Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

A place to share your views and make your case on any issues fit to discuss.

Moderators: kmax, SonomaCat, rtb

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by iaafan » Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:23 am

91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:49 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:25 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:15 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:50 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 6:59 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:32 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but police DeptS are funded locally and therefore controlled by local government, right. If a local government believes they have a better way to provide safety for their citizens they are welcome to do so. I’m sure no one would do so without meaningful due diligence.

It’s kind of like draining the swamp, like getting rid of the pandemic response team, right. Only with serious thought and deliberation.
There must be a certain amount of federal funding, because last week Bernie Sanders said he wanted to remove federal funding of police. I'm gonna assume he knows what he's talking about since he's been in the senate since the dawn of time... but I honestly do not know.

Also, the Defund The Police movement does not offer an alternative. It simply calls for the removal of the police. If they have a reasonable alternative I'd definitely be interested to hear it.
If you think that defunding simply calls for the removal of police, then you aren't following this very closely and probably shouldn't be weighing in on it considering how serious a topic it is. Talk of defunding has been around for several years, so this isn't something someone pulled out of the clear blue sky.

I see you were saying that bad cops are very rare or something to that effect. A poll from 2000 (a little dated) had 84% of police saying they've seen fellow officers use excessive force and 22% said they've seen it on a regular basis. Those aren't good numbers. It would be interesting to see a poll today to see if that's still the case.

There is a federal grant program, but there's not a direct appropriation of federal funds to police departments. Most funding comes from local government taxes. Pulling that grant program would not force a police dept. to disband. Sanders wants to make it unavailable to departments that violate Civil Rights laws, so it's a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.
Its the first I've heard of it, so forgive me for bringing it up several years too late, apparently. I'm not interested in arguing semantics, but the word "DE-fund" literally means "remove funding". If you want to justify it by saying it refers to a budget cut, I think its YOU who doesn't understand it. But I will say that I think "Defund the Police" means different things to different left wingers, depending on who you talk to. I've seen some that want reform, and some that want the complete and total removal of the police (many protesters in Minneapolis, for one example).

Thanks for the info on the federal funding, I didn't know that. Also, I'm glad you used the word "disband" because that's exactly the word used by congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and thats what she wants to do - disband the police. SO yes, I think it is you who doesn't understand what many of these people are calling for.

Your poll numbers are interesting, I'll have to do more research on that. But I'm still against disbanding the police, or even a major budget cut. Its possible that a part of this problem is LACK of budget, not too much budget. In fact, I might be in favor of adding to the budget to provide better training, better screening to make sure the personality type is going to function well as a cop, and better internal enforcement when problems arise. I also might be in favor of the breakup of the police union so that its easier to get rid of bad cops.
But defunding and disbanding? Nope.
In this case it means defund and use funds elsewhere. The city's budget amount stays roughly the same, but funds are placed on other line items that are deemed better at providing the service.

Omar wants to disband the police and use the funding they receive in an area that would better serve the people. If she's correct that another area would serve the people better than the traditional police department does, then who can knock her?

Yes, do more research. Please. Let me know what you find.

Hopefully we come out of this with a better way to serve the public that doesn't just involve throwing more money at it. You might want to take a closer look at some of the budgets in these large metro areas and ask yourself if you think the people are getting a good deal based on how the police perform in those areas.
If thats what Omar meant, then thats what she should've said. Then she wouldn't need democrat apologists to explain and spin her words into something more benign and sensible.

I'm aware of the budgets, my point was that "defunding" isn't a realistic solution if we want a better police force, unless you have a plan for where to reappropriate that money and how it will serve the same functions that the police currently do. Until I see that plan, I'm not on board with anything beyond reforming the current police departments and I indicated a few ideas in my last post.
No one is apologizing for her, there's no need to. She's talking about reimaging the Mpls law enforcement. Tons of people agree. You need to follow through on your "research" promise. Do you regularly use a search engine? Your comment about seeing that plan and what Omar meant tells me you don't.



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by iaafan » Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:25 am

ilovethecats wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:04 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:49 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:25 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:15 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:50 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 6:59 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:32 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but police DeptS are funded locally and therefore controlled by local government, right. If a local government believes they have a better way to provide safety for their citizens they are welcome to do so. I’m sure no one would do so without meaningful due diligence.

