calbear93 said:

---

BearForce2 said:

---

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/us/police-violence-defund-debate-trnd/index.html

Chicago

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/19/us/chicago-shootings-weekend/index.html

New York

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/nyregion/nyc-shootings-nypd.html

---

Then the people in those cities should vote out the leaders. Non-federal crimes are purely within the jurisdiction of local government. If the people vote for the local leaders that create the environment, they get the government they chose and deserve. We all live with the choices we make. And if I don't like the crime rate and politics in a specific city, that will definitely be a strong factor in where I choose to live.

More than anything, crime rate is a reflection of economics and strong family values. The real question is are the liberal economic policies generating sufficient economic and family stability and well being that people have more to lose to deter against committing petty and serious crimes? I don't think so, but that is the core of the debate between liberal and conservative fiscal policy. I don't think liberal or conservative social policies play a lot into it, but just my opinion.

---

So you think they should vote out their leaders for a 6-month increase in the murder rate after years of falling numbers? That seems a bit fickle.

sycasey said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

BearForce2 said:

---

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/us/police-violence-defund-debate-trnd/index.html

Chicago

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/19/us/chicago-shootings-weekend/index.html

New York

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/nyregion/nyc-shootings-nypd.html

---

Then the people in those cities should vote out the leaders. Non-federal crimes are purely within the jurisdiction of local government. If the people vote for the local leaders that create the environment, they get the government they chose and deserve. We all live with the choices we make. And if I don't like the crime rate and politics in a specific city, that will definitely be a strong factor in where I choose to live.

More than anything, crime rate is a reflection of economics and strong family values. The real question is are the liberal economic policies generating sufficient economic and family stability and well being that people have more to lose to deter against committing petty and serious crimes? I don't think so, but that is the core of the debate between liberal and conservative fiscal policy. I don't think liberal or conservative social policies play a lot into it, but just my opinion.

---

So you think they should vote out their leaders for a 6-month increase in the murder rate after years of falling numbers? That seems a bit fickle.

---

So why was that your take away? Did you even read what I wrote? I will highlight it for you.

If people in Chicago keep voting for the leaders, they must prefer the city as is over a city run by conservatives. And no one in the federal government need to intercede on a purely local matter. Just like UN has no authority over what is purely a US matter, the federal government and non-Chicagoans have no vested interest in purely local matters. If I don't like the way Chicago is run, I won't move there.

And as I stated, the real issue of crime rate is economics. Which type of economics will generate more broader wealth so that people have more to lose and won't commit petty crimes? Let's debate that instead of which cities I don't live in are run by which party and therefore has higher crime rate.

calbear93 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

BearForce2 said:

---

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/us/police-violence-defund-debate-trnd/index.html

Chicago

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/19/us/chicago-shootings-weekend/index.html

New York

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/nyregion/nyc-shootings-nypd.html

---

Then the people in those cities should vote out the leaders. Non-federal crimes are purely within the jurisdiction of local government. If the people vote for the local leaders that create the environment, they get the government they chose and deserve. We all live with the choices we make. And if I don't like the crime rate and politics in a specific city, that will definitely be a strong factor in where I choose to live.

More than anything, crime rate is a reflection of economics and strong family values. The real question is are the liberal economic policies generating sufficient economic and family stability and well being that people have more to lose to deter against committing petty and serious crimes? I don't think so, but that is the core of the debate between liberal and conservative fiscal policy. I don't think liberal or conservative social policies play a lot into it, but just my opinion.

---

So you think they should vote out their leaders for a 6-month increase in the murder rate after years of falling numbers? That seems a bit fickle.

---

So why was that your take away? Did you even read what I wrote? I will highlight it for you.

If people in Chicago keep voting for the leaders, they must prefer the city as is over a city run by conservatives. And no one in the federal government need to intercede on a purely local matter. Just like UN has no authority over what is purely a US matter, the federal government and non-Chicagoans have no vested interest in purely local matters. If I don't like the way Chicago is run, I won't move there.

And as I stated, the real issue of crime rate is economics. Which type of economics will generate more broader wealth so that people have more to lose and won't commit petty crimes? Let's debate that instead of which cities I don't live in are run by which party and therefore has higher crime rate.

---

That's fine. I thought that since you led with a statement that the people in those cities should vote out their leaders, you were making a recommendation. I see now you were proposing it as more of a hypothetical, as in, IF the voters don't like it they can change it. Fair enough.

