Can anyone say how the whole "January 6 thing" was worse than the 2020 riots?

[BuckSwope 654]

42 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Less taxes isn’t very communist. If corporate America and wall street can get tax credits, so can the people. Nice try. 

Correct, it's also not what some of the programs were that were helping, either.  

[kilroy69 1,216]

The liberal media supported the riots. They did not support Jan 6th.  Pretty cut and dried. 

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

33 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

We’ll never know. You have 50 different aliases. We’ll call it a draw, loser. Lol. 

Nothing I do will ever out-creep you looking up ex-wives, wives, their hair color and other personal information, nor will I out-loser you when it comes how much time I spend here, particularly on Christmas. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,934]

32 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Correct, it's also not what some of the programs were that were helping, either.  

Well, I’m talking about the child tax credit, seeing as we are talking about child poverty.  You’re talking about something else. Phone a friend. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,934]

3 minutes ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Nothing I do will ever out-creep you looking up ex-wives, wives, their hair color and other personal information, nor will I out-loser you when it comes how much time I spend here, particularly on Christmas. 

I spend a lot of time here on Christmas? I don’t think so. Why do you woketards always have to make things up? 

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

31 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I spend a lot of time here on Christmas? I don’t think so. Why do you woketards always have to make things up? 

Nice non-denial of the creepy Internet stalker aspect of the equation. I recently tidied up my attic, getting rid of stuff, consolidating boxes, etc. I ran across a yellow pad with the real names and addresses of Geeks who wanted me to send them copies of my first CD, which was a humorous thing at the time. A lot of those Geeks, many of whom sit on the opposite side of the political fence, are still around. Yet I'd never think to drill into that personal information and use it as some kind of gotcha moment on this forum like you did with your Internet research. That's sick. I'm all for benevolent ball-busting, but you have a mean-spirited pattern of going too far, right up to planning to meet someone here for a fight somewhere and wishing death and rape on other people's kids. That's just dysfunctional and stupid, bro, and the forum is a worse place because of it. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,934]

Just now, Pimpadeaux said:

Nice non-denial of the creepy Internet stalker aspect of the equation. I recently tidied up my attic, getting rid of stuff, consolidating boxes, etc. I ran across a yellow pad with the real names and addresses of Geeks who wanted me to send them copies of my first CD, which was a humorous thing at the time. A lot of those Geeks, many of whom sit on the opposite side of the political fence, are still around. Yet I'd never think to drill into that personal information and use it as some kind of gotcha moment on this forum like you did with your Internet research. That's sick. I'm all for benevolent ball-busting, but you have a mean-spirited pattern of going too far, right up to planning to meet someone here for a fight somewhere and wishing death and rape on other people's kids. That's just dysfunctional and stupid, bro, and the forum is a worse place because of it. 

Yeah. Now about Christmas. Struck out I guess? 

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

10 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Yeah. Now about Christmas. Struck out I guess? 

Christmas is in December, while Juneteenth is in June.

 

[RLLD 4,143]

4 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

To me, this is a perfect example of what I am talking about but you still don't seem to see how it might affect black communities.   From what I posted above, two things could be true:

1.  That level of policing or more is needed for those small %  of areas/times.   

2.  90% of the city feels like they are being over policed, harrassed, etc.  as they are being pulled over too often.   

 

So if a city decides to defund police, it's probably in a general way - so those 90% might be a little happier, but crime is rising because #1 isn't addressed.  Which, IMO is what you see with an example like yours. 

Sometimes really bad ideas need to run their course. Defund is an exceptionally bad idea that is running its course.

Even the NAACP has figured out that the police are not the problem. So there is hope, but in order for the galactic ally bad ideas to be discovered to be ruthlessly bad….many good people have to be harmed…. In order to avoid hurting the feelings of criminals 

[seafoam1 2,803]

I don't give a shlt of the race. People should be put to death for unjustified violence. 

Put to death. 

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

37 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Sometimes really bad ideas need to run their course. Defund is an exceptionally bad idea that is running its course.