It’s kind of like draining the swamp, like getting rid of the pandemic response team, right. Only with serious thought and deliberation.
There must be a certain amount of federal funding, because last week Bernie Sanders said he wanted to remove federal funding of police. I'm gonna assume he knows what he's talking about since he's been in the senate since the dawn of time... but I honestly do not know.

Also, the Defund The Police movement does not offer an alternative. It simply calls for the removal of the police. If they have a reasonable alternative I'd definitely be interested to hear it.
If you think that defunding simply calls for the removal of police, then you aren't following this very closely and probably shouldn't be weighing in on it considering how serious a topic it is. Talk of defunding has been around for several years, so this isn't something someone pulled out of the clear blue sky.

I see you were saying that bad cops are very rare or something to that effect. A poll from 2000 (a little dated) had 84% of police saying they've seen fellow officers use excessive force and 22% said they've seen it on a regular basis. Those aren't good numbers. It would be interesting to see a poll today to see if that's still the case.

There is a federal grant program, but there's not a direct appropriation of federal funds to police departments. Most funding comes from local government taxes. Pulling that grant program would not force a police dept. to disband. Sanders wants to make it unavailable to departments that violate Civil Rights laws, so it's a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.
Its the first I've heard of it, so forgive me for bringing it up several years too late, apparently. I'm not interested in arguing semantics, but the word "DE-fund" literally means "remove funding". If you want to justify it by saying it refers to a budget cut, I think its YOU who doesn't understand it. But I will say that I think "Defund the Police" means different things to different left wingers, depending on who you talk to. I've seen some that want reform, and some that want the complete and total removal of the police (many protesters in Minneapolis, for one example).

Thanks for the info on the federal funding, I didn't know that. Also, I'm glad you used the word "disband" because that's exactly the word used by congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and thats what she wants to do - disband the police. SO yes, I think it is you who doesn't understand what many of these people are calling for.

Your poll numbers are interesting, I'll have to do more research on that. But I'm still against disbanding the police, or even a major budget cut. Its possible that a part of this problem is LACK of budget, not too much budget. In fact, I might be in favor of adding to the budget to provide better training, better screening to make sure the personality type is going to function well as a cop, and better internal enforcement when problems arise. I also might be in favor of the breakup of the police union so that its easier to get rid of bad cops.
But defunding and disbanding? Nope.
In this case it means defund and use funds elsewhere. The city's budget amount stays roughly the same, but funds are placed on other line items that are deemed better at providing the service.

Omar wants to disband the police and use the funding they receive in an area that would better serve the people. If she's correct that another area would serve the people better than the traditional police department does, then who can knock her?

Yes, do more research. Please. Let me know what you find.

Hopefully we come out of this with a better way to serve the public that doesn't just involve throwing more money at it. You might want to take a closer look at some of the budgets in these large metro areas and ask yourself if you think the people are getting a good deal based on how the police perform in those areas.
If thats what Omar meant, then thats what she should've said. Then she wouldn't need democrat apologists to explain and spin her words into something more benign and sensible.

I'm aware of the budgets, my point was that "defunding" isn't a realistic solution if we want a better police force, unless you have a plan for where to reappropriate that money and how it will serve the same functions that the police currently do. Until I see that plan, I'm not on board with anything beyond reforming the current police departments and I indicated a few ideas in my last post.
Good points.

I think the term "defunding" is really just the attention grabber based on the little I have read. While their may be some who would support no police of any kind, I think that is a very extreme take likely held by only a few. I think the majority of the people supporting this movement are looking for a different allocation of funds. And while I agree it's not what defunding means, I think the term served it's purpose.

There was an article yesterday that basically said we spend like 110-115 billion dollars policing every year. And while the system works for white guys like me for the most part, the system doesn't seem to be working for everyone. And in the case of blacks, you could make the case it is hindering more than helping. So I know supports in Minnesota are asking for funds to be allocated differently which at it's face I don't have a problem with.

In it's very simplest form, my opinion is that if we spent less on our policing and military, and FAR less on what our government leaders earn, and put those funds to even just education and mental health resources, we'd be far better off. Since the beginning of time crime statistics have been linked to education, yet we completely ignore the education and then spend billions fighting crime, defending criminals, and paying for jails and prisons. Imagine if everyone had the same opportunities with their education, and the same resources across the board, what we might be able to accomplish.
Absolutely!!