LMK5 said:

---

One thing's for sure, the Democrat mayors who are pushing for police defunding know very well that crime in black neighborhoods will go up as a result. No amount of championship-level BI posting can get around this.

---

That's not what happened in Camden

calbear93 said:

---

LMK5 said:

---

One thing's for sure, the Democrat mayors who are pushing for police defunding know very well that crime in black neighborhoods will go up as a result. No amount of championship-level BI posting can get around this.

---

Well, then so be it. Every American citizen who is not a felon can vote, whether they are white, black, Asian, etc. If they want a city without a police force and with an increase in crime rate, they must believe that the higher crime rate is preferable to police misbehavior.

I would want a reformed but healthy police. Defunding or weakening the police force would not be something I would want. I would vote against any mayor who supported defunding the police and, if that fails, I would not live in a city that went down that path.

Those who successfully choose otherwise will live with the consequences. I don't happen to believe that I need to protect or shield any community with my wisdom. The voters are grown ups and they can choose for themselves and live with their choice.

---

IMO this kind of thing will work itself out. It's very unlikely the police force will be fully abolished anywhere, but different cities can try different reforms and see how it works. The key effect of the protests is that such reform is actually politically feasible now.

BearChemist said:

---

Wow, that's pathetically embarrassing. By the way, has GoldenOne appeared in the Trump vs. Biden video battle thread?

---

You mean the non-existent "Boy, that was a pretty embarassing Biden video, think I'll stop now" thread?

LMK5 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

LMK5 said:

---

One thing's for sure, the Democrat mayors who are pushing for police defunding know very well that crime in black neighborhoods will go up as a result. No amount of championship-level BI posting can get around this.

---

That's not what happened in Camden

---

What happened in Camden was the police force was rebuilt from the ground up and then refocused on community policing. It wasn't defunded: Camden police

---

What Camden did was defund local police and shifted policing to the sheriff's department. I believe that allowed them to get around the powerful local police union.

Defund the police means many things to many people. While most think that defund police means moving some but not all (now there is a full spectrum of how much to defund), there are those who take it literally as noted below.

And that is the stupidity of the movement. It uses the most extreme words to describe different things, enabling a troll like Trump to exploit it using the literal words.


From an Atlantic article:

All well and good, said one of the protesters. (Not in those words.) The mayor's brokenness aside, the relevant question was: "Will you defund the Minneapolis Police Department?" After a pause to make a slight adjustment to his drooping face mask, Frey said, "I do not support the full abolition of the police department."

"All right," replied his questioner, "then get the **** out of here." Which Frey did, through a gantlet of shouting protesters that recalled Cersei's walk of shame in Game of Thrones. The mayor managed to remain fully clothed.

Another take:

http://www.citypages.com/news/minneapolis-city-council-members-consider-disbanding-the-police/570993291

blungld said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

The irony isn't lost on me that you think TDS is a terminal illness and that liberalism is a mental disease but you support a President and a party who think COVID is 99% harmless and not worth addressing any more.

---

If this COVID is nothing more than the sniffles or a Deep State hoax, ignoring of course the 140K dead Americans, why don't we try this?

Every person who believes it's fake or inconsequential, be given COVID while the rest of us shelter in place. I mean that gives everyone what they want, right? Quick to herd immunity, the Trumpers get to "prove" that the disease is nothing, we all get to make our own choice, and the country has a quick plan that can be over with in about 4-5 weeks.

Oh wait, you mean the Trumpers won't do this? Because those are only WORDS they say to argue against Liberals? They don't mean them at all? They actually do know that the disease is real and dangerous, they just don't want to admit it? Ah, I see, I didn't realize they are literally willing to die for this president and everything is about saving face and owning the Libs.

Hey OneNote, you willing to get infected to prove your point?

---

There you go again, just making stuff up. Please show me where I ever said COVID-19 was just a deep state hoax. Or that coronavirus was fake or inconsequential. You won't be able to, because I've never said any of this. The virus is clearly a serious threat, especially to the elderly and those with compromised immune system. In the short term, it's even a more serious threat than liberalism.


Liberalism is a mental illness.

Let's go fill circle. Camden defunded the police and crime went down.

dajo9 said:

---

Let's go fill circle. Camden defunded the police and crime went down.

