspicion that he’s learnt his lesson today .

 

[Famine]

Since the thread title is defund police, maybe if you’re stupid enough to want LACK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
then you morons in favor of the idea would support paying the money that was defunded to criminals directly, since they wouldn’t do crime if they were rich. Further that’s what it does-REWARD CRIME LMFAO
YEAH that’s what you want smfh

"Defund the police" means "stop all funding to police and do away with law enforcement" just as much as "lowering the penalty for an adult who has consensual sex with a minor within 10 years of their age" means "legalising paedophilia".

Which is to say it doesn't.

 

[UKMikey]

See, this is exactly what I mean. Those inflicted with the "my side is right and normal, any anything that isn't deemed acceptable by the top legion on my side is anti whatever and must be destroyed, nuance is a word I've never learned" ideology will never see beyond that slogan.

There's only so far you can dumb things down for people who don’t want to educate themselves. If a sentence or two of explanation won't help, how much do you think rebranding would?

"Defund the police" means "stop all funding to police and do away with law enforcement" just as much as "lowering the penalty for an adult who has consensual sex with a minor within 10 years of their age" means "legalising paedophilia".

Which is to say it doesn't.

You just don't understand basic philosophy man. I mean, I "Kant" even.

 

[Groundfish]

"Defund the police" means "stop all funding to police and do away with law enforcement" just as much as "lowering the penalty for an adult who has consensual sex with a minor within 10 years of their age" means "legalising paedophilia".

Which is to say it doesn't.

Well in my view, if police have insufficient means to stop riots and looting it isn’t right. It’s not right when rioters steal a man lift (large) and use it to ram down the entrance doors to a large electronics store.
I personally support police having any and all means necessary to enforce the law.
The problem again that I have here is that “defund the police” is a knee jerk reaction by some.
I see it as look bad cop do bad thing
Therefore cops are bad
A lot of people without knowledge jumping on a bandwagon is a wild goose chase or lynch mob in effect isn’t it?
Tbh I agree that many of the others duties as assigned’ job tasks assigned to police officers in the USA have nothing to do with police work nor should those tasks be done by police, and that should change.
When I was 16-20 something I personally hated police.
I hated the highway patrolmen the most. At my school they used to use radar guns and ticket students for violations on lunch.
We felt they were profiling us and they were. I stood by and watched a motorcycle officer wait to use his radar gun until students came out or were entering school grounds, and not radar ‘normal average’ citizens.
Yes I went and screamed profanities at them until they reacted and yes I was detained.
What never occurred to me at the time was the huge number of complaints normal citizens had about the school kids burning out reckless and the highest accident area being right there.
I’ve been arrested enough to understand the situations.
Now, at middle age I value the service law enforcement officers provide to law abiding peaceful citizens.
I am 110 percent for protests etc, but NOT riots.
They need to have the resources necessary to quell riots quickly. They need the support not given to them by Democrat politicians to do their job.
Sometimes it’s a dirty job. I support the ability of law enforcement to STOP crime.
I support GTA level resources for them.
I do not support crime.
I like these guys. If criminals know police don’t have adequate resources it will embolden them imo. I support SWAT.

 

[NotThePrez]

Well in my view, if police have insufficient means to stop riots and looting it isn’t right.

Nobody actually worth listening to has said otherwise.

The problem again that I have here is that “defund the police” is a knee jerk reaction by some.

Similar to how some people think that "Defund the Police" means taking away police funding to the point where they can't do their job, even though that's very much not the case.

You do realize that the post you quoted literally explains that, right?

I see it as look bad cop do bad thing
Therefore cops are bad

I find it quite telling how you're cool with cops going after people who break the law no matter what, yet you don't seem to hold officers to the same level of scrutiny.

A lot of people without knowledge jumping on a bandwagon is a wild goose chase or lynch mob in effect isn’t it?

Now That's What I Call Ironic!(tm)

Tbh I agree that many of the others duties as assigned’ job tasks assigned to police officers in the USA have nothing to do with police work nor should those tasks be done by police, and that should change.

Well, at least there's agreement somewhere.

They need to have the resources necessary to quell riots quickly. They need the support not given to them by Democrat politicians to do their job.
Sometimes it’s a dirty job. I support the ability of law enforcement to STOP crime.

