New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Extreme deviation, don't defund the po po

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
Crime, violent crime us up


Listened to a very interesting report on NPR this morning that discussed how communities nation wide are rethinking the stance on defunding police forces in the face of big upticks in crime... particularly violent crime..

Uh oh..
 
Crime, violent crime us up


Listened to a very interesting report on NPR this morning that discussed how communities nation wide are rethinking the stance on defunding police forces in the face of big upticks in crime... particularly violent crime..

Uh oh..
Wow, whoda seen this coming, right?
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Crime, violent crime us up


Listened to a very interesting report on NPR this morning that discussed how communities nation wide are rethinking the stance on defunding police forces in the face of big upticks in crime... particularly violent crime..

Uh oh..

The whole "Defund the Police" idea never really made sense to me....If the argument was that the deficiencies in good policing was due to their having too many resources at their disposal, more than sufficient training, and an over-abundance of manpower, then, yes, cutting back funding would make sense. I doubt that is the case, however.

It also seems to run counter to how government approaches virtually every other problem they feel needs addressing - Normally, the fix is to throw money at it, in the form of programs, training, increased resources, etc. Here, they tell us the cure is to do the exact opposite. Where's the logic in that?

The defunding strategy seems more about retaliation, even revenge than it does about problem solving. It is an emotional response to a series of outrages where logic would have served everyone better.

And the results have been all too predictable...

Just my two cents.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
The whole "Defund the Police" idea never really made sense to me....If the argument was that the deficiencies in good policing was due to their having too many resources at their disposal, more than sufficient training, and an over-abundance of manpower, then, yes, cutting back funding would make sense. I doubt that is the case, however.

It also seems to run counter to how government approaches virtually every other problem they feel needs addressing - Normally, the fix is to throw money at it, in the form of programs, training, increased resources, etc. Here, they tell us the cure is to do the exact opposite. Where's the logic in that?

The defunding strategy seems more about retaliation, even revenge than it does about problem solving. It is an emotional response to a series of outrages where logic would have served everyone better.

And the results have been all too predictable...

Just my two cents.
Agree. Now, crime rises and those maligned police are needed. Sad.
 
The only way to fix a poorly run government program is to funnel more money into the government program. Amirite?
No, of course not. We should rely on government for as little as possible. Clearly, things like police and fire services are needed.

But it sounds like we're talking about two separate issues here. The defunding of police idea is out of hatred for the police. It has nothing to do with public safety. As an example, part of the issue is supposed to be about black men being shot by police. For every black person killed by police, there are at least 500 murdered by other blacks. Obviously, defunding the police because "Black Lives Matter" is pure silliness. It's an ineffective solution. But fortunately, the defund the police morons have figured out their idea is stupid. 80% of blacks, for example, want the same amount or more police. They get it. Defund the police morons don't.

The other issue: bang for the buck. I'm all for squeezing everything we can out of government services. IMHO, the best place to start would be the DoD. We spend far too much on the military, stick our noses into too many foreign problems and pay too much for everything.

And as with probably everything involving government, I suspect there is massive mismanagement of funds with the money going places other than where needed. Government excels at this.
 

Bernard_Fokke

Captain Fokke
Supporting Member
Crime, violent crime us up


Listened to a very interesting report on NPR this morning that discussed how communities nation wide are rethinking the stance on defunding police forces in the face of big upticks in crime... particularly violent crime..

Uh oh..
What a suprise, cause and effect with the dark side of human nature tossed in.

Bad mix
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Agree. Now, crime rises and those maligned police are needed. Sad.
Wouldn't it be nice if just one (or more) of those political officials who made their bones by calling for the defunding of the police would have the integrity to say publicly that hey, maybe we got this wrong and need to rethink it?

Maybe Santa will bring us one...


1607526138872.png
 

Dr. Steven Brule

Council Member
And as with probably everything involving government, I suspect there is massive mismanagement of funds with the money going places other than where needed. Government excels at this.
While overstated in some instances, performance of policing needs to improve. The unfortunate and misguided emotional response for some within the black community was a call to "Defund the Police". This was a mistake because not only do we need police, but Republicans used it as an opportunity to undermine and vilify the movement.

Most reasonable people, including on the Democrat side, realize that we need police but we also need police reform. That doesn't mean a complete elimination of police forces. However, some funds might be better used towards other community services that would help lower crime.
 