Even the NAACP has figured out that the police are not the problem. So there is hope, but in order for the galactic ally bad ideas to be discovered to be ruthlessly bad….many good people have to be harmed…. In order to avoid hurting the feelings of criminals 

Hasn't defund pretty much run its course at this point?

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 hour ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Nice non-denial of the creepy Internet stalker aspect of the equation. I recently tidied up my attic, getting rid of stuff, consolidating boxes, etc. I ran across a yellow pad with the real names and addresses of Geeks who wanted me to send them copies of my first CD, which was a humorous thing at the time. A lot of those Geeks, many of whom sit on the opposite side of the political fence, are still around. Yet I'd never think to drill into that personal information and use it as some kind of gotcha moment on this forum like you did with your Internet research. That's sick. I'm all for benevolent ball-busting, but you have a mean-spirited pattern of going too far, right up to planning to meet someone here for a fight somewhere and wishing death and rape on other people's kids. That's just dysfunctional and stupid, bro, and the forum is a worse place because of it. 

[BuckSwope 654]

39 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Sometimes really bad ideas need to run their course. Defund is an exceptionally bad idea that is running its course.

Even the NAACP has figured out that the police are not the problem. So there is hope, but in order for the galactic ally bad ideas to be discovered to be ruthlessly bad….many good people have to be harmed…. In order to avoid hurting the feelings of criminals 

I don't agree fully with you here -there are nuggets of good ideas wrapped in a terrible packaging with bad ideas.   You also seem to say the police are not the problem, and I also disagree there.   Our policing system is part of the problem, but I don't believe the motivations are to target black people because of the color of their skin.   

IMO you and others seem to think that anybody who is saying police are an issue believes they are an issue because of racism.   It's odd to me that none of you seem to think that policing for profit is a bad idea.   It's all in the Ferguson report how it was tied to the city and their requests for more money, and which neighborhoods were the focus of attention.    Where it spins out of control is when the narrative goes to loony town and people think blacks are being mowed down by cop by the 1000s.  

[shorepatrol 1,870]

17 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

I don't agree fully with you here -there are nuggets of good ideas wrapped in a terrible packaging with bad ideas.   You also seem to say the police are not the problem, and I also disagree there.   Our policing system is part of the problem, but I don't believe the motivations are to target black people because of the color of their skin.   

IMO you and others seem to think that anybody who is saying police are an issue believes they are an issue because of racism.   It's odd to me that none of you seem to think that policing for profit is a bad idea.   It's all in the Ferguson report how it was tied to the city and their requests for more money, and which neighborhoods were the focus of attention.    Where it spins out of control is when the narrative goes to loony town and people think blacks are being mowed down by cop by the 1000s.  

Nice word vomit 

[seafoam1 2,803]

1 hour ago, shorepatrol said:

Nice word vomit 

Yep.

[RLLD 4,143]

8 hours ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Hasn't defund pretty much run its course at this point?

Not sure, there appear to still be those who want to try it. It could also be true that those folks are coming up on an election and are simply trying to manipulate voters. Hard to tell right now. 

[RLLD 4,143]

8 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

I don't agree fully with you here -there are nuggets of good ideas wrapped in a terrible packaging with bad ideas.   You also seem to say the police are not the problem, and I also disagree there.   Our policing system is part of the problem, but I don't believe the motivations are to target black people because of the color of their skin.   

IMO you and others seem to think that anybody who is saying police are an issue believes they are an issue because of racism.   It's odd to me that none of you seem to think that policing for profit is a bad idea.   It's all in the Ferguson report how it was tied to the city and their requests for more money, and which neighborhoods were the focus of attention.    Where it spins out of control is when the narrative goes to loony town and people think blacks are being mowed down by cop by the 1000s.  

I think you have salient points here.  Police are not excluded from the problem of course, there are going to be select individuals that should just never be a cop. And there will also be those who should be better trained. Policing has a historical factor, but one that should be left to history and not cherry-picked to be applied to current day situations so as to arrive at that "see! its still a problam !!" mantra..... because it is not the systemic issue that once plaugued this nation, instead it is isolated one-offs that are dealt with swiftly....so the entire premise of "lets burn sh!t" will never be something I support...

