Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
7
LastLast
  1. #81
    I keep my head shaved year-round because (1) my hair grows out thick, making it hard to maintain, and (2) the head is the warmest part of the body, so keeping my head cool is a high priority (especially because I become dehydrated easily) even in the winter, and (3) because I sweat a lot, shorter hair retains less moisture, so the sweat evaporates quicker.

    Please stop generalizing that men who shave their heads are trying to "send a message". It's fine if you don't like my shaved hair style but please, for the love of God, forego the judgement.

  2. #82
    The Undying Themius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    32,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    Chatting with my wife yesterday, we were talking about this and some surrounding issues. My hypothesis is that the United States combines a peaceful Western European level of tolerance for criminality, plus a population that's much more criminally inclined than Western Europe, plus an unwillingness to take genuinely extreme measures (significantly increased levels of exile, capital punishment, or corporal punishment). So, we get a series of twisted half measures like a massive carceral state, huge surveillance apparatus, and police behavior ranging from low-level harassment to outright violence. No one much likes this arrangement, but it's hard to see a path to significant improvement.
    "We need to kill more people"

    We have studies on this saying that doesn't work so...

    You think we need a tougher system when we have one of the toughest in the western world to begin with? What foolishness is this? "let's be even more tough!" when it clearly isn't working.

    Significant improvement is rather easy, we do what other countries do.

    Firstly get rid of the most of the fucking police departments. We have far too many leading to differing degrees of standards. It also makes it hard to take a bad cop and move them to another department when the department is one per state. You wouldn't end up with an officer in Florida being moved from one district to another because he falsified confessions and was given the option to go to jail or move... so he moves and then locks up any black person and charges them with an unsolved robbery. Shit like that doesn't happen when you have a single state wide department.

    Training becomes standardized everyone within a single state has one form of training you don't get departments implementing their vastly different own sense of training.

    You also don't get officers who are rivals to other officers because they're from another town. This is a pretty big problem in New Jersey and I imagine it is the same in other places. Where officers in Jersey City give officers from Secaucus shit because... they're from differing towns. The tribalism dies when everyone is a single department.

    There is no need to have sheriffs, and town officers, and state officers we don't need over 18k departments with over 18k different training methods and different standards.

    The answer is to condense departments, standardize training, require higher bars.

    Violent crime rates in the UK are about the same to higher than the USA so this idea that "we're just violent people" is unfounded.

  3. #83
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    Chatting with my wife yesterday, we were talking about this and some surrounding issues. My hypothesis is that the United States combines a peaceful Western European level of tolerance for criminality, plus a population that's much more criminally inclined than Western Europe, plus an unwillingness to take genuinely extreme measures (significantly increased levels of exile, capital punishment, or corporal punishment). So, we get a series of twisted half measures like a massive carceral state, huge surveillance apparatus, and police behavior ranging from low-level harassment to outright violence. No one much likes this arrangement, but it's hard to see a path to significant improvement.
    With regards to the bold, it's necessarily combined with an unwillingness to consider and implement social reforms to address the underlying socioeconomic factors contributing to that increased criminality.

    Western Europe and Canada and Australia don't all have lower rates of criminal offense, and particularly violent offense, by accident. And there's really nothing about the USA's circumstances that provide any insurmountable expectation, here.

    And it isn't that those nations have stricter penalties for crime. Pretty typically, the opposite.

    You need to be willing to discuss and implement policy to address underlying socioeconomic factors if you really want to address the problem of crime. This isn't a wild hypothesis; it's standard policy practice pretty much everywhere.


    As for police culture in particular, there seems to have been a shift among American police forces from seeing themselves as serving and protecting their communities, to approaching crime as a "war" against the "enemy", said "enemy" being that same community, or at least sections of it that are indistinguishable from the rest.

    In Canada, if I get pulled over by a cop while driving, he's going to saunter up, tap on my window, we'll have a conversation, he might give me a ticket, that's pretty much it. In the USA, the officer usually approaches weapon drawn, and is in many cases ordering the civilian to step out or show their hands or the like; it's presumed to be a violently hostile situation. That shift in approach matters. It means civilians are, quite rightly, afraid of the police, rather than seeing them as protectors. It means every interaction with an officer starts out negative, and is likely to get worse. It means that not only do the police see the people as their enemy, the people see the police as an enemy. Wrap that up and let it cook for 50 years, and you get the modern United States.