---

Here's the story of the Camden police. Resources were redeployed.: https://www.businessinsider.com/camden-new-jersey-police-disbanded-but-theres-more-to-story-2020-6

LMK5 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

LMK5 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

LMK5 said:

---

One thing's for sure, the Democrat mayors who are pushing for police defunding know very well that crime in black neighborhoods will go up as a result. No amount of championship-level BI posting can get around this.

---

That's not what happened in Camden

---

What happened in Camden was the police force was rebuilt from the ground up and then refocused on community policing. It wasn't defunded: Camden police

---

What Camden did was defund local police and shifted policing to the sheriff's department. I believe that allowed them to get around the powerful local police union.

Defund the police means many things to many people. While most think that defund police means moving some but not all (now there is a full spectrum of how much to defund), there are those who take it literally as noted below.

And that is the stupidity of the movement. It uses the most extreme words to describe different things, enabling a troll like Trump to exploit it using the literal words.


From an Atlantic article:

All well and good, said one of the protesters. (Not in those words.) The mayor's brokenness aside, the relevant question was: "Will you defund the Minneapolis Police Department?" After a pause to make a slight adjustment to his drooping face mask, Frey said, "I do not support the full abolition of the police department."

"All right," replied his questioner, "then get the **** out of here." Which Frey did, through a gantlet of shouting protesters that recalled Cersei's walk of shame in Game of Thrones. The mayor managed to remain fully clothed.

Another take:

http://www.citypages.com/news/minneapolis-city-council-members-consider-disbanding-the-police/570993291

---

The lady who questioned Frey was pretty clear by stating she don't want "no mo police": https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/chants-shame-boos-protest-minneapolis-mayor-jacob-frey-1011261/

From the article: "We have a yes or no question for you: Will you commit to defunding the Minneapolis Police Department? We don't want no more police, is that clear?" the organizer asked.

---

Is that the only voice on the matter?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/06/19/what-does-defund-the-police-mean-and-does-it-have-merit/amp/

LMK5 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Let's go fill circle. Camden defunded the police and crime went down.

---

Here's the story of the Camden police. Resources were redeployed.: https://www.businessinsider.com/camden-new-jersey-police-disbanded-but-theres-more-to-story-2020-6

---

Are you in favor of what was done in Camden or against it?

calbear93 said:

---

LMK5 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Let's go fill circle. Camden defunded the police and crime went down.

---

Here's the story of the Camden police. Resources were redeployed.: https://www.businessinsider.com/camden-new-jersey-police-disbanded-but-theres-more-to-story-2020-6

---

And notice how no one talks about what actually happened during the mid 90s in New York City when, prior to that, people assumed they were going to get mugged walking down Broadway or riding the subway. I wonder why no one talks about that, but uses a misleading narrative of Camden as an example.

---

All you need to do is look upthread from earlier in the day

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/96679/replies/1775237

Unit2Sucks said:

---

When did conservatives stop saying that the government was wasteful and that spending more money on government services would improve them? That's what we were told about schools right?

Somehow it doesn't seem to apply to police force and the military.

---

Yeah, I don't think conservatives would be for cutting school budget by 50% because some teachers are crappy and their union is too strong. We may want reform, we may want to hold teachers accountable, and provide options for kids in poorer neighborhoods to have charter schools, but when have we said defund the schools as a chant? I am all for managing efficiently the police budget and think the police union and retirement packages for police are too strong, and I think we need police reform.

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

When did conservatives stop saying that the government was wasteful and that spending more money on government services would improve them? That's what we were told about schools right?

Somehow it doesn't seem to apply to police force and the military.

---

Yeah, I don't think conservatives would be for cutting school budget by 50% because some teachers are crappy and their union is too strong. We may want reform, we may want to hold teachers accountable, and provide options for kids in poorer neighborhoods to have charter schools, but when have we said defund the schools as a chant? I am all for managing efficiently the police budget and think the police union and retirement packages for police are too strong, and I think we need police reform.

---

See, I've actually worked with teachers. In fact, a lot of teachers. Most of them are good, despite what conservatives would have you think. And the ones at the private school I worked at are no better than the ones at the public schools my youngest attended or the parochial school my eldest attended for elementary and junior high.

Additionally, having raised two children, I've interacted with their teachers. Most of them have been really good. Last year's P.E. teacher was the first teacher that I've ever actually thought about speaking to a principal about. He sucked worse than the Vote Blue No Matter Who posts on this board.