The worst localities need cops the most. There are good people there, and they deserve protection from the criminals. Once you diminish policing you leave those poor people at the mercy of the wolves.....and that is wrong. 

[BuckSwope 654]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

I think you have salient points here.  Police are not excluded from the problem of course, there are going to be select individuals that should just never be a cop. And there will also be those who should be better trained. Policing has a historical factor, but one that should be left to history and not cherry-picked to be applied to current day situations so as to arrive at that "see! its still a problam !!" mantra..... because it is not the systemic issue that once plaugued this nation, instead it is isolated one-offs that are dealt with swiftly....so the entire premise of "lets burn sh!t" will never be something I support...

The worst localities need cops the most. There are good people there, and they deserve protection from the criminals. Once you diminish policing you leave those poor people at the mercy of the wolves.....and that is wrong. 

I still don't think you are getting what I am saying.   To me this isn't even about rogue or bad cops, though I will admit that is also an issue.  

We have a SYSTEM of policing that largely revolves around the idea that it's good policy to stop people for minor infractions and look for:  guns, drugs, criminals.   That's not select individuals doing this, it's largely a way of policing.  Do you at least agree on this point?   

[RLLD 4,143]

Just now, BuckSwope said:

I still don't think you are getting what I am saying.   To me this isn't even about rogue or bad cops, though I will admit that is also an issue.  

We have a SYSTEM of policing that largely revolves around the idea that it's good policy to stop people for minor infractions and look for:  guns, drugs, criminals.   That's not select individuals doing this, it's largely a way of policing.  Do you at least agree on this point?   

Ah! I was missing that point, yes, thank you for clarifying.  I think you are correct and I think that could be better. I would like to see police stopping more people in areas of higher crime to better protect the good people in those areas. 

[seafoam1 2,803]

9 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Ah! I was missing that point, yes, thank you for clarifying.  I think you are correct and I think that could be better. I would like to see police stopping more people in areas of higher crime to better protect the good people in those areas. 

There are liberals who are saying that policing more aggressively in higher crime areas is racist because many of the higher crime areas are predominantly black. 

It's just another absurd liberal way of thinking.

[BufordT 427]

If you're a democrat,  1/6 was worse, because party comes first and you are a hack

If you're a republican, 2020 riots were worse, because party comes first and you are even more of a hack.

If you're an unbiased observer, they were both deplorable and don't feel sorry for any participant's involved that received punishment.

 

[RLLD 4,143]

3 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

There are liberals who are saying that policing more aggressively in higher crime areas is racist because many of the higher crime areas are predominantly black. 

It's just another absurd liberal way of thinking.

Well yes, I get that.......but people who happen to live in these areas who are not criminals deserve protection. Just because the criminality in a given locale is dominated by some segment of society does not mean we allow the criminal element more space to exist.....it means we go after it harder. We should be protecting the good people, even if it means hurting the feelings of the bad ones....

[BuckSwope 654]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

Ah! I was missing that point, yes, thank you for clarifying.  I think you are correct and I think that could be better. I would like to see police stopping more people in areas of higher crime to better protect the good people in those areas. 

Great, on the same page so far.   To me, that is the core of the issue, and where most of this stems from - not rogue cops, not racist cops, but our way of policing in general.    So when I say it's systemic, that is what I mean.   Race hasn't even entered the equation.  

Let's just imagine a fairly decent sized city and assume that the stats and studies were correct that (I think it makes common sense too) that a city's crime is quite centrally located to an area and time.  For our thought experiment,  we will just say there is 4-5 city blocks that are high crime areas at night.  That is where 50% of violent crime is coming from, probably a good assumption that drugs, guns, whatever are being dealt etc.     By all means, use that method then and there - it's been shown to drop crime significantly.   For the rest of the time, what is happening though? 

