Defund the Police!

Maybe we can run a little real-life experiment somewhere. You know, set up a 51st state for the no-popo crowd to see what it's actually like to live in a place with no LE. We can carve it out of part of Alaska or Nevada or North Dakota. Let's name the new state Anarchia. Originally Posted by lustylad

No need, let it be Los Angeles or New York city or both! That's what Federalism is all about. Let states experiment to find the best solution for all states.

I'm beginning to really like this idea. A real life Purge and Vegas could take bets on say which city reaches 100,000 dead the fastest! Yeah, that's the ticket! Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Hmmm... you're probably right, we'll never get those DDPDs (Defund Da Popo Dipshits) to move to Alaska or North Dakota to show us what will happen when the rubber meets the road. So we need to bring the real-life experiment to them. Right in their backyards.

Unfortunately most of these dim-retards are also NIMBY hypocrites. So we need to make sure if Los Angeles actually defunds da popo, they do it in Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Malibu, and Palos Verdes. Not just in Compton and Watts. A good idea should START in your backyard, not be implemented everywhere else BUT your backyard!

All of us rubes out in flyover country will be carefully monitoring this brave real-life experiment. If it works, then it should be a win-win for everyone! Just think, we can cite its success and begin applying the same defunding principle to every other arm of the government. Defund our failing schools! Defund the mayor's office! Defund the State Department! Defund public bureaucrats everywhere! Defund the swamp! The possibilities are limitless.

At the end of the day, we might actually achieve Grover Norquist's dream of shrinking the government down to a size where we can drown it in a bathtub!

Keith Ellison says he doesn't want police officers showing up at scenes of domestic abuse, the call that many cops are injured at.


300 million guns in America and Ellison wants to limit when a cop may carry a gun to a reported incident of violence. Just the man we need heading law enforcement, not! Originally Posted by HedonistForever

I understood Mr. LE Ellison wanted them to be without a firearm when they appeared for a domestic abuse call .... not showing up would be better .... but Mr. LE might want to explore the stats on domestic disturbance calls ... before he starts making policy decisions. But your comment reminded me ...

Almost 30 years ago San Diego had the worst record in the country (or at least near the "top") on officer's being killed on calls (primarily domestic disturbance matters). They explored the events and determined mid-career officers were not following the standards set by their academy ... mandatory backups!

The patrol officers had "forgotten" the lessons they were taught!

That is consistent pretty much across the board. One mostly sees mid-career officers varying from the standards taught in their training academy days ... most of it is complacency ... some of it is merely cutting corners .... taking the position that's "book stuff."*

*One can find officer restraint examples showing the officer's left knee on an arrestee's upper back to put pressure on the arrestee to hold him or her down while cuffs are applied or other restraints (leg restraints) to secure the person who is resisting. That is an acceptable method to temporarily control the arrestee who is struggling with the officer. The neck is not part of that training.

At the end of the day, we might actually achieve Grover Norquist's dream of shrinking the government down to a size where we can drown it in a bathtub! Originally Posted by lustylad

Keep the welfare checks flowing though ...

I watched the clip ... several times. I even posted a frame. He clearly has an electronic instrument in his hand .... he was NOT REACHING for the officer's weapon.... Originally Posted by LexusLover

OMF'nG, pay attention man. He was scanning their communications devices to send back to Rabble-Rouser Central Command, where they will try to decrypt the communications signals to intercept and/or hack into their communications and cameras - thus compromising the officer's operational security and safety. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

Let's try another angle. When our military attacks a country or region - what is the very first thing they target? Their commutations infrastructure. We want them either blinded or receiving false information.

You still think that was some innocent and unfortunate victim of Police abuse?!?

OMF'nG, pay attention man. He was scanning their communications devices to send back to Rabble-Rouser Central Command, where they will try to decrypt the communications signals to intercept and/or hack into their communications and cameras - thus compromising the officer's operational security and safety. Why is that so hard to comprehend?


