It's the sixth version of The Swamp. What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.sportsfrog.net/phpbb/
Yeah, I worry a bit about the messaging behind “defund the police.” I think there’s growing support for shifting resources from punitive law enforcement efforts to social services, which is a great idea. But if people miss the fact that “defund the police” means that, and instead think it means “abolish the police” then it could lead to a backlash against the reform efforts.
What is an example of punitive law enforcement and are social service and mental health workers trained to do this? What would be example of something police handles today but not handle in the new proposed system?Joe K wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 3:53 pmYeah, I worry a bit about the messaging behind “defund the police.” I think there’s growing support for shifting resources from punitive law enforcement efforts to social services, which is a great idea. But if people miss the fact that “defund the police” means that, and instead think it means “abolish the police” then it could lead to a backlash against the reform efforts.
Yes, I agree. Just don't want social workers walking into a dangerous situation. You might think something is common like a house call or a car accident but it escalates quickly, like the car involved was stolen by fugitives. I think some other common things such panhandlers and drunks sleeping on benches can be handled by non-police.brian wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 4:46 pm The most obvious to me would be if you live with someone who has mental health issues, calling a social worker trained to deal with those issues to come over immediately and whose job it is to know how to de-escalate and deal with those issues instead of the police is strikingly obviously.
I'm not putting him on the spot but think about someone like BFJ who has a son with autism. If his son is having an incident where BFJ feels his son or someone in the house might be in danger, his only recourse right now would be to call the police and worry about them injuring or killing his son, which happens all of the time or not calling anyone at all and just praying that nothing happens.
I'm friends with a few social workers who worked in group homes and it's a dangerous situation pretty much everyday. Granted, I'm sure calling the police is in the protocols if things get too dangerous. Emergency response is so dummied down to make sure people do something, so the instructions will always be to call 911 (maybe it's different in other areas, but I have apologized a few times for calling 911 for my job and every time the response is we'd rather have you call and it be nothing than the other way around). And then there's the lawsuit factor, where if 911 is called, they will over-do the response because they don't want a lawyer suing the city saying my client's wife was stabbed because you only sent out a social worker for the emergency. So it's complicated.degenerasian wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:09 pmYes, I agree. Just don't want social workers walking into a dangerous situation.brian wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 4:46 pm The most obvious to me would be if you live with someone who has mental health issues, calling a social worker trained to deal with those issues to come over immediately and whose job it is to know how to de-escalate and deal with those issues instead of the police is strikingly obviously.
I'm not putting him on the spot but think about someone like BFJ who has a son with autism. If his son is having an incident where BFJ feels his son or someone in the house might be in danger, his only recourse right now would be to call the police and worry about them injuring or killing his son, which happens all of the time or not calling anyone at all and just praying that nothing happens.
Yeh, I hate the terminology of "Defund the Police". As JoeK said above, it plays right into the hands of Trump's propaganda machine.EdRomero wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:53 pm That is very well said..and it's an argument that's been made for a long time; I hope it gets somewhere but I'm worried it will turn into Trump and company saying that when a criminal is attacking you, the Democrats will send a social worker out to talk about feelings.
That is what they'll say but what it comes down to is the same thing that drives everything about the conservative mindset - fear.EdRomero wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:53 pm That is very well said..and it's an argument that's been made for a long time; I hope it gets somewhere but I'm worried it will turn into Trump and company saying that when a criminal is attacking you, the Democrats will send a social worker out to talk about feelings.
On May 31, hundreds of people — most of them men, many of them armed and some representing far right-wing groups — descended upon a stretch of this small town where restaurants, antique shops and flower pots line the street.
They were drawn by rumors of a looming threat: Antifa activists were planning to bring chaos to their community and damage businesses as days of massive protests decrying the death of George Floyd, police brutality and racial injustice swept cities, including Seattle just 30 miles to the south.
Some in the crowd socialized and drank while carrying assault rifles, handguns and other firearms. At least one Confederate flag flew from the back of a pickup truck. As the hours passed, the predictions of mayhem never materialized.
Yet another example of how bad the Left is at branding. When I first heard the calls for defunding or dismantling the police, I thought it was a crackpot idea from nuttiest wing. When I saw a link to John Oliver's piece, I thought he was fucking nuts, but I know he isn't, so I watched thinking, "how the fuck could Oliver think this is a good idea?" Sure enough, it isn't what it sounds like, make perfect sense, and actually had some amazing results in Camden, where the dissolved the police force. When that happened, I thought Camden would devolve into Mad Max. Turns out, you can successfully use other services to meet the needs of the community, and they have county police services filling the crime prevention role. Everything I'm learning about the Minneapolis PD is terrifying. The union has the City by the balls, and they aren't able to discipline anyone for even the most heinous acts of abuse of power. The head of the union is a disgusting prick, a sociopath and a white supremacist.EdRomero wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:53 pm That is very well said..and it's an argument that's been made for a long time; I hope it gets somewhere but I'm worried it will turn into Trump and company saying that when a criminal is attacking you, the Democrats will send a social worker out to talk about feelings.
They just want to cry that they don't want to do all that other stuff, dog catching, but still keep their jobs and funding.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:36 pm I think it was the Seattle chief of police that started just listing all possible crime, as an argument against defunding the police. So stupid. Yes, that's what are there for... Not for mental health, drug addiction... fucking dog catching (I think that was Dallas.)
They are constantly exclaiming they aren't social workers. And, yeah, we get it. Move aside.
This drives me nuts (not your comment, but the argument) - so cut the number of cops and increase the number of paramedics and social workers.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:36 pm I think it was the Seattle chief of police that started just listing all possible crime, as an argument against defunding the police. So stupid. Yes, that's what are there for... Not for mental health, drug addiction... fucking dog catching (I think that was Dallas.)
