OT Black Man In Minnesota Dies After Cop Kneels On His Neck/ Portland Riots (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
noknobs said:
Can someone please explain to me how there's a movement to "defund the police"? Is this Russia again? Because I can't for the life of me understand how one can both have the mental capacity to say "defund" yet also think law enforcement isn't a necessity in any civilized society. Where am I? What is happening?
Click to expand...
I think its a few things. There are certainly anarchists that would just rather have no laws or law enforcement. I think thats a minority (maybe not).
I think what many are saying is police budgets are excessive, and that money could be going towards better social programs to help urban communities, which could in turn make it so less police are needed.
Then there is what some would call police reform, which is re-evaluate what the police departments are doing, make their “reach” less, give them power of less situations.

Its strange to read people’s social media from like a month ago begging for basically a police state and people to not be allowed outside due to covid and literal posts about police should be forcing people to stay inside. To now some of the same people are saying we shouldnt have police.

Its an interesting situation...
 
I'm on my laptop. Doesn't on my phone either.
 
noknobs said:
Can someone please explain to me how there's a movement to "defund the police"? Is this Russia again? Because I can't for the life of me understand how one can both have the mental capacity to say "defund" yet also think law enforcement isn't a necessity in any civilized society. Where am I? What is happening?
Click to expand...

I'll try although I'm suspicious of your approach

what reform movements are running up against, and reform movements are broad and far reaching, is the entrenched obstinate power of the police, their unions, and the systems. Police have immunity protections nobody else has. And a policemen on trial is afforded legal protections nobody else has. Even bad cops are extremely hard to weed out of lots of police departments

the problem is we have gone down the road of putting the police above the law for too long. They are too protected from scrutiny and too sheltered from oversight. The laws are warped in their favor and so is the system

and police almost never cooperate with even common sense reforms.

It's a fucking impasse, and the pile of black corpses just keeps getting bigger. People are pissed off, and rather than beat their heads against the blue stone wall for years and years, some are thinking it would be easier just to dismantle the walls and start over. To go back to the idea of "serve and protect" and abandon the mindset of "light em up"

for instance, if the Minneapolis police department continues to be unresponsive to the city government, and the police there have been beyond unresponsive, then why should the city keep paying the salaries of the unresponsive police?

I think it's probably too simplistic a solution, but for damn sure, the police seem way too insulated and powerful collectively. And thses protests have shown the brutality of many police departments and the disdain they have for the people they serve
 
noknobs said:
Can someone please explain to me how there's a movement to "defund the police"? Is this Russia again? Because I can't for the life of me understand how one can both have the mental capacity to say "defund" yet also think law enforcement isn't a necessity in any civilized society. Where am I? What is happening?
Click to expand...

That's not what defunding is.

This does a pretty good job of explaining it.

 
by the way, all the 'opposition' and criticism of the police isn't happening in a vacuum.

not only are there dozens of video of police brutality, not to mention trump's fucking photo op...

now, Minnesota cops have admitted to massive vandalism in a tire-slashing orgy they engaged in:

https://www.motherjones.com/anti-ra...lashing-car-tires-at-protests-in-minneapolis/

https://www.startribune.com/officer...parked-during-mpls-protests-unrest/571105692/

the police have done more damage the last couple of weeks than antifa
 
Some police are necessary, but this is part of the "defund" argument:

lfz95Ao.jpg


Like anything else, we have to ask whether we're putting too much into something, whether that money could be more productively used elsewhere and whether we're trying to solve the wrong things when we spend this money.
 
White House press secretary, a former internet troll who was too whackadoo for Fox, was asked about Romney joining Black Lives Matter march. She said Trump got 8 percent of black votes and Romney 2 percent.

Romney got 6 percent running against President Obama.

And the fact that 92 percent of black voters opposed your candidate is not a lot to boast about.
 
reportedly, Barr was actually told the protests were peaceful before he gave the order to attack and clear them out:

"A member of the National Guard directly informed Attorney General William Barr that anti-racist protesters were peaceful as Barr launched a violent police action against them before President Donald Trump walked to a church to pose with a Bible for a photo-op, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said Monday.

“The D.C. National Guard member spoke to Attorney General Barr, who was in charge, and explained that the crowd was peaceful — but troops from federal agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Prisons, remained,” said a statement Sunday from the delegate’s office.

Norton shielded the identity of the National Guard officer, whom she personally talked to, because he was not authorized to speak for the Guard, she told HuffPost on Monday. He had reached out to her office to recount the events of that evening, she said."

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bill...anor-holmes-norton_n_5edec67dc5b601aa32429385
******************************

now, I suppose the guardsman could be lying; and it might be the the delegate could be lying

but the evidence is that Barr is almost as big a liar as trump, so my bet would be he is the one lying. And that's supported by just about every reporter and witness of those protests saying they were peaceful.

All for a photo-op for putin's sock puppet
 
wizenheimer said:
reportedly, Barr was actually told the protests were peaceful before he gave the order to attack and clear them out:

"A member of the National Guard directly informed Attorney General William Barr that anti-racist protesters were peaceful as Barr launched a violent police action against them before President Donald Trump walked to a church to pose with a Bible for a photo-op, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said Monday.

