Defund the Police

[Rougarou 594]

10 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

You know they did this in an American city. The results haven’t been perfect but stop pretending that what you’re suggesting isn’t also unproven and experimental.

Super curious about this-- can you post something about it? If you don't have links, I can do my own googling, just name of the American city and the initiative? Year? 

 

[hobbes2702 13354]

You’ve never heard of Camden, NJ?

[Rougarou 594]

3 hours ago, Rougarou said:

First off-- I've never been accused of flowery prose. That's a first. Maybe I should try my hand at poetry.

Secondly-- Just because it was discussed does not mean, at least in my view, there was a consensus or agreement made. I get that you think you speak in resolute and definitive ways, and I do respect your opinion and point of view, but your responses in this other thread do little to sway my thinking. This is because all the extrapolation for why it won't work is based on speculation (thus, faulty assumptions). Everyone's knee jerk response to the mention of "for profit police reform" is so predictable and bureaucratic--along with no having a good plan for how to defund the police without creating a bigger problem and gap in equality between whites and blacks-- that it makes me more convinced that police reform will have to be from the private sector. That is because it's too 1) radical 2) it would be disruptive 3) it is counter-intuitive to the ways most people think a problem should be solved and 4) it probably won't turn a profit for a long time.

Thirdly-- I answered your direct question about what I think "Defund Police" means in the expectation that you would answer my question for you to  correct me and educate me or otherwise critique, and then for you to give me your stance and belief on what the phrase means. Here it is for your review:

I think Defund the Police means rationalizing the Police budget of a municipality. Best case, it means using data-driven inputs to make decisions and scaling the budget back to whatever minimum dollar amount intersects with the maximum amount of crime (violent? non-violent? aggregated?) that is deemed an acceptable benchmark. Worst case, it means just sticking a finger in your mouth and putting it in the air before peanut-buttering a round number across the board (e.g. cut 25% of budget evenly across all functions of the police budget).

What do you think it means?

Thanks for the contribution wildcat!

A worse idea for what? A worse idea for innocents being killed? For a white man kneeling on the neck of a black man to death? 

Why do you think that a public union with power and carte blanche and very little, if any, accountability is a better option than literally anything else you can probably think of for governance and oversight? Maybe the second worst is the free market and shareholders, but it's not worse than what we have now.

And to that end, look at the response of corporate america and police unions, to all this. Who is responding better? Who is progressive on this matter? And it doesn't have to be because of some genuine belief or love of the cause-- placating your customers and the quarterly guidance being met is encouragement enough to keep people accountable. So when you can charter rules and when you align behaviors (e.g. police reform and public servant leadership vs what we have now) with money, you will get the right behaviors. It's a tale as old as time.

Let's take 5 steps backwards here though to touch on the main issue:

If you defund the police, overnight and with the only substitute being throwing a bunch more low-paid/govt paid social works to medicate a bunch of Arthur Flecks and you try to lovebomb poverty and criminal thinking/culture, then there will be a large gap in equality, diversion and inclusion and education and wealth and everything else.

It will be the exact same formula for what happens when you defund schools in inner and mid-cities. Just look at some of the old threads full of scholarship and research that @Catdaddyhorn has done around real estate and white flight and how detrimental it is. Defunding Police, in my opinion, is going to put White Flight on the priority list for the majority of those who have not already fled to the exburbs who have a) privilege b) means and c) interest in an enriching environment, which are all three things fundamental in a transformation of culture and neighborhood.

The only difference is that when you proactively are driving to defund police, and that begets other problems like education/schools and home values and a plethora of secondary and tertiary problems, you can't cry about it and beg for a Robinhood program because Suburbs are thriving and the equality gap is widening...because you will have brought this doom loop upon yourself.

Also, since we have a new page and it might be missed, I'm still really interested in @Huckleberry's help to calibrate on what I might be missing in my understanding of the phrase "Defund the Police" based off my response to his question. 

