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 17 of 22 FirstFirst ...
7
15
16
17
18
19
... LastLast
  1. #321
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    43,694
    Quote Originally Posted by uuuhname View Post
    oh hey, look at that, here's something specific we can do about police reform.

    [video=youtu/video]
    If you seen Uvalde I think it's pretty fucking clear WE ALREADY DON'T HAVE SHERIFFS!


    We have over paid bully's in uniform that protect mostly a corrupt institution.

    We had a bunch of cops stand around one of them while his wife was being slaughtered in a classroom.


    Yes, yes I know he went in went out and "They took his gun and wouldn't let him back in" he left his wife to fucking die.
    Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis

  2. #322
    North Carolina town to be without full-time police after all officers resign

    The town of Kenly, N.C., will soon be without full-time police officers. All of the department’s officers have announced their intentions to quit — and now, residents have a lot of questions about what led to the resignations.

    The Johnston County Sheriff’s Office will respond to calls in Kenly so neighbors aren’t just left to fend for themselves.

    “I will assign deputies to patrol the streets to ensure public safety if and when needed,” said Sheriff Steve Bizzell.

    But business owners have concerns about relying on a county-wide police team, saying they want the town council to act immediately to try to keep the police force.

    ------
    Seems to me that the whole "defund police" spiel is missing an opportunity here.

  3. #323
    Merely a Setback PACOX's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    26,281
    What does that story have to do with defund the police?

    Also Biden is trying to give police even more money.
    Last edited by PACOX; 2022-07-23 at 12:55 AM.

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  4. #324
    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    What does that story have to do with defund the police?
    A response to those that think Uvalde story was relevant here.

  5. #325
    Quote Originally Posted by wunksta View Post
    That's the crux of the issue though. Do you believe any city should spend over 50% of their budget on police? Milwaukee, WI for example spent 58% of their budget just on police in 2020. Is this a good use of their budget?
    It depends on whether that is true and what the city is responsible for

    Different regions (especially in different countries) have split responsibilities in different ways for policing, education, and health-care so it's too different to say anything in particular; and one of them can part of city budget or not the other which means any comparison is just too messy. And it can also be more complicated than just part of it or not. It may make sense to have those responsibilities funded by larger regions (even federally) to even out disparities.

    Specifically for Milwaukee, WI it seems that the statement is wrong both in specifics and numbers.

    https://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibr...020Budget2.pdf has the police department (297M$) of a bit below 50% (not 58%) of the General Fund under City Council control (697M$). That means it is about 25% of the budget controlled by the City Council (1,118M$) - but the education budget is outside the control of the City Council and thus not included in the figures (it may also be about 1 billion $, meaning that the police shrinks to about 13% of the city budget in that sense).

    However, it may still be a bit too high - and the problem here is that the Wisconsin is a mess in terms of taxes, and as a consequence Milwaukee has had to cut expenditure a lot (likely too much) but not cut the police as much as everything else (for various reasons). Thus focusing on how big a percentage the police is of a specific budget part misses the actual problem: Milwaukee City is underfunded.

  6. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    You haven't been listening.

    The points are that it is unpopular (and pushing through unpopular issues is problematic - and has failed in multiple cities), but also that it is based on a bad analysis - the US police force is actually smaller per capita than in many other countries, the military equipment is free of charge so not a sign of overfunding, and alternatives will take time to take effect so redirecting police funds to them will in the short run create a worse situation - which will backfire, and then those programs will be terminated creating a bigger mess.
    Does the military equipment require upkeep? Does it require storage space? If so, it's not free. If so, it's a waste of money.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  7. #327
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Does the military equipment require upkeep? Does it require storage space? If so, it's not free. If so, it's a waste of money.
    Yes, there are obvious costs associated with it but the point is that it isn't that costly.

    And as previously stated there are different forms of military equipment - chairs and computers from the military require storage and upkeep, but may still be good use. Using bayonets as knifes may be ok; using military small arms may be ok in the US due to prevalence of similar weapons among criminals - whereas armored tracked vehicles seems less clear; unless the situation is really really bad.

  8. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Does the military equipment require upkeep? Does it require storage space? If so, it's not free. If so, it's a waste of money.
    Ukraine says "we'll gladly take it all off your hands!"

  9. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    Yes, there are obvious costs associated with it but the point is that it isn't that costly.

