Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
itsnotoutthere

Mayor who dismissed lawlessness

Recommended Posts

itsnotoutthere

:lol:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
aztek
Posted (edited)

the city should get more cops, only if mayor and anyone else who supported her and dismissed riots crime jump, resigns and leaves the city. or better yet let people defend themselves. shot the looters and whoever puts their lives in danger, we wont need much of police this way.

Edited by aztek
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Silver Shroud

In the UK, we are constantly requesting funding for the police not cuts, it is our government who are making cuts. What madmen think cutting back on police funding is a good idea?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Silver Shroud

I've just looked up "Defund the Police"  Defund the police - Wikipedia.

I've noticed the phrase, but never thought about it. In the UK, we are (most people anyway) always requesting more funding for all our public services-  more for healthcare, more for social care, more for social housing, more for social workers, police , fire services.  And our governments always resist, so we reach a status quo where we accept "cut backs". We live with it.

I find it so hard to believe that anyone would want to roll back funding. I am beginning to see now why in the US 'socialism' is considered by many to be a bad word-  in the UK when we refer to a "socialist government", our brand of socialism is so mild it is hardly distinguishable from a Tory (right wing) government.

What motive could anyone have for cutting back on policing? It doesn't make sense, unless you are keen on a bit of lawlessness.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Autochthon1990
26 minutes ago, Ted E Hughes said:

I've just looked up "Defund the Police"  Defund the police - Wikipedia.

I've noticed the phrase, but never thought about it. In the UK, we are (most people anyway) always requesting more funding for all our public services-  more for healthcare, more for social care, more for social housing, more for social workers, police , fire services.  And our governments always resist, so we reach a status quo where we accept "cut backs". We live with it.

I find it so hard to believe that anyone would want to roll back funding. I am beginning to see now why in the US 'socialism' is considered by many to be a bad word-  in the UK when we refer to a "socialist government", our brand of socialism is so mild it is hardly distinguishable from a Tory (right wing) government.

What motive could anyone have for cutting back on policing? It doesn't make sense, unless you are keen on a bit of lawlessness.

It's because cops over here are a BIT more intense then the cops in the UK. Go ahead, google some of the gear they have, the tactics they use, and the methods they're involved with, and I think you'll see why so many people think there's too much sugar in the soda. We want some of that cash distributed into 'root cause' solutions, like rehab programs, social workers, and other options that might be better suited to solve a problem then 'dude shows up with a gun'. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
Posted (edited)

Doesn't matter what Jenny Durkin asks for.  The city council, ran by communists and all defund/abolish the police, are the ones who vote for the police budget and with Durkin already stating she will not run for re-election has no negotiating power since they don't have to worry about what she thinks for much longer.  The people in the Belltown neighborhood referenced here are begging for more police but the city council is generally convinced that it is ultimately the police who are responsible for any and all violence.  With the makeup of voters, majority political morons brought in from CA by the tech industry which is how we got to where we are now, I don't see the issue with our council getting fixed any time soon.  

A few months ago there was a "man" standing outside the grocery store with a sign and a petition to "STOP THE RACIST RECALL" of Kshama Sawant, my district three representative and main lunatic on the council.  So I asked the guy, if I'm for the recall I'm a racist?  and he says who said that?  I told him your sign says it (they have since revised that sign to read right wing recall) I explained to him that I have lived on Capitol Hill longer than he has been alive and that it has never been more filthy and dangerous than it it is now.  His response?  He blamed the police and said once we have abolished the police.......at which point I cut him off "You're blaming this on the police!!!!!??????!!!!!?????  That is the mindset of the lunatics around here.  They are delusional.  It's the councils policies which are responsible for all of this but they're the types that are convinced that communism always ends in death camps because it hasn't been done right, but this time, with them in charge......... Here is a video I recorded from my window.

What really cracks me up is when you have this forums equivalent to this idiot on the video above telling me I'm a racist or a fascist.  Those people are truly ****ing stupid and I wish they would just keep their mouths shut.  They have barely lived in the real world.  The problems of this society are people like them not people like me.

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

2 Corinthians 9:6: "The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
itsnotoutthere
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, OverSword said:

Doesn't matter what Jenny Durkin asks for.  The city council, ran by communists and all defund/abolish the police, are the ones who vote for the police budget and with Durkin already stating she will not run for re-election has no negotiating power since they don't have to worry about what she thinks for much longer.  The people in the Belltown neighborhood referenced here are begging for more police but the city council is generally convinced that it is ultimately the police who are responsible for any and all violence.  With the makeup of voters, majority political morons brought in from CA by the tech industry which is how we got to where we are now, I don't see the issue with our council getting fixed any time soon.  