91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by 91catAlum » Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:33 am

Thats quite an article...
Opponents to such a profound restructuring of policing cite concerns about how serious offenses like rapes and murder would otherwise be prevented or investigated. But arrests for violent crimes like these make up no more than five percent of arrests nationally.
...
As for violent crimes, police critics point to the fact that the current system isn't all that effective at identifying offenders. Nearly 40 percent of murders nationwide go unsolved, and only one percent of rapes end in a conviction for a felony.
The point here appears to be that its OK to "defund" or "disband" the police because violent crimes don't really get solved anyway. This is such an ignorant and/or naive point of view. What do people think is going to happen to the violent crime numbers if there is no police force or similar public service? The mere existence of a police force and a criminal justice system is the only thing that deters many people from committing crimes.
“City council members need to literally sit down and decide the range of things that police officers are to do,” says Muhammad. “Nuisance calls where police show up because someone's made a noise complaint, and now all of a sudden a black person has gotten beaten down by the police—take that off the list. Mental health visits or wellness checks for people who they might decide made them afraid, so they had to kill them—take that off the list.”
OK. Then tell us what your alternative is. Do we call a new "noise police" group to complain about disrespectful neighbors cranking music at 2am and waking up our kids on a school night? if so, what powers will they have to make sure the offenders comply? Or do we just decide that noise complaints aren't worth anyone's time so we won't bother with them anymore? Is that the society we wanna live in?
And besides - how would this have changed the George Floyd case? It wasn't a noise complaint or a wellness check. He got caught passing counterfeit money. Is that still something the police would respond to, or whats the plan for that?


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by 91catAlum » Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:38 am

iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:23 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:49 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:25 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:15 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:50 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 6:59 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:32 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but police DeptS are funded locally and therefore controlled by local government, right. If a local government believes they have a better way to provide safety for their citizens they are welcome to do so. I’m sure no one would do so without meaningful due diligence.

It’s kind of like draining the swamp, like getting rid of the pandemic response team, right. Only with serious thought and deliberation.
There must be a certain amount of federal funding, because last week Bernie Sanders said he wanted to remove federal funding of police. I'm gonna assume he knows what he's talking about since he's been in the senate since the dawn of time... but I honestly do not know.

Also, the Defund The Police movement does not offer an alternative. It simply calls for the removal of the police. If they have a reasonable alternative I'd definitely be interested to hear it.
If you think that defunding simply calls for the removal of police, then you aren't following this very closely and probably shouldn't be weighing in on it considering how serious a topic it is. Talk of defunding has been around for several years, so this isn't something someone pulled out of the clear blue sky.

I see you were saying that bad cops are very rare or something to that effect. A poll from 2000 (a little dated) had 84% of police saying they've seen fellow officers use excessive force and 22% said they've seen it on a regular basis. Those aren't good numbers. It would be interesting to see a poll today to see if that's still the case.

There is a federal grant program, but there's not a direct appropriation of federal funds to police departments. Most funding comes from local government taxes. Pulling that grant program would not force a police dept. to disband. Sanders wants to make it unavailable to departments that violate Civil Rights laws, so it's a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.
Its the first I've heard of it, so forgive me for bringing it up several years too late, apparently. I'm not interested in arguing semantics, but the word "DE-fund" literally means "remove funding". If you want to justify it by saying it refers to a budget cut, I think its YOU who doesn't understand it. But I will say that I think "Defund the Police" means different things to different left wingers, depending on who you talk to. I've seen some that want reform, and some that want the complete and total removal of the police (many protesters in Minneapolis, for one example).

Thanks for the info on the federal funding, I didn't know that. Also, I'm glad you used the word "disband" because that's exactly the word used by congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and thats what she wants to do - disband the police. SO yes, I think it is you who doesn't understand what many of these people are calling for.

Your poll numbers are interesting, I'll have to do more research on that. But I'm still against disbanding the police, or even a major budget cut. Its possible that a part of this problem is LACK of budget, not too much budget. In fact, I might be in favor of adding to the budget to provide better training, better screening to make sure the personality type is going to function well as a cop, and better internal enforcement when problems arise. I also might be in favor of the breakup of the police union so that its easier to get rid of bad cops.
But defunding and disbanding? Nope.
In this case it means defund and use funds elsewhere. The city's budget amount stays roughly the same, but funds are placed on other line items that are deemed better at providing the service.

