CDZ Have frustrated young Whites been bamboozled by BLM?

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
18,399
Reaction score
2,941
Points
215
What do you call.... redirecting some of the police funding? That's.... defunding.
I disagree. As I understand it, right now if you call 911 the operator has 2 choices, armed police officers or fire/EMT. If some money is re-directed from armed police to unarmed, community police, you give that 911 operator another option for someone just sleeping in his car. Is that defunding police or focusing policing? Might be good is every cop spend his first 5 years as an unarmed, community police force before they got their wings.
That's going to get people killed. Honestly, because I can think, just off the top of my head, of 3 times when police showed up to what should have been non-events... like someone is out in the car in the parking lot.... and it turned into a violent confrontation.

Now you are going to send unarmed people out? Yeah....

I think we're going to disagree on this... good luck with that. I know I'm not doing that for sure.

Some guy on PCP in his car at a Wendy's parking lot, and you want me to go check it out, with zero protection? hahahah.... yeah so I wonder who they intend to get to do that job.

Right now, if Zimmerman had not been armed, he would have been in the hospital with brain damage. So I get a call about a suspicious guy walking behind the condo buildings, and I have no protection at all... I'm going to get my face smashed in.

No. Not doing that. You are going to get people killed. Bad plan.

In fact, I just remembered this.... I worked at the homeless shelter, and they were asked why they had armed security, and the reason is because an unarmed guard asked a homeless person to not sleep on the steps, and the homeless guy pulled a knife and attacked the guard with it. Could have killed him. And guard couldn't do anything. He was unarmed. NO.... bad plan. Very bad plan.
If Zimmerman hadn't been armed he would have minded his own business and everyone would have simply went home that night.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,239
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia
What do you call.... redirecting some of the police funding? That's.... defunding.
I disagree. As I understand it, right now if you call 911 the operator has 2 choices, armed police officers or fire/EMT. If some money is re-directed from armed police to unarmed, community police, you give that 911 operator another option for someone just sleeping in his car. Is that defunding police or focusing policing? Might be good is every cop spend his first 5 years as an unarmed, community police force before they got their wings.
That's going to get people killed. Honestly, because I can think, just off the top of my head, of 3 times when police showed up to what should have been non-events... like someone is out in the car in the parking lot.... and it turned into a violent confrontation.

Now you are going to send unarmed people out? Yeah....

I think we're going to disagree on this... good luck with that. I know I'm not doing that for sure.

Some guy on PCP in his car at a Wendy's parking lot, and you want me to go check it out, with zero protection? hahahah.... yeah so I wonder who they intend to get to do that job.

Right now, if Zimmerman had not been armed, he would have been in the hospital with brain damage. So I get a call about a suspicious guy walking behind the condo buildings, and I have no protection at all... I'm going to get my face smashed in.

No. Not doing that. You are going to get people killed. Bad plan.

In fact, I just remembered this.... I worked at the homeless shelter, and they were asked why they had armed security, and the reason is because an unarmed guard asked a homeless person to not sleep on the steps, and the homeless guy pulled a knife and attacked the guard with it. Could have killed him. And guard couldn't do anything. He was unarmed. NO.... bad plan. Very bad plan.
Here's someone who might agree with me:
One such proposal, designed to "attract better personnel, to​
utilize them more effectively in controlling crime, and to gain​
greater understanding of community problems," suggested that​
police candidates enter departments at three levels of qualification,​
competence, responsibility, and pay: community service​
officer, police officer, and police agent. The community service​
officer would be essentially an apprentice working on the street​
under close supervision, unarmed and without full law enforcement​
authority. The police officer would carry out regular police functions,​
such as response to calls for service, routine​
patrol, traffic enforcement, and accident investigation. The​
police agent would handle the basic police tasks that are the​
most complicated, sensitive, and demanding. Under this​
scheme, an individual could enter the police department at any​
one of the three levels, depending upon prior education and​
experience, and could advance through the various levels and​
attain the position of police agent without having to compete for​
the limited number of supervisory positions available in a traditional​
hierarchy.I7 Thus, an officer who was good at street policing or​
investigation could continue performing those types of​
duties throughout his or her career without having to become an​
administrator​
Edwin Meese III (born December 2, 1931) is an American attorney, law professor, author and member of the Republican Party who served in official capacities within the Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Administration (1967–1974), the Reagan Presidential Transition Team (1980) and the Reagan White House (1981–1985), eventually rising to hold the position of the 75th United States Attorney General (1985–1988)
 

Andylusion

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
19,095
Reaction score
4,711
Points
290
Location
Central Ohio
What do you call.... redirecting some of the police funding? That's.... defunding.
I disagree. As I understand it, right now if you call 911 the operator has 2 choices, armed police officers or fire/EMT. If some money is re-directed from armed police to unarmed, community police, you give that 911 operator another option for someone just sleeping in his car. Is that defunding police or focusing policing? Might be good is every cop spend his first 5 years as an unarmed, community police force before they got their wings.
That's going to get people killed. Honestly, because I can think, just off the top of my head, of 3 times when police showed up to what should have been non-events... like someone is out in the car in the parking lot.... and it turned into a violent confrontation.