One of my proudest moments of my younger daughter is during her junior high's Open House when she went with her mom (I forget why I didn't go to this one) to go visit her science teacher. Her teacher was a fill-in teacher for that year and I don't think she was particularly loved by either the parents or the students. She was a little weird. But my daughter said "Let's go visit Ms. (whateverhernamewas). She tries."

My daughter and my wife were the only ones in her classroom. She was thrilled they came in. Said my kid was an excellent science student (she is).

Nobody who doesn't witness it or has to do the job will ever understand all that teachers give of themselves and their time. They are not milking the system. They are getting paid too little to do a very important job and by the end of the school year they are spent.

Spend a little more time appreciating teachers and a lot less time slagging them.

Matthew Patel said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

When did conservatives stop saying that the government was wasteful and that spending more money on government services would improve them? That's what we were told about schools right?

Somehow it doesn't seem to apply to police force and the military.

---

Yeah, I don't think conservatives would be for cutting school budget by 50% because some teachers are crappy and their union is too strong. We may want reform, we may want to hold teachers accountable, and provide options for kids in poorer neighborhoods to have charter schools, but when have we said defund the schools as a chant? I am all for managing efficiently the police budget and think the police union and retirement packages for police are too strong, and I think we need police reform.

---

See, I've actually worked with teachers. In fact, a lot of teachers. Most of them are good, despite what conservatives would have you think. And the ones at the private school I worked at are no better than the ones at the public schools my youngest attended or the parochial school my eldest attended for elementary and junior high.

Additionally, having raised two children, I've interacted with their teachers. Most of them have been really good. Last year's P.E. teacher was the first teacher that I've ever actually thought about speaking to a principal about. He sucked worse than the Vote Blue No Matter Who posts on this board.

One of my proudest moments of my younger daughter is during her junior high's Open House when she went with her mom (I forget why I didn't go to this one) to go visit her science teacher. Her teacher was a fill-in teacher for that year and I don't think she was particularly loved by either the parents or the students. She was a little weird. But my daughter said "Let's go visit Ms. (whateverhernamewas). She tries."

My daughter and my wife were the only ones in her classroom. She was thrilled they came in. Said my kid was an excellent science student (she is).

Nobody who doesn't witness it or has to do the job will ever understand all that teachers give of themselves and their time. They are not milking the system. They are getting paid too little to do a very important job and by the end of the school year they are spent.

Spend a little more time appreciating teachers and a lot less time slagging them.

---

Well, that's just you using my post to not necessary respond but writing something you just wanted to write. Or you were just reading into what I wrote that I didn't intend.

Where was I slagging on teachers? U2 made a comment of comparing what liberals are saying about defunding the police with conservatives position on holding school districts accountable for performance.

Well, I think you agree that there are "some teachers" who are crappy. Substantially all of them are great and passionate about teaching. My teachers growing up were particularly encouraging, driving me to strive as much as I can. But there are some crappy teachers. That is all I wrote.

Despite that, we do not, and have not, asked to defund the schools, have we? Maybe allow charter schools by parents, especially in LAUSD where the school system and the administrators, irrespective of the teachers, are one of the worst political organizations. A majority of teachers, just like majority of police, are brave and sacrificial. The bad ones get the press, and the bad ones should be held accountable despite the unions wanting to protect them and despite the politicians catering to the unions for votes and election support.

So, as a product of public school and as a parent of kids who mostly went to public schools, I am definitely not in favor of cutting school budget (would want higher budget) despite some crappy teachers (again some, but most are great) and strong union that protect even the crappy teachers. Most of the police officers are great, but the union sucks and there needs to be more accountability but not defunding of the police. So, no, what the conservatives have said about holding bad teachers accountable and allowing parents in bad school districts to create their own charter schools is not the same as what the liberals are now saying about defunding the police.

calpoly said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

When did conservatives stop saying that the government was wasteful and that spending more money on government services would improve them? That's what we were told about schools right?

Somehow it doesn't seem to apply to police force and the military.

---

Don't try to understand conservative logic.

---

#metoo

calpoly said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

When did conservatives stop saying that the government was wasteful and that spending more money on government services would improve them? That's what we were told about schools right?

Somehow it doesn't seem to apply to police force and the military.

---

Don't try to understand conservative logic.

---

There's no such thing. Logic doesn't need an adjective. Justice doesn't need an adjective.

Maybe the uptick is simply due to Republican politicians being caught for their crimes.

https://m.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2020/07/21/ohio-house-speaker-larry-householder-arrested-in-connection-with-60-million-in-bribes