Omar wants to disband the police and use the funding they receive in an area that would better serve the people. If she's correct that another area would serve the people better than the traditional police department does, then who can knock her?

Yes, do more research. Please. Let me know what you find.

Hopefully we come out of this with a better way to serve the public that doesn't just involve throwing more money at it. You might want to take a closer look at some of the budgets in these large metro areas and ask yourself if you think the people are getting a good deal based on how the police perform in those areas.
If thats what Omar meant, then thats what she should've said. Then she wouldn't need democrat apologists to explain and spin her words into something more benign and sensible.

I'm aware of the budgets, my point was that "defunding" isn't a realistic solution if we want a better police force, unless you have a plan for where to reappropriate that money and how it will serve the same functions that the police currently do. Until I see that plan, I'm not on board with anything beyond reforming the current police departments and I indicated a few ideas in my last post.
No one is apologizing for her, there's no need to. She's talking about reimaging the Mpls law enforcement. Tons of people agree. You need to follow through on your "research" promise. Do you regularly use a search engine? Your comment about seeing that plan and what Omar meant tells me you don't.
I said I'd research the dubious numbers you stated about police brutality.
If you want to continue having a dialog then stop being so condescending and provide a link once in a while instead of just making statements that aren't backed up here.


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by iaafan » Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:54 am

91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:33 am
Thats quite an article...
Opponents to such a profound restructuring of policing cite concerns about how serious offenses like rapes and murder would otherwise be prevented or investigated. But arrests for violent crimes like these make up no more than five percent of arrests nationally.
...
As for violent crimes, police critics point to the fact that the current system isn't all that effective at identifying offenders. Nearly 40 percent of murders nationwide go unsolved, and only one percent of rapes end in a conviction for a felony.
The point here appears to be that its OK to "defund" or "disband" the police because violent crimes don't really get solved anyway. This is such an ignorant and/or naive point of view. What do people think is going to happen to the violent crime numbers if there is no police force or similar public service? The mere existence of a police force and a criminal justice system is the only thing that deters many people from committing crimes.
“City council members need to literally sit down and decide the range of things that police officers are to do,” says Muhammad. “Nuisance calls where police show up because someone's made a noise complaint, and now all of a sudden a black person has gotten beaten down by the police—take that off the list. Mental health visits or wellness checks for people who they might decide made them afraid, so they had to kill them—take that off the list.”
OK. Then tell us what your alternative is. Do we call a new "noise police" group to complain about disrespectful neighbors cranking music at 2am and waking up our kids on a school night? if so, what powers will they have to make sure the offenders comply? Or do we just decide that noise complaints aren't worth anyone's time so we won't bother with them anymore? Is that the society we wanna live in?
And besides - how would this have changed the George Floyd case? It wasn't a noise complaint or a wellness check. He got caught passing counterfeit money. Is that still something the police would respond to, or whats the plan for that?
That's what the point appears to be to you? I took it as they need to fund some other body to see if they can get better results in crime solving. Did you not think of that possibility. "...the current system isn't all that effective at identifying offenders." Seems to be a complaint the current system doesn't get good results (I'd agree) and that defunding that system and putting funds elsewhere may produce better numbers. Or are you just intentionally being narrow.



User avatar
BozoneCat
Member # Retired
Posts: 2915
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 7:15 pm
Location: Boise, ID

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by BozoneCat » Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:55 am

ilovethecats wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:04 am
In it's very simplest form, my opinion is that if we spent less on our policing and military, and FAR less on what our government leaders earn, and put those funds to even just education and mental health resources, we'd be far better off. Since the beginning of time crime statistics have been linked to education, yet we completely ignore the education and then spend billions fighting crime, defending criminals, and paying for jails and prisons. Imagine if everyone had the same opportunities with their education, and the same resources across the board, what we might be able to accomplish.
=D^ =D^ =D^ =D^ =D^


GO CATS GO!!!