Now you are going to send unarmed people out? Yeah....

I think we're going to disagree on this... good luck with that. I know I'm not doing that for sure.

Some guy on PCP in his car at a Wendy's parking lot, and you want me to go check it out, with zero protection? hahahah.... yeah so I wonder who they intend to get to do that job.

Right now, if Zimmerman had not been armed, he would have been in the hospital with brain damage. So I get a call about a suspicious guy walking behind the condo buildings, and I have no protection at all... I'm going to get my face smashed in.

No. Not doing that. You are going to get people killed. Bad plan.

In fact, I just remembered this.... I worked at the homeless shelter, and they were asked why they had armed security, and the reason is because an unarmed guard asked a homeless person to not sleep on the steps, and the homeless guy pulled a knife and attacked the guard with it. Could have killed him. And guard couldn't do anything. He was unarmed. NO.... bad plan. Very bad plan.
Here's someone who might agree with me:
One such proposal, designed to "attract better personnel, to​
utilize them more effectively in controlling crime, and to gain​
greater understanding of community problems," suggested that​
police candidates enter departments at three levels of qualification,​
competence, responsibility, and pay: community service​
officer, police officer, and police agent. The community service​
officer would be essentially an apprentice working on the street​
under close supervision, unarmed and without full law enforcement​
authority. The police officer would carry out regular police functions,​
such as response to calls for service, routine​
patrol, traffic enforcement, and accident investigation. The​
police agent would handle the basic police tasks that are the​
most complicated, sensitive, and demanding. Under this​
scheme, an individual could enter the police department at any​
one of the three levels, depending upon prior education and​
experience, and could advance through the various levels and​
attain the position of police agent without having to compete for​
the limited number of supervisory positions available in a traditional​
hierarchy.I7 Thus, an officer who was good at street policing or​
investigation could continue performing those types of​
duties throughout his or her career without having to become an​
administrator​
Edwin Meese III (born December 2, 1931) is an American attorney, law professor, author and member of the Republican Party who served in official capacities within the Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Administration (1967–1974), the Reagan Presidential Transition Team (1980) and the Reagan White House (1981–1985), eventually rising to hold the position of the 75th United States Attorney General (1985–1988)
Again, that solves none of the problems I just mentioned. Of course stupid people always have brilliant ideas that suck. When Edwin Meese III, spends a month of his life walking around doing police work, without any arms or method of self protection... then I'll listen to his brilliant wisdom on this.

But to suggest others put their lives on the line, unarmed.... when they have never put their lives on the line for anything.....

Yeah, he's a brilliant idiot.

I watched 2 specific videos (and I've seen others), where two officers were confronted by a violent criminal. In one, the officer conducting their duty, had the gun pointed in their face. They grabbed at the gun causing the first shot to miss. While they were struggling over the gun, the other officer quickly moved around to a position where he wouldn't hit his partner, and shot the criminal.

Under the system you just outlined, the other officer would be unarmed. That criminal would have shot the officer they were fighting with, and then shot the completely unarmed and helpless "community service officer".

The second video was far worse. A criminal came up behind and officer trying to help a deaf man to find his way home. The criminal walked up behind the officer and pulled a gun, and killed the officer. The partner officer, which was on the other side of the patrol car, then drew his weapon and a fire fight ensued, where the officer was hit non-lethally, while the criminal was killed.

Under the system you just outlined, both officers would be killed.

You can list a million different ways you think having unarmed officers is a good idea.... they are all crap. You send out officers without weapons, they are going to get killed. And they are going to get their partners killed, by the way.

The moment you make that policy law, the criminals are going to know to kill the armed officer first, and then they can kill the unarmed one without worry.

No. No one I know at least is going to do this. No one. You tell people going to police academies across the country, that their first year or whatever on the job, they are going to walk around and patrol crime ridden neighborhoods without the ability to defend themselves.... everyone will drop out. You simply won't have any new recruits.