[BuckSwope 654]

5 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

There are liberals who are saying that policing more aggressively in higher crime areas is racist because many of the higher crime areas are predominantly black. 

It's just another absurd liberal way of thinking.

Of course there are, and that's dumb.   Go find them and talk to them about it, it doesn't apply here.  

[RLLD 4,143]

Just now, BuckSwope said:

Great, on the same page so far.   To me, that is the core of the issue, and where most of this stems from - not rogue cops, not racist cops, but our way of policing in general.    So when I say it's systemic, that is what I mean.   Race hasn't even entered the equation.  

Let's just imagine a fairly decent sized city and assume that the stats and studies were correct that (I think it makes common sense too) that a city's crime is quite centrally located to an area and time.  For our thought experiment,  we will just say there is 4-5 city blocks that are high crime areas at night.  That is where 50% of violent crime is coming from, probably a good assumption that drugs, guns, whatever are being dealt etc.     By all means, use that method then and there - it's been shown to drop crime significantly.   For the rest of the time, what is happening though? 

That criminality to which you are referring is not honoring the zone, it goes outside of it, so the zone of response increases as those criminal elements reach out further and harm more people. 

When the police go out....I expect them to stop people using their prowess and experience, and to intervene frequently.....even if that action might tend to hurt feelings.  Good people wont mind, criminals will focking hate it....which is gratifying in and of itself.  More policing will be infuriating to criminals. 

[seafoam1 2,803]

9 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Well yes, I get that.......but people who happen to live in these areas who are not criminals deserve protection. Just because the criminality in a given locale is dominated by some segment of society does not mean we allow the criminal element more space to exist.....it means we go after it harder. We should be protecting the good people, even if it means hurting the feelings of the bad ones....

Yes. And they pay taxes too and deserve a heavy police presence.

[RLLD 4,143]

4 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Yes. And they pay taxes too and deserve a heavy police presense.

Good people never mind the presence of police

[BuckSwope 654]

3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

That criminality to which you are referring is not honoring the zone, it goes outside of it, so the zone of response increases as those criminal elements reach out further and harm more people. 

When the police go out....I expect them to stop people using their prowess and experience, and to intervene frequently.....even if that action might tend to hurt feelings.  Good people wont mind, criminals will focking hate it....which is gratifying in and of itself.  More policing will be infuriating to criminals. 

Do you honestly think that represents what we see though, or are the police doing what I describe everywhere?    

Again, using my example - if the crime is THAT localized, what good is it doing when you are employing that method of policing say, a neighborhood over at 3pm?   Aren't the cops still pulling over people with tinted windows, failure to signal, rolling stops, etc..   Why?  If we can show when and where the large portion of the crime is, you honestly don't see how that would be an irritant to those people?  It's not addressing the crime, because for the most part it's not there, as we have already discussed.    So if they aren't largely getting the violent criminals here, who are they repeatedly pulling over?  

To me this explains damn near all the issues we are seeing.  Communities feeling they are being harassed.  Too many stops going south for a variety of reasons.   Profitable revenue stream for the city, on and on.   

[RLLD 4,143]

3 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Do you honestly think that represents what we see though, or are the police doing what I describe everywhere?    

Again, using my example - if the crime is THAT localized, what good is it doing when you are employing that method of policing say, a neighborhood over at 3pm?   Aren't the cops still pulling over people with tinted windows, failure to signal, rolling stops, etc..   Why?  If we can show when and where the large portion of the crime is, you honestly don't see how that would be an irritant to those people?  It's not addressing the crime, because for the most part it's not there, as we have already discussed.    So if they aren't largely getting the violent criminals here, who are they repeatedly pulling over?  

To me this explains damn near all the issues we are seeing.  Communities feeling they are being harassed.  Too many stops going south for a variety of reasons.   Profitable revenue stream for the city, on and on.   

Absolutely!   And it is not isolated to areas where minorities exist. It happens in areas dominated by white people, but where crime is elevated. We do not hear about those instances because 1) no one cares, so media does not cover it, no ratings to be derived and 2) there is no political value to be found so the politicians ignore it.