  4. #84
    What I find hilarious is that in towns like mine, which rank in the top 20% safety-wise...

    Yes, we have had a murder but it was because the kid was schizophrenic. The most crime that happens are marijuana busts, domestic disputes and petty larceny... it's a joke.

    My town is like the most boring place a cop could work in, it is so safe.

    Even the residents are getting mad about people gettin' jailed over marijuana lol, "Do something else, leave them alone it's about to get legalized!" It really is about to, btw. with total expungements.

    I will say this though... the cops in this town are A+. They are really good people and I like 'em all.

  5. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    In Canada, if I get pulled over by a cop while driving, he's going to saunter up, tap on my window, we'll have a conversation, he might give me a ticket, that's pretty much it. In the USA, the officer usually approaches weapon drawn, and is in many cases ordering the civilian to step out or show their hands or the like; it's presumed to be a violently hostile situation.
    Snipping out a lot of inaccuracy to focus on one particular bit of inaccuracy. The rest of your post is about as accurate of a grasp of the United States as this dystopian fantasy. There's no point addressing a longer post when the basics aren't even close to right.

  6. #86
    Mechagnome Reaper0329's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Southern US
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post

    - - - Updated - - -


    You did miss the one important thing of "banned in 1986", you cannot manufacture new machineguns after 1986 for us mere peasants. You can only buy machineguns registered before 1986, which is why they run $8000 and way way up. The $200 tax stamp is a transfer tax, but is tied to a specific transfer of a specific weapon, rather than getting the stamp, then looking for a product. You buy the product, file the form with $200, then wait for approval (currently about a year).

    An FFL can get his Special Occupational Tax (SOT) for $500 a year, which allows him to transfer to/from other SOT dealers without the $200 tax on each transaction. Otherwise he would pay the $200 tax each time.


    More worrisome is how many of the young men are clearly losing their hairline!
    I knew I missed something...lol that's what I get for typing up law on downtime at work. Good catch, and thank you.

  7. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by Cruor View Post
    Yeah... look at those two racist black police officers going after that black criminal. They must have targeted him because he is black... like they are.
    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke View Post
    You are aware of the context of those photos right?
    I was not, actually. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_campaign Reverse image searching works wonders. Yikes. What kind of damage would police dogs do in situations like that? It's hard to tell from a still image. Either way, absolutely insane stuff. All this as recently as the 1960's.

    I have to wonder how they justified this insanely evil BS to themselves in a country that's supposed to have a right to protest.

  8. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper0329 View Post
    No, you can't.

    The operative part of that is the "Federal and State laws" bit. Ignoring the state law component, legally owning what the statute classifies as a machine gun requires compliance with the National Firearms Act. In order to comply and get the $200 tax stamp, you'll need to undergo an extensive background check (I want to say that's done by the FBI but don't quote me on that one), get the approval of your local sheriff, submit your fingerprints to the BATF, and wait about six months for everything to clear. At that point, you'll be issued a $200 tax stamp allowing you to buy one machine gun of your choice...if you have around ~$20,000 lying around and can find a Class III firearms dealer. They're fairly rare. I do not know if Class III weapons are subject to the same FFL rules as regular guns (meaning, I don't know if you can do the transaction online and have it mailed to any regular FFL dealer; the dealer side of the law isn't my forte).

    The Virginia statute doesn't make an exception to that presumption of offensive purpose for possession outside of one's premises for ranges or practice, which I find interesting. It's also interesting the law would specify empty shells, but that's more legal musings than anything else.

    Not calling you out or anything; I just find that's a common misconception. You can get things that look like machine guns all day long, but getting an actual machine gun is usually prohibitively expensive and legally onerous.