Also super interested in @Huckleberry's own definition and any clarity he might offer about how he understands the term "Defund the Police" and so I can where the differences are.

[Rougarou 594]

6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

You’ve never heard of Camden, NJ?

Vaguely from the debates because of Booker. I think what you are implying is that a) there was an experiment or case study done on defunding the police and infusing social services and that information and research is readily available from which we can read and make determinations on efficacy and b) that it's so ubiquitous (your first post was like "hey numbnuts there was an American city not to be specifically named because everyone should know this already that has tried this, but results are not good but also not bad") that everyone engaged in this conversation should have already made themselves familiar with said study? 

I'll do some reading up on it-- thanks for the input.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Rougarou

[hobbes2702 13354]

5 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Vaguely from the debates because of Booker. I think what you are implying is that a) there was an experiment or case study done on defunding the police and infusing social services and that information and research is readily available from which we can read and make determinations on efficacy and b) that it's so ubiquitous (your first post was like "hey numbnuts there was an American city not to be specifically named because everyone should know this already that has tried this, but results are not good but also not bad") that everyone engaged in this conversation should have already made themselves familiar with said study? 

I'll do some reading up on it-- thanks for the input.

You posted basically three pages worth of your opinions on the subject so yes I think you should have some understanding of previous examples. Especially as you continually tell us that defunding the police is stupid. You are basically trying to mansplain this topic to other posters without having the necessary information because you aren’t as informed as you are pretending to be.

[Bone3421 716]

Some services are not meant to be profit-motivated or incentivized. Policing is definitely one of them.

Yet it already is profit-motivated and incentivized.

[Anastasis 23704]

 

[Huckleberry 34408]

55 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Also, since we have a new page and it might be missed, I'm still really interested in @Huckleberry's help to calibrate on what I might be missing in my understanding of the phrase "Defund the Police" based off my response to his question. 

Also super interested in @Huckleberry's own definition and any clarity he might offer about how he understands the term "Defund the Police" and so I can where the differences are.

You have the definition essentially correct. Which makes this post completely nonsensical:

On 7/31/2020 at 8:49 AM, Rougarou said:

Defund the Police is the dumbest idea in the big box of dumb ideas or ideas that are counter-intuitive to integration and inclusion/diversity. Literally no other issue has the biggest impact on driving white flight, as this will also directly impacting schools.

There is absolutely nothing about "rationalizing the Police budget of a municipality" that would negatively affect integration, diversity, schools, or that would drive white flight.

[UpperWestside 6263]

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

You’ve never heard of Camden, NJ?

Has Fox News done an expose yet on the intense emotional distress officers in Camden are under every single day from being asked to do their job in a more human-friendly way that doesn’t involve beating POC for giving them a dirty look? They haven’t? Then no this just asking questions clownshow has not heard of Camden’s reformed police department.

[UpperWestside 6263]

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

You posted basically three pages worth of your opinions on the subject so yes I think you should have some understanding of previous examples. Especially as you continually tell us that defunding the police is stupid. You are basically trying to mansplain this topic to other posters without having the necessary information because you aren’t as informed as you are pretending to be.

There was a study cited in a book that I believe the title of is “Racism Without Racists.” In that book it cited that white flight is triggered when as little as 7 percent of the neighborhood is populated by African-Americans. SEVEN FUCKING PERCENT of the neighbors being black is enough for white people to throw up their hands and declare a neighborhood to be unlivable in and thus a move to a further out suburban neighborhood is necessary in their racist-addled minds. African-Americans are not the problem. Other minorities are not the problem. A smaller police force is not the problem. White people still being terrified of co-existing and living with black people and other minorities is the problem. It’s a racist behavior, but it’s covered up under the auspices of safety. 

[Anastasis 23704]

2 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

Other minorities are not the problem. 

White people are the worst. 

[Rougarou 594]

31 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You have the definition essentially correct. Which makes this post completely nonsensical:

There is absolutely nothing about "rationalizing the Police budget of a municipality" that would negatively affect integration, diversity, schools, or that would drive white flight.