You might as well activate the national guard in every state, and have curfew and marshal law.
 

GHook20

Active Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
60
Reaction score
86
Points
33
Location
Las Vegas
Well, if so you have a psychopathic police officer to thank for that. One that should have been off the force long ago.
Now that that full body cam video was leaked, he was hardly a psychopathic or premeditated murderer. Rather he was an unsympathetic character to a neurotic large man that was high as a kite and resisting arrest.
 

Mytwocents

Active Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2020
Messages
156
Reaction score
118
Points
43
The Police kill twice as many White suspects annually as Black suspects.
So why aren't you twice as outraged?
Is police killing white people OK with you? BTW, police would have to kill 6 times as many whites as blacks to make the number equivalent.
How do you make the adjustment for the disproportionate number of crimes committed relative to whites?

Police are encountering a disproportionate number of contact with blacks so it would seem that might be the better measure. Deaths per police contact. Something like that.
I can't say I know much about this subject. That said, I have to ask, is there really a disproportionate number of crimes or is it like what Trump says about virus testing. If Blacks are stopped and searched by police more often than whites, which appears to be the case generally, more Black crime will be discovered. If they stopped whites at the same rate would more white crime be found?
Yeah, it's pretty well known. These numbers are from the 2014 FBI crime and statistics. It's pretty much the same every year though.

View attachment 369918
Pretty damning I must admit. I wonder if whites are being prosecuted with the same vigor as Blacks are? Are whites more likely to be offered a plea deal for a lesser charge than Blacks? I don't honestly know but I'd bet that is at least a part of the discrepancy in numbers.
Why don't you get arrested and find out? Good luck! ...oh, don't be biased...just be your average joe...just like the rest of everyone one else...dumbass...
 

Tumblin Tumbleweed

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
8,742
Reaction score
1,683
Points
170
I don't think it is a coincidence that Marxist transformers masquerading as Black Lives Matter were so successful recruiting young White people. You have more angst and uncertainty with unemployed, struggling young White people than at anytime in recent history. All it took was being cooped up for a couple months on lockdown and playing the George Floyd video 24/7 and suddenly they had a whole generation of recruits looking to vent.
Oh, what a load of garbage. And as to your OP title? Even more garbage.

It isn't the youth that is bamboozled by BLM. It is you, and the rest of the older generations. Young people in this country will *always* tend to be more liberal and more active in movements with the intention of bringing about societal change. Some of those people are going to turn out to be opportunistic dirtbags, just like in the 60s. This is simply you and your entitled brood of extremist political cult members voicing how much you can't stand it because it brings your sense of morality, entitlement and comfort level crashing to the ground, exposing your hipocrisy to the light. Due to this, you rat people have devolved into using the same methods of those you claim to detest without an ounce of irony. So, good. Boo Hoo. The perpetual outrage from stupid Americans in this country is quite delicious.

You and your caustic Cult45 identity politics don't deserve to be taken seriously about anything, especially when railing about societal issues you know nothing about, so I already know I'm wasting my breath with you political zombies. In short, You aren't qualified. Actually, you see to it that you are completely out of touch on purpose. Whatever talk radio trough of nonsense you choose to drink from is even more tainted than the establishment trough of information you idiots complain about, making you exactly like them. This is the nonsense you sell to your tribe. You will deny this because denial is where you've chosen to live for the last 3+ years with your sickening and traitorous behavior.

Cult45 has whittled away all tangible values they've ever claimed to have down to two things: the worship of fame and money. If you cared about a higher power like you claim, you would have empathy and try to be better human beings. That's off the table. If you cared about the economy, you would decry our ever growing debt a vote for fiscally responsible candidates. Cult45's creedo seems to be a cartoonish willingness to return society to a 50s like nostalgia that never existed by using identity politics. You are giving away your vote to fantasy, not policy. You have been taught to gaslight and project. You promote bigotry, not equality. Rights are only important to you if they are for the 'right' people. You want to pretend this country doesn't have serious class and race problems, and by doing so you sew division and complain about everyone hating you. Many of you are full of it and have become a bit much for some to take.

The regressive left simply have no idea what they want. I'm sure their caustic ideologies were rooted in fact once upon a time, but they drove off of that freeway a long time ago. I can admit I believe Black Lives Matter is a terribly divisively chosen name for a movement supposedly demanding racial equality, and also believe the martyrs for their movements aren't all saints either. Now they are suddenly the new self proclaimed arbiters of morality and inclusiveness and really bad PR is their biggest export (see: Antifa, Occupy, etc.). But that is not the point. It never was the point. You used to be liberals, the architects of peaceful protest. Now propaganda, hypocrisy, destruction and violence are tools of your trade to be ignored instead of derided. Any actual policies you once decreed have taken a backseat to identity politics.