    On topic, I would presume the whole shaved head thing is simply so that suspects could not leverage the officer's hair in the event of an altercation. I don't really see anything spooky beyond that.
    You say you can't but then go on to say how you can lol

    A person being poor isn't the issue here just whether or not it's possible.
    - Bring back my damn zoom distance/MoP Portals - I read OP minimum, 1st page maximum-make wow alt friendly again -Please post constructively(topkek) -updated 2/8/2019

  9. #89
    Mechagnome Reaper0329's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Southern US
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by Drusin View Post
    You say you can't but then go on to say how you can lol

    A person being poor isn't the issue here just whether or not it's possible.
    And it's not possible. Your original claim was that a person can go into a department store and walk out with a machine gun. You cannot do that. The only way to get an automatic weapon is 1) from a vendor allowed to sell such items and 2) after a strenuous background check and legal loopholes, and 3) only for a limited set of weapons manufactured before the act came into effect.

  10. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by morpen View Post
    There being less crime because society is generally improving, doesn't rule out that crime there still is has gotten more hardcore/gang related.
    Ii didn't say crime was on the rise you idiot.
    Hardcore crime involving fewer violent crimes?

    Like what, they listen to thrash metal while committing their fewer crimes? LOL.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  11. #91
    The Unstoppable Force Ghostpanther's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    USA, Ohio
    Posts
    20,374
    Quote Originally Posted by Drusin View Post
    You say you can't but then go on to say how you can lol

    A person being poor isn't the issue here just whether or not it's possible.
    It is a issue when most people cannot buy one. Also, link the last time a person used a machine gun ( as defined by the FBI as being a machine gun ) to commit a crime.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    I was not, actually. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_campaign Reverse image searching works wonders. Yikes. What kind of damage would police dogs do in situations like that? It's hard to tell from a still image. Either way, absolutely insane stuff. All this as recently as the 1960's.

    I have to wonder how they justified this insanely evil BS to themselves in a country that's supposed to have a right to protest.
    We have the right for peaceful protests. And in a lot of cases, permits are needed to do such in some places. Blocking access for other citizens to a public building or road, is not legal unless you get a permit which allows for such. If one is denied a permit, there are legal ways to challenge it. Otherwise, you can create violence by acting unlawful. Dogs are still used by the police and have been found to be very effective tools for them.
    The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that… it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” - Thomas Jefferson.

    If I do not respond to your post directed at myself, there will be three reasons. 1. You are on my ignore list. 2. You did not make a post I felt was worthy of a response. 3. I simply never saw it, as I do not dig thru posts if I been offline for a while.

  12. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by CmdrShep2154 View Post
    1950s



    present



    Where did this shaved head bs come from?
    https://newrepublic.com/article/1416...ior-philosophy

    Should American police work harder to attract a more classy recruit?

    Should we enforce more hair in the police dress code?
    There's probly some deep shit to unpack here around the heavy use of ex military men and the mentality of the "war on drugs" and its effects in the culture outlook of a police force.

  13. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    In the USA, the officer usually approaches weapon drawn, and is in many cases ordering the civilian to step out or show their hands or the like; it's presumed to be a violently hostile situation.
    This has not been my experience or the experience of any of my friends (among which there is a good mix of ethnicities). I've had several encounters with police over the years and I have never once had a weapon drawn on me or have seen police behaving with anything other than professionalism. One even talked about surfing with me while I was living in Florida. People's perceptions are seasoned by what we see in the media. I suspect those incidents, while numerous, are still a relatively small portion of the total police and community interactions which surely number in the tens of thousands every day.

  14. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by CmdrShep2154 View Post
    1950s



    present



    Where did this shaved head bs come from?
    https://newrepublic.com/article/1416...ior-philosophy

    Should American police work harder to attract a more classy recruit?

    Should we enforce more hair in the police dress code?
    You act like that first photo doesn't still happen today? And then you linked a pic from a tv show? And then complained about haircuts lol. You're funny :P

  15. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    With regards to the bold, it's necessarily combined with an unwillingness to consider and implement social reforms to address the underlying socioeconomic factors contributing to that increased criminality.

    Western Europe and Canada and Australia don't all have lower rates of criminal offense, and particularly violent offense, by accident. And there's really nothing about the USA's circumstances that provide any insurmountable expectation, here.

    And it isn't that those nations have stricter penalties for crime. Pretty typically, the opposite.

