- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Help me understand. defunding vs Reform
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:17 pm to IAmNERD
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:17 pm to IAmNERD
Smart, serious people are willing to look at "reform".
Stupid people think that "defund" is a good description of "reform".
Really stupid people take "defund" and proceed to disband.
The city council of Minneapolis are really stupid people.
Stupid people think that "defund" is a good description of "reform".
Really stupid people take "defund" and proceed to disband.
The city council of Minneapolis are really stupid people.
0
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:18 pm to IAmNERD
quote:
This right here is the basis for my confusion on the whole defunding position.
It is simply a knee jerk reaction to placate an emotional populace that is currently the center of attention.
Unfortunately, that stance of appeasement can have a very real and lasting impact.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:19 pm to AUCE05
quote:
It is demilitarizing departments and removing responsibility.
That's not what the Minneapolis city council wants to do, or most of my lefty acquaintances. They want to replace police with social workers
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:23 pm to IAmNERD
Change their aim. Stop militarization and the sham drug war. Stop speeding traps. Repurpose all those jobs to actual crime solving.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:24 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
The losers in this, no matter our good intentions, will be law abiding citizens. Those who break the law will continue to break the law, and those who don't will suffer the consequences at an ever-increasing rate.
That is if we continue to underfund or defund our police departments.
Yeah, it looks like we are in complete agreement here. I agree, that something has to change. But are we going to bend to the will of people who refuse to accept the laws of our society?
I've seen a lot of "Oh, well, the left is ramming our views down the throat of the right, they just took it as we burned cities hurr durr." When in reality most people (left and right) just want to get back to their fricking lives. This literally happened to me today when I was in line at Lowe's behind a black girl I went to school with. She said "miss me with all that shite. Me and ***** been laid off for 2 months. Don't be fricking up my work hours." And she's dead serious.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:24 pm to AUCE05
quote:
It is demilitarizing departments
The problem isn't militarized police forces, though, people love to debate that one.
The issue is that having a militarized police force without the oversight, capable leadership, and regimented discipline the military is known for, is a problem.
Military might with a child's manner, more-or-less.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:26 pm to IAmNERD
quote:
But are we going to bend to the will of people who refuse to accept the laws of our society?
Elections, as they say, have consequences. Good and bad.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:26 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
It is simply a knee jerk reaction to placate an emotional populace that is currently the center of attention.
Unfortunately, that stance of appeasement can have a very real and lasting impact.
This is my fear in a few sentences.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:29 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Obviously, removing all police will not happen. But NYC doesn't need a 6 Billion dollar budget to build a military force.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:33 pm to IAmNERD
Police are asked to do a lot of crap they weren’t trained to do and they’d gladly give it up but no one is willing to take it. That’s where the real reform needs to be. I’m talking about calls involving things like mental health, homelessness,domestic disputes, drug abuse/overdoses, welfare checks etc. There’s room for negotiation but it’s not defunding and it’s not the type of stuff that will satisfy a group like BLM.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:37 pm to AUCE05
quote:
Obviously, removing all police will not happen. But NYC doesn't need a 6 Billion dollar budget to build a military force.
I don't know what NYC needs to build and maintain a police force.
I do know that the city is in much better shape, crime wise, than they were 30 years ago. It used to be a much more dangerous city.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:37 pm to IAmNERD
The intellectual argument here is that the scope of policing has grown too vast and complicated for their class of labor. Therefore, we should redirect some of that funding into different institutions that will absorb the budget liability for those matters.
There will also be cries about draconian prison terms and our approach to substance abuse. We are currently warehousing the largest prison population in the history of human civilization.
But we live in a world of slogans, so instead of “reform policing and create new systems to placate and eventually support the less fortunate,” they say: “defund the police,” because it turns out half the country has negative perceptions of the police.
There will also be cries about draconian prison terms and our approach to substance abuse. We are currently warehousing the largest prison population in the history of human civilization.