The regressive left, like Cult45, have whittled away all tangible values they've ever claimed to have down to two things: the worship of fame and money. You've effectively banished common sense. You've taken personal accountability to cartoonish levels with your constant barrage of political correctness. No one can rationally measure up. Even the poster child of political correctness, Ellen Degeneres, is becoming a casualty of your wars on culture. Think about that. One of the most famous and revered lesbian pro feminist talk show host no longer even makes the cut in your visions of utopia because it might turn out she's an elitist jerk in her personal life. Also, like Cult45, many of you are full of it and have become a bit much for some to take.

You all can have each other. I'm done tolerating stupid political extremists claiming to be something they're clearly not (Americans).

I've got damn good reasons for rejecting the Orange clown. Biden could be a fern in a flower pot and I would still vote for him over the impeached criminal and traitor occupying our country. The only thing these last four years have proven to me is that America is not great. America is a festering, open wound of the corrupt with class, racial, religious, political, gender and healthcare inequality that we refuse to recognize and/or treat as a collective. The democratic experiment has failed. We will never be great when we despise each other.
 

wamose

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
5,461
Reaction score
3,874
Points
2,015
Location
Pennsylvania
100 times the amount of people who die senselessly at the hands of bad police will die because of lack of policing. What result makes you feel better?
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
18,399
Reaction score
2,941
Points
215
Well, if so you have a psychopathic police officer to thank for that. One that should have been off the force long ago.
Now that that full body cam video was leaked, he was hardly a psychopathic or premeditated murderer. Rather he was an unsympathetic character to a neurotic large man that was high as a kite and resisting arrest.
You can't do what he did even if Floyd had been a mass murderer.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,239
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia
What do you call.... redirecting some of the police funding? That's.... defunding.
I disagree. As I understand it, right now if you call 911 the operator has 2 choices, armed police officers or fire/EMT. If some money is re-directed from armed police to unarmed, community police, you give that 911 operator another option for someone just sleeping in his car. Is that defunding police or focusing policing? Might be good is every cop spend his first 5 years as an unarmed, community police force before they got their wings.
That's going to get people killed. Honestly, because I can think, just off the top of my head, of 3 times when police showed up to what should have been non-events... like someone is out in the car in the parking lot.... and it turned into a violent confrontation.

Now you are going to send unarmed people out? Yeah....

I think we're going to disagree on this... good luck with that. I know I'm not doing that for sure.

Some guy on PCP in his car at a Wendy's parking lot, and you want me to go check it out, with zero protection? hahahah.... yeah so I wonder who they intend to get to do that job.

Right now, if Zimmerman had not been armed, he would have been in the hospital with brain damage. So I get a call about a suspicious guy walking behind the condo buildings, and I have no protection at all... I'm going to get my face smashed in.

No. Not doing that. You are going to get people killed. Bad plan.

In fact, I just remembered this.... I worked at the homeless shelter, and they were asked why they had armed security, and the reason is because an unarmed guard asked a homeless person to not sleep on the steps, and the homeless guy pulled a knife and attacked the guard with it. Could have killed him. And guard couldn't do anything. He was unarmed. NO.... bad plan. Very bad plan.
Here's someone who might agree with me:
One such proposal, designed to "attract better personnel, to​
utilize them more effectively in controlling crime, and to gain​
greater understanding of community problems," suggested that​
police candidates enter departments at three levels of qualification,​
competence, responsibility, and pay: community service​
officer, police officer, and police agent. The community service​
officer would be essentially an apprentice working on the street​
under close supervision, unarmed and without full law enforcement​
authority. The police officer would carry out regular police functions,​
such as response to calls for service, routine​
patrol, traffic enforcement, and accident investigation. The​
police agent would handle the basic police tasks that are the​
most complicated, sensitive, and demanding. Under this​
scheme, an individual could enter the police department at any​
one of the three levels, depending upon prior education and​
experience, and could advance through the various levels and​
attain the position of police agent without having to compete for​
the limited number of supervisory positions available in a traditional​
hierarchy.I7 Thus, an officer who was good at street policing or​
investigation could continue performing those types of​
duties throughout his or her career without having to become an​
administrator​
Edwin Meese III (born December 2, 1931) is an American attorney, law professor, author and member of the Republican Party who served in official capacities within the Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Administration (1967–1974), the Reagan Presidential Transition Team (1980) and the Reagan White House (1981–1985), eventually rising to hold the position of the 75th United States Attorney General (1985–1988)
Again, that solves none of the problems I just mentioned. Of course stupid people always have brilliant ideas that suck. When Edwin Meese III, spends a month of his life walking around doing police work, without any arms or method of self protection... then I'll listen to his brilliant wisdom on this.

