|
And then hire an armed response unit that undergoes very different training than they receive currently, some detectives, and a ton of social workers.
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2020 00:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
silence_kit posted:If what police departments are doing now is not government corruption, but is instead government working as intended, doesn't that undermine the entire idea of using the government to improve the lives of people? If the only use of law enforcement that you could ever imagine is to brutalize the weak, and not to enforce justice, then why would you ever want to expand the power of government? Why aren't you both hardcore libertarians? (Maybe you are, and I'm just projecting normal progressive beliefs onto you?) This is just 0 difference between good and bad things
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 17:40
|
|
|
Sure we can. It's been endlessly discussed what we can do with all the money currently wasted on police. Having the perfect plan should not be prerequisite to drawing down and defunding our police forces as they exist, because any such requirement will be used as pretext to endlessly put off the necessary and push for milquetoast and useless reform like "8 can't do poo poo." Somehow we keep coming back to "there will be total chaos and no crimes will ever get solved" even when it's made very clear that there would be a new structure inevitably put into place. People arguing in favor of the current system feel personally protected by it and are terrified that if we try to make anything better for anyone else that could change Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Jun 13, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
It's already trained in and then they go get separately trained in private for more of this poo poo. They need to all be fired. Start over with fresh recruits and a fresh training program
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2020 15:49
|
|
|
We'll have to ban all the old cop shows. Can't have that culture creeping back in
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2020 15:58
|
|
|
I don't think "no one will ever enforce any laws" is strictly what most are suggesting here, though some may be, and the idea that any kind of law enforcement is exactly the same as the police seems to be a silly excuse to get pedantic.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2020 14:12
|
|
|
BoldFace posted:There are small counties that have near zero reports of police brutality and deaths caused by police. Why should they be punished? Who is being punished? This is Luddite thinking. "Keep bad jobs we don't need because progress is scary" If former cops want strong safety nets they should consider voting for candidates who support that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2020 15:03
|
|
|
Community fights sex trafficking that cops ignore, recovers missing kids while cops coverup: https://twitter.com/partymom6/status/1275595157098893315?s=20
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
The abolish language is important because if you send the same men to the same building to check in then out into the same streets with the same guns they are going to keep doing the same things. It has to be a total tear down and creation of something new that might have some specific elements in common with what came before but is not just a fresh coat of paint over the bloodstains
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2020 04:12
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:Almost all your posts in this thread are zero effort grudgy nonsense. If you post any more you're threadbanned. He's right tho. CS is doing the thing that usually is only this explicit when it's white characters in political cartoons. "Not like that. Or that. Or that." I'm sure one day we'll find the perfect word they can imagine no one else taking issue with.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2020 13:37
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:What are you talking about? I literally said I was in favor of abolishing the police a few posts ago. My point was that the word “abolish” may have bad connotations and turn people off. Like I’m sorry if that’s too spicy a take for you or whatever. I can read subtext too. Even if it is entirely in good faith, at best what you are doing is repeatedly coming up with theoretical arguments on behalf of others that aren't here. And since they aren't your opinion, just this theoretical idea for others, it's conveniently impossible to persuade those others. I don't read you suggesting a bunch of alternatives, just repeated declarations of 'not good enough' and demand for more work from everyone else. You are demanding to be persuaded that other people will agree with something you have decided they will disagree with, it's frankly not a possibility. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Sep 24, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2020 14:12
|
|
|
The implicit assumption that he would face 0 consequence whatsoever kinda suggests you haven't read a goddamn word of this thread
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2020 06:11
|
|
|
It's a frankly unreasonable expectation that makes those putting it forth look like the comic strip politicians waiting for approval of an issue hit the acceptable number before leaping on board. You can just want to do the right thing because it's right, that's ok! Im sure here it was probably meant somewhat hyperbolically, but any argument based on what other people not here might do feels unproductive. We may have to abolish the *new thing we made up* too, for sure. Maybe a few times til we get it right. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Sep 25, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2020 19:50
|
|
|
Since the premise is "if they didn't exist" data based on them existing is meaningless
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 01:50
|
|
|
flashman posted:Ultimately fines or whatever punishment is imposed have to be backed up by force otherwise non compliance with the punishment is just met with another empty demand to stop that behaviour. I guess if you grew up sheltered from the members of society who don't really give a gently caress about society this may not be intuitive. Bolded the key word. Pushing back when we end up having to have armed men pointing guns at people is going to be a net good. Morningwoodpecker posted:What happens if they completely ignore you and carry on driving anyway ?. In OF's scenario they run out of gas and can't buy more, problem solved I think. IMO we probably add fines. From time to time more enforcement will be necessary. You can create that position in advance, sure, but we have to be very careful that it doesn't become more of the same.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
flashman posted:Yes I agree with limiting interactions with armed police is a good idea I'm specifically pushing against the idea of the removal of the coercive force. No punishment? I think the "punishment" question is more complicated than the police existing as they are is punishment and if we get rid of them there is none. Again, we've already discussed restricting various freedoms like "you don't get to buy gas" that could also be theoretically extended to other things, like booze. Feel free to come up with some of your own! flashman posted:And doesn't turning everything into a fine simply mean the rich are free to continue to do as they please with no repercussions? I understand that this is already the case and the rich largely abuse the legal system already but it becomes much simpler to simply pay a fine than fight it in court. Obviously it would be best to dismantle capitalism, but of course we can't solve all its problems in the police reform thread so I'm not going to try. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Sep 26, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 16:09
|
|
|
All of these arguments seem to suggest we might need some sort of more limited enforcement mechanism after we abolish the police. I agree!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 16:31
|
|
|
Morningwoodpecker posted:I never mentioned motivation. yes that it why the flaw in your argument was pointed out
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
Criminals just keep comitting crimes so why bother with laws at all? Is your argument that only the existence of the police is preventing you from becoming a wanton destroyer of other humans? You just keep saying things like 'no teeth' and 'no consequences' but there are some. Then you dismiss them as circumventable as tho the current system doesn't have the same problems. People still commit crimes with the current consequences, it's not clear that this would drastically increase if those consequences stopped including your immediate death. We can't get rid of police because of things that are still happening all the time despite the police? Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Sep 26, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 17:22
|
|
|
Nice diversion. Abolish them, and no one will have reason to shoot them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
Morningwoodpecker posted:No. I thought my point was very clear, I'm going with remove taxation enforcement gather less taxes. You continuously lie about the positions being taken and downplay very real consequences proposed to the point of absurdity. gently caress off troll. "maybe we don't need armed murders constantly ready everywhere to kill us" 'ah, but have you considered that without that exact situation no one will ever pay taxes again'. This isn't a real argument. You aren't engaging with the real proposal but your own piss poor understanding and or strawman Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Sep 26, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 19:35
|
|
|
Morningwoodpecker posted:It's not my fault you haven't thought through any of the practicalities of any of this stuff. Turn your monitor on
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
They're just not thinking of the possibility that you know that police are super racist but like cops anyway
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Sep 26, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
'When you abolish the police, who stops their riot?' essentially? Yeah... 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2020 14:28
|
|
|
That's what we been sayin
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2020 04:39
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:Pretending this is just a matter of optics is stupid, cut it out. This quite clearly is not saying that and you seem to be using it as an excuse to not engage to people who don't understand your confusion. He wasn't threadbanning you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
The connection between dtp and those electorial losses is tenuous, and I'm being incredibly generous
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Dec 5, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2020 23:58
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:you clearly haven’t read what I’ve suggested be done with law enforcement much earlier in the thread There's no way this isn't deliberate trolling, the irony is way to thick. You constantly seem to forget everything said to you here. If sincere, quote yourself instead of forcing each reader to separately try to sort all your old posts. This q and a is way too smart for me, but I'm gonna reread it a few more times because it's super interesting. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Jan 8, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2021 02:46
|
|
|
Politicians who say "reform" do not do the things you are now defining as reform, but they have been patting themselves on the back for their "incremental improvements" for decades. That is what is meant by "we already tried that"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2021 03:09
|
|
|
The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
Oh you think it might have been a cop? Name every cop.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2022 19:19
|
|