So when you hear the term "white privilege" there is an example here.  White areas are policed commensureate with their level of crime, and no one tries to dillute that....therefore white areas are better policed and enjoy less crime. Black neighborhoods are left to fester and suffer, rather than risk offending someone.

Who is winning in that scenerio......only the criminals in the black neighborhoods and the good people in the white ones.  You want to address a "systemic disparity", let the police do their job.....

[The Real timschochet 6,421]

11 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

I don't give a shlt of the race. People should be put to death for unjustified violence. 

Put to death. 

I think it’s fair to read this statement and regard you as a fascist. Especially since you use the word “unjustified” which suggests that there is “justified” violence.
 

You are not a conservative; never call yourself that again. You are an authoritarian fascist. 

[The Real timschochet 6,421]

45 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Good people never mind the presence of police

This is simply not true. It depends on the situation. 

[RLLD 4,143]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is simply not true. It depends on the situation. 

I am willing to allow that there could be instances where good people have been so misinformed that they also have capiophobia. 

[The Real timschochet 6,421]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

I am willing to allow that there could be instances where good people have been so misinformed that they also have capiophobia. 

I think you’re the one who has been misinformed. 

[RLLD 4,143]

6 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I think you’re the one who has been misinformed. 

I understand that, and I get it. But reality shows us that my assertions have merit. Those who initially pushed the defund movement are being proven wrong, but only after enough harm is visited upon people.  The entire premise of this movement was inane. The people pushing this should have known better, but apparently were misinformed by our schools, media and politicians....   it was just precious when Pelosi had her AHA moment.  It is so easy to trot oneself out as virtuous.....standing up for the poor oppressed minorities....when you do not bear the consequences of your own bad policies....I wonder if Mr Pelosi whispered in her ear to cut the crap and get more policing 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,934]

NYC police officers fired their weapons 312 times in 1993. By 2001 that number had shrunk to 126 times. Enforcing the law is better for everyone. 

[BuckSwope 654]

15 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Absolutely!   And it is not isolated to areas where minorities exist. It happens in areas dominated by white people, but where crime is elevated. We do not hear about those instances because 1) no one cares, so media does not cover it, no ratings to be derived and 2) there is no political value to be found so the politicians ignore it.

So when you hear the term "white privilege" there is an example here.  White areas are policed commensureate with their level of crime, and no one tries to dillute that....therefore white areas are better policed and enjoy less crime. Black neighborhoods are left to fester and suffer, rather than risk offending someone.

Who is winning in that scenerio......only the criminals in the black neighborhoods and the good people in the white ones.  You want to address a "systemic disparity", let the police do their job.....

I largely agree on the first paragraph, but we are veering off.  

Yes/no to the second part.    We already agreed that the system of policing is: stop for infractions, look for guns/drugs/criminals, right?   So how i see it is more like this.  These studies came out many years ago showing that was a very effective tactic in those very isolated areas.  Crime dropped in those areas, so that must be an effective way to police, right? so they use that everywhere.    We all are adults and can also agree that those initial areas were probably poor black neighborhoods with a lot of gang activity.   It's not the black community as a whole, but it's probably one of their neighborhoods in a big city.    So if we agree that in those cases 50% of the violent crime is coming from there, wouldn't the police look for similar things outside that zone?   They can't pull people over for nothing, right?   And as you move outside that zone that method of policing is not effective, because again - it's largely not where the crime is.    

