We need to defund the police.

We spend way too much money on law enforcement, money that could be used for more productive things, like education. Of course, to accomplish this people will have to stop committing crimes so law enforcement budgets can be reduced. Are any out there on board with this?

I make this commitment here and now, that I will refrain from committing any more crimes. :up:
I've never committed a crime. But I'm sure I'm an "insurrectionist".

At least I don't cover for a stolen election
 
Cool, I'm all for well-behaved, armed citizens. Sounds like 'Murica to me. :113:

It’s interesting isn’t it? The Old West would appear to some to be your dream. Everyone armed. Little or no law enforcement. Yet the first thing the boomtowns did was get lawmen to establish some order. And then those boomtowns banned the carrying of guns. Then the towns became more along the lines of well behaved and peaceful.
 
It’s interesting isn’t it? The Old West would appear to some to be your dream. Everyone armed. Little or no law enforcement. Yet the first thing the boomtowns did was get lawmen to establish some order. And then those boomtowns banned the carrying of guns. Then the towns became more along the lines of well behaved and peaceful.


No, they didn't. Guns were rarely regulated in the west, mainly because no one would pay attention to such an asinine law.
 
The ABUSE of qualified immunity is what needs to stop ...

If the City passes an ordinance, and the officer enforces that ordinance, and the ordinance is later found to be unconstitutional and unenforceable ... should the officer's private property be at risk in a civil case, or should only the City's assets be at risk ...

That's different than the Police Chief ordering his cocaine be unloaded ... and cash payments to the officers ... like that time in Key West ... the officers have to pay that money back ...

I think if the government, herself, is liable ... then only she should have to pay ... and the employee exercised "reasonable prudence" unless we can prove otherwise ... taking some Middle Class bloke's home is a terrible way to get revenge on your government ...
I understand your point, but must disagree.

QI is a fantasy concocted by Earl Warren in 1967, and does nothing except expand a police state.

Cops are supposed to know the law and understand the role of police officers as PEACE officers. When they cross that line they should be prosecuted or sued, depending upon the circumstances of each case.

Blanket immunity for errant police officers is a grave mistake, and time since 1967 has clearly shown that.
 
And then those boomtowns banned the carrying of guns.

Not in the Old West, USA ... we still have our guns and small police forces aren't impossible ... just police have to focus on murders, rapes, arson and drunk driving ... neighborhoods have to solve their own petty disputes without police interference ...

I was shocked to learn one needs a license in Georgia to pack a handgun on the hip ... shocked I say ... that's not America, that's the Soviet Union ... no wonder your elections are rigged ... and what did you do with Putin's Electors? ...
 
Ironically it is the police that are the only ones in the whole criminal justice system that are actually doing the job they were hired to do.
 
Ironically it is the police that are the only ones in the whole criminal justice system that are actually doing the job they were hired to do.

You make a mistake in assuming the judge always believes the police officer ... the police officer comes into court having followed every little step required of him and he has all the evidence he needs to prove he followed each and every little step of proper and published police procedures ...

I've spent enough time sitting in a court-of-law to know judges are doing their job making sure the police do their job ... police are dotting the i's and crossing the t's, so it's written law forcing the judge's hand ... and if you want the judges' favor, criticize the legislature, but he won't break the law ... and you knew that when you walked into his courtroom ...
 
You make a mistake in assuming the judge always believes the police officer ... the police officer comes into court having followed every little step required of him and he has all the evidence he needs to prove he followed each and every little step of proper and published police procedures ...

I've spent enough time sitting in a court-of-law to know judges are doing their job making sure the police do their job ... police are dotting the i's and crossing the t's, so it's written law forcing the judge's hand ... and if you want the judges' favor, criticize the legislature, but he won't break the law ... and you knew that when you walked into his courtroom ...
Judges are hamstrung by their state legislatures, which make the laws they are to adjudicate. To that extent those legislatures are the weak link in the criminal justice system.
 
Abolish the police. Empty and close all prisons. Allow vigilante justice to be the only justice.
 
Judges are hamstrung by their state legislatures, which make the laws they are to adjudicate. To that extent those legislatures are the weak link in the criminal justice system.

You should try reading the Bill of Rights.
 
Career criminals forfeit those rights. State legislatures grant them rights that they shouldn't have.

Yeah. Point out that to me in the Constitution. I must have missed where people you don’t like forfeit their rights.
 
It’s interesting isn’t it? The Old West would appear to some to be your dream. Everyone armed. Little or no law enforcement. Yet the first thing the boomtowns did was get lawmen to establish some order. And then those boomtowns banned the carrying of guns. Then the towns became more along the lines of well behaved and peaceful.
There was nothing in my statement about "Little or no law enforcement". Well armed law abiding citizens and a strong law enforcement presence are not mutually exclusive.
 
A lot of the resentment towards police has been from some of the newer adopted policies of what is termed "Preventative Policing".

Where ordinary people doing ordinary things are detained and harassed and investigated while a complete search of their identity is performed. This coupled with the immunity has caused many police officers to abuse their authority and created a lot of animosity towards police.

We don't want to defund the police and we shouldn't . If anything we need more money put into policing than ever before due to the sheer volume of riots and retailers closing up shop due to theft and vandalism.

48 billion dollars in retail inventory shrink last year alone. That's $150 per person in America. (Including infants)

Dunno about you but it's definitely getting out of hand.
 
There was nothing in my statement about "Little or no law enforcement". Well armed law abiding citizens and a strong law enforcement presence are not mutually exclusive.

Then you get your panties in a twist because a Rancher is arrested for Murder. Or a man is arrested for shooting an innocent through a door. Or three moron Rednecks are busted in Georgia and chasing down a jogger.

You don’t want anything you say you do. You don’t want armed people sorting out their own problems. You want the freedom to shoot anyone you want without consequences.
 

Forum List

Back
Top