The Times, They Are A-Changin’
Black helicopters everywhere?
Regarding defunding the police, not everyone in every city is on board with that idea. And there are few specifics re: what Minneapolis plans to do and what is meant by “defunding” the police.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-dems-punt-on-defund-the-police-question
Can’t have it both ways!
Even Biden’s campaign issued a statement on his behalf saying ‘not a good idea’: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/08/biden-campaign-rejects-defund-police-307401
From the article: A national movement to defund police is gathering steam — but former Vice President Joe Biden is not on board.
“No, I don‘t support defunding the police,” Biden said in a CBS interview excerpt aired Monday evening. “I support conditioning federal aid to police based on whether or not they meet certain basic standards of decency and honorableness and, in fact, are able to demonstrate they can protect the community and everybody in the community.”
“Biden supports the urgent need for reform — including funding for public schools, summer programs, and mental health and substance abuse treatment separate from funding for policing — so that officers can focus on the job of policing,” Biden spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement Monday afternoon.
While Biden supports increased funding for some programs that activists support, the former vice president’s platform also calls for increasing investment in law enforcement, a stance that runs counter to what many protesters have called for. – article
Not defending Biden or anything like that, but it’s going around all over the place now, which is likely why he spoke up. It’s something that does bear open discussion without the interference of the media mavens and their insidious attempts to stir up trouble, even when there was none. If there are going to be discussions, they should be open and above board, not held in secrecy behind closed doors.
The gross exaggerations and panic attacks over CV19, while ignoring the effects of the flu season, only means that the media in general are trying to control the narrative instead of relaying the real news to their audience. That part is controlled by the heads of publications and heads of TV/radio stations.
It’s a lot like Orson Welles’ 1938 broadcast of “War of the Worlds” over radio with no commercial interruptions, causing a large number of people to phone local police to find out what was going on. The reported panic attacks were mostly generated stories by the newspapers, to sell copies at newsstands. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/infamous-war-worlds-radio-broadcast-was-magnificent-fluke-180955180/
If there was any panic at all, it was low-key and mostly on the East Coast, involving people who had tuned into the show after the warning announcement had been broadcast, and had no idea what was going on. Welles, in fact, had no idea that he had caused a near-panic in the population and had to hold a live press conference the next day to let the media know that, because it was Hallowe’en, it was done in the spirit of that spooky night: scare people!!!
While Welles’ intent was meant in the spirit of Spook Night Hallowe’en and nothing else, the media got the bit in their collective teeth over it and ran with it. If it sells, it prints!
That appears more and more to be what has been going on with CV19. Now that the riots and looting and pillaging are over with, we’re back to putting CV19 reports on the head of the list of ‘things to review today’, even though the numbers are dropping daily and Ferguson’s sloppy software, as with all of his forecasts, produced a grossly invalid forecast for the USofA.
No, the disease should not be ignored, but the destruction of a global economy at the drop of a hat does need closer examination.
Likewise, the term “defunding the police” implies doing away with law enforcement with no alternative to replace it. If this were the Middle Ages, the King’s Yeomen did that kind of work and they were a lot nastier than cops are today. British Bobbies never used to carry weapons. Now they do. So let’s do have a closer look at what that means and ask for real solutions, not fantasyland nonsense.
Category: "The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves", "Your Tax Dollars At Work"
In practice, this will be a shift to federal funding.
Cost will not reduce
Violence will not end
Police will not go away
All that will change is the source of funding and tactical approaches on the ground.
Federal funding of local police is a bad thing.
Reform of police methods could be a good thing…but “community based policing” is not new and does not reduce crime or impact.
Federal funding of ANYTHING not directely related to federal functions (national security, international relations, et al) is a very, very bad idea.
Federal funding of ANYTHING not directely related to federal functions (national security, international relations, et al) is a very, very bad idea.
This is right…the common defense and the general welfare.
Limit the size and scope of government and dictate how we wish to be governed instead of being dictated to for a change.
If defunding means reducing the number of uniformed officers I’m all for it.
If defunding means reducing and capping the amount of overtime pay uniformed officers can earn I’m all for it.
If defunding means busting police unions and weakening or eliminating collective bargaining agreements I’m all for it.
I live in a small town 0f 7,500 residents in the PDRofMA with a higher starting salary for its full time officers (5) than that offered by the nearest large city. Personally, I would rather have policing eliminated entirely or shared with the county sheriff or state police.
