Jump to content
Alias Detective

Defund the police

Recommended Posts

Can someone explain what is meant by this?  Someone smart came up with the slogan but I’m having trouble understanding why this would be a goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alias Detective said:

Can someone explain what is meant by this?  Someone smart came up with the slogan but I’m having trouble understanding why this would be a goal.

Not sure, but LA is looking at it.

Nashville had a meeting this week to discuss the Mayor’s proposed budget and a 32% property tax increase. The meeting lasted 11 hours, mostly taken over by folks reading from a script calling to defund the police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a virtue signalling method in which guilt-ridden rich white liberals give permission to criminals to deal drugs, mug, loot, and rape in areas outside their gated communities.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I don't see how defunding the police could be beneficial.

I do. Let them have a taste. Funding will be restored real fast. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I do. Let them have a taste. Funding will be restored real fast. 

It's just stupid for them to think it's a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

It's just stupid for them to think it's a good idea.

It’s even dumber for them to think that police killing blacks because  of racism justifies all this destruction. Because there’s no proof of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s even dumber for them to think that police killing blacks because  of racism justifies all this destruction. Because there’s no proof of it. 

It's all a big sh1t show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s even dumber for them to think that police killing blacks because  of racism justifies all this destruction. Because there’s no proof of it. 

I meant to ask you this one the other day - if we look at the data and it doesn't show that there is any racial bias of police in killing unarmed people (I still am not sure on that), do we know if we have a problem with police killing too many unarmed people overall? I don't know whether it is just a matter of those things just being a function of millions of interactions with people and there is human error, or whether we have a problem of too many bad apples. Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patriotsfatboy1 said:

I meant to ask you this one the other day - if we look at the data and it doesn't show that there is any racial bias of police in killing unarmed people (I still am not sure on that), do we know if we have a problem with police killing too many unarmed people overall? I don't know whether it is just a matter of those things just being a function of millions of interactions with people and there is human error, or whether we have a problem of too many bad apples. Thoughts?

If you play with fire.....very seldom people get murdered by police officers on their way to church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Alias Detective said:

If you play with fire.....very seldom people get murdered by police officers on their way to church.

That is BS too. Police should not be shooting unarmed suspects. Their goal is to have that never happen, but that is not realistic. I don't know whether the current state is that numbers are higher than is reasonable given the number of dangerous interactions that happen. That is the question.

Ultimately, part of the answer is that we should reduce the number of dangerous interactions, but there are other variables too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Patriotsfatboy1 said:

I meant to ask you this one the other day - if we look at the data and it doesn't show that there is any racial bias of police in killing unarmed people (I still am not sure on that), do we know if we have a problem with police killing too many unarmed people overall? I don't know whether it is just a matter of those things just being a function of millions of interactions with people and there is human error, or whether we have a problem of too many bad apples. Thoughts?

Too many bad apples and it's only going to get worse as long as community leaders fail to support the police. It's already one of the toughest jobs on the planet. At least 90% of the contact you have is with complete losers at life. Try doing that day after day for 30 years. I couldn't. Trying the soft approach to crime and criminals is a miserable failure.

However, the correct way to police is to make the penalty for a crime so horrific that people will think twice about it. Seriously. if you are a criminal and you have the option to live in 2 cities. One has police that cracks the skulls of criminals and the other one lets you back out on the street the next day with a slap on the wrist and a 'please don't do that again' warring, which city does the criminal choose? It's really that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patriotsfatboy1 said:

I meant to ask you this one the other day - if we look at the data and it doesn't show that there is any racial bias of police in killing unarmed people (I still am not sure on that), do we know if we have a problem with police killing too many unarmed people overall? I don't know whether it is just a matter of those things just being a function of millions of interactions with people and there is human error, or whether we have a problem of too many bad apples. Thoughts?

I’m not being glib, but things go wrong sometimes. Yes, the amount of interactions is at some point going to end up in disaster. My biggest issue, and I’ve been saying this for a while now, is the hiring standards have been downgraded over time. It’s systematic. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Too many bad apples and it's only going to get worse as long as community leaders fail to support the police. It's already one of the toughest jobs on the planet. At least 90% of the contact you have is with complete losers at life. Try doing that day after day for 30 years. I couldn't. Trying the soft approach to crime and criminals is a miserable failure. The correct way to police is to make the penalty for a crime so horrific that people will think twice about it. Seriously. if you are a criminal and you have the option to live in 2 cites. One has police that the skulls of criminals and the other one lets you back out on the street the next day with a slap on the wrist and a 'please don't do that again' warring, which city does the criminal choose? It's really that simple.

Doesn't that kind of go against the freedoms we have as Americans though?  Where is the line between having too much freedom and having too much policing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I’m not being glib, but things go wrong sometimes. Yes, the amount of interactions is at some point going to end up in disaster. My biggest issue, and I’ve been saying this for a while now, is the hiring standards have been downgraded over time. It’s systematic. 

Based on other things that you have said in the past, I figured that was what you thought, but I did not want to assume. I do agree that there is a systemic issue with some of the hiring practices and there are all sorts of reason. One of my friends is getting close to retiring and he was saying a good portion of the new guys are just asswholes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is part of the continued push for a National Police Force. This isn’t new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Doesn't that kind of go against the freedoms we have as Americans though?  Where is the line between having too much freedom and having too much policing?

