Poll: Defund the Police U.S or anywhere?

Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.

Page 9 of 22 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
10
11
19
... LastLast
  1. #161
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Specialka View Post
    More bad faith from you, not really surprised though. As it has been said by multiple people, "Defund the Police" is a bad slogan because it is not self explanatory and worse, can be use against itself by detractors like Republican. "Reform the Police" would be a far better alternative. Period. I know you do not get it, but I keep trying.
    It's entirely self-explanatory.

    We don't want to use "Reform the Police" because we want far more sweeping changes, which include significant reductions in policing and police funding. Y'know, defunding.

    Same way Republicans talk about "defunding Planned Parenthood", except that the goal for us is to minimize the number of innocents slaughtered by abusive cops who face next to no consequences for their actions, whereas the Republicans are pushing to victimize and harm innocent women. Cause, y'know, the objective matters.

    Btw, the fact that you are not infracted after all the shit you throw at other posters is baffling.
    Describing the dishonest tactics used by other posters is not actually against the site rules in any way whatsoever. I'm not in any way immune to infractions, and in fact currently have active infraction points on my account. Maybe I'm just, like, not breaking site rules nearly as much as you seem to think.


  2. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Same way Republicans talk about "defunding Planned Parenthood", except that the goal for us is to minimize the number of innocents slaughtered by abusive cops who face next to no consequences for their actions, whereas the Republicans are pushing to victimize and harm innocent women.
    The 'defund planned parenthood act of 2019' means completely cut federal funding for planned parenthood for one year unless they stop doing 'elective' abortion.

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-...house-bill/369

    So, why do some think that defund for something else mean completely remove the funds?
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    It's entirely self-explanatory.
    And as previously stated: the US has few law enforcement officers per capita (and not very well trained it seems), and the military surplus hasn't cost much (only shipping and handling it seems), and any alternatives to police will take time to take effect.

  3. #163
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    The 'defund planned parenthood act of 2019' means completely cut federal funding for planned parenthood for one year unless the stop doing 'elective' abortion.

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-...house-bill/369

    So, why do some think that defund for something else mean completely remove the funds?
    Because they're functionally illiterate?

    That's a pretty silly question, dude. Why am I having to explain why so many Americans have a limited grasp of the only language they generally know?

    Also, there's not just the 2019 Act. There's been others in 2015 and 2021. I can't be arsed to look up precisely how different they are, but clearly "Defund" isn't a scary word that chases voters away just because it was used. Which was the argument being leveled against "Defund the Police".


  4. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    That's a pretty silly question, dude. Why am I having to explain why so many Americans have a limited grasp of the only language they generally know?
    One party says 'defund planned parenthood' meaning 'completely remove funds from', and Trump defunds WHO (at least Vanity Fair used that headline) - meaning completely withdrawing the US government funding. And California defunded IWC https://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/IWC_Defunded.html meaning it completely remove funding.

    So when someone says 'defund' and people assume it means the same, you call them illiterate?

    BTW The last example was from searching for dictionary definition - and dictionary.com has this to say:
    Based on these policy proposals, some people find the slogan defund the police confusing or misleading because the word defund can sound like a call to eliminate police forces altogether—which definitely isn’t something most activists are proposing.
    https://www.dictionary.com/e/what-do...bout-policing/
    That's literally the dictionary saying that the slogan is far from ideal.

  5. #165
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    One party says 'defund planned parenthood' meaning 'completely remove funds from', and Trump defunds WHO (at least Vanity Fair used that headline) - meaning completely withdrawing the US government funding. And California defunded IWC https://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/IWC_Defunded.html meaning it completely remove funding.

    So when someone says 'defund' and people assume it means the same, you call them illiterate?
    Yes.

    The same way I'd assume anyone seeing the word "cut" and presuming it means "completely eliminate", just because it can be used that way in some cases. And then trying to argue someone talking about "cutting their lawn" means they want to remove the lawn entirely, or that getting a hair "cut" means you're going bald.

    It's exactly that illiterate.

    BTW The last example was from searching for dictionary definition - and dictionary.com has this to say:

    https://www.dictionary.com/e/what-do...bout-policing/
    That's literally the dictionary saying that the slogan is far from ideal.
    If you literally ignore the rest of the article and just pick that one sentence out, absent the rest of the context.

    Which isn't reasonable.

    Again; the people who are confused or misled about it are either A> failing to understand pretty basic English, or B> lying about their confusion because they oppose the movement. Even in the case of A, their ignorance is not the movement's fault, and the responsibility for their failure to understand is entirely on them, especially since just looking it up would've informed them otherwise.


  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Yes.