But to suggest others put their lives on the line, unarmed.... when they have never put their lives on the line for anything.....

Yeah, he's a brilliant idiot.

I watched 2 specific videos (and I've seen others), where two officers were confronted by a violent criminal. In one, the officer conducting their duty, had the gun pointed in their face. They grabbed at the gun causing the first shot to miss. While they were struggling over the gun, the other officer quickly moved around to a position where he wouldn't hit his partner, and shot the criminal.

Under the system you just outlined, the other officer would be unarmed. That criminal would have shot the officer they were fighting with, and then shot the completely unarmed and helpless "community service officer".

The second video was far worse. A criminal came up behind and officer trying to help a deaf man to find his way home. The criminal walked up behind the officer and pulled a gun, and killed the officer. The partner officer, which was on the other side of the patrol car, then drew his weapon and a fire fight ensued, where the officer was hit non-lethally, while the criminal was killed.

Under the system you just outlined, both officers would be killed.

You can list a million different ways you think having unarmed officers is a good idea.... they are all crap. You send out officers without weapons, they are going to get killed. And they are going to get their partners killed, by the way.

The moment you make that policy law, the criminals are going to know to kill the armed officer first, and then they can kill the unarmed one without worry.

No. No one I know at least is going to do this. No one. You tell people going to police academies across the country, that their first year or whatever on the job, they are going to walk around and patrol crime ridden neighborhoods without the ability to defend themselves.... everyone will drop out. You simply won't have any new recruits.

You might as well activate the national guard in every state, and have curfew and marshal law.
There are a range of options.

What the U.S. Can Learn From 19 Countries Where Cops Don't Carry Guns
Better Training
In many countries where police are unarmed, governments invest in advanced level of training for law enforcement. In Norway, for example, policing is an elite occupation, where only the most qualified candidates are selected. In 2015, only 14% of candidates who applied to police schools were accepted.​
Once admitted, prospective officers receive more extensive training than officers in the United States. Norwegian student officers must complete a three-year bachelor’s degree where they spend one year studying society and ethics, another shadowing officers, and a final year focusing on investigations and completing a thesis (In the United States, officers spend only on average 21 weeks in training which are modelled on military bootcamps).​
“I think that the United States must learn that it takes time to educate people,” says Rune Glomseth, a professor at Norweigan police university college. “Police are a very special role in society and you can’t just train them for a few weeks. You need time.” Even once students have graduated, they are required to complete fifty hours of operational training per year. “If our officers were trained as extensively as police in Norway, they would be less reliant on deadly force,” says Hirschfield.​
Officers in both Norway and Finland also work in tandem with medical professionals, particularly psychiatric specialists that accompany officers when dealing with people who are exhibiting signs of mental illness. In contrast, funding for psychiatric services in the United States has been cut in recent years, resulting in police officers handling cases of people who are mentally ill often without having the background knowledge to do so. The result is striking: A Washington Post analysis found that 25% of people shot by police officers during a six months period in 2015 were experiencing severe mental health issues.​
The greatest skill a police officer can have is “critical reflection,” says Oddsson. “We need people [on the streets] who are cognizant of the fact that being a police officer is like being a social worker.”​
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,239
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia
The Police kill twice as many White suspects annually as Black suspects.
So why aren't you twice as outraged?
Is police killing white people OK with you? BTW, police would have to kill 6 times as many whites as blacks to make the number equivalent.
How do you make the adjustment for the disproportionate number of crimes committed relative to whites?

Police are encountering a disproportionate number of contact with blacks so it would seem that might be the better measure. Deaths per police contact. Something like that.
I can't say I know much about this subject. That said, I have to ask, is there really a disproportionate number of crimes or is it like what Trump says about virus testing. If Blacks are stopped and searched by police more often than whites, which appears to be the case generally, more Black crime will be discovered. If they stopped whites at the same rate would more white crime be found?
Yeah, it's pretty well known. These numbers are from the 2014 FBI crime and statistics. It's pretty much the same every year though.