    And as previously stated there are different forms of military equipment - chairs and computers from the military require storage and upkeep, but may still be good use. Using bayonets as knifes may be ok; using military small arms may be ok in the US due to prevalence of similar weapons among criminals - whereas armored tracked vehicles seems less clear;
    So bad faith pedantry, and then this

    unless the situation is really really bad.
    disproven by j6. Not a real strong argument. Police shouldn't have that equipment at all.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  10. #330
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    So bad faith pedantry, and then this
    The main point is that 'defunding the police' leads to asking the wrong questions.

    The first question should be about funding the alternatives - and despite people claiming that is about funding alternatives we still get questions about what percentage is reasonable for the police - and not what absolute number is needed for social workers, or for removing lead to protect the kids as in Milwaukee.

    The second question about military equipment - its not so much about local PD, but one part is to limit 1033 to the right equipment - as was done by DoD and Obama, undone a bit by Trump, and possibly redone by Biden. But more importantly - why do the police feel the need to have armored vehicles - to protect against military-grade weapons?

    Note that the vehicles supplied by the military aren't tanks with guns, but armored vehicles protecting against guns.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    disproven by j6. Not a real strong argument. Police shouldn't have that equipment at all.
    There are cases where the police have used armored tracked vehicles for good purposes. Whether those cases are sufficiently many I don't know.

  11. #331
    Pandaren Monk wunksta's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    Specifically for Milwaukee, WI it seems that the statement is wrong both in specifics and numbers.

    https://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibr...020Budget2.pdf has the police department (297M$) of a bit below 50% (not 58%) of the General Fund under City Council control (697M$). That means it is about 25% of the budget controlled by the City Council (1,118M$) - but the education budget is outside the control of the City Council and thus not included in the figures (it may also be about 1 billion $, meaning that the police shrinks to about 13% of the city budget in that sense).
    This site is what I was using which also includes other data like the police commission and overtime costs. This page on the same site compares those figures to other cities budgets. This shows that Milwaukee still spends more of their budget on police even when compared to other cities of similar populations and budgets.

  12. #332
    Quote Originally Posted by wunksta View Post
    This site is what I was using which also includes other data like the police commission and overtime costs.
    Well, it's a 'Fire and Police Commission'; but still they put it 100% under the police department. What I find odd is that they complain about the lack of transparency in budgets, but they don't list what items they have included in their totals - i.e. they are less transparent than the cities.

    It's also clear that they are biased, and thus they don't want to show that 'city council' is different from overall city spending - which was the main problem with the numbers.

    Specifically they try to frame it as redirecting funds to education, although education budget isn't controlled by the city council; so they are hypocritically ignoring that education isn't part of the remaining percentage and still claiming that the funds could be redirected to education.

    However, the main problem is still getting more funds to the city.

  13. #333
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,799
    Quote Originally Posted by Deus Mortis View Post
    They are not difficult to understand for you because you pay attention to politics deeply. You fail completely on understanding the average person though. A lot of people are too fucking busy with life to invest as much time into politics as those of us on this board have. While on the surface Defund the Police would on face value, take money away from them, you have to remember something that the republicans have been saying for a long time. That is Defund Planned Parenthood, and when republicans say that they mean a lot more than just taking some money away.

    https://news.yale.edu/2022/02/04/res...licy-proposals
    If someone is going to take an active part in politics such that they start hearing the phrase "defund the police" (and yes, you must be an active participant in politics to ever hear this) then the logical response is to look up why the phrase is being used. The idiot's response is to assume what it means and start going on a crusade. But that's one of the big issues here.

    Everyone in this thread participates in politics to some degree enough that they are on this forum posting about it. Either they know what it means and are trying to argue some kind of weird devil's advocate, or they're already opposed to everything the left stands for (because let's face it, nobody on the right is a single issue voter, they've all adopted the anti-left stance) and will sit here and willfully use the phrase incorrectly, even when they know they're wrong, because it's an attempt to make someone on the left look bad.

    Nearly every person in this country has the internet literally at their fingertips, and can look up a phrase, slogan, or whatever in an instant. Choosing not to do so shows a willful kneejerk reaction born from their own ignorance.
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

  14. #334
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    If someone is going to take an active part in politics such that they start hearing the phrase "defund the police" (and yes, you must be an active participant in politics to ever hear this) then the logical response is to look up why the phrase is being used. The idiot's response is to assume what it means and start going on a crusade. But that's one of the big issues here.