You are right, in and of itself, in a vacuum.

But when that rationalization of municipality is done in contrast or when compared to other municipality's who do not rationalize budgets, you see a picture of disparity. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

In any event, a good old fashioned "needs based analysis" or assessment should be done based on data for every city. Maybe large, urban city A needs more mental health resources and less code compliance cops and tony, suburban zipcode B needs more traffic cops and less swat/gang units, etc. But do that for every city and municipality, as a good first step.

[Rougarou 594]

34 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

Has Fox News done an expose yet on the intense emotional distress officers in Camden are under every single day from being asked to do their job in a more human-friendly way that doesn’t involve beating POC for giving them a dirty look? They haven’t? Then no this just asking questions clownshow has not heard of Camden’s reformed police department.

You are militant. I'd definitely cross the street the get away from you.

[UpperWestside 6263]

2 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

You are militant. I'd definitely cross the street the get away from you.

You are a racist moron hiding under the guise of word salad vagaries while simultaneously posing as stupid fucking questions guy. Figure out how to use google and drop the bullshit routine. Never heard about Camden...Get the fuck outta here with that.

[hobbes2702 13354]

1 minute ago, UpperWestside said:

You are a racist moron hiding under the guise of word salad vagaries while simultaneously posing as stupid fucking questions guy. Figure out how to use google and drop the bullshit routine. Never heard about Camden...Get the fuck outta here with that.

This is correct

[Rougarou 594]

16 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

You are a racist moron hiding under the guise of word salad vagaries while simultaneously posing as stupid fucking questions guy. Figure out how to use google and drop the bullshit routine. Never heard about Camden...Get the fuck outta here with that.

You are an angry elf.

[Rougarou 594]

21 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

This is correct

I think you were the one that posted it; I've read a good 6 or 7 long form pieces from a variety of sources (NPR, WaPo, Politico, Salon, etc.) to get a varied point of view, and I think you summed it up well. It was experimented (through political necessity) and there was nothing left to lose, and the results that have been made available (there have been some accusations of transparency with data issues) represent a mixed bag. It's not the feel good, turn-around, zero to hero story that some activists want to paint it as and it hasn't been a failure either. One thing for sure is that Camden is better today than it was before.

I would 100% advocate for using this model in other bombed out and depleted cities with over 170 open air drug markets and high crime rates that rival MS-13 strongholds and other failed states. I just don't think that most places are complete reclamation projects at salvage value.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Rougarou

[hobbes2702 13354]

26 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

You are a racist moron hiding under the guise of word salad vagaries while simultaneously posing as stupid fucking questions guy. Figure out how to use google and drop the bullshit routine. Never heard about Camden...Get the fuck outta here with that.

 

[Nivek 17350]

On 8/2/2020 at 12:01 AM, Rougarou said:

I remain: Defund the Police is the dumbest idea in the big box of dumb ideas or ideas that are counter-intuitive to integration and inclusion/diversity. Literally no other issue has the biggest impact on driving white flight, as this will also directly impacting schools.

 

On 7/31/2020 at 9:25 PM, Rougarou said:

Sounds reasonable. ......

Why would you agree with what I pulled from a wiki article and 2 days later claim it is all dumb?    Is this just a troll account for you? 

[Catdaddyhorn 3462]

I haven't kept up with his thread so I'm not certain that this story hasnt been posted,  but I'm curious as to whether anyone else has heard this story before.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Catdaddyhorn

[FondrenRoad 4378]

2 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

You posted basically three pages worth of your opinions on the subject so yes I think you should have some understanding of previous examples. Especially as you continually tell us that defunding the police is stupid. You are basically trying to mansplain this topic to other posters without having the necessary information because you aren’t as informed as you are pretending to be.

But you need to pay McKinsey millions of dollars to bring the Bobs in to reorganize police into their same command structure. Just so you can train them to patrol and get to know people without killing them, or to implement recruiting that focuses on hiring from the local community. 

You can't change anything without consultants. 