View attachment 369918
Pretty damning I must admit. I wonder if whites are being prosecuted with the same vigor as Blacks are? Are whites more likely to be offered a plea deal for a lesser charge than Blacks? I don't honestly know but I'd bet that is at least a part of the discrepancy in numbers.
Why don't you get arrested and find out? Good luck! ...oh, don't be biased...just be your average joe...just like the rest of everyone one else...dumbass...
An anecdote is your answer? I guess you don't like numbers.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,239
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia
100 times the amount of people who die senselessly at the hands of bad police will die because of lack of policing. What result makes you feel better?
Actually the number is 10 times.
 

wamose

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
5,461
Reaction score
3,874
Points
2,015
Location
Pennsylvania
100 times the amount of people who die senselessly at the hands of bad police will die because of lack of policing. What result makes you feel better?
Actually the number is 10 times.
Actually you have no way of knowing that. I was just estimating 100 times as a theory. In reality, it's probably much higher.
 

Redcurtain

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
1,282
Points
1,893
Walk away campaign is getting millions of people a day. I’d say they are waking up
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,239
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia
100 times the amount of people who die senselessly at the hands of bad police will die because of lack of policing. What result makes you feel better?
Actually the number is 10 times.
Actually you have no way of knowing that. I was just estimating 100 times as a theory. In reality, it's probably much higher.
About 11,000 people are shot and killed every year, the police kill an average of 1,000 people. You do the math.
 

wamose

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
5,461
Reaction score
3,874
Points
2,015
Location
Pennsylvania
100 times the amount of people who die senselessly at the hands of bad police will die because of lack of policing. What result makes you feel better?
Actually the number is 10 times.
Actually you have no way of knowing that. I was just estimating 100 times as a theory. In reality, it's probably much higher.
About 11,000 people are shot and killed every year, the police kill an average of 1,000 people. You do the math.
You forgot the senseless part. I'd say that the great majority of that 1000 was far from senseless. Let's be generous and say 100 were senseless. And if 11000 people were shot last year, they're saying that since this anti policeman movement, the figure is up by 70%. Let's say that comes to 18700. That comes to 187 times as many.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,239
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia
100 times the amount of people who die senselessly at the hands of bad police will die because of lack of policing. What result makes you feel better?
Actually the number is 10 times.
Actually you have no way of knowing that. I was just estimating 100 times as a theory. In reality, it's probably much higher.
About 11,000 people are shot and killed every year, the police kill an average of 1,000 people. You do the math.
You forgot the senseless part. I'd say that the great majority of that 1000 was far from senseless. Let's be generous and say 100 were senseless. And if 11000 people were shot last year, they're saying that since this anti policeman movement, the figure is up by 70%. Let's say that comes to 18700. That comes to 187 times as many.
They are all senseless. Some are understandable given the circumstances but none of them made 'sense'.
 

Andylusion

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
19,095
Reaction score
4,711
Points
290
Location
Central Ohio
What do you call.... redirecting some of the police funding? That's.... defunding.
I disagree. As I understand it, right now if you call 911 the operator has 2 choices, armed police officers or fire/EMT. If some money is re-directed from armed police to unarmed, community police, you give that 911 operator another option for someone just sleeping in his car. Is that defunding police or focusing policing? Might be good is every cop spend his first 5 years as an unarmed, community police force before they got their wings.
That's going to get people killed. Honestly, because I can think, just off the top of my head, of 3 times when police showed up to what should have been non-events... like someone is out in the car in the parking lot.... and it turned into a violent confrontation.

Now you are going to send unarmed people out? Yeah....

I think we're going to disagree on this... good luck with that. I know I'm not doing that for sure.

Some guy on PCP in his car at a Wendy's parking lot, and you want me to go check it out, with zero protection? hahahah.... yeah so I wonder who they intend to get to do that job.

Right now, if Zimmerman had not been armed, he would have been in the hospital with brain damage. So I get a call about a suspicious guy walking behind the condo buildings, and I have no protection at all... I'm going to get my face smashed in.

No. Not doing that. You are going to get people killed. Bad plan.