As long as I can still squeeze a trigger I’ll stand watch along my compound’s borders. The black helicopters are only flying over once a week now.
CCR, that’s really a shot I got of a Sikorksy from the nearby USMC training center flying over my house. You can only see the markings if I blow it up a lot. 🙂
Myself – I wonder what IS going to happen. Never felt so much at loose ends.
If defunding means reducing the number of uniformed officers I’m all for it.
If defunding means reducing and capping the amount of overtime pay uniformed officers can earn I’m all for it.
If defunding means busting police unions and weakening or eliminating collective bargaining agreements I’m all for it.
Exactly.
It’s time for the people to remember this government requires the consent of the governed to operate as intended.
“….the media in general are trying to control the narrative…” Yeah, they are.
And Biden running his mouth? The pure stupidity of people listening to anything that POS has to say is ludicrous too. His junky dumbass has been part of the grubmint for over 40 years and the failed policies that he has supported for that same number of decades has led to a lot of the problems that we see today. Biden, you bitch you helped build this. You are part and parcel of the problem. And typical demonrat good idea fairy is to throw more taxpayer money and create another level of grubmint. Insanity is the act of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Eff it! Let them defund their popo. They can use the savings to rebuild the city they allowed to get burned down. Oh, forgot. Hizz honor da Mayor done asked for a starting figure of 55 million to start the rebuilding. Yep federal money, or should we say, our money that the feds have confiscated from other taxpayers who were not burning our towns down.
The pure stupidity of people listening to anything that POS has to say is ludicrous too. –
GunBunny, the reason they want him (and the lambrained media want him and worship him) is that he is SO dumb, you could tell him the sun is shining outdoors in the middle of a thunderstorm, and he’d go out without an umbrella. It’s also the reason the Dems want him in the White House: easily manipulated. He’ll sign anything, including bad bills.
Ex – in short, you are saying he is a Useful Idiot.
Am I correct?
Why, yes. Yes, you are very correct.
Let’s not forget the fact that Biden is old and dementia addled. There’s a good chance he wouldn’t finish his first term. So, watch who his VP nominee is very closely.
Most communities mean they intend to break the power of police unions when they discuss defunding the police.
These communities are looking to demilitarize the police and return a to a broader based community policing policy.
When police contracts run out communities are free to disband their association with the current union and negotiate with other entities to replace those unions and union members.
As Commissar pointed out in a previous thread Camden did something like this eight years ago with mostly positive results to date. The city admits it’s far from perfect but murders are way down and complaints against police have dropped 95% over these eight years.
Police, like any conservative group, tend to be uncomfortable with altering the status quo thus they are reluctant and resistant to any consideration of an alternative to what we do today. The change will benefit those honest officers who are tired of remaining silent for fear of jeopardizing their own careers when the union protects a shit bag who can now remain on the force and disrupt the honest officer’s future career.
We the people however have the right to determine how we intend to allow the government to police us in order for the government to maintain the consent of the governed as the founders envisioned.
Officers are free to return to private sector jobs and leave public service if the change doesn’t suit their world view or career aspirations.
Show me one of these idiots who has proposed breaking up a single police or other public sector union.
Just one.
The entire city council of Camden did it eight years ago. Disbanded their police department and ended their associate with the union.
And Camden is still a shithole.
Now do it for a metro area of almost 4 million.
And they didn’t break up the union.
The did indeed break the union initially, that is exactly what the Fraternal Order of Police called the move, a union busting tactic.
They made it clear a city can take out the union.
There should be no public sector unions in any event as a matter of law. Public unions don’t benefit the public in any fashion.
Murder dropped over 75% and complaints against cops dropped 95%.
I said it wasn’t perfect, but it’s a sight better than it was. A step in the right direction doesn’t mean you’ve completed the journey, it just means you’re going the right way at this time.
Lisa Bender, Minneapolis city council president, desires a “police free future” and believes calling the police because one’s home is broken into is “privilege”.
The intent in Minneapolis isn’t to defund or reshape the department, it’s to get rid of ALL policing. I’m basing this off of the words coming out of the mouths of elected officials in the city.
And why on earth would you point to Camden as an example of how law enforcement should be done if you don’t want more cops? When Camden switched to a county PD the number of officers on the payroll doubled.
While I’m no fan of unions, are you arguing the government should criminalize/prohibit citizens forming a union? The National Labor Relations Act would make that a tad bit difficult. Or is your contention everyone else has rights, just not cops?