    The same way I'd assume anyone seeing the word "cut" and presuming it means "completely eliminate", just because it can be used that way in some cases. And then trying to argue someone talking about "cutting their lawn" means they want to remove the lawn entirely, or that getting a hair "cut" means you're going bald.
    A bad example. Cutting the hair or the lawn means that you use a sharp-edged instrument to separate the hair or grass-straws.

    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/cut

    When a scene is 'cut' it comes from the fact that they literally cut the movie by scissors around that scene.

    Defunding had previously generally been used for completely removing the funding from; not for reducing the funding; as has been shown by previous examples. In some cases it was gradual - but with a clear goal. If you believe the dictionary is saying that the language is clear you should read again.

    Apart from that it's the bad attempt at solution based on the incorrect analysis of the problem, and that's why don't even see AOC listing it as one of her issues. Please read the analysis in The Economist; they are crystal clear.

  7. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    As we got into with SpecialKa; they understand, they just want a police state and oppose it on principle, but know that advocating more knees on necks isn't gonna win them any friends here, so we get this absolute bad-faith malarkey about it being a "bad slogan", because "defund" ..
    San Francisco, Philadelphia, Portland...liberals want a police state, or maybe they're too uneducated to understand? What narrative are you creating to explain the lack of traction here? Your best chance was in 2020 with the supposed "blue wave" that never manifested.

  8. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    As already said more liberal cities aren't going to hear you.
    Portland Sees Spike in Gun Violence; Some Say Defunding of Police is to Blame

    Portland police warned that other cities that have made a similar choice saw spikes in homicides. Stockton, California, began disbanding and defunding police units dedicated to gun violence in 2010. Stockton then saw record homicide rates in 2011 and 2012. Data reported by the Stockton police shows homicides significantly declines after the city restored the units.

    I think Uvalde is proof that more Cops does not equal more Safety.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  9. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    I think Uvalde is proof that more Cops does not equal more Safety.
    Small town versus big cities.

  10. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    Small town versus big cities.
    That's some nice handwaving.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    San Francisco, Philadelphia, Portland...liberals want a police state, or maybe they're too uneducated to understand? What narrative are you creating to explain the lack of traction here? Your best chance was in 2020 with the supposed "blue wave" that never manifested.
    Stop wasting your breath on him, he will refuse to listen when plenty of people including Obama have explained why it is a no go here in America. Instead anyone with a different opinion is a right winger even though as evidenced by the people trying to explain it to him the vast majority are left leaning by post history. I already posted multiple links that even the majority of minorities do not want less cops.

  12. #172
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Deus Mortis View Post
    Stop wasting your breath on him, he will refuse to listen when plenty of people including Obama have explained why it is a no go here in America. Instead anyone with a different opinion is a right winger even though as evidenced by the people trying to explain it to him the vast majority are left leaning by post history. I already posted multiple links that even the majority of minorities do not want less cops.
    You've made an appeal to authority looking to Obama, and an appeal to popularity by looking at, well, popularity.

    I'd rather focus on the merit of the idea itself, rather than fallacious deflections because the idea makes you uncomfortable or whatever.

    Sue me for expecting actual discussion rather than handwaves and deflection.

    Edit: Also, stop saying I'm accusing "everyone of being a right-winger" as if there's only two teams and the lines are neatly laid out. Democrats are mostly right-wing. Center-right, but right. Biden and Clinton are clear examples, and that's before we get to the likes of Manchin. If I point out views that are right-wing in character, that's not an accusation of betrayal or some garbage. Most of those are perfectly in-line with mainstream Democratic views.

    Which are center-right in character.
    Last edited by Endus; 2022-07-18 at 01:49 AM.


  13. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I'd rather focus on the merit of the idea itself, rather than fallacious deflections because the idea makes you uncomfortable or whatever.
    That's fine the thing is the majority, including minorities do not want less officers. In an ideal space when people hear defund in America they would think of its actual description. However due to the years and years of Republicans using that word when in reality they mean abolish, it has twisted the word into at times having more meanings, even if those meanings are wrong by definition. This is one reason why people say it is a bad slogan. The goal that you want would be easier accomplished with going for words like reform. We have seen all across the US that even in very liberal areas, that defund is not a winning platform.

    Edit: Imo the best way to get what you want is to start with going down the reform road, increase help to communities that need it. In the process you get better police officers, you get less crime and then you can start defunding them since they will not be as needed as well as the perception of them not being as needed. As long as crime rates spike, people will want to see more officers.
    Last edited by Deus Mortis; 2022-07-18 at 02:14 AM.

  14. #174
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Deus Mortis View Post
    That's fine the thing is the majority, including minorities do not want less officers. In an ideal space when people hear defund in America they would think of its actual description. However due to the years and years of Republicans using that word when in reality they mean abolish, it has twisted the word into at times having more meanings, even if those meanings are wrong by definition. This is one reason why people say it is a bad slogan. The goal that you want would be easier accomplished with going for words like reform. We have seen all across the US that even in very liberal areas, that defund is not a winning platform.
    Here is what I think the core issue is;

    My position, and that of those supporting Defund the Police, want to carve down and reduce police presence in society.

