So its a numbers game.
Just your response to each
So its a numbers game.
it's a really stupid name considering re-fund the police is right there, makes more sense, and tells you what most people want
No one said that at allOP was just asking about the specific issue “defund the police”My example is a Dem vs Rep issue in fact - look at states where funding has been stripped of mental health services and programs to help the poor and it is always rep states that cut the mostRemember “welfare state”That is republicans cutting budgets and using the “tough on crime” and “pulled myself from my bootstrap” arguments to the poorWhen dems try to help- repubs scream “socialism” “get the govt out of our lives”
IMO, I don't think that people are generally representative of all people requesting police reform. So you can't reconcile that message for those people (which appear to be a minority, I might add), but I don't think that people are the majority (not even average) representation of what it's being conveyed as reforming the police force.
I will say that message is damaging overall to the idea of police reform, though. You certainly can't escape that, and I wish more leadership will come out and oppose it.
The protests I have seen, like in San Marcos were a bit more accurate as talking about shifting investments.
Bernie:
The problem is amplified by the right-wing media that will ignore anything else to try and shape the narrative. Even if everyone moves on to "police-reform" or "shift investments" today they will hammer that phrase home and strawman it to death, because modern conservatives cannot win honest arguments. They have to use strawman lies.
It is the most frustrating part in talking to them and you see it here all the time.
I think police reform is the bigger issue. Knees to the neck should never ever happen.
CLAIM: Hitler also defunded the police and installed his own enforcers.
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Hitler did not defund the police.
THE FACTS: As protesters around the nation call for defunding the police in response to police brutality, social media users are sharing posts saying that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler also wanted to defund the police.
Historians say the posts, which have garnered thousands of likes online, are false. The Nazis expanded funding for police, the number officers and their powers, said Christopher Browning, a Holocaust scholar and retired University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill professor.
“Hitler did not disband or defund the police,” he said in an email. “The Fire Decrees of February 1933 gave the Nazis the power to take over all state governments, which meant also the power to take over each state police.”
With the protective custody decree of 1933, police had the power to arrest and place anyone in concentration camps they viewed as being against the regime, according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. By 1936, police forces centralized under Heinrich Himmler as head of the SS, a group first designed to protect Hitler that would later become the private army for the Nazi party. Himmler, who, as head of the SS, was also chief of German police, oversaw the Gestapo and the SD, the intelligence branch of the SS. Heinrich Muller, who was appointed to lead the Gestapo under Himmler, was a career Munich policeman. The SS, SD and police would go on to become the primary leading forces behind the Holocaust, where six million Jews and millions of others including gay people were murdered.
Gavriel D. Rosenfeld, a historian and history professor at Fairfield University, said in an email that the Nazis made the police one of the chief recipients of state financial support aside from military spending.
“Let’s just say the Nazis did everything BUT defund the police,” he said.
failed twitter lawyer also turns out to be a failed twitter historian
more than 280 characters
he wont read
Caught him spreading propaganda, but that won't prevent him by spreading more propaganda while simultaneously criticizing "democratic propaganda"
got emmm
I didn’t take any tact with the disinfect. I don’t think I commented on it, tbh. Still, to compare the fringe left with the leader of the GOP is ignorant. You’re an argumentative clown as always
lol no
you have 0 credibility.
Yeah, that is an important number.
Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/o...nd-police.html
Thanks for sharing this opinion. I mean, if we're talking real reform, she's probably right that nothing seems to ever happen in this department, and Joe Biden isn't going to be that guy.
That said, I think she should temper her expectations accordingly, tbh
"We should redirect the billions that now go to police departments toward providing health care, housing, education and good jobs. If we did this, there would be less need for the police in the first place."
Education is a good start. But are we talking math & science or social awareness? Unfortunately such a transformation would take several generations.
Chris spreads his hateful lies because we move on to the next subject of discussion. We must never forget this weak beta male is a malicious liar.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/o...nd-police.htmlWhen the streets calm and people suggest once again that we hire more black police officers or create more civilian review boards, I hope that we remember all the times those efforts have failed.
https://www.npr.org/sections/live-up...riminal-systemwe can shrink the net by shrinking our misdemeanor codes — that's the job of the legislature. We can shrink the misdemeanor net by reducing arrests, that can be a legislative action, decriminalization for example, it can be the decision by individual police departments, and it can be the decision by prosecutors to move away from the enforcement of these low-level offenses and focus on more serious offenses. And then we can punish less, we can arrest less, we can incarcerate less, we can fine less. It's zeroing in on that net and finding ways to shrink it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)