[Catdaddyhorn 3462]

 

[Catdaddyhorn 3462]

 

[Rougarou 594]

10 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

you are a racist moron.

I'm a racist moron because I think defunding the police is bad for already bad things like wealth and income inequality between races, home values, and school/education opportunities for black people?

You and Upperwestside are moronic because since the above has been my thesis belief since the jump, I would be a racist if I was pro-Defund the Police, as I understand it.

Ultimately, I acknowledged and will continue to acknowledge that my input and voice is a privileged one and that if black people want to push Defund the Police because they are the ones facing the abuse and I can't pretend to know how they feel.

I feel like calling someone a racist is pretty much the worst thing you can call someone, so I'd like to hear why you went from 0 to 10 in short order. I am not a racist, but I think you might be.

[Rougarou 594]

7 minutes ago, Nivek said:

 

Why would you agree with what I pulled from a wiki article and 2 days later claim it is all dumb? 

What is dumb is that there is no transition period but rather a hard cut-over.

[Rougarou 594]

7 minutes ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

I haven't kept up with his thread so I'm not certain that this story hasnt been posted,  but I'm curious as to whether anyone else has heard this story before.

 

 

This was really insightful, thanks for sharing!

[hobbes2702 13354]

4 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

I'm a racist moron because I think defunding the police is bad for already bad things like wealth and income inequality between races, home values, and school/education opportunities for black people?

You and Upperwestside are moronic because since the above has been my thesis belief since the jump, I would be a racist if I was pro-Defund the Police, as I understand it.

Ultimately, I acknowledged and will continue to acknowledge that my input and voice is a privileged one and that if black people want to push Defund the Police because they are the ones facing the abuse and I can't pretend to know how they feel.

I feel like calling someone a racist is pretty much the worst thing you can call someone, so I'd like to hear why you went from 0 to 10 in short order. I am not a racist, but I think you might be.

[UpperWestside 6263]

16 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

I think you were the one that posted it; I've read a good 6 or 7 long form pieces from a variety of sources (NPR, WaPo, Politico, Salon, etc.) to get a varied point of view, and I think you summed it up well. It was experimented (through political necessity) and there was nothing left to lose, and the results that have been made available (there have been some accusations of transparency with data issues) represent a mixed bag. It's not the feel good, turn-around, zero to hero story that some activists want to paint it as and it hasn't been a failure either. One thing for sure is that Camden is better today than it was before.

I would 100% advocate for using this model in other bombed out and depleted cities with over 170 open air drug markets and high crime rates that rival MS-13 strongholds and other failed states. I just don't think that most places are complete reclamation projects at salvage value.

And there it is. Right out of the Fox News playbook. Portray inner cities populated by African-Americans as war zones with a comparison to MS-13 thrown in for good measure.
 

You are either intentionally stupid and racist to say that shit or, check that, there isn’t another option. Rush and Tucker Carlson could not be prouder that all their hard work pays off with diarrhea like that posted.

[Rougarou 594]

8 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

And there it is. Right out of the Fox News playbook. Portray inner cities populated by African-Americans as war zones with a comparison to MS-13 thrown in for good measure.
 

You are either intentionally stupid and racist to say that shit or, check that, there isn’t another option. Rush and Tucker Carlson could not be prouder that all their hard work pays off with diarrhea like that posted.

Dude what? I just read no less than 7 long form journalism pieces about this and the comparison was made there, I just lifted it from them. The murder rate was that of "Tijuana, Mexico" the Chief of Police said and "Honduras where gangs controlled cities" another said. That is factual and using other journalists language.

Do you want me to submit citations in APA? You are pathetic.

“I don’t want you to write tickets, I don’t want you to lock anybody up. I’m dropping you off on this corner that has crime rates greater than that of Juárez, Mexico, and for the next 12 hours I don’t want you to make an arrest unless it’s for an extremely vile offense,” Thomson recalls telling his officers. “Don’t call us—we’re not coming back to get you until the end of your shift, so if you got to go to the bathroom, you need to make a friend out here. You want to get something to eat? You better find who the good cook is.”