Image

91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by 91catAlum » Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:42 pm

iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:54 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:33 am
Thats quite an article...
Opponents to such a profound restructuring of policing cite concerns about how serious offenses like rapes and murder would otherwise be prevented or investigated. But arrests for violent crimes like these make up no more than five percent of arrests nationally.
...
As for violent crimes, police critics point to the fact that the current system isn't all that effective at identifying offenders. Nearly 40 percent of murders nationwide go unsolved, and only one percent of rapes end in a conviction for a felony.
The point here appears to be that its OK to "defund" or "disband" the police because violent crimes don't really get solved anyway. This is such an ignorant and/or naive point of view. What do people think is going to happen to the violent crime numbers if there is no police force or similar public service? The mere existence of a police force and a criminal justice system is the only thing that deters many people from committing crimes.
“City council members need to literally sit down and decide the range of things that police officers are to do,” says Muhammad. “Nuisance calls where police show up because someone's made a noise complaint, and now all of a sudden a black person has gotten beaten down by the police—take that off the list. Mental health visits or wellness checks for people who they might decide made them afraid, so they had to kill them—take that off the list.”
OK. Then tell us what your alternative is. Do we call a new "noise police" group to complain about disrespectful neighbors cranking music at 2am and waking up our kids on a school night? if so, what powers will they have to make sure the offenders comply? Or do we just decide that noise complaints aren't worth anyone's time so we won't bother with them anymore? Is that the society we wanna live in?
And besides - how would this have changed the George Floyd case? It wasn't a noise complaint or a wellness check. He got caught passing counterfeit money. Is that still something the police would respond to, or whats the plan for that?
That's what the point appears to be to you? I took it as they need to fund some other body to see if they can get better results in crime solving. Did you not think of that possibility. "...the current system isn't all that effective at identifying offenders." Seems to be a complaint the current system doesn't get good results (I'd agree) and that defunding that system and putting funds elsewhere may produce better numbers. Or are you just intentionally being narrow.
I suppose you can infer that there would be a similar body formed and funded with that money, but that's not what it says. If thats the case, I'm not totally opposed but would need to see the details before fully jumping on board.


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by 91catAlum » Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:44 pm

iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:23 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:49 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:25 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:15 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:50 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 6:59 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:32 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but police DeptS are funded locally and therefore controlled by local government, right. If a local government believes they have a better way to provide safety for their citizens they are welcome to do so. I’m sure no one would do so without meaningful due diligence.

It’s kind of like draining the swamp, like getting rid of the pandemic response team, right. Only with serious thought and deliberation.
There must be a certain amount of federal funding, because last week Bernie Sanders said he wanted to remove federal funding of police. I'm gonna assume he knows what he's talking about since he's been in the senate since the dawn of time... but I honestly do not know.

Also, the Defund The Police movement does not offer an alternative. It simply calls for the removal of the police. If they have a reasonable alternative I'd definitely be interested to hear it.
If you think that defunding simply calls for the removal of police, then you aren't following this very closely and probably shouldn't be weighing in on it considering how serious a topic it is. Talk of defunding has been around for several years, so this isn't something someone pulled out of the clear blue sky.

I see you were saying that bad cops are very rare or something to that effect. A poll from 2000 (a little dated) had 84% of police saying they've seen fellow officers use excessive force and 22% said they've seen it on a regular basis. Those aren't good numbers. It would be interesting to see a poll today to see if that's still the case.

There is a federal grant program, but there's not a direct appropriation of federal funds to police departments. Most funding comes from local government taxes. Pulling that grant program would not force a police dept. to disband. Sanders wants to make it unavailable to departments that violate Civil Rights laws, so it's a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.
Its the first I've heard of it, so forgive me for bringing it up several years too late, apparently. I'm not interested in arguing semantics, but the word "DE-fund" literally means "remove funding". If you want to justify it by saying it refers to a budget cut, I think its YOU who doesn't understand it. But I will say that I think "Defund the Police" means different things to different left wingers, depending on who you talk to. I've seen some that want reform, and some that want the complete and total removal of the police (many protesters in Minneapolis, for one example).

Thanks for the info on the federal funding, I didn't know that. Also, I'm glad you used the word "disband" because that's exactly the word used by congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and thats what she wants to do - disband the police. SO yes, I think it is you who doesn't understand what many of these people are calling for.