That sounds worrying similar to advocating for a police force that's a couple steps away from being an militarized force that ignores and/or suppresses individual rights, acts above the law without consequence, and are immune from consequence in the event of criminally negligent homicide or other similar crimes.

I support GTA level resources for them.

Nevermind. That's exactly what you're advocating.

Unsurprisingly, you still fundamentally don't understand why people are protesting, or why public distrust in police is at an all-time high. Yet you're advocating for actions that would do nothing but exacerbate current problems, and would end up getting even more people (both citizens, innocent and otherwise, and police) hurt and/or killed, and that's best-case scenario. It's amazing at this point that you have the gall to accuse others who don't agree with you of "lacking knoweledge," while demonstrating that you fundamentally do not understand the other side of the equation, and even go as far as to blatantly ignore said issues (many of which have been explained in this thread and others within this subforum) to advocate for greater police power and presence.

You seem to enjoy accusing people who don't support your "cause" of lacking knowledge. Perhaps you should practice what you preach and research what "Defund The Police" actually means for most reasonable individuals?

 

[McLaren]

I personally support police having any and all means necessary to enforce the law.

Most people on both sides support this up to various points. The issue is how police choose to decide what constitutes as requiring "all means necessary".

I have no issue with a police force having ARs on hand. I will have issue with a police force choosing to deploy ARs when they're clearly not necessary. People protesting? Nah. Lunatic using a protest as cover to start ambushing police officers & protesters with a rifle of his own? Sure.

The problem again that I have here is that “defund the police” is a knee jerk reaction by some.
I see it as look bad cop do bad thing
Therefore cops are bad
A lot of people without knowledge jumping on a bandwagon is a wild goose chase or lynch mob in effect isn’t it?

But... you've done this in regards to grouping all BLM folks in with rioters & looters.

I am 110 percent for protests etc, but NOT riots.

Congrats then. You'll find a lot of protesters are as well.

I support GTA level resources for them.

Hopefully, you don't back the level of training they have in GTA as well.

 

[Groundfish]

I find it quite telling how you're cool with cops going after people who break the law no matter what, yet you don't seem to hold officers to the same level of scrutiny

I don’t know where you got the idea that’s my position because I never typed that.
In fact if you added more resources to the law enforcement community imo some amount of that should go to IA to ensure bad cops are rooted out and prosecuted.

That sounds worrying similar to advocating for a police force that's a couple steps away from being an militarized force that ignores and/or suppresses individual rights, acts above the law without consequence, and are immune from consequence in the event of criminally negligent homicide or other similar crimes

Again no. That would be the opposite to my opinion.

Unsurprisingly, you still fundamentally don't understand why people are protesting, or why public distrust in police is at an all-time high

I don’t believe that’s the case. I do know however that there’s a large element to the situation that’s political and NOT concerned citizens peacefully protesting.

You seem to enjoy accusing people who don't support your "cause" of lacking knowledge. Perhaps you should practice what you preach and research what "Defund The Police" actually means for most reasonable individuals?

A lot of posts said this, and I have a problem with a motto when it means diff things to diff people, and especially when my position is that law enforcement needs more resources not less, especially to stop violent crime like riots killings rapes etc, and including To provide better oversight and aggressive prosecution of bad cops to the maximum extent of the law.
via the additional funding.
Also more funding could mean more training as well.
Less funding for law enforcement I don’t support.

I will have issue with a police force choosing to deploy ARs when they're clearly not necessary. People protesting? Nah

Ok, but riots are different. Once things are getting burned it’s a riot. Once it’s a riot and people do not disperse...They should be subject to necessary crowd control measures.
These measures are necessary to PROTECT the property and lives of the law abiding citizens in the riot affected area.
It’s really bad that police have been told to stand down and let this go on by leftist politicians like in Seattle. Summer of Love remember when the mayor said that and refused to stop the CHOP thing?
Innocent citizens got murdered there.
They had to stop it.

 

[Famine]

Well in my view, if police have insufficient means to stop riots and looting it isn’t right.

Quite so, and if police budgets were spent on law enforcement only (and crime prevention; that's an important part of the job lots of people always forget about) rather than on myriad other roles that policing has seen significant feature creep into, that'd not be an issue.