• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Editorial Concerning Police Today

Patrickt

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
3,609
Reaction score
1,100
Location
Oaxaca, Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This is an editorial from the conservative Washington Times. Some of it I agree with, some I disagree with.

"Cooperation between residents and cops is indeed a key to preventing an us-versus-them attitude from growing on both sides of the badge. President Obama has spent his presidency fanning the flames of distrust, even hosting at the White House members of Black Lives Matter, the radical organization that erupts in mindless protest whenever a black American is shot by cops, regardless of the circumstances. The president has met 47 times with Democratic operative Robert Creamer, who is accused of organizing violent confrontations at rallies for Donald Trump, the Republican candidate."

I tend to agree that the race-baiters and politicians, like Al Sharpton and President Obama, are working hard to make things worse. I guess you'd have to ask them why.

"At last count Mr. Obama’s adopted hometown of Chicago has already suffered 3,560 shootings this year, 614 of them fatal. While the Justice Department focuses on police shootings, the civilian-vs.-civilian carnage is a figure that neither president nor the attorney general are anxious to tally. They wouldn’t like what they would see."

Bingo. For all their expressed concern, they really don't care about the slaughter in Chicago. There's no political advantage to caring.
 
This is an editorial from the conservative Washington Times. Some of it I agree with, some I disagree with.

"Cooperation between residents and cops is indeed a key to preventing an us-versus-them attitude from growing on both sides of the badge. President Obama has spent his presidency fanning the flames of distrust, even hosting at the White House members of Black Lives Matter, the radical organization that erupts in mindless protest whenever a black American is shot by cops, regardless of the circumstances. The president has met 47 times with Democratic operative Robert Creamer, who is accused of organizing violent confrontations at rallies for Donald Trump, the Republican candidate."

I tend to agree that the race-baiters and politicians, like Al Sharpton and President Obama, are working hard to make things worse. I guess you'd have to ask them why.

"At last count Mr. Obama’s adopted hometown of Chicago has already suffered 3,560 shootings this year, 614 of them fatal. While the Justice Department focuses on police shootings, the civilian-vs.-civilian carnage is a figure that neither president nor the attorney general are anxious to tally. They wouldn’t like what they would see."

Bingo. For all their expressed concern, they really don't care about the slaughter in Chicago. There's no political advantage to caring.

There's a major reason police want Donald trump to win. It's certainly not because he's going to be the best President. It's because the left wing hates police. They're despised by the liberals. The police are "racist" they are all "bigots who target people". Their lives will be in much more danger under a left wing President than a right winger after this war on police Obama started.
Let these facts from the police associations PLI team sink in:
Fallen_officers_meme.jpg
 
This is an editorial from the conservative Washington Times. Some of it I agree with, some I disagree with.

"Cooperation between residents and cops is indeed a key to preventing an us-versus-them attitude from growing on both sides of the badge. President Obama has spent his presidency fanning the flames of distrust, even hosting at the White House members of Black Lives Matter, the radical organization that erupts in mindless protest whenever a black American is shot by cops, regardless of the circumstances. The president has met 47 times with Democratic operative Robert Creamer, who is accused of organizing violent confrontations at rallies for Donald Trump, the Republican candidate."

I tend to agree that the race-baiters and politicians, like Al Sharpton and President Obama, are working hard to make things worse. I guess you'd have to ask them why.

"At last count Mr. Obama’s adopted hometown of Chicago has already suffered 3,560 shootings this year, 614 of them fatal. While the Justice Department focuses on police shootings, the civilian-vs.-civilian carnage is a figure that neither president nor the attorney general are anxious to tally. They wouldn’t like what they would see."

Bingo. For all their expressed concern, they really don't care about the slaughter in Chicago. There's no political advantage to caring.

Cops Gone Wild and Institutional racism, is a separate problem from neighborhood violence. And a MUCH more serious one. IF IT EXISTS. While I know there are some bad shoots, I'm not at all convinced this is some kind of systemic problem. Cops make mistakes. Cops over react. Cops get scared and have knee jerk reactions. To think that law enforcement is going to be perfect every time is unreasonable. The IMPORTANT thing is how we INVESTIGATE cop shootings. It would appear there is coverup. That is completely unacceptable.