Your poll numbers are interesting, I'll have to do more research on that. But I'm still against disbanding the police, or even a major budget cut. Its possible that a part of this problem is LACK of budget, not too much budget. In fact, I might be in favor of adding to the budget to provide better training, better screening to make sure the personality type is going to function well as a cop, and better internal enforcement when problems arise. I also might be in favor of the breakup of the police union so that its easier to get rid of bad cops.
But defunding and disbanding? Nope.
In this case it means defund and use funds elsewhere. The city's budget amount stays roughly the same, but funds are placed on other line items that are deemed better at providing the service.

Omar wants to disband the police and use the funding they receive in an area that would better serve the people. If she's correct that another area would serve the people better than the traditional police department does, then who can knock her?

Yes, do more research. Please. Let me know what you find.

Hopefully we come out of this with a better way to serve the public that doesn't just involve throwing more money at it. You might want to take a closer look at some of the budgets in these large metro areas and ask yourself if you think the people are getting a good deal based on how the police perform in those areas.
If thats what Omar meant, then thats what she should've said. Then she wouldn't need democrat apologists to explain and spin her words into something more benign and sensible.

I'm aware of the budgets, my point was that "defunding" isn't a realistic solution if we want a better police force, unless you have a plan for where to reappropriate that money and how it will serve the same functions that the police currently do. Until I see that plan, I'm not on board with anything beyond reforming the current police departments and I indicated a few ideas in my last post.
No one is apologizing for her, there's no need to. She's talking about reimaging the Mpls law enforcement. Tons of people agree. You need to follow through on your "research" promise. Do you regularly use a search engine? Your comment about seeing that plan and what Omar meant tells me you don't.
Just so you know, an Apologist isn't a person who apologizes. Its a person who defends a position. For example, there are Christian apologists, Republican apologists, socialism apoligists, etc.


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

User avatar
allcat
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7944
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:13 pm
Location: 90 miles from Nirvana (Bobcat Stadium)

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by allcat » Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:59 pm

iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:53 am
allcat wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:40 am
These police departments are mostly in Democrat hands. They pass the laws , they hire the Chiefs. When it goes wrong they blame what they created.
So since the democrats have screwed it all up, then you agree that it should be reformed. Or do you think that police departments would be better at serving and protecting if republicans are in charge?
What I do think is that without all of family and society destruction under the Dems, there would be more opportunities for all, thus reducing the need for the heavy hand. I also think that community policing would be more effective.


Now sorry for caring about Cat/griz too much. I've been properly chastised by the coach of the other team. :-^

91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by 91catAlum » Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:01 pm

Biden does the politically smart thing here; he'll never win if he panders too much to the far left:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-comes- ... 42854.html
"As his criminal justice proposal made clear months ago, Vice President Biden does not believe that police should be defunded," campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said in response to questions from USA TODAY.


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by iaafan » Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:12 pm

91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:44 pm
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:23 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:49 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:25 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:15 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:50 am
91catAlum wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 6:59 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:32 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but police DeptS are funded locally and therefore controlled by local government, right. If a local government believes they have a better way to provide safety for their citizens they are welcome to do so. I’m sure no one would do so without meaningful due diligence.

It’s kind of like draining the swamp, like getting rid of the pandemic response team, right. Only with serious thought and deliberation.
There must be a certain amount of federal funding, because last week Bernie Sanders said he wanted to remove federal funding of police. I'm gonna assume he knows what he's talking about since he's been in the senate since the dawn of time... but I honestly do not know.

Also, the Defund The Police movement does not offer an alternative. It simply calls for the removal of the police. If they have a reasonable alternative I'd definitely be interested to hear it.
If you think that defunding simply calls for the removal of police, then you aren't following this very closely and probably shouldn't be weighing in on it considering how serious a topic it is. Talk of defunding has been around for several years, so this isn't something someone pulled out of the clear blue sky.

I see you were saying that bad cops are very rare or something to that effect. A poll from 2000 (a little dated) had 84% of police saying they've seen fellow officers use excessive force and 22% said they've seen it on a regular basis. Those aren't good numbers. It would be interesting to see a poll today to see if that's still the case.