    Everyone in this thread participates in politics to some degree enough that they are on this forum posting about it. Either they know what it means and are trying to argue some kind of weird devil's advocate, or they're already opposed to everything the left stands for (because let's face it, nobody on the right is a single issue voter, they've all adopted the anti-left stance) and will sit here and willfully use the phrase incorrectly, even when they know they're wrong, because it's an attempt to make someone on the left look bad.

    Nearly every person in this country has the internet literally at their fingertips, and can look up a phrase, slogan, or whatever in an instant. Choosing not to do so shows a willful kneejerk reaction born from their own ignorance.
    Willful ignorance at its best. You really think that, for instance, parents have time to check up on the internet what a slogan means ?

    It is a bad slogan. Period. Better version have already been proposed in this very thread. Plus, it seems that the Police overall in the US is underfunded ironically.

    I guess you find this a good slogan is you are against policing, meaning you are privileged enough to live in a privileged area where policing is not needed.

  15. #335
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,902
    Quote Originally Posted by Specialka View Post
    Willful ignorance at its best. You really think that, for instance, parents have time to check up on the internet what a slogan means ?
    1> Yes. Were talking about 30 seconds or so.
    2> If they don't, they don't have time to express any opinion or interpretation or viewpoint on the movement and probably haven't heard it in the first place.

    It is a bad slogan. Period. Better version have already been proposed in this very thread. Plus, it seems that the Police overall in the US is underfunded ironically.
    You can't possibly be serious about that "underfunded" malarkey.

    I guess you find this a good slogan is you are against policing, meaning you are privileged enough to live in a privileged area where policing is not needed.
    That would be "every area". It's the most-policed parts of the USA that also see the majority of police abuse and the least trust of the institution.


  16. #336
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    1> Yes. Were talking about 30 seconds or so.
    2> If they don't, they don't have time to express any opinion or interpretation or viewpoint on the movement and probably haven't heard it in the first place.



    You can't possibly be serious about that "underfunded" malarkey.


    That would be "every area". It's the most-policed parts of the USA that also see the majority of police abuse and the least trust of the institution.
    Talked like a person who has no kid .

    Get a better slogan, and you get a better response, simple as that.

  17. #337
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,902
    Quote Originally Posted by Specialka View Post
    Talked like a person who has no kid .
    You have no idea what my personal life is, dude.

    If you don't have 30 seconds to look up a movement's goals, you don't have 30 seconds to watch the news, or check Facebook stories, or follow that link your friend sent you, or whatever. You literally do not have the time to have learned of the slogan in question, either. Much less to actually form any informed opinion about any of it.

    Your position on this just celebrates willful ignorance as an approach to life.

    Get a better slogan, and you get a better response, simple as that.
    This is a complaint about marketing, not the movement, and you folks keep deflecting to the marketing because you don't want to talk about the movement.

    It's boring, it's willfully ignorant, and it's a waste of everyone's time.


  18. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    If someone is going to take an active part in politics such that they start hearing the phrase "defund the police" (and yes, you must be an active participant in politics to ever hear this) then the logical response is to look up why the phrase is being used.
    No.
    The logical response is to tune the person out. Because logically, the words mean exactly how they're used. And people in high crime areas don't make time to listen to idiocy.

  19. #339
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,902
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    No.
    The logical response is to tune the person out. Because logically, the words mean exactly how they're used. And people in high crime areas don't make time to listen to idiocy.
    If they're presuming it's "idiocy" without looking it up, they aren't being "logical", they're kneejerking over baseless assumptions and prejudices.


  20. #340
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You have no idea what my personal life is, dude.

    If you don't have 30 seconds to look up a movement's goals, you don't have 30 seconds to watch the news, or check Facebook stories, or follow that link your friend sent you, or whatever. You literally do not have the time to have learned of the slogan in question, either. Much less to actually form any informed opinion about any of it.

    Your position on this just celebrates willful ignorance as an approach to life.



    This is a complaint about marketing, not the movement, and you folks keep deflecting to the marketing because you don't want to talk about the movement.

    It's boring, it's willfully ignorant, and it's a waste of everyone's time.
    Why talk about the movement ? I think it is great to hope for a world without the need for police. Not realistic as our world stands, though.

Posting Permissions

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