    You're arguing for reforming the police, as they are, without doing so.

    Your issue is not that the slogan is "bad", your issue is that you don't agree with the movement and its goals. If we shifted to "Reform the Police" and pushed for what you're suggesting, that would be an entirely different movement. That doesn't mean the slogan or the Defund movement is "bad", it just means you, personally, don't support it.

    Which is fine. Nobody's saying you must. But that's not a problem with the Defund movement or its slogan. It's just an ideological difference in what we think would be most effective, and over what length of term (I agree the Defund movement's approach would take a longer term to reach full value).

    Again; there aren't just two sides. We don't all have to come to an agreement on this "side" about a topic. We're free to have differences of opinion. I'm an incrementalist; if all I can get is reform, I'll take reform, but I'll keep pushing for defunding. That's how this stuff works. I don't need to get everything I want on a silver platter tomorrow or else. But I'm gonna keep holding up my idealized end point as the goal we should be seeking, even if current practices aren't gonna get us that much closer. Maybe not even in my own lifetime.

    Telling me we'll never reach my utopia is never gonna be an argument to me that I should stop trying.


  15. #175
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    That's some nice handwaving.
    And yet we have a thread on rural vs urban. I suppose that's all handwaving too?

  16. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    And yet we have a thread on rural vs urban. I suppose that's all handwaving too?
    When you're only explanation is "big cities vs small towns"...yeah...that's handwaving my dude.

    How about you tell us why having more cops in a big city is safer and having more cops in a small town isn't?
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Telling me we'll never reach my utopia is never gonna be an argument to me that I should stop trying.
    But you're not really doing anything. The Minneapolis link had it best, those yelling "defund police" don't live there. "You" are at best a tourist. You can't vote in referendums, you don't know anything of what it's like on a day-to-day basis, let alone walk around at night. You need to accept that as why this all failed at a time when you believed it shouldn't have. "We" live here. "You" don't.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    When you're only explanation is "big cities vs small towns"...yeah...that's handwaving my dude.
    Best chance was in 2020, why did "you" lose the argument? The reasons were already posted.
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    How about you tell us why having more cops in a big city is safer and having more cops in a small town isn't?
    I don't live in a small town. I never have. I can't compare. I certainly don't let one shitty example set policy.

  18. #178
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post

    Best chance was in 2020, why did "you" lose the argument? The reasons were already posted.
    That has literally nothing to do with what I said.

    I don't live in a small town. I never have. I can't compare. I certainly don't let one shitty example set policy.
    You're the one that brought "Small Town vs Big City" into the discussion.

    Read what i said again...I didn't say one thing about policy, 2020, or any argument the "I" suppodely lost.

    I think Uvalde is proof that more Cops does not equal more Safety.
    The cops had the shooter outnumbered 400 to 1.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  19. #179
    Merely a Setback PACOX's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    26,281
    Quote Originally Posted by Deus Mortis View Post
    That's fine the thing is the majority, including minorities do not want less officers. In an ideal space when people hear defund in America they would think of its actual description. However due to the years and years of Republicans using that word when in reality they mean abolish, it has twisted the word into at times having more meanings, even if those meanings are wrong by definition. This is one reason why people say it is a bad slogan. The goal that you want would be easier accomplished with going for words like reform. We have seen all across the US that even in very liberal areas, that defund is not a winning platform.

    Edit: Imo the best way to get what you want is to start with going down the reform road, increase help to communities that need it. In the process you get better police officers, you get less crime and then you can start defunding them since they will not be as needed as well as the perception of them not being as needed. As long as crime rates spike, people will want to see more officers.
    I don't know many minorities who want more police when the whole call for defunding the police is is response targeted abusive policing of minority communities. What are they going to do? Harass more poor people with moving violations and fuck with young black men walking while black?

    It really doesn't matter what the majority wants when the majority does take the brunt of police misconduct.

    The idea behind 'defund the police' is to reallocate police surpluses into programs that will help communities - that money doesn't just vanish the same way the PDs wouldn't just vanish.

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  20. #180
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    But you're not really doing anything. The Minneapolis link had it best, those yelling "defund police" don't live there. "You" are at best a tourist. You can't vote in referendums, you don't know anything of what it's like on a day-to-day basis, let alone walk around at night. You need to accept that as why this all failed at a time when you believed it shouldn't have. "We" live here. "You" don't.
    Fun facts;

    1> The USA is not the only country that exists.
    2> Time did not end yesterday.
    3> None of these efforts have "failed". They just have not gained much ground yet, in the USA in particular.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •