Started By
Message

re: Who here supports sending federal troops to major cities to combat crime?

Posted on 8/25/25 at 6:21 pm to
Posted by fischd1
Mandeville
Member since Dec 2007
3439 posts
Posted on 8/25/25 at 6:21 pm to
only if they ask for the help. I remember when New Orleans had a crime spree I think either the mayor or the governor brought in the National Guard and it worked in lowering crime. I assume these states with high crime rates can you call in their own National Guard if they want to.
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
65562 posts
Posted on 8/25/25 at 6:45 pm to
quote:

How would they even impliment this everywhere else?

The OP asked a question. I answered it. No need for you to go full shill 100% of the time.
quote:

orange bad
guess again.
Posted by Wednesday
Member since Aug 2017
17301 posts
Posted on 8/25/25 at 6:58 pm to
Do not support unless as adjunct to ICE/deportations. I see these functions as essential to federal law and national security.
That’s where my tolerance for federal police power begins and ends.

I do not want the next Marxist that Democrats put in charge of the auto pen policing individual states. I will not end well.
Posted by pankReb
Defending National Champs Fan
Member since Mar 2009
73098 posts
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:02 pm to
quote:

Nope Nope Nope If you support, think about what it will be like in 12 years when the Dems have the Presidency back and they are sending jack booted thugs to your door to carry away any white nationalist terrorists.


This. Say goodbye to your guns.
Posted by Tiger Roux
Houston
Member since Mar 2009
5024 posts
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:07 pm to
I never felt safer in New Orleans than when the national guard was there.
Posted by northshorebamaman
Mackinac Island
Member since Jul 2009
38343 posts
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:31 pm to
quote:

. I recognize that this good can and most likely will be attempted to use for evil in the future by those same dims who hate their power base being disrupted. BUT- you cannot fail to do what is right and good because you are living in fear of the revenge of truly evil people.
I agree with you. However, I also believe that part of determining whether something is truly right and good requires looking beyond first-order effects and considering possible second-, third-, and fourth-order effects as well. For instance, a person might argue that providing the homeless with food, clothing, and shelter is right and good (and many churches and other organizations would agree)—but if doing so removes incentives for those people to provide for and better themselves, I question whether those actions are truly right and good.

In the same vein, even if deploying troops to American cities leads to a drastic reduction in crime, if those same troops are used by another party to facilitate a truly totalitarian, Orwellian state a few years later, was it truly right and good to deploy them in the first place—no matter how noble the original intent?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
This post was edited on 8/25/25 at 7:46 pm
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 5Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram