Total Posts:85|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Calling all BLM haters

Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Which of these things do you disagree with?

1. Putting an end to Broken Windows policing

2. Community oversight

3. Limiting the use of force

4. Independent investigations and prosecutions against law enforcement

5. Community representation

6. Body cameras and filming the police

7. Increased training for cops

8. Ending for-profit policing

9. Demilitarization of cops

10. Fair police union contracts

If you don't know what any of these refers to, see here: http://www.joincampaignzero.org...
President of DDO
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2016 10:41:28 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Not sure if I count. Either way, none.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:01:26 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
None
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 1:14:19 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:
Which of these things do you disagree with?

1. Putting an end to Broken Windows policing
Disagree. I think that it has some merits, it just runs into substantial cultural problems.

2. Community oversight
Depends.

3. Limiting the use of force
To some degree, agree.

4. Independent investigations and prosecutions against law enforcement
Strongly agree. I actually support returning to some degree to the original grand jury model.

5. Community representation
Too vague.

6. Body cameras and filming the police
Agree

7. Increased training for cops
Depends

8. Ending for-profit policing
Agree

9. Demilitarization of cops
Depends

10. Fair police union contracts
Define 'fair'.

If you don't know what any of these refers to, see here: http://www.joincampaignzero.org...
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Robkwoods
Posts: 576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 1:58:17 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:
Which of these things do you disagree with?

1. Putting an end to Broken Windows policing

Disagree. Stop breaking that law, simple. You don't get a pass because your black.
2. Community oversight

Remember George Z. Is this that no police bull, what idiocy.
3. Limiting the use of force

Nope. This gets police killed. The latest Harvard study actually shows that an increased gradient of force can prevent the use of lethal force.
4. Independent investigations and prosecutions against law enforcement

IA is independent.
5. Community representation

Nope. As with the military I only want the highest quality candidates. Race and Sex diversity are always terrible quota to try to achieve.
6. Body cameras and filming the police

Yes, yes, and yes.
7. Increased training for cops

Depends on the training
8. Ending for-profit policing

I don't really believe in this concept as it pertains to race. I would like to see the war on drugs go away, but welfare has to go too.
9. Demilitarization of cops

As long as they never become a federalized I am ok with the level of weaponry they have.
10. Fair police union contracts

I hate unions.
If you don't know what any of these refers to, see here: http://www.joincampaignzero.org...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 2:08:25 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:
Which of these things do you disagree with?

1. Putting an end to Broken Windows policing

yes
2. Community oversight

yes
3. Limiting the use of force

yes
4. Independent investigations and prosecutions against law enforcement

yes
5. Community representation

no
6. Body cameras and filming the police

yes
7. Increased training for cops

no
8. Ending for-profit policing

no
9. Demilitarization of cops

no
10. Fair police union contracts

no
If you don't know what any of these refers to, see here: http://www.joincampaignzero.org...
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:02:22 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/20/2016 10:41:28 PM, someloser wrote:
Not sure if I count. Either way, none.

Cool, so you agree with the stated goals of Black Lives Matter.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:02:29 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:01:26 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
None

Cool, so you agree with the stated goals of Black Lives Matter.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:04:48 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 2:08:25 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
5. Community representation

no

Why?

7. Increased training for cops

no

Why?

8. Ending for-profit policing

no

Why? What a disgusting position. Especially civil asset forfeiture.

9. Demilitarization of cops

no

Gross. Why not.

10. Fair police union contracts

no

Why.
President of DDO
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:23:24 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 3:04:48 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 7/21/2016 2:08:25 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
5. Community representation

no

Why?
The public generally has no idea how to police a community. Just ideas on how not to police it.

7. Increased training for cops

no

Why?
Cops are well trained. if you want to change their training, that's a different request.

8. Ending for-profit policing

no

Why? What a disgusting position. Especially civil asset forfeiture.
Would you rather go to jail than pay a speeding ticket?
9. Demilitarization of cops

no

Gross. Why not.
Need to demilitarize the public first.

10. Fair police union contracts

no

Why.
Police need to do the job as outlined in a government contract set by the people.
YYW
Posts: 36,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 4:05:10 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:
Which of these things do you disagree with?

1. Putting an end to Broken Windows policing

Depends.

2. Community oversight

Depends.

3. Limiting the use of force

Depends.

4. Independent investigations and prosecutions against law enforcement

This already is the norm.

5. Community representation

This would happen more if more blacks could pass background checks.

6. Body cameras and filming the police

Absolutely not.

7. Increased training for cops

It is way more complicated than that.

8. Ending for-profit policing

To the limited extent that it exists, yes. Prisons are the bigger concern, though. Generally, just get profit margins out of the penal system entirely.

9. Demilitarization of cops

It's complicated.

10. Fair police union contracts

That already happens.
Tsar of DDO
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:01:51 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:
Which of these things do you disagree with?

1. Putting an end to Broken Windows policing

There is merit to this, though its enforcement needs to be uniform.


3. Limiting the use of force

No.


7. Increased training for cops

To what end?

9. Demilitarization of cops

No.

How about community self help? "See something, say something" sort of community standard, instead of nobody (seemingly) ever seeing anything.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:43:48 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

No, that's not a solution.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:52:00 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:43:48 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

No, that's not a solution.

And why is that not a solution, exactly? What prevents people from breaking the law?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 12:56:08 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:52:00 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:43:48 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

No, that's not a solution.


And why is that not a solution, exactly? What prevents people from breaking the law?

"Just stop breaking the law" is an incredibly naive and, frankly speaking, dumb statement. It's almost the same as saying "just stop being poor" or "just stop getting raped." It's stupid. People aren't cackling masterminds rubbing their palms together and scheming about how they can break the law today. They break the law because their lives or safety depend on it. The law isn't just to them anyway, so there's no point to following it. The greatest perversion one can do the law is make one unworthy of enforcement. You're the guy who's saying, "well, if slaves don't want to get punished, they should just stop running away."
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 1:02:18 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:56:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:52:00 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:43:48 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

No, that's not a solution.


And why is that not a solution, exactly? What prevents people from breaking the law?

"Just stop breaking the law" is an incredibly naive and, frankly speaking, dumb statement. It's almost the same as saying "just stop being poor" or "just stop getting raped." It's stupid.

Only if you feel there is an agency in being passive, as opposed to active. You see the difference between "being" poor or raped as opposed to "being" a criminal, right?

People aren't cackling masterminds rubbing their palms together and scheming about how they can break the law today. They break the law because their lives or safety depend on it. The law isn't just to them anyway, so there's no point to following it.

You don't consider those two to be opposites? They aren't scheming about breaking the law, but they sure have decided which laws are unjust in the first place...

The greatest perversion one can do the law is make one unworthy of enforcement. You're the guy who's saying, "well, if slaves don't want to get punished, they should just stop running away."

This infers my example of people being oppressed from the onset. I am merely remarking about laws, laws that the vaaaaaaast majority of the population don't seem to have a problem following. This is the problem with a social justice movement, what is considered "just" is in the mind of the protestor, not specifically courts of law.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Robkwoods
Posts: 576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 1:19:42 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Interesting that you say this, considering this is the only thing BLM does. Screaming RACISM, because...reasons, is not a solution.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 2:57:10 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:56:08 PM, Semiya wrote:

"Just stop breaking the law" is an incredibly naive and, frankly speaking, dumb statement. It's almost the same as saying... "just stop getting raped." It's stupid.

Wow..I haven't heard something so genuinely stupid in a long. long time on this site...

Breaking the law is the same thing as being a victim of rape?

Michael Brown grabbing a cop's gun was self-defense? And I suppose robbing and looting stores is the only predictable thing we can expect from all rape victims...
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:05:37 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 3:23:24 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The public generally has no idea how to police a community. Just ideas on how not to police it.

That has nothing to do with what it's calling for. I figured most people wouldn't get it which is why I provided the link (God forbid people read something before having an opinion on it though, right?). Community oversight isn't asking for civilian policing.

http://www.joincampaignzero.org...

Cops are well trained. if you want to change their training, that's a different request.

Then why do tax payers spend billions of dollars on malpractice suits against law enforcement? Why are cops routinely caught on camera and video breaking the law? Why do so many cops shoot unarmed people that aren't at close range? Increased training quite obviously means *different* training and better training. Is this the best you think they can do? Even if you do, it doesn't matter, because you've already defeated your own argument in saying civilians don't know enough about law enforcement. Police higher-ups admit they need different and better training. There are also soldiers going around talking about how even they are better prepared to de-escalate situations and only use force when absolutely necessary.

Would you rather go to jail than pay a speeding ticket?

That has nothing to do with for-profit policing.

Should you get pulled over for going 2 mph over the speed limit (or not speeding at all) just so a cop can fulfill their quota? Civil asset forfeiture is a disgusting fraudulent thieving scam that legalizes theft and robbery. If you don't want to curb it then you might have mental issues or moral issues worth sorting out. I'll post a link about this gross endeavor but I doubt you'll be keen on reading it and learning something. We'll see. Here's an article called "Cops Now Make More Than Robbers"

http://reason.com...

Need to demilitarize the public first.

I'm pro 2nd amendment. You're not? Boo.

Police need to do the job as outlined in a government contract set by the people.

How do you know that's not part of the "fair" contract? This point is actually about removing barriers to effective misconduct investigations (to promote police accountability). What's wrong with that? Cops shouldn't be held accountable to the law, eh? This is also about keeping officers' disciplinary history accessible to police departments and the public. They are in significant positions of power and authority. They are civil SERVANTS and should be held to higher standards than others. I also think it's important to ensure officers do not get paid after they kill or seriously injure a civilian unjustly (i.e. "paid vacation" or being put on desk duty after doing something blatantly wrong).
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:07:39 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

It's naive and ignorant to assume that you have to be breaking the law to be harassed by police (regardless of race). The plethora of evidence showing cops caught on audio and video recording being obnoxious, violent toolbags proves this.
President of DDO
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:10:03 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 3:07:39 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

It's naive and ignorant to assume that you have to be breaking the law to be harassed by police (regardless of race). The plethora of evidence showing cops caught on audio and video recording being obnoxious, violent toolbags proves this.

Ah, but is it "true"?

That being, if am breaking the law, is it more or less likely that law enforcement will be summoned?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:18:06 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 1:02:18 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:56:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:52:00 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:43:48 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:36:56 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:27:35 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:24:58 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 7/20/2016 10:37:03 PM, Danielle wrote:

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

No, that's not a solution.


And why is that not a solution, exactly? What prevents people from breaking the law?

"Just stop breaking the law" is an incredibly naive and, frankly speaking, dumb statement. It's almost the same as saying "just stop being poor" or "just stop getting raped." It's stupid.

Only if you feel there is an agency in being passive, as opposed to active. You see the difference between "being" poor or raped as opposed to "being" a criminal, right?

Being don't become criminals purely by free and informed agency and choices but because of socioeconomic environment and circumstance. To stop crime, you need to understand why it happens.

People aren't cackling masterminds rubbing their palms together and scheming about how they can break the law today. They break the law because their lives or safety depend on it. The law isn't just to them anyway, so there's no point to following it.

You don't consider those two to be opposites? They aren't scheming about breaking the law, but they sure have decided which laws are unjust in the first place...

More or less, though you make it sound like they break the law just because they dislike it, which isn't remotely true.

The greatest perversion one can do the law is make one unworthy of enforcement. You're the guy who's saying, "well, if slaves don't want to get punished, they should just stop running away."

This infers my example of people being oppressed from the onset. I am merely remarking about laws, laws that the vaaaaaaast majority of the population don't seem to have a problem following. This is the problem with a social justice movement, what is considered "just" is in the mind of the protestor, not specifically courts of law.

When the vaaaaast majority of the population benefits from the systems of oppression which boosted them to power in the first place, why wouldn't they bother following it?
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:19:29 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 2:57:10 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:56:08 PM, Semiya wrote:

"Just stop breaking the law" is an incredibly naive and, frankly speaking, dumb statement. It's almost the same as saying... "just stop getting raped." It's stupid.


Wow..I haven't heard something so genuinely stupid in a long. long time on this site...

Breaking the law is the same thing as being a victim of rape?

No, but telling people to just stop being a victim to a stronger power which forces them into a state of oppression and submission is, as I said, stupid.

Michael Brown grabbing a cop's gun was self-defense? And I suppose robbing and looting stores is the only predictable thing we can expect from all rape victims...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:22:23 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 3:05:37 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 7/21/2016 3:23:24 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
The public generally has no idea how to police a community. Just ideas on how not to police it.