There is a federal grant program, but there's not a direct appropriation of federal funds to police departments. Most funding comes from local government taxes. Pulling that grant program would not force a police dept. to disband. Sanders wants to make it unavailable to departments that violate Civil Rights laws, so it's a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.
Its the first I've heard of it, so forgive me for bringing it up several years too late, apparently. I'm not interested in arguing semantics, but the word "DE-fund" literally means "remove funding". If you want to justify it by saying it refers to a budget cut, I think its YOU who doesn't understand it. But I will say that I think "Defund the Police" means different things to different left wingers, depending on who you talk to. I've seen some that want reform, and some that want the complete and total removal of the police (many protesters in Minneapolis, for one example).

Thanks for the info on the federal funding, I didn't know that. Also, I'm glad you used the word "disband" because that's exactly the word used by congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and thats what she wants to do - disband the police. SO yes, I think it is you who doesn't understand what many of these people are calling for.

Your poll numbers are interesting, I'll have to do more research on that. But I'm still against disbanding the police, or even a major budget cut. Its possible that a part of this problem is LACK of budget, not too much budget. In fact, I might be in favor of adding to the budget to provide better training, better screening to make sure the personality type is going to function well as a cop, and better internal enforcement when problems arise. I also might be in favor of the breakup of the police union so that its easier to get rid of bad cops.
But defunding and disbanding? Nope.
In this case it means defund and use funds elsewhere. The city's budget amount stays roughly the same, but funds are placed on other line items that are deemed better at providing the service.

Omar wants to disband the police and use the funding they receive in an area that would better serve the people. If she's correct that another area would serve the people better than the traditional police department does, then who can knock her?

Yes, do more research. Please. Let me know what you find.

Hopefully we come out of this with a better way to serve the public that doesn't just involve throwing more money at it. You might want to take a closer look at some of the budgets in these large metro areas and ask yourself if you think the people are getting a good deal based on how the police perform in those areas.
If thats what Omar meant, then thats what she should've said. Then she wouldn't need democrat apologists to explain and spin her words into something more benign and sensible.

I'm aware of the budgets, my point was that "defunding" isn't a realistic solution if we want a better police force, unless you have a plan for where to reappropriate that money and how it will serve the same functions that the police currently do. Until I see that plan, I'm not on board with anything beyond reforming the current police departments and I indicated a few ideas in my last post.
No one is apologizing for her, there's no need to. She's talking about reimaging the Mpls law enforcement. Tons of people agree. You need to follow through on your "research" promise. Do you regularly use a search engine? Your comment about seeing that plan and what Omar meant tells me you don't.
Just so you know, an Apologist isn't a person who apologizes. Its a person who defends a position. For example, there are Christian apologists, Republican apologists, socialism apoligists, etc.
Thanks!



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by iaafan » Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:18 pm

allcat wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:59 pm
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:53 am
allcat wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:40 am
These police departments are mostly in Democrat hands. They pass the laws , they hire the Chiefs. When it goes wrong they blame what they created.
So since the democrats have screwed it all up, then you agree that it should be reformed. Or do you think that police departments would be better at serving and protecting if republicans are in charge?
What I do think is that without all of family and society destruction under the Dems, there would be more opportunities for all, thus reducing the need for the heavy hand. I also think that community policing would be more effective.
I don't see the family and society destruction by Dems. Neither does this guy: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/opin ... amily.html



arvcat2
BobcatNation Letterman
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2015 6:41 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by arvcat2 » Mon Jun 08, 2020 6:44 pm

RickRund wrote:
Sun Jun 07, 2020 1:52 pm
Crickets from the alt-lefties & the do gooder “moderates” on this board.

It doesn’t matter who is the GOP nominee is, like clockwork, the race card narrative surfaces in an election year. Less than five months to go until the general election, still lots of time for a LGPTQXYZ and misogyny spiel to be pushed by the democrats & their Demedia mouth pieces. Bank on it.