You still think that was some innocent and unfortunate victim of Police abuse?!? Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

You learned all of this when? From watching the clip?

You're making up shit to justify an over-reaction by the officer, and then you expand it to a military operation to justify the officers aggravated assault on the citizen? And now you are reading the officer's mind from a video clip!

Nice! Just what this country needs. Loons reading minds!!!!

On either side of these issues!!!!

Perhaps you should go back to my objection to the "gun safety" claim in here that the old man was "near" the officer's weapon so the officer had the "right" to push him down ... I suppose was the "argument" ..... then when I pointed out the old man had his hand full of something so could not have grabbed the officer's weapon, which was strapped down in his holster with his lower arm over it, .... then it turns on the guy was holding an electronic device to read the officer's .... err .... radio traffic .... err....electronic communications to tell him what to do .... just what was he scanning .... the air defense the cops had set up for the riot? ..........

Loons! No wonder this country is fucked up and getting worse.

People have been eavesdropping on the police radio traffic with scanners since there were radios! So LE has the right to go around cracking open their heads for "listening" to the radio traffic? Really? Better let Fry's Electronic know! OR WALMART!!!!!!!!

T...

Gnadfly, I have over 30 guns (about 10 Henrys), but all of those weapons are not all mine but they are. I have a friend who owes me money and he gave me his guns as collateral. He'll never pay me back so technically I just count them as mine.

..... Originally Posted by Lucas McCain

I thought you said you had a lot of guns.

OMF'nG, pay attention man. He was scanning their communications devices to send back to Rabble-Rouser Central Command, where they will try to decrypt the communications signals to intercept and/or hack into their communications and cameras - thus compromising the officer's operational security and safety. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

Let's try another angle. When our military attacks a country or region - what is the very first thing they target? Their commutations infrastructure. We want them either blinded or receiving false information.

You still think that was some innocent and unfortunate victim of Police abuse?!? Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

so he did that with his Apple ISpyPhone right? the dude had a phone in his hand and got too close to that officer. he got knocked back. end of story.

speaking of defunding the police.

seem this has been tried. a new jersey city of 75,000 did just that 7 years ago.

Minneapolis is a larger city.

is this article comparing apples to oranges?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/09/us/di...rnd/index.html

Some hookers have fuck the police in their social media pages. Next time a big burly guy raw dawgs em without permission and they scream rape. Who they gonna call?

...You're making up shit to justify an over-reaction by the officer... Originally Posted by LexusLover

In a court case, which this will ultimately come down to, you have to prove a few things and there is a standard called reasonable doubt and of course motive etc, etc. Will there be an investigation? Of course. Stay tuned.

Were the officers following orders give to them?
Was the antagonist following orders given to them by the police?

Anyway, faggit about all that beezwax. Just remember that Buffalo now has no Rapid Response Team. All 57 of them resigned.

A 5 mins primer. Still early in the trial game

I thought you said you had a lot of guns. Originally Posted by gnadfly

He doesn’t know WTF he is saying in all his lies...

In a court case, which this will ultimately come down to, you have to prove a few things and there is a standard called reasonable doubt and of course motive etc, etc.... Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Are you just pretending to be more knowledgeable with respect to a "court case" or do you ASSUME you are more knowledgeable so you can lecture on what happens in a "court case"? I'm just asking ...

because you quoted a legitimate comment I made before you started your lecture on "Trying Cases" 101!

I won't risk outing you by asking the obvious!

I thought you said you had a lot of guns. Originally Posted by gnadfly

Gnad .... he did .... and the clue is ...... "guns" .....

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Does it say "guns"?

Some hookers have fuck the police in their social media pages. Originally Posted by winn dixie

They are just advertising and showing some "love" for Big Blue!

the left's call to defund the police isn't a call to end "community policing"

those with keen awareness might understand that the call to 'defund" the police is to defund what exists but to fund or create an ideological "police" in the place of criminal law enforcement

a force that will enforce their language and mind control and anti-free speech codes and their social justice injustice