That has nothing to do with what it's calling for. I figured most people wouldn't get it which is why I provided the link (God forbid people read something before having an opinion on it though, right?). Community oversight isn't asking for civilian policing.

http://www.joincampaignzero.org...

I read it. I repeat, the general community has no idea how to police, as evidenced by the many videos out there when a member of the general community volunteers to go through the "shoot or don't shoot" police training exercises. Every one of them admits afterwards they had no clue what police officers had to go through.

Cops are well trained. if you want to change their training, that's a different request.

Then why do tax payers spend billions of dollars on malpractice suits against law enforcement? Why are cops routinely caught on camera and video breaking the law? Why do so many cops shoot unarmed people that aren't at close range? Increased training quite obviously means *different* training and better training. Is this the best you think they can do? Even if you do, it doesn't matter, because you've already defeated your own argument in saying civilians don't know enough about law enforcement. Police higher-ups admit they need different and better training. There are also soldiers going around talking about how even they are better prepared to de-escalate situations and only use force when absolutely necessary.

You essentially agree with me here by restating they need different and better training, not just more training.
Would you rather go to jail than pay a speeding ticket?

That has nothing to do with for-profit policing.

Should you get pulled over for going 2 mph over the speed limit (or not speeding at all) just so a cop can fulfill their quota? Civil asset forfeiture is a disgusting fraudulent thieving scam that legalizes theft and robbery. If you don't want to curb it then you might have mental issues or moral issues worth sorting out. I'll post a link about this gross endeavor but I doubt you'll be keen on reading it and learning something. We'll see. Here's an article called "Cops Now Make More Than Robbers"

http://reason.com...

I agree it's problematic, but wouldn't the alternative mean jail time if fines were abolished?
Need to demilitarize the public first.

I'm pro 2nd amendment. You're not? Boo.

I am lol.
Police need to do the job as outlined in a government contract set by the people.

How do you know that's not part of the "fair" contract? This point is actually about removing barriers to effective misconduct investigations (to promote police accountability). What's wrong with that? Cops shouldn't be held accountable to the law, eh? This is also about keeping officers' disciplinary history accessible to police departments and the public. They are in significant positions of power and authority. They are civil SERVANTS and should be held to higher standards than others. I also think it's important to ensure officers do not get paid after they kill or seriously injure a civilian unjustly (i.e. "paid vacation" or being put on desk duty after doing something blatantly wrong).
They can do that through holding electing officials accountable.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:25:01 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 3:19:29 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/21/2016 2:57:10 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/21/2016 12:56:08 PM, Semiya wrote:

"Just stop breaking the law" is an incredibly naive and, frankly speaking, dumb statement. It's almost the same as saying... "just stop getting raped." It's stupid.


Wow..I haven't heard something so genuinely stupid in a long. long time on this site...

Breaking the law is the same thing as being a victim of rape?

No, but telling people to just stop being a victim to a stronger power which forces them into a state of oppression and submission is, as I said, stupid.

Michael Brown grabbing a cop's gun was self-defense? And I suppose robbing and looting stores is the only predictable thing we can expect from all rape victims...

Buddy, hate to break it to you, but the vast majority of poor oppressed people, including rape victims, don't choose to break the law.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:26:37 PM
Posted: 4 months ago

Most "BLM haters" on this site disagree with the means employed by the BlackLivesMatter movement, not the ends of the movement (e.g. social justice).

And it's so much easier to hate on a movement than it is to try and come up with alternative solutions.

Is "stop breaking the law" a solution? That seems to be pretty potent in terms of wrapping up a LOT of problems.

No, that's not a solution.


And why is that not a solution, exactly? What prevents people from breaking the law?

"Just stop breaking the law" is an incredibly naive and, frankly speaking, dumb statement. It's almost the same as saying "just stop being poor" or "just stop getting raped." It's stupid.

Only if you feel there is an agency in being passive, as opposed to active. You see the difference between "being" poor or raped as opposed to "being" a criminal, right?

Being don't become criminals purely by free and informed agency and choices but because of socioeconomic environment and circumstance. To stop crime, you need to understand why it happens.

Why it happens, and the end of the chain, is some one decided to act. If you disagree that the criminal is not 100% to blame, if I might mention something previously you mentioned: the victim themselves had a hand in their own rape. Is this a prospect you agree with?