While overstated in some instances, performance of policing needs to improve. The unfortunate and misguided emotional response for some within the black community was a call to "Defund the Police". This was a mistake because not only do we need police, but Republicans used it as an opportunity to undermine and vilify the movement.

Most reasonable people, including on the Democrat side, realize that we need police but we also need police reform. That doesn't mean a complete elimination of police forces. However, some funds might be better used towards other community services that would help lower crime.
I can't find anything to argue with there. You've reminded me of a specific example where screening, training and/or policy came up short: the killing of Philando Castille.

Now, when one has been pulled over by the police, never, ever, EVER announce you have a gun in your possession then reach for anything. That said, the officer in question appears to have been either too jumpy, too trigger happy or was not properly trained on how to handle such situations. I don't know if it was one, two or all three aspects. But obviously, there was a shortcoming there.

I'm not sure about "other services". There could be something there. But I am sure about one thing: people need to learn how to behave. Many if not most bad outcomes involving police interactions could have been mitigated or eliminated by simply understanding police are authority figures. When you're told to not move, it's not a negotiation, etc etc.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
I can't find anything to argue with there. You've reminded me of a specific example where screening, training and/or policy came up short: the killing of Philando Castille.

Now, when one has been pulled over by the police, never, ever, EVER announce you have a gun in your possession then reach for anything. That said, the officer in question appears to have been either too jumpy, too trigger happy or was not properly trained on how to handle such situations. I don't know if it was one, two or all three aspects. But obviously, there was a shortcoming there.

I'm not sure about "other services". There could be something there. But I am sure about one thing: people need to learn how to behave. Many if not most bad outcomes involving police interactions could have been mitigated or eliminated by simply understanding police are authority figures. When you're told to not move, it's not a negotiation, etc etc.

I would think reform might include elements such as additional training, more equipment in the form of bodycams, etc.....This would require additional funding, not less funding.

A part of the problem may also be the long hours police officers are often required to work, resulting in increased stress and fatigue. Again, more funding to increase manpower.

Counseling, for those officers dealing with stress from the job, stress at home, and PTSD...More funding.

Protective equipment, such as bulletproof vests....More funding.


I am still not seeing a direct line between less funding and better policing, but I'm more than willing to be shown the flaw in my logic.
 

Dr. Steven Brule

Council Member
I can't find anything to argue with there. You've reminded me of a specific example where screening, training and/or policy came up short: the killing of Philando Castille.

Now, when one has been pulled over by the police, never, ever, EVER announce you have a gun in your possession then reach for anything. That said, the officer in question appears to have been either too jumpy, too trigger happy or was not properly trained on how to handle such situations. I don't know if it was one, two or all three aspects. But obviously, there was a shortcoming there.

I'm not sure about "other services". There could be something there. But I am sure about one thing: people need to learn how to behave. Many if not most bad outcomes involving police interactions could have been mitigated or eliminated by simply understanding police are authority figures. When you're told to not move, it's not a negotiation, etc etc.
So "other services" can mean a lot of things, but investment in education and social services that would help reduce the poverty that fosters crime is one example.

Unfortunately we live in a time where media and social media draw our attention to the outliers and exaggerate everything. The vast majority of police are good. The vast majority of protesters are peaceful. But if we watch the nightly news or peruse FB we're inundated with nothing but the worst examples of society. I hope that most people recognize this and are able to sit down together and have reasonable discussions about how to improve things without throwing babies out with the bathwater.
 

Dr. Steven Brule

Council Member
I would think reform might include elements such as additional training, more equipment in the form of bodycams, etc.....This would require additional funding, not less funding.

A part of the problem may also be the long hours police officers are often required to work, resulting in increased stress and fatigue. Again, more funding to increase manpower.

Counseling, for those officers dealing with stress from the job, stress at home, and PTSD...More funding.

Protective equipment, such as bulletproof vests....More funding.


I am still not seeing a direct line between less funding and better policing, but I'm more than willing to be shown the flaw in my logic.
As I referred to in the post above, it's not about just reducing police funding. It's about moving some of those funds over to social programs that would help reduce the conditions that foster crime in the first place. In essence, you'd be attacking the source of the crime rather than constantly trying to contain it.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
As I referred to in the post above, it's not about just reducing police funding. It's about moving some of those funds over to social programs that would help reduce the conditions that foster crime in the first place. In essence, you'd be attacking the source of the crime rather than constantly trying to contain it.

So, to be clear, no cuts in funding for the police?
 
Top