Quote

Almost 40 percent of residents lived below the poverty line. At one point, the city had 175 open-air drug markets, and 80 percent of drug arrests were of nonresidents, suggesting that out-of-towners were making a stop in Camden just to buy and sell.

Quote

Behind that image is a yearslong story of how Camden officials transformed policing in a city where the murder rate was once on par with Honduras. The police were despised by residents for being ineffective at best and corrupt at worst. Today, violent crime in the city has decreased, and police officers are a regular presence at community block parties.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Rougarou

[UpperWestside 6263]

1 minute ago, Rougarou said:

Dude what? I just read no less than 7 long form journalism pieces about this and the comparison was made there, I just lifted it from them. The murder rate was that of "Tijuana, Mexico" the Chief of Police said and "Honduras where gangs controlled cities" another said. That is factual and using other journalists language.

You are pathetic.

“My racism is innocent because I am just repeating racist ideas.”

Narrator: It’s not innocent and you are a racist POS.

[Rougarou 594]

Just now, UpperWestside said:

“My racism is innocent because I am just repeating racist ideas.”

Narrator: It’s not innocent and you are a racist POS.

You are an idiot and obviously a troll and not worth responding to anymore. Ignore.

[hobbes2702 13354]

[UpperWestside 6263]

4 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

You are an idiot and obviously a troll and not worth responding to anymore. Ignore.

Another play from the racist playbook. Act like you’re the victim when called out for saying racist shit in order to avoid confronting the truth of being a racist. This is white fragility in its absolute lowest and most cowardly form.

Edited August 3, 2020 by UpperWestside

[UpperWestside 6263]

5 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Racists are a predictable lot. You have to call out the racism every time you see it or nothing changes. This idiot ran to whatever his safe space is where the mean people can’t encroach on his entrenched racist construct he has spent a lifetime building.

[YChang 3533]

1 hour ago, Rougarou said:

Ultimately, I acknowledged and will continue to acknowledge that my input and voice is a privileged one and that if black people want to push Defund the Police because they are the ones facing the abuse and I can't pretend to know how they feel.

Ha, what if part of the solution of a privatized police force was outsourced to China? Say for their expertise in collecting data and monitoring people? 

I want to assume positive but I can't quite tell if you're sincere about trying to learn more about topics outside your norms... or not. Let me know if I'm off but It seems like your concerns are that defunding the police is too immediate, too dramatic... therefore not a transitional way toward fixing the problem? 

[Nivek 17350]

1 hour ago, Rougarou said:

What is dumb is that there is no transition period but rather a hard cut-over.

You didn't know what it meant, so I told you.  That was it.  You wanting a full roll-out of ideas, mapped, and means tested is on you to look up.  

[Rougarou 594]

16 minutes ago, YChang said:

Ha, what if part of the solution of a privatized police force was outsourced to China? Say for their expertise in collecting data and monitoring people? 

I want to assume positive but I can't quite tell if you're sincere about trying to learn more about topics outside your norms... or not. Let me know if I'm off but It seems like your concerns are that defunding the police is too immediate, too dramatic... therefore not a transitional way toward fixing the problem? 

Some people might think that's fine and okay. I absolutely 100% would object to outsourcing anything to China. I'm no fan of the CCP. At all.

Too immediate/dramatic is a good way to characterize how I think of it. Not because I don't think long-term it's a better solution and answer, but because I think if you do a hard and fast cut-over from A to B, there is a chance you are going to break too much and it might not be repairable.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Rougarou

[NameAlreadyInUse 5169]

3 hours ago, Rougarou said:

My point, to what you are proving every time you post, is that you can't just change three or four things within the system we have now and get to the results you want. Everything you are talking about involves a change in processes and personnel and you are already engaging in scope creep like no other by trying to silo behavior and processes without taking into account all the dependencies and assumptions being made.