People aren't cackling masterminds rubbing their palms together and scheming about how they can break the law today. They break the law because their lives or safety depend on it. The law isn't just to them anyway, so there's no point to following it.

You don't consider those two to be opposites? They aren't scheming about breaking the law, but they sure have decided which laws are unjust in the first place...

More or less, though you make it sound like they break the law just because they dislike it, which isn't remotely true.

People smoke and sell weed in states which find it to be contraband for what reason other than they prefer their tastes than the current law?

The greatest perversion one can do the law is make one unworthy of enforcement. You're the guy who's saying, "well, if slaves don't want to get punished, they should just stop running away."

This infers my example of people being oppressed from the onset. I am merely remarking about laws, laws that the vaaaaaaast majority of the population don't seem to have a problem following. This is the problem with a social justice movement, what is considered "just" is in the mind of the protestor, not specifically courts of law.

When the vaaaaast majority of the population benefits from the systems of oppression which boosted them to power in the first place, why wouldn't they bother following it?

"boosted them to power"? Please explain to me how NOT selling crack boosts me to power. Please explain to me how keeping my pants around my waist and not my thighs "boosts" me to power.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2016 3:31:46 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/21/2016 4:05:10 AM, YYW wrote:
Depends.

Depends on what? Cops encourage racist stop-and-frisk which is a violation of Constitutional rights. Do you believe in the Constitution or not. Further, cops stop minorities (more often) and everyone for victimless crimes which is pathetic. People in the ghetto get ticketed for jay walking and loitering; not so in the suburbs. I digress. Cops suck at policing the mentally ill. Mental Health Response Teams being sent in lieu of cops have been proven to reduce police use of force in these situations by nearly 40 percent. This is part of reforming Broken Windows policing.

Depends.

On what.

3. Limiting the use of force

Depends.

No, it doesn't. People have the right to due process and a trial by judge or jury of their peers after being afforded legal representation. Cops should be required to use the absolute minimal force necessary that #1 keeps themselves and others safe and #2 does not KILL the suspect. That is the standard. It's just not enforced. That must be why you're confused and think cops should be given more leeway to kill. No. They're already given leeway to kill where it's justified. Shooting someone 9 times (in a recent video I saw this morning) is not justified. One shot isn't enough? Two? Three? Four? FOURTY ONE shots a la Mr. Diallo?

This already is the norm.

No, it's not. "In the United States, investigation of cases of police brutality has often been left to internal police commissions and/or district attorneys (DAs). Internal police commissions have often been criticized for a lack of accountability and for bias favoring officers, as they frequently declare upon review that the officer(s) acted within the department's rules, or according to their training. For instance, an April 2007 study of the Chicago Police Department found that out of more than 10,000 police abuse complaints filed between 2002 and 2003, only 19 (0.19%) resulted in meaningful disciplinary action."

You can read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org...

There is an obvious need for outside regulation. "We have investigated ourselves and found ourselves innocent" is problematic.

This would happen more if more blacks could pass background checks.

What about using community feedback to inform police department policies and practices? Also, in NJ for example (where my friend has been desperately trying to become a cop) they are so inundated with applicants there is a crazy waiting list and extensive check because so many people want to be cops... yet the job must be so hard and tough. I bet why that's why people are literally fighting over police jobs.

Absolutely not.

They absolutely should. I mean, just because their videos seem to "malfunction" in cases where they are accused of excessive force, and just because cops have been caught on their own cameras bragging about how they'll simply delete the videos, doesn't change the statistics on their effectiveness and overall significance.

It is way more complicated than that.

Right. It should say better training for cops. And more accountability. And better laws.

To the limited extent that it exists, yes. Prisons are the bigger concern, though. Generally, just get profit margins out of the penal system entirely.

Then legalize drugs and stop policing victimless or nonsense crimes, the ones you might permit "depending" on your first answer to Broken Windows policing. For-profit policing incentivizes finding criminals for profit and to perpetuate the Prison Industrial Complex. Any time the government can use its authority to make other people money it should be subject to severe scrutiny.

It's complicated.

Maybe. The majority of policing does not need to be militarized. I can see why NYC cops should be.

That already happens.

Not even close.
President of DDO