In fact, I just remembered this.... I worked at the homeless shelter, and they were asked why they had armed security, and the reason is because an unarmed guard asked a homeless person to not sleep on the steps, and the homeless guy pulled a knife and attacked the guard with it. Could have killed him. And guard couldn't do anything. He was unarmed. NO.... bad plan. Very bad plan.
Here's someone who might agree with me:
One such proposal, designed to "attract better personnel, to​
utilize them more effectively in controlling crime, and to gain​
greater understanding of community problems," suggested that​
police candidates enter departments at three levels of qualification,​
competence, responsibility, and pay: community service​
officer, police officer, and police agent. The community service​
officer would be essentially an apprentice working on the street​
under close supervision, unarmed and without full law enforcement​
authority. The police officer would carry out regular police functions,​
such as response to calls for service, routine​
patrol, traffic enforcement, and accident investigation. The​
police agent would handle the basic police tasks that are the​
most complicated, sensitive, and demanding. Under this​
scheme, an individual could enter the police department at any​
one of the three levels, depending upon prior education and​
experience, and could advance through the various levels and​
attain the position of police agent without having to compete for​
the limited number of supervisory positions available in a traditional​
hierarchy.I7 Thus, an officer who was good at street policing or​
investigation could continue performing those types of​
duties throughout his or her career without having to become an​
administrator​
Edwin Meese III (born December 2, 1931) is an American attorney, law professor, author and member of the Republican Party who served in official capacities within the Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Administration (1967–1974), the Reagan Presidential Transition Team (1980) and the Reagan White House (1981–1985), eventually rising to hold the position of the 75th United States Attorney General (1985–1988)
Again, that solves none of the problems I just mentioned. Of course stupid people always have brilliant ideas that suck. When Edwin Meese III, spends a month of his life walking around doing police work, without any arms or method of self protection... then I'll listen to his brilliant wisdom on this.

But to suggest others put their lives on the line, unarmed.... when they have never put their lives on the line for anything.....

Yeah, he's a brilliant idiot.

I watched 2 specific videos (and I've seen others), where two officers were confronted by a violent criminal. In one, the officer conducting their duty, had the gun pointed in their face. They grabbed at the gun causing the first shot to miss. While they were struggling over the gun, the other officer quickly moved around to a position where he wouldn't hit his partner, and shot the criminal.

Under the system you just outlined, the other officer would be unarmed. That criminal would have shot the officer they were fighting with, and then shot the completely unarmed and helpless "community service officer".

The second video was far worse. A criminal came up behind and officer trying to help a deaf man to find his way home. The criminal walked up behind the officer and pulled a gun, and killed the officer. The partner officer, which was on the other side of the patrol car, then drew his weapon and a fire fight ensued, where the officer was hit non-lethally, while the criminal was killed.

Under the system you just outlined, both officers would be killed.

You can list a million different ways you think having unarmed officers is a good idea.... they are all crap. You send out officers without weapons, they are going to get killed. And they are going to get their partners killed, by the way.

The moment you make that policy law, the criminals are going to know to kill the armed officer first, and then they can kill the unarmed one without worry.

No. No one I know at least is going to do this. No one. You tell people going to police academies across the country, that their first year or whatever on the job, they are going to walk around and patrol crime ridden neighborhoods without the ability to defend themselves.... everyone will drop out. You simply won't have any new recruits.

You might as well activate the national guard in every state, and have curfew and marshal law.
There are a range of options.

What the U.S. Can Learn From 19 Countries Where Cops Don't Carry Guns
Better Training
In many countries where police are unarmed, governments invest in advanced level of training for law enforcement. In Norway, for example, policing is an elite occupation, where only the most qualified candidates are selected. In 2015, only 14% of candidates who applied to police schools were accepted.​
Once admitted, prospective officers receive more extensive training than officers in the United States. Norwegian student officers must complete a three-year bachelor’s degree where they spend one year studying society and ethics, another shadowing officers, and a final year focusing on investigations and completing a thesis (In the United States, officers spend only on average 21 weeks in training which are modelled on military bootcamps).​
“I think that the United States must learn that it takes time to educate people,” says Rune Glomseth, a professor at Norweigan police university college. “Police are a very special role in society and you can’t just train them for a few weeks. You need time.” Even once students have graduated, they are required to complete fifty hours of operational training per year. “If our officers were trained as extensively as police in Norway, they would be less reliant on deadly force,” says Hirschfield.​
Officers in both Norway and Finland also work in tandem with medical professionals, particularly psychiatric specialists that accompany officers when dealing with people who are exhibiting signs of mental illness. In contrast, funding for psychiatric services in the United States has been cut in recent years, resulting in police officers handling cases of people who are mentally ill often without having the background knowledge to do so. The result is striking: A Washington Post analysis found that 25% of people shot by police officers during a six months period in 2015 were experiencing severe mental health issues.​
The greatest skill a police officer can have is “critical reflection,” says Oddsson. “We need people [on the streets] who are cognizant of the fact that being a police officer is like being a social worker.”​
So much miss-information here.

In Norway, for example, policing is an elite occupation, where only the most qualified candidates are selected. In 2015, only 14% of candidates who applied to police schools were accepted.