Having said that, we have finally had a black POTUS. IMO, racism from both directions is worse than it's been in 25 years. On purpose. I sure wish I knew the endgame because, most assuredly, there is one.
 
Obama started this fight with law enforcement at the very beginning of his first term.
It's a great wedge issue for the left and he has used it to it's maximum benefit.

Black Lives Matter was founded on the BIG lie of "Hands Up Don't Shoot" That never happened.
But is been used over and over to poison the black communities relationship with the police.
BLM has pushed the lie that the police are the biggest threat to black males today.
Again much damage done based on a total lie. The media has played a big part in this by
pushing the lies told.
 
Obama started this fight with law enforcement at the very beginning of his first term.
It's a great wedge issue for the left and he has used it to it's maximum benefit.

Black Lives Matter was founded on the BIG lie of "Hands Up Don't Shoot" That never happened.
But is been used over and over to poison the black communities relationship with the police.
BLM has pushed the lie that the police are the biggest threat to black males today.
Again much damage done based on a total lie. The media has played a big part in this by
pushing the lies told.

Exactly right.
 
Cops Gone Wild and Institutional racism, is a separate problem from neighborhood violence. And a MUCH more serious one. IF IT EXISTS. While I know there are some bad shoots, I'm not at all convinced this is some kind of systemic problem. Cops make mistakes. Cops over react. Cops get scared and have knee jerk reactions. To think that law enforcement is going to be perfect every time is unreasonable. The IMPORTANT thing is how we INVESTIGATE cop shootings. It would appear there is coverup. That is completely unacceptable.

Having said that, we have finally had a black POTUS. IMO, racism from both directions is worse than it's been in 25 years. On purpose. I sure wish I knew the endgame because, most assuredly, there is one.

The problem is systemic. The problem stems from bad law which decreases the rights, freedoms and liberty of "we the people" and increases police powers.

This puts the police and "we the people" at odds with each other more often than it should be.

Police corruption and abuse of power is not "one bad apple" The idea that Police are on some pedestal of moral integrity is abject nonsense. Police are people and people in general are self serving, greedy, selfish, controlling, power hungry, easily corruptible, petty, vindictive, woefully ignorant and downright nasty.

So it is not that police are on some pedestal or in some gutter. Police are just people. Power corrupts and more power corrupts more. As we increase the amount of power police have (as we have been doing at the expense of liberty) the amount of abuse of that power will also increase.
 
I know I sound like a broken record on this issue, but a big part of the bad relations between the police and the citizens is the decades long zealous enforcement of really bad law, to wit: the drug laws.

For decades in the name of the drug prohibition, police have been wreaking havoc in society, shooting dogs, shooting innocent people and infants with "no knock" warrants. After all these decades, the cumulative effect has been very destructive to society.

LEAP | Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
 
I know I sound like a broken record on this issue, but a big part of the bad relations between the police and the citizens is the decades long zealous enforcement of really bad law, to wit: the drug laws.

For decades in the name of the drug prohibition, police have been wreaking havoc in society, shooting dogs, shooting innocent people and infants with "no knock" warrants. After all these decades, the cumulative effect has been very destructive to society.

LEAP | Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

As much as I wish I could fully agree...my problem with this is that the worst problem regular people deal with as far as drugs go...is behavioral. Disorderly conduct, fighting, domestics, and all that petty crap.

We need to solve addiction rather than just "legalize." It is 2 fold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
As much as I wish I could fully agree...my problem with this is that the worst problem regular people deal with as far as drugs go...is behavioral. Disorderly conduct, fighting, domestics, and all that petty crap.

We need to solve addiction rather than just "legalize." It is 2 fold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We cannot solve addiction anymore than we can "solve" fornication.