But we live in a world of slogans, so instead of “reform policing and create new systems to placate and eventually support the less fortunate,” they say: “defund the police,” because it turns out half the country has negative perceptions of the police.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:42 pm to WestSideTiger
quote:
Police are asked to do a lot of crap they weren’t trained to do and they’d gladly give it up but no one is willing to take it. That’s where the real reform needs to be. I’m talking about calls involving things like mental health, homelessness,domestic disputes, drug abuse/overdoses, welfare checks etc. There’s room for negotiation but it’s not defunding and it’s not the type of stuff that will satisfy a group like BLM.
That is one reason the loss of shows like Cops and Live PD is a bigger blow than most realize.
The general public has no idea what the average officer has to deal with on a daily basis. Those shows, for better or worse, showed that.
It is also why I believe every single citizen in this country should have to serve on at least one Grand Jury. People have no clue what is going on in their communities day-in and day-out. You hear it all when sitting on a Grand Jury.
Posted on 6/8/20 at 9:47 pm to The Third Leg
Well said.
ETA:
I would add more transparency too. They really have no accountability.
ETA:
I would add more transparency too. They really have no accountability.
This post was edited on 6/8/20 at 9:50 pm
Posted on 6/9/20 at 12:06 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
Change their aim. Stop militarization and the sham drug war. Stop speeding traps. Repurpose all those jobs to actual crime solving.
This.
And: much of the "defunding" arguments in larger cities are based on stats showing that a large amount of police responses (and therefore budget) are spent on things like dealing with mental health problems and/or homeless people. It's obvious that just continually spending millions to send police to pick up these people up but then have them right back out is just wasting money.
I'm sure someone can find examples of very radical ideas but the more thoughtful and serious "defunding" plans are mostly about narrowing the police departments to deal with actual crime and redirecting funds to find better solutions for the "social problems" they are currently being funded to put a band-aid over.
Posted on 6/9/20 at 12:29 am to wm72
quote:
based on stats showing that a large amount of police responses (and therefore budget) are spent on things like dealing with mental health problems and/or homeless people. It's obvious that just continually spending millions to send police to pick up these people up but then have them right back out is just wasting money
I can get behind things like legalizing weed and doing away with the traditional "speed traps" and any other petty bs. No problem there. But what are you going to do when the guy who's been off of his meds for 3 months and is having a full blown schizo meltdown where the voices in his head are telling him that you and your house are the epitome of evil and he is gonna do everything in his power to take you and your family out so you don't spread evil to the rest of the community? Are you waiting on mental health professionals? Or do you want the police to come and neutralize that threat ASAP?
You may say that is far fetched but I'm here to tell you I have arrived on a scene where a guy heard the voices tell him to douse himself in Coleman fuel and light himself and run around his house. This shite happens. And it happens more than the general public would like to think. People are nuts and everyone can't always protect themselves because they think they live in a civilized society.
This post was edited on 6/9/20 at 12:47 am
Posted on 6/9/20 at 12:33 am to IAmNERD
Just to add to the defunding topic and another case of the Dems being hypocritical.
quote:
Natalie Brunell
@natbrunell
While one LA Councilmember was introducing a motion to cut $150 million in #LAPD funding, that official also had round-the-clock private security provided by the department at their home.
@LAPPL
calls it hypocrisy, adding it may have cost taxpayers around $100k.
quote:
Natalie Brunell
@natbrunell
#LATEST LA Council Pres. Nury Martinez, who introduced a motion to cut #LAPD’s budget by $150 million, had a private LAPD protection detail camped at her home from April to June. It was called off the night we called to ask her team about it. Full story coming to
@SpecNews1SoCal
Posted on 6/9/20 at 12:50 am to IAmNERD
It is another masterful job of how the left can take a good idea and make it sound stupid af.
The basic idea is two pieces:
"Defund" = Restructure
Surely we can all agree that police are called into things in which they should not be called. This includes traffic stops, calls for mentally disturbed people, car wrecks, etc. Not only are a lot of those things not their jobs, but they go into them overworked/overstressed and heavily armed.