Not to mention the assumption police unions are to account for all these ills, fails to address agencies who have issues and have no union.
I did not say I wanted less cops. Not in any of my comments.
I suggested that some communities where these words are being used are talking about the kind of shift that took place in Camden.
Ms. Bender has her opinions and Minneapolis can choose its own course. I’m offering a response based on a successful disbanding of a previously corrupt and non-accountable department into something that serves its community far better than previously.
With respect to public unions they bring nothing to the table in terms of public benefit. I did not suggest removing private unions. Our tax dollars allow us to have some say in how we employ and negotiate with government workers. The teachers unions and police unions are prime examples of just how poorly the actual public benefits from public unions.
Teachers and cops that are just terrible at their jobs remain on the job thanks to their unions. There is no benefit to society in their unionization.
If a private union suffocates its parent company the parent company closes its doors and ceases to operate. The public unions suffocate the parent organization and the parent organization is forced to raise your taxes. A difference of no small significance.
I misunderstood you re: unions. I’m in total agreement. Public sector unions should be a no-go across the board.
I still maintain what they’ve accomplished in Camden doesn’t apply to Minneapolis.
In Camden they shaped the police force to provide better services to citizens. In Minneapolis the desired endstate is an elimination of policing. Those are two very different scenarios.
One of the significant factors in Camden was doubling the number of officers. There was a focus on having adequate resources.
In Minneapolis there is zero (0) discussion about adequacy of resources. There is discussion of elimination of policing in totality at the local level.
This will result in the Sheriff’s office and state police stepping in to fill the void. They promise to end policing knowing that it isn’t going to end. The scenario the local leaders are aiming for is one that will end poorly.
It’s yet another example of politicians washing their hands of problems they own and pushing them on someone else. Disgusting to me.
No attempt to change the dynamic between citizens and law enforcement. Just do their best Pointus Pilate impression. If someone else is responsible for law enforcement then they aren’t responsible.
There are lots of productive things they could do. Here’s a few off the top of my head:
-Start up an auxiliary program. The Hennepin SO has a program they could base theirs off of. One of the results for these types of programs can be increased transparency and improved relationships within the community.
-Obtain CALEA certification. If this department had obtained CALEA certification the “restraint” hold used on Floyd wouldn’t have been authorized in any circumstance.
-Increase budgeting for Community Services Boards. This is the conduit to get community services to people in need from multiple venues. FDs, PDs, SOs, counselors, etc.. all use this resource. They are chronically underfunded and understaffed everywhere.
If they were talking about practical solutions I would be all for reshaping police departments. But the local leaders don’t appear to care about practical solutions. They want slogans and election platforms.
Free Market Capitalism has largely succeeded in the de facto “criminalizing” of unions as only about 7 million non-government American workers belong to unions. Another 7 million workers who are government employees belong to unions (police, fire, teachers, etc.).
If ‘Murica can “privatize” warfighting as we’ve done with some success in AFG and Iraq it’s not a stretch to think police functions can also be privatized to some degree.
For me personally, it’s all about towns and cities being able to reduce their pension and health insurance obligations to current and future government retirees. The US Armed Forces is now on its fourth retirement plan in the past four decades. Change will eventually happen because more affluent people will vote with their feet and move to more tax friendly states.
Privatizing policing would be disastrous. That experiment has already been tried with prisons and civil forfeiture.
We incentivized putting people into prison. As a result more people ended up in prison.
We’ve allowed agencies to seize private property and keep the funds seized. The abuse this has engendered is legion.
That way lays folly.
Privatizing wasn’t incentivizing putting more people into prison. That incentive has long existed. There are at least 5,000 federal criminal laws, with up to 300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally. In 2003, there were only 4,000 offenses that carried criminal penalties. By 2013, that number had grown by 21 percent to 4,850.
Congress continues to criminalize at an average rate of one new crime for every week of every year. Practically all inherently wrongful conduct has been criminalized several times over, yet from 2000 through 2007, Congress enacted 452 new criminal offenses.
As a taxpayer, it’s cheaper to pay 401(k) contributions for a private worker than pay pension and health insurance benefits for a retired LEO or corrections officer. As state pension plans become more underfunded and ultimately fail, they’ll go under the jurisdiction of the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. States are counting on a federal bailout, but there’s no guarantee the PBGC will be able to cover all or even most state pension plan shortfalls.