In fact, society and the legal system deal with addiction quite well. Cigarettes are smoked outside, coffee is consumed inside, and so is Red Bull and associated blends. Life goes on, and nobody goes to jail unless they drive badly or other overt acts.

The problem is when we attach the criminal sanction to ordinary and harmless acts associated with a fairly short list of just a few drugs. Some drugs legal and some illegal--an irrational and counterproductive policy.
 
We cannot solve addiction anymore than we can "solve" fornication.

In fact, society and the legal system deal with addiction quite well. Cigarettes are smoked outside, coffee is consumed inside, and so is Red Bull and associated blends. Life goes on, and nobody goes to jail unless they drive badly or other overt acts.

The problem is when we attach the criminal sanction to ordinary and harmless acts associated with a fairly short list of just a few drugs. Some drugs legal and some illegal--an irrational and counterproductive policy.

Cigs and coffee don't make you eat someone's face. Bath salts do. And aren't those legal to buy now?

Look. The fact is you may not be able to "solve" addition as in "make it go away," but we can damn sure do a better job treating it. Or do you think it is just a coincidence that alcoholics and drug users are frequently arrested for behavior problems?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Cigs and coffee don't make you eat someone's face. Bath salts do. And aren't those legal to buy now?

Look. The fact is you may not be able to "solve" addition as in "make it go away," but we can damn sure do a better job treating it. Or do you think it is just a coincidence that alcoholics and drug users are frequently arrested for behavior problems?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The subject matter was addiction, and magically making it "go away".

I understand your need to introduce an emotional subject like eating faces, but that does not really address your previous point.

Society currently deals with addiction in many ways. There is no law you can pass that will eliminate fornication, addiction, taking selfies and a gazillion other aspects of human behavior.

Appeal to emotion is not really rational public dialogue, but it might make one feel a little better. :mrgreen:
 
The subject matter was addiction, and magically making it "go away".

I understand your need to introduce an emotional subject like eating faces, but that does not really address your previous point.

Society currently deals with addiction in many ways. There is no law you can pass that will eliminate fornication, addiction, taking selfies and a gazillion other aspects of human behavior.

Appeal to emotion is not really rational public dialogue, but it might make one feel a little better. :mrgreen:

You can pretend that my response was an "appeal to emotion," but not once do you see me suggesting a law. I was pointing out that addiction doesn't go away and you can't legislate it away by taking away laws. It will still be there. And people will still be committing crimes while high and stealing to feed their addictions. It will not go away.

That is why my original response was that you can't "just legalize." That is a stupid policy. That isn't what makes other nations effective at addictions. They have better treatments for mental disorders and addictions that come from that stuff.

You want a suggestion? Subsidize mental health care for the homeless...by not buying the F35 for 1.5 trillion dollars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You can pretend that my response was an "appeal to emotion," but not once do you see me suggesting a law. I was pointing out that addiction doesn't go away and you can't legislate it away by taking away laws. It will still be there. And people will still be committing crimes while high and stealing to feed their addictions. It will not go away.

That is why my original response was that you can't "just legalize." That is a stupid policy. That isn't what makes other nations effective at addictions. They have better treatments for mental disorders and addictions that come from that stuff.

You want a suggestion? Subsidize mental health care for the homeless...by not buying the F35 for 1.5 trillion dollars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Far out dude, we frigging agree on something! :mrgreen: No, addiction will not go away.

So why do we urinate on the Fourth Amendment and the rest of the constitution pretending that applying a criminal sanction against it will "make it go away?" Beats hell out of me. It seems completely irrational to fill our prisons, pretending we're making it go away. That's rather the point LEAP is trying to make, among others.

And in the meantime, applying the criminal sanction brings all manner of social pathologies, not the least of which is poor relations between the police and the citizenry. Another point by LEAP

And in the meantime, the drug cartels CREATED BY the prohibition thrive, just as we learned with the Volstead Act. Another point by LEAP. See?

Just as sure as prohibition made those who trafficked in alcohol wealthy and powerful, the same dynamic plays out with the prohibition of the other drugs.
 
Back
Top Bottom