In order to change two or three or four significant, what I would call "Big Rock" items in the police institution would cause for a complete tear down and rebuild, which is the point missed I think when you have people say  "this isn't rocket science" and "no radical change is needed".

But hey, I guess McKinsey or BCG can come in and make a ton of money re-organizing --err, I mean, transforming-- a current old and outdated institution into something that might or might not look and act differently in the way you want it to.

 

Disagree.  Not going to dox myself, but I have reason to know that you can make large institutional changes in organizations and you can do it without tearing down the whole structure and starting over.  However, you are correct that there will be change required and some of that change will be painful.  For instance, mr. tank driver needs to have some other skills or he's getting laid off when I drop my tank division.  I'm also going to have to go for a different type of manager, I don't have to replace all or even any of my current managers when I decide what kind of change is necessary, but I can set new standards and expect those standards to be followed, and fire those that don't and replace them with people that will.  I can quit hiring for those skills I've decided to deemphasize and start hiring for those skills I've realized I need more of, and that can be an incremental thing that happens with standard attrition.  And I'll take advantage of the fact that there will be a subset of my workforce who absolutely won't buy in and will leave voluntarily so my changes will happen faster than I originally project assuming normal attrition rates.  I can also break this into small enough pieces that I'm not having to move 1 or 2 big rocks, instead I'm building a new path for the water and letting the water move those rocks for me.  You can change the natural progression of an org this way as long as you stick to it, and as long as your stakeholders have the patience to hang with you while you do it.  The big difference between this and a private company here is that you'd need to over communicate to those external stakeholders in the situation of a government agency because this will take some time, but if you can come up with objective metrics, allow oversight from your stakeholder groups to see those objectives are being met or are trending in the right direction and that you are continuing to refine your changes as you go, you will find that you can do this mostly without pain, except to the people who do not like the new direction.

Or you could bring in McKinsey and let them build you a massive complex process that no one but them understands or buys into completely and they'll keep selling you more services to keep working on it for the next 25 years while nothing really changes.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5169]

2 hours ago, Nivek said:

 

Why would you agree with what I pulled from a wiki article and 2 days later claim it is all dumb?    Is this just a troll account for you? 

Since I saw this thread late, I had the benefit of seeing these two posts within 5 minutes of each other, and I was confused about that as well.

[YChang 3533]

45 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Too immediate/dramatic is a good way to characterize how I think of it. Not because I don't think long-term it's a better solution and answer, but because I think if you do a hard and fast cut-over from A to B, there is a chance you are going to break too much and it might not be repairable.

Yeah, I understand your concern, especially the break too much and it might not be repairable part. I think for some... on a 10 point scale... they’re at a 9 where things are so broken and it’s time for a hard break from the norm and try something different. 

I think I’m closer to 7... open to the idea with some reservations of what you described. But I definitely don’t think that’s a reason to not do something. It’s time for bold ideas and policy changes. 

UpperWestside... maybe you’re having a bad day? But what was so bad with his reply? 

[UpperWestside 6263]

9 minutes ago, YChang said:

UpperWestside... maybe you’re having a bad day? But what was so bad with his reply? 

I am having a really good day and the weather was perfect here. This wasn’t just from posts today. He’s a racist POS and it’s time he’s called to the carpet for being one. 

[Rougarou 594]

1 hour ago, YChang said:

Yeah, I understand your concern, especially the break too much and it might not be repairable part. I think for some... on a 10 point scale... they’re at a 9 where things are so broken and it’s time for a hard break from the norm and try something different. 

I think I’m closer to 7... open to the idea with some reservations of what you described. But I definitely don’t think that’s a reason to not do something. It’s time for bold ideas and policy changes. 

UpperWestside... maybe you’re having a bad day? But what was so bad with his reply? 

Totally fair and that’s why I then clarified with my disclaimer language saying essentially that I’m not a black person in any community and don’t live with systemic racism and have no authority or agency to define if it’s a 7 or 9 or 2, in any community where this is being seriously protested, so if this is the decision then onward and upward and I hope I’m wrong about the effects.