They are constantly exclaiming they aren't social workers. And, yeah, we get it. Move aside.
Usually, when we say the left is terrible at branding, we're talking about the Democratic Party. But hasn't "Defund the Police" been a phrase used by Blacks and other more hardcore lefties? I've seen people on that hardcore end of the spectrum criticize more middle-of-the-road liberals for suggesting a different phrase should be used.The Sybian wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:06 pmYet another example of how bad the Left is at branding. When I first heard the calls for defunding or dismantling the police, I thought it was a crackpot idea from nuttiest wing. When I saw a link to John Oliver's piece, I thought he was fucking nuts, but I know he isn't, so I watched thinking, "how the fuck could Oliver think this is a good idea?" Sure enough, it isn't what it sounds like, make perfect sense, and actually had some amazing results in Camden, where the dissolved the police force. When that happened, I thought Camden would devolve into Mad Max. Turns out, you can successfully use other services to meet the needs of the community, and they have county police services filling the crime prevention role. Everything I'm learning about the Minneapolis PD is terrifying. The union has the City by the balls, and they aren't able to discipline anyone for even the most heinous acts of abuse of power. The head of the union is a disgusting prick, a sociopath and a white supremacist.EdRomero wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:53 pm That is very well said..and it's an argument that's been made for a long time; I hope it gets somewhere but I'm worried it will turn into Trump and company saying that when a criminal is attacking you, the Democrats will send a social worker out to talk about feelings.
"Reallocate Tax Dollars" has been taken already by every group. It's "defund", not "abolish".Pruitt wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:05 pmThis drives me nuts (not your comment, but the argument) - so cut the number of cops and increase the number of paramedics and social workers.Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:36 pm I think it was the Seattle chief of police that started just listing all possible crime, as an argument against defunding the police. So stupid. Yes, that's what are there for... Not for mental health, drug addiction... fucking dog catching (I think that was Dallas.)
They are constantly exclaiming they aren't social workers. And, yeah, we get it. Move aside.
HATE that people have decided that the phrase is "Defund The Police." But I guess it's snappier than "Reallocate Tax Dollars."
It doesn't have to do with national politics at all? Defund the police is a a phrase to pressure on civic politics around the country?Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:26 pm Too be fair, I don’t think the activists saying “Defund the Police” necessarily view electing Joe Biden (or any other particular Democrats) as their end goal. After all, Minneapolis and many other cities plagued by bad policing are entirely Democrat-run. So the strategy could be to stake out an ultra-aggressive position with the goal of getting good reforms as a “compromise.” I still have my skepticism about the effectiveness of the chosen catchphrase, I just think this could be an alternative reason for it.
Of course it is. The only control over this stuff is at the local level for the most part (there's federal funding of the police, which the activists want to see reduced and or eliminated, but no one's really tripping over that. This is all about local taxes, local control and local reform of the police departments.degenerasian wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:19 pmIt doesn't have to do with national politics at all? Defund the police is a a phrase to pressure on civic politics around the country?Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:26 pm Too be fair, I don’t think the activists saying “Defund the Police” necessarily view electing Joe Biden (or any other particular Democrats) as their end goal. After all, Minneapolis and many other cities plagued by bad policing are entirely Democrat-run. So the strategy could be to stake out an ultra-aggressive position with the goal of getting good reforms as a “compromise.” I still have my skepticism about the effectiveness of the chosen catchphrase, I just think this could be an alternative reason for it.
Yeah, but how hard would they police then be fighting to keep the money in their budgets for other things that benefit them only and not the city/society at large? After police in major cities just "were required to" use all that excess force to quell rioters and looters, they'd be claiming they need to be militarized to "keep peace".
POLITICO spoke to 10 National Guardsmen who have taken part in the protest response across the country since the killing of George Floyd while in police custody. Many Guardsmen said they felt uncomfortable with the way they were used to handle the unrest because demonstrators lumped them in with the police. They felt that while they swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, their presence at times intimidated Americans from expressing their opinions and even escalated the tension.
And in the case of Guardsmen involved in the Lafayette incident, some felt used.
“As a military officer, what I saw was more or less really f---ed up,” said one D.C. Guardsman who was deployed to Lafayette Square last Monday and who, like some others, spoke on condition of anonymity to speak freely. The official line from the White House that the protesters had turned violent, he said, is false.
“The crowd was loud but peaceful, and at no point did I feel in danger, and I was standing right there in the front of the line,” he said. “A lot of us are still struggling to process this, but in a lot of ways, I believe I saw civil rights being violated in order for a photo op.
Uh, yea. Gunna need a politician to echo that sentiment.“I felt that we were more protecting the people from the police,”
I think the big challenge is oversight. Giving more federal funding to police departments isn’t necessarily bad but there need to be appropriate strings attached to it. I think the activists calling for defunding just don’t trust that police will use additional funding for productive purposes.
They absolutely won't use the funds properly. Not to protect the people the activists want protected anyway.Joe K wrote: ↑Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:33 amI think the big challenge is oversight. Giving more federal funding to police departments isn’t necessarily bad but there need to be appropriate strings attached to it. I think the activists calling for defunding just don’t trust that police will use additional funding for productive purposes.
Isn't that already happening with resource officers in schools. From what I understand, in wealthier schools, the resource officer is usually a great resource and works with the the guidance department to help kids in need. In poorer schools, they're assholes.The Sybian wrote: ↑Wed Jun 10, 2020 11:00 am Well, if it actually goes towards "community policing," that would mean programs designed to integrate the police into the community, like PAL sports programs or doing stuff that makes the police part of the community. The idea is that if the police know the neighborhood kids, they won't shoot them. Also giving kids in poor neighborhoods with no activities something to do will keep them out of trouble.