SO inside the localized zone, they are pulling gang bangers over left and right and finding a ton of guns and drugs.   Probably a certain look, certain types of cars, you get the drift.   Maybe they pull over 100 cars and find something on 40% of them (I am just making up numbers here to relay my point).  Yes, in those areas criminals get frustrated, violent crime drops, etc..   Now, as you get further and further out - because of their methods and what they are looking for in the other areas, who are they going to be pulling over and checking?   But the violent criminals are largely not out there, and probably not at 3pm.   So you go from pulling over a large % of criminals and frustrating them to pulling over a much larger % of law abiding people going about their day - can't you see where that frustration would start to bubble up?    For their safety, they have to also treat each stop as though there are criminals, guns, and drugs in the equation.    Again, to me this explains what we see in the country.   Cops do that because it can be effective.  The black community as a whole can feel frustrated because outside those localized range, they are probably getting pulled over more.  Interactions are heated because one side is frustrated and the other side is trained to treat them as though they have guns and drugs so each stop can be tense.   Cities see the outcry of the 80% and drop police across the board, which ...  takes away police from those trouble areas and now we see crime spike in the black communities.  

 

[BuckSwope 654]

33 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I think it’s fair to read this statement and regard you as a fascist. Especially since you use the word “unjustified” which suggests that there is “justified” violence.
 

You are not a conservative; never call yourself that again. You are an authoritarian fascist. 

You realize that posters like seafoam post that dumb stuff to get reaction from libs like you just did, correct?  

[RLLD 4,143]

1 minute ago, BuckSwope said:

I largely agree on the first paragraph, but we are veering off.  

Yes/no to the second part.    We already agreed that the system of policing is: stop for infractions, look for guns/drugs/criminals, right?   So how i see it is more like this.  These studies came out many years ago showing that was a very effective tactic in those very isolated areas.  Crime dropped in those areas, so that must be an effective way to police, right? so they use that everywhere.    We all are adults and can also agree that those initial areas were probably poor black neighborhoods with a lot of gang activity.   It's not the black community as a whole, but it's probably one of their neighborhoods in a big city.    So if we agree that in those cases 50% of the violent crime is coming from there, wouldn't the police look for similar things outside that zone?   They can't pull people over for nothing, right?   And as you move outside that zone that method of policing is not effective, because again - it's largely not where the crime is.    

SO inside the localized zone, they are pulling gang bangers over left and right and finding a ton of guns and drugs.   Probably a certain look, certain types of cars, you get the drift.   Maybe they pull over 100 cars and find something on 40% of them (I am just making up numbers here to relay my point).  Yes, in those areas criminals get frustrated, violent crime drops, etc..   Now, as you get further and further out - because of their methods and what they are looking for in the other areas, who are they going to be pulling over and checking?   But the violent criminals are largely not out there, and probably not at 3pm.   So you go from pulling over a large % of criminals and frustrating them to pulling over a much larger % of law abiding people going about their day - can't you see where that frustration would start to bubble up?    For their safety, they have to also treat each stop as though there are criminals, guns, and drugs in the equation.    Again, to me this explains what we see in the country.   Cops do that because it can be effective.  The black community as a whole can feel frustrated because outside those localized range, they are probably getting pulled over more.  Interactions are heated because one side is frustrated and the other side is trained to treat them as though they have guns and drugs so each stop can be tense.   Cities see the outcry of the 80% and drop police across the board, which ...  takes away police from those trouble areas and now we see crime spike in the black communities.  

 

The cost of policing in higher crime areas, to the local people, is more palatable than the crime. And until the police are able to wring that criminalitu out of that area....it will be better to be stopped and inconvenienced....than to have a loved one killed.....just that simple.

My suggestion to those impacted is simple....suck it up....help the police not the criminals.....and until the police can get those criminals off the streets and into jail, you might be inconvenieced....

It is really up to the people that live there.  Decide, embrace criminality to avoid police involvment....or support the police, and eventually come out the other side....

I know what I would choose....

[GutterBoy 2,898]

Camden NJ disbanded their police force, and murders plummeted.  It's not perfect, but a good use case for how police reform improves the community.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-jersey-city-disbanded-its-police-force-here-s-what-n1231677

[The Real timschochet 6,421]

11 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

You realize that posters like seafoam post that dumb stuff to get reaction from libs like you just did, correct?  

I’m pretty sure that’s true. But the reason it’s worth responding to is because there appears to be a lot of sentiment in that direction.