I should have led with that language and disclaimer Instead of inserting it mid-conversation. 

Edited August 4, 2020 by Rougarou

[Rougarou 594]

Also I should apologize here as it just dawned on me; I should never have said it was a “stupid” idea, when what I meant was it was a “bad” idea, with respect to potentially adverse affects I’ve outlined a few times.

Stupid instead of bad is loaded language and not productive to the conversation and comes across as adversarial, which is why the nice little person turned into an angry elf earlier maybe, in his defense.

Words matter and my error on choosing the wrong adjective.

[Catdaddyhorn 3462]

3 hours ago, Rougarou said:

This was really insightful, thanks for sharing!

Here's a much more detailed history of Freedom House and how they came about. 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/american-innovations/id1370092284?i=1000457431077

It's a really great story and I'm a bit surprised there hasn't been a movie made about it.  

[UpperWestside 6263]

30 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Also I should apologize here as it just dawned on me; I should never have said it was a “stupid” idea, when what I meant was it was a “bad” idea, with respect to potentially adverse affects I’ve outlined a few times.

Stupid instead of bad is loaded language and not productive to the conversation and comes across as adversarial, which is why the nice little person turned into an angry elf earlier maybe, in his defense.

Words matter and my error on choosing the wrong adjective.

Once again you’re deflecting from owning being a fucking racist POS. It’s what most racists do when they get called out. You’re not special. Run from it all you want, but you have shown your ass several times. Racists like you do not derserve to breathe the same air as the rest of us. 

[Brisketexan 106670]

Some people might think that's fine and okay. I absolutely 100% would object to outsourcing anything to China. I'm no fan of the CCP. At all.
Too immediate/dramatic is a good way to characterize how I think of it. Not because I don't think long-term it's a better solution and answer, but because I think if you do a hard and fast cut-over from A to B, there is a chance you are going to break too much and it might not be repairable.

“Too much, too fast” is the fall-back position for people and institutions that have experienced decades of success with the argument of “we’re not the problem - YOU ARE,” but then see that argument now dead in the water. So, they know change is coming...and the strategy is to slow-play it, drag it out, and hope that the agents of change lose patience.

It’s basic game theory shit. And...fuck that shit. If you want to have ANY chance of major change in how we police, then the only path with any chance is a fast-moving, disruptive approach. Bottom line, the most important thing to accomplish is for PDs to realize that they aren’t in charge. We are.

[Anastasis 23704]

37 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

“Too much, too fast” is the fall-back position for people and institutions that have experienced decades of success with the argument of “we’re not the problem - YOU ARE,” but then see that argument now dead in the water. So, they know change is coming...and the strategy is to slow-play it, drag it out, and hope that the agents of change lose patience.

It’s basic game theory shit. And...fuck that shit. If you want to have ANY chance of major change in how we police, then the only path with any chance is a fast-moving, disruptive approach. Bottom line, the most important thing to accomplish is for PDs to realize that they aren’t in charge. We are.

Burn it all down?

[ChiTownDoc 21326]

47 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Bottom line, the most important thing to accomplish is for PDs to realize that they aren’t in charge. We are.

Bingo.  These motherfuckers hiding behind their police unions and shady DA's are our employees.  Fuck them in the ass for thinking they can push the people around.  You motherfuckers will absolutely learn one way or the other.  Either we defund you or you fall in line.  And that is EXACTLY where we will get in our lifetimes.  Mark that shit down.  God damn cowards make me sick. 

[Brisketexan 106670]

Burn it all down?

Nope. Just house by house, until they get in fucking line. Metaphorically, of course.

PDs have declared war against the rest of us; they threaten us and hold us hostage (“let us do exactly what we want, or we won’t do our jobs - protecting people!”). They only speak the twin languages of power and pain. Time for them to listen, in their native tongue.

[Anastasis 23704]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Nope. Just house by house, until they get in fucking line.

Lulz.