YES..... because in Norway, the public respects and appreciates, and honors police officers. The reason our police forces are accepting anyone... is because hardly anyone is applying. When you have 20 open positions, and only 13 people even show up at the Police Academy, you take every single person you can get, even if they are not all that great.

Haverhill Police Chief Alan DeNaro said even with his city’s 13 recruits the department will still fall seven officers short of the 20 positions it needs to fill to be a full staff. And that’s if all 13 recruits make it through the process.​


If you want to make police into an elite profession, where you pick the best people... you have actually treat police with enough respect and honor, that people want to do that job. Throwing them in prison, for doing exactly what they are taught to do, isn't going to get you there, I promise.

Once admitted, prospective officers receive more extensive training than officers in the United States. Norwegian student officers must complete a three-year bachelor’s degree where they spend one year studying society and ethics, another shadowing officers, and a final year focusing on investigations and completing a thesis (In the United States, officers spend only on average 21 weeks in training which are modelled on military bootcamps).

BULL CRAP. Ignorant people in the media spouting nonsense for internet parrots to repeat.


About one third (30.2 percent) of police officers in the United States have a four-year college degree. A little more than half (51.8 percent) have a two-year degree, while 5.4 percent have a graduate degree.​

That means that 87.4 of all police officers have degrees. Almost 1/3rd have 4 years degrees. Plus, many have in-service training, in addition to the 6 months of police academy training.

So, the vast majority of all officers, have degrees, and years of training.

Now you might point out that not all officers do. You want to fix that? Goes back to the problem above. Treat officers with respect, honor, decency, and make it a desirable job.

When you have 50 applicants, for 20 positions, instead of only 13... you can pick the more qualified officers. That's the solution.

As a side note about "military bootcamp style" training. You (or the idiotic author of the article you cited) are acting as if this is bad.

This is a good thing. This is why when the police departments are in charge of the training, they go for boot camp style training, over stress-free training that governments prefer. Because it results in a better officer.

Think about. You put an officer, that has never been trained to deal with stress, hand them a firearm, and put them in a stressful situation. Brilliant move.

Why do you think the military puts recruits in a very stressful boot camp situations? Because you don't want them freaking out, shooting their fellow soldiers, or having a melt down, and shooting a bunch of civilians.

Yeah... kind of like what we don't want police officers doing. If it were up to me, EVERY police academy would be a boot-camp style training system.

Officers in both Norway and Finland also work in tandem with medical professionals, particularly psychiatric specialists that accompany officers when dealing with people who are exhibiting signs of mental illness.

Great. Have all these local and state governments, cut spending on welfare and food stamps, and instead focus the money on psychiatric care.

But this is a red herring. The vast majority of police shootings are not mental patients. They are criminals. Brown was a criminal. Floyd was a criminal.

The problem that spawned this discussion, was not the millions of mental patients being shot by police.

And additionally, I find it ridiculous to make comparisons between armed and unarmed police, from countries that have an entirely different criminal makeup. Norway doesn't have the kind of violent criminals we do. Comparing the two, is ridiculous.

It's like suggesting that if you simply disarm the police, then criminals will all put their guns away. Well if that worked, then why hasn't every city where the police have virtually disappeared, had a sharp drop in crime?

You take an unarmed police officer from Norway, and put them in the US, and they are going to get killed.
 

Andylusion

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
19,095
Reaction score
4,711
Points
290
Location
Central Ohio
100 times the amount of people who die senselessly at the hands of bad police will die because of lack of policing. What result makes you feel better?
Actually the number is 10 times.
Actually you have no way of knowing that. I was just estimating 100 times as a theory. In reality, it's probably much higher.
About 11,000 people are shot and killed every year, the police kill an average of 1,000 people. You do the math.
Two problems. The vast vast majority of those 1,000 people, deserved it. They attacked an officer, and got killed.

Whereas, the 11,000 people you mentioned, I wager were not engaged in a crime, when they were killed.

So you are comparing criminals getting shot, to innocent people getting shot, and suggesting that there is a trade off... no there isn't.

Moreover, you are acting like the reduction in policing is only going to affect shootings. All murders will increase. Last year we had 15,500 murders. If you don't have active and effective law enforcement, stabbings will go up....


beating to death will go up


strangling to death will go up


What is it with you idiots on the left-wing, that the only deaths that matter are gun deaths? Are you people morons?

You are trading a thousand justified shootings, for tens of thousands of innocents murdered.

That is the bottom line. And by the way, that is why we on the right-wing are flat out better than you.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top