No one is free to break the law. The punishment needs to fit the crime and for a lot of crimes it no longer does. A speeding ticket still gets you the same thing it got you 50 years ago. Looting? Nope, go ahead, destroy and loot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lod001 said:

No one is free to break the law. The punishment needs to fit the crime and for a lot of crimes it no longer does. A speeding ticket still gets you the same thing it got you 50 years ago. Looting? Nope, go ahead, destroy and loot. 

That is true but laws still need to be reasonable and there needs to be due process.  It's what separates us from other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

That is true but laws still need to be reasonable and there needs to be due process.  It's what separates us from other countries.

And there is, unless D's are in charge. They are the ones that came up with the idea that, 'oh you stole less than $100 worth of items' 'You can go free, no penalty and the rest of us will pay for it.' Give them enough time and stealing will no longer be a crime at all. If ya want it, take it. How can any one other than a complete fucktard vote for them?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lod001 said:

And there is, unless D's are in charge. They are the ones that came up with the idea that, 'oh you stole less than $100 worth of items' 'You can go free, no penalty and the rest of us will pay for it.' Give them enough time and stealing will no longer be a crime at all. If ya want it, take it. How can any one other than a complete fucktard vote for them?

What should the punishment for stealing something around $30 be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Defunding the police sounds like something Coleman Young would have come up with. I know he bad mouthed and chased all the good cops out of Detroit in his 1974 police reforms, fortunatly the rest of the region stayed nice because they all got re-hired in suburban departments, but the method by which he went about it, I really don't know. It was before my time but defundung the police sounds like jsut the sort tool that would have been in his toolbag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is one of the main goals of BLM. good job all the retards posting black squares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

What should the punishment for stealing something around $30 be?

Restitution and a slap on the wrist the first 10 times. Then there might be a pattern 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Restitution and a slap on the wrist the first 10 times. Then there might be a pattern 

Repeat offenders certainly deserve more.  No argument there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of defunding the police is a great idea. It pairs well with other great Liberal ideas such as releasing criminals from jail during a quarantine and harboring law-breaking illegal aliens.

I can't imagine why anyone would be against Democrats being in charge of the country! Vote with your feels and not your head!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

The idea of defunding the police is a great idea. It pairs well with other great Liberal ideas such as releasing criminals from jail during a quarantine and harboring law-breaking illegal aliens.

I can't imagine why anyone would be against Democrats being in charge of the country! Vote with your feels and not your head!

Don't forget we need to abolish ICE and tear down the border gates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Restitution and a slap on the wrist the first 10 times. Then there might be a pattern 

Restitution x 10.  Otherwise why pay for anything?  If you get caught stealing something then you pay for it if not, oh well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bill E. said:

Restitution x 10.  Otherwise why pay for anything?  If you get caught stealing something then you pay for it if not, oh well. 

They’re just trying to feed their families in these uncertain times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bill E. said:

Restitution x 10.  Otherwise why pay for anything?  If you get caught stealing something then you pay for it if not, oh well. 

Like getting blood from a stone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

What should the punishment for stealing something around $30 be?

Restitution And 40 hours of community service. This doubles after each offense.

How much do you have to steal before it is a crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Baker Boy said:

Restitution And 40 hours of community service.

How much do you have to steal before it is a crime?

Stealing is already a crime, it's the punishment than changes.  I think the fact that it is a crime is what makes it stealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Stealing is already a crime, it's the punishment than changes.  I think the fact that it is a crime is what makes it stealing.

is it a crime if you don’t prosecute?

Dallas County DA Won't Prosecute If You Steal Under $750

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2019/04/dallas-county-da-wont-prosecute-if-you-steal-under-daniel-greenfield/

California’s Proposition 47 downgraded a variety of “non-serious, nonviolent crimes” that had previously been considered felonies to misdemeanors. These include shoplifting, grand theft, receiving stolen property, forgery, fraud, and writing bad checks. As long as the total value of the stolen property is under $950, only a ghost of an offense has occurred. A thief may now steal something under that limit on a daily basis and it will never rise to felony status.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/01/californias-proposition-47-crime-and-no-consequences/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2020s as a decade shaping up to be a nightmare for the country as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In chester w.va new police hires start at 9 dollars an hour...they could make more at wal mart.

Theres your problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

is it a crime if you don’t prosecute?

Dallas County DA Won't Prosecute If You Steal Under $750

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2019/04/dallas-county-da-wont-prosecute-if-you-steal-under-daniel-greenfield/

I don't agree with letting theft go like that but I did read that they are not letting all theft go under $750.  If somehow they can prove it was for economic gain they will prosecute.  Still dumb.

"Criminalizing poverty is counter-productive for our community’s health and safety. For that reason, this office will not prosecute theft of personal items less than $750 unless the evidence shows that the alleged theft was for economic gain."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cloaca du jour said:

In chester w.va new police hires start at 9 dollars an hour...they could make more at wal mart.

Theres your problem.

Are putting new police hires that are only making $9 an hour on the streets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×