So the "defund" argument is to take funds that go to, say, the guys who cover car wrecks and have a new agency that handles that with way less weaponry. But defund isn't really what they're saying, they're saying to divert funds but they're delivering the message in the most arse backwards way they can.
Reform Takes Too Long
The other side of the argument is that reforms have been attempted for the last 40-50 years and the problems have only gotten worse. That was exacerbated after 9/11 and the second iraq war when police departments basically inherited military surplus equipment.
Let's be honest, getting "swatted" is a thing in the United States and it's not a thing literally anywhere else.
Because of all the historical "reforms" ending up with what we have today, they are saying there's no time for reform let's just restructure entirely starting now.
My take is that restructuring is actually a really good idea and you might find some good cost savings in having fewer cops going out to calls they aren't trained for and calls that have nothing to do with them. Another example of this is I had two cops in my mom's house when she passed just sitting around waiting for the coroner to show up. That should not be part of their job. They either didn't need to be there or another type of worker should've been, but two armed cops were way over-equipped for what they were doing.
But, the modern left is so dog shite at communicating, that message gets lost in slogans that are more meant to shock and less meant to educate.
The basic idea is two pieces:
"Defund" = Restructure
Surely we can all agree that police are called into things in which they should not be called. This includes traffic stops, calls for mentally disturbed people, car wrecks, etc. Not only are a lot of those things not their jobs, but they go into them overworked/overstressed and heavily armed.
So the "defund" argument is to take funds that go to, say, the guys who cover car wrecks and have a new agency that handles that with way less weaponry. But defund isn't really what they're saying, they're saying to divert funds but they're delivering the message in the most arse backwards way they can.
Reform Takes Too Long
The other side of the argument is that reforms have been attempted for the last 40-50 years and the problems have only gotten worse. That was exacerbated after 9/11 and the second iraq war when police departments basically inherited military surplus equipment.
Let's be honest, getting "swatted" is a thing in the United States and it's not a thing literally anywhere else.
Because of all the historical "reforms" ending up with what we have today, they are saying there's no time for reform let's just restructure entirely starting now.
My take is that restructuring is actually a really good idea and you might find some good cost savings in having fewer cops going out to calls they aren't trained for and calls that have nothing to do with them. Another example of this is I had two cops in my mom's house when she passed just sitting around waiting for the coroner to show up. That should not be part of their job. They either didn't need to be there or another type of worker should've been, but two armed cops were way over-equipped for what they were doing.
But, the modern left is so dog shite at communicating, that message gets lost in slogans that are more meant to shock and less meant to educate.
Posted on 6/9/20 at 12:57 am to IAmNERD
quote:
I can get behind things like legalizing weed and doing away with the traditional "speed traps" and any other petty bs. No problem there. But what are you going to do when the guy who's been off of his meds for 3 months and is having a full blown schizo meltdown where the voices in his head are telling him that you and your house are the epitome of evil and he is gonna do everything in his power to take you and your family out so you don't spread evil to the rest of the community? Are you waiting on mental health professionals? Or do you want the police to come and neutralize that threat ASAP?
I don't disagree and I'm certainly no expert. I'm also certainly on board with even more than just legalizing weed as the drug war in general is hands down the biggest waste of tax money in any of this police funding debate.
However, using your example, that the police are being sent over and over and over to pick up the exact same guy off his meds without any real solution to deal with the issue may mean that the funds being used to do that could be spent on a better solution.
Again, I don't think there's a huge amount of people saying that there should not be any police officers at all for dealing with violent crimes/situations.
Just from personal experience in Brooklyn where I own a record shop, I can say that I witness the NYPD called to deal with someone pretty often and I usually recognize that homeless mentally ill person because it's about the 10th time I've seen them picking up the same person and it's almost always just someone being more a nuisance (very big annoying one that's bad for business I'd add) than wielding a machete.
This post was edited on 6/9/20 at 1:00 am
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News