“The D.C. National Guard member spoke to Attorney General Barr, who was in charge, and explained that the crowd was peaceful — but troops from federal agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Prisons, remained,” said a statement Sunday from the delegate’s office.

Norton shielded the identity of the National Guard officer, whom she personally talked to, because he was not authorized to speak for the Guard, she told HuffPost on Monday. He had reached out to her office to recount the events of that evening, she said."

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bill...anor-holmes-norton_n_5edec67dc5b601aa32429385
******************************

now, I suppose the guardsman could be lying; and it might be the the delegate could be lying

but the evidence is that Barr is almost as big a liar as trump, so my bet would be he is the one lying. And that's supported by just about every reporter and witness of those protests saying they were peaceful.

All for a photo-op for putin's sock puppet
Click to expand...

They gotta get rid of that whistle blower!

Get that [whisper mode] son of a bitch [/whisper mode] in jail!
 
Shaboid said:
Which one?



That one made me question reality. He is quoting a "news" network that got this rating:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/one-america-news-network/
Click to expand...

that's the one. ugh. I read that the man who was bleeding thru his ear is actually receiving treatment for prostate cancer. Ya, make him the face of your so called terrorism. Fucking idiot. I can't wait to see Trump suffer. Put him in jail, starve him, and let him die like the monster he is.

Can't wait for our resident right wing nuts to blindly defend this one. Maybe they'll just ignore it like they do the other shit they don't have the balls to call out

Rinse and fucking repeat.
 
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
reportedly, Barr was actually told the protests were peaceful before he gave the order to attack and clear them out:

"A member of the National Guard directly informed Attorney General William Barr that anti-racist protesters were peaceful as Barr launched a violent police action against them before President Donald Trump walked to a church to pose with a Bible for a photo-op, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said Monday.

“The D.C. National Guard member spoke to Attorney General Barr, who was in charge, and explained that the crowd was peaceful — but troops from federal agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Prisons, remained,” said a statement Sunday from the delegate’s office.

Norton shielded the identity of the National Guard officer, whom she personally talked to, because he was not authorized to speak for the Guard, she told HuffPost on Monday. He had reached out to her office to recount the events of that evening, she said."

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bill...anor-holmes-norton_n_5edec67dc5b601aa32429385
******************************

now, I suppose the guardsman could be lying; and it might be the the delegate could be lying

but the evidence is that Barr is almost as big a liar as trump, so my bet would be he is the one lying. And that's supported by just about every reporter and witness of those protests saying they were peaceful.

All for a photo-op for putin's sock puppet
Click to expand...
I feel I should use the same fact check process for this, as I did Trump's tweet tagging the One American News Network.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/huffington-post/

Trump/Barr are obviously wrong and lying about this situation. My point is that the media does have some blame in this entire thing. Police, lobbyists, government officials, and all of America too. BLM.
 
wizenheimer said:
I'll try although I'm suspicious of your approach

what reform movements are running up against, and reform movements are broad and far reaching, is the entrenched obstinate power of the police, their unions, and the systems. Police have immunity protections nobody else has. And a policemen on trial is afforded legal protections nobody else has. Even bad cops are extremely hard to weed out of lots of police departments

the problem is we have gone down the road of putting the police above the law for too long. They are too protected from scrutiny and too sheltered from oversight. The laws are warped in their favor and so is the system

and police almost never cooperate with even common sense reforms.

It's a fucking impasse, and the pile of black corpses just keeps getting bigger. People are pissed off, and rather than beat their heads against the blue stone wall for years and years, some are thinking it would be easier just to dismantle the walls and start over. To go back to the idea of "serve and protect" and abandon the mindset of "light em up"

for instance, if the Minneapolis police department continues to be unresponsive to the city government, and the police there have been beyond unresponsive, then why should the city keep paying the salaries of the unresponsive police?

I think it's probably too simplistic a solution, but for damn sure, the police seem way too insulated and powerful collectively. And thses protests have shown the brutality of many police departments and the disdain they have for the people they serve
Click to expand...
Thanks for the explanation, although I don't know why you're suspicious of me...?

What most people want is the partial reallocation of funds and major reform. That actually makes sense. The actual defunding/dismantling of the police force and starting over from scratch seems ridiculous for a variety of reasons.
 
Shaboid said:
I feel I should use the same fact check process for this, as I did Trump's tweet tagging the One American News Network.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/huffington-post/

Trump/Barr are obviously wrong and lying about this situation. My point is that the media does have some blame in this entire thing. Police, lobbyists, government officials, and all of America too. BLM.
Click to expand...

obviously, 'huffington post' is heavily left. I've prefaced that several times when posting links from there

by the way, there was no fact check to the article I posted. Just assigning some arbitrary position on an arbitrary left-wing-to-right-wing scale is not a fact check. As I said, that article might have some things wrong, but I haven't seen anything confirmed as wrong yet
 
noknobs said:
The actual defunding/dismantling of the police force and starting over from scratch seems ridiculous for a variety of reasons.
Click to expand...

You make sense if the police unions were not as powerful as they are, until there is a federal law that removes some of the police immunity and curtail their power - that might be the only reasonable way for cities towns to get to these reforms...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top