User avatar
RickRund
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4384
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Post Falls ID

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by RickRund » Mon Jun 08, 2020 8:58 pm

Something tells me the minneapolis "leaders" did not think real hard to come up with this lame brain answer...Unbelievable that this is the best there is to pick the to lead their city.

https://teamcandaceowens.org/watch-minn ... -privileg/



User avatar
RickRund
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4384
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Post Falls ID

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by RickRund » Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:09 pm

Here is a guy that knows his stuff. His take on the whole mess happening now.

https://teamcandaceowens.org/civil-righ ... n-america/



User avatar
allcat
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7944
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:13 pm
Location: 90 miles from Nirvana (Bobcat Stadium)

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by allcat » Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:10 am

iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:18 pm
allcat wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:59 pm
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:53 am
allcat wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:40 am
These police departments are mostly in Democrat hands. They pass the laws , they hire the Chiefs. When it goes wrong they blame what they created.
So since the democrats have screwed it all up, then you agree that it should be reformed. Or do you think that police departments would be better at serving and protecting if republicans are in charge?
What I do think is that without all of family and society destruction under the Dems, there would be more opportunities for all, thus reducing the need for the heavy hand. I also think that community policing would be more effective.
I don't see the family and society destruction by Dems. Neither does this guy: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/opin ... amily.html
That article was definitely written to the educated people that he says don't have the problem. I like that he actually argues to reflect Trump, while voicing the opposite. Trump is bringing back the very jobs he wants. However it is happening family values in urban settings are eroding and which party has fostered that? You might not see it because some liberal bloviate writes a long winded dissertation, but I do. Once again I'm glad he supports Trump's end game.


Now sorry for caring about Cat/griz too much. I've been properly chastised by the coach of the other team. :-^

User avatar
wbtfg
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 10020
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 12:52 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by wbtfg » Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:14 am

allcat wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:10 am
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:18 pm
allcat wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:59 pm
iaafan wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:53 am
allcat wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:40 am
These police departments are mostly in Democrat hands. They pass the laws , they hire the Chiefs. When it goes wrong they blame what they created.
So since the democrats have screwed it all up, then you agree that it should be reformed. Or do you think that police departments would be better at serving and protecting if republicans are in charge?
What I do think is that without all of family and society destruction under the Dems, there would be more opportunities for all, thus reducing the need for the heavy hand. I also think that community policing would be more effective.
I don't see the family and society destruction by Dems. Neither does this guy: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/opin ... amily.html
That article was definitely written to the educated people that he says don't have the problem. I like that he actually argues to reflect Trump, while voicing the opposite. Trump is bringing back the very jobs he wants. However it is happening family values in urban settings are eroding and which party has fostered that? You might not see it because some liberal bloviate writes a long winded dissertation, but I do. Once again I'm glad he supports Trump's end game.
Family Values...I think that’s the title of the new Stormy Daniels movie. ;)



77matcat
Member # Retired
Posts: 2484
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:12 pm

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by 77matcat » Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:18 am

45 has no end game. He doesn’t know what he’s going to do at the end of the day.



User avatar
The Butcher
1st Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1901
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 8:51 am

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by The Butcher » Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:44 am

Who here hasn't known a police officer that is a real a**? An investigator where I live now acts above the law all the time. He pulls s*** that would get anyone one of us a ticket, but the badge lets him do it. Even more to the issue; other police officers and their union don't intervene. That isn't how it is supposed to work, but it happens all the time. Now imagine if you are a minority in a low-income housing area. Obviously it is much worse than were most of us white guys live. Now having no police force is idiotic, but that isn't the point that is trying to be made. The point is accountability and what is best for all our communities. Everyone should want to see that except the bad cops.



91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Imagine if Democrats got Their Way...

Post by 91catAlum » Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:59 am

The Butcher wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:44 am
Who here hasn't known a police officer that is a real a**? An investigator where I live now acts above the law all the time. He pulls s*** that would get anyone one of us a ticket, but the badge lets him do it. Even more to the issue; other police officers and their union don't intervene. That isn't how it is supposed to work, but it happens all the time. Now imagine if you are a minority in a low-income housing area. Obviously it is much worse than were most of us white guys live. Now having no police force is idiotic, but that isn't the point that is trying to be made. The point is accountability and what is best for all our communities. Everyone should want to see that except the bad cops.
If the Defund movement was simply yelling for more police accountability they would have over 90% approval, and Joe Biden would not have come out against it. But that's not the case, you are giving them too much credibility. Everything I've read suggests anything from a budget reallocation to total disbanding.

I agree with your statement that having no police force is idiotic. Thank you for stating that.
Last edited by 91catAlum on Tue Jun 09, 2020 8:56 am, edited 1 time in total.


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

Post Reply