    You need to be willing to discuss and implement policy to address underlying socioeconomic factors if you really want to address the problem of crime. This isn't a wild hypothesis; it's standard policy practice pretty much everywhere.


    As for police culture in particular, there seems to have been a shift among American police forces from seeing themselves as serving and protecting their communities, to approaching crime as a "war" against the "enemy", said "enemy" being that same community, or at least sections of it that are indistinguishable from the rest.

    In Canada, if I get pulled over by a cop while driving, he's going to saunter up, tap on my window, we'll have a conversation, he might give me a ticket, that's pretty much it. In the USA, the officer usually approaches weapon drawn, and is in many cases ordering the civilian to step out or show their hands or the like; it's presumed to be a violently hostile situation. That shift in approach matters. It means civilians are, quite rightly, afraid of the police, rather than seeing them as protectors. It means every interaction with an officer starts out negative, and is likely to get worse. It means that not only do the police see the people as their enemy, the people see the police as an enemy. Wrap that up and let it cook for 50 years, and you get the modern United States.
    While i'm not fan of LEOs for personal reasons, this is you lying. Stop lying.
    "It doesn't matter if you believe me or not but common sense doesn't really work here. You're mad, I'm mad. We're all MAD here."

  16. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorianus View Post
    The Militarization of your Police Force is just a byproduct of the 393 million http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/filea...ms-Numbers.pdf Firearms that are in the Wild in the US basicaly, its a response because of the paranoia of getting or getting not shot every day on your job.
    There's also the point that the US police force is one of the main recruiters of soldiers post service. There's whil papers on transitioning from military service to law enforcement as it was/is seen as a natural fit. This seemed to start after Vietnam when Alot of soldiers demobbed and needed work and the war on drugs really kicked off.

    Up side is it gave them work and they were all ready firearms trained.

    Downside is they took the same militaristic approach to things. Which isnt the right way, criminals arn't some foreign fighters and orders shouldn't blindly be followed.

  17. #97
    The Patient Yadryonych's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Матушка Россия
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by CryotriX View Post
    That's weird, there's another image from that era that stuck in my mind. I wonder why.
    Probably because you expected to see American policemen in this thread, and those classy gentlemen with sideburns are actually Canadians

  18. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post

    In Canada, if I get pulled over by a cop while driving, he's going to saunter up, tap on my window, we'll have a conversation, he might give me a ticket, that's pretty much it. In the USA, the officer usually approaches weapon drawn, and is in many cases ordering the civilian to step out or show their hands or the like; it's presumed to be a violently hostile situation. That shift in approach matters. It means civilians are, quite rightly, afraid of the police, rather than seeing them as protectors. It means every interaction with an officer starts out negative, and is likely to get worse. It means that not only do the police see the people as their enemy, the people see the police as an enemy. Wrap that up and let it cook for 50 years, and you get the modern United States.
    What complete and utter bullshit.

  19. #99
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,627
    Quote Originally Posted by neocount View Post
    This has not been my experience or the experience of any of my friends (among which there is a good mix of ethnicities). I've had several encounters with police over the years and I have never once had a weapon drawn on me or have seen police behaving with anything other than professionalism. One even talked about surfing with me while I was living in Florida. People's perceptions are seasoned by what we see in the media. I suspect those incidents, while numerous, are still a relatively small portion of the total police and community interactions which surely number in the tens of thousands every day.
    Maybe, I'll freely admit I'm talking about what I see officers saying in the news and my own personal experiences when traveling through the US. The latter is admittedly highway patrol, maybe that's different.

  20. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Maybe, I'll freely admit I'm talking about what I see officers saying in the news and my own personal experiences when traveling through the US. The latter is admittedly highway patrol, maybe that's different.
    You have had a police draw their gun on you while traveling in the USA?

    I have been pulled over probably 6-8 times by police. Received 2 speeding tickets and been required to do sobriety tests twice. Not once have I ever had a weapon drawn on me or ever for a second thought my life was at risk. I was just chatting to my coworkers here, and of the 6 of them (2 of them poc), not a single one has had a weapon drawn or ever been afraid of the police while being pulled over. You seriously need to stop watching the news to get your facts about police.

Posting Permissions

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