A few months ago there was a "man" standing outside the grocery store with a sign and a petition to "STOP THE RACIST RECALL" of Kshama Sawant, my district three representative and main lunatic on the council.  So I asked the guy, if I'm for the recall I'm a racist?  and he says who said that?  I told him your sign says it (they have since revised that sign to read right wing recall) I explained to him that I have lived on Capitol Hill longer than he has been alive and that it has never been more filthy and dangerous than it it is now.  His response?  He blamed the police and said once we have abolished the police.......at which point I cut him off "You're blaming this on the police!!!!!??????!!!!!?????  That is the mindset of the lunatics around here.  They are delusional.  It's the councils policies which are responsible for all of this but they're the types that are convinced that communism always ends in death camps because it hasn't been done right, but this time, with them in charge......... Here is a video I recorded from my window.

What really cracks me up is when you have this forums equivalent to this idiot on the video above telling me I'm a racist or a fascist.  Those people are truly ****ing stupid and I wish they would just keep their mouths shut.  They have barely lived in the real world.  The problems of this society are people like them not people like me.

Yes, that slur has been thrown in my direction on this forum by those people, funny though, when I asked for an example none was forthcoming. They know they can't win an argument using reasoned words and as a final effort they call you a racist. It's the keyboard equivalent of that anti trump woman screaming at the sky. 843958616_R(1).jpg.1d4905f2c3a95ffc8909816e8c662916.jpg

As Ricky would say :-

52634.jpg.6e41ac123aa841da67f237e687d80856.jpg

 

Edited by itsnotoutthere
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
22 hours ago, aztek said:

the city should get more cops, only if mayor and anyone else who supported her and dismissed riots crime jump, resigns and leaves the city. or better yet let people defend themselves. shot the looters and whoever puts their lives in danger, we wont need much of police this way.

Great plan!

So you'd be ok with shooting anyone without a mask on sight? They are, after all, putting lives in danger.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Ted E Hughes said:

I've just looked up "Defund the Police"  Defund the police - Wikipedia.

I've noticed the phrase, but never thought about it. In the UK, we are (most people anyway) always requesting more funding for all our public services-  more for healthcare, more for social care, more for social housing, more for social workers, police , fire services.  And our governments always resist, so we reach a status quo where we accept "cut backs". We live with it.

I find it so hard to believe that anyone would want to roll back funding. I am beginning to see now why in the US 'socialism' is considered by many to be a bad word-  in the UK when we refer to a "socialist government", our brand of socialism is so mild it is hardly distinguishable from a Tory (right wing) government.

What motive could anyone have for cutting back on policing? It doesn't make sense, unless you are keen on a bit of lawlessness.

When people refer to 'defund the police' in the US, they usually mean stop spending millions buying tanks for the police and instead spend the money training social workers.

That way, next time some poor sod has a psychotic episode, he can be treated appropriately by trained professionals. Instead of shot by a wannabe soldier because he moved funny.

It's an essential move to demilitarise the American police and create an civilian police service appropriate for the 21st century. Or, you know, the 19th...

It might help to remember that a UK police officer has several months training then 2 years probation. Then they're allowed out unsupervised with a baton and cs spray.

A US police officer gets a few weeks training then is let loose with a gun.

Basically it boils down to, do you address police shootings by appropriately training other services or do you address police shootings by giving them a tank?

Edited by Setton
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Setton said:

When people refer to 'defund the police' in the US, they usually mean stop spending millions buying tanks for the police and instead spend the money training social workers.

That way, next time some poor sod has a psychotic episode, he can be treated appropriately by trained professionals. Instead of shot by a wannabe soldier because he moved funny.

It's an essential move to demilitarise the American police and create an civilian police service appropriate for the 21st century. Or, you know, the 19th...

It might help to remember that a UK police officer has several months training then 2 years probation. Then they're allowed out unsupervised with a baton and cs spray.

A US police officer gets a few weeks training then is let loose with a gun.

Basically it boils down to, do you address police shootings by appropriately training other services or do you address police shootings by giving them a tank?

You are quite right on most points.  But here is how it would really work even after the police were defunded and money reallocated to a social services approach.  When the emergency number is called there is non-professional person taking that call on behalf of every emergency service available.  These people are not qualified to determine by a phone call if the emergency is about a dangerous person or not.  So naturally to avoid getting social workers killed by dangerous people having a psychotic breakdown and being legally responsible for inured or killed social workers, the city will send out armed police who are in the area and possibly a social worker trained as a psychologist will be dispatched from wherever they're office is at.  If the police are having difficulty such as the man has a knife in his hand and refuses to drop it on command he's likely to be shot.

As far as demilitarizing the police I'm all for it theoretically, but in reality the police have to have the equipment able to deal with criminals with large caliber weapons in the USA and that reality is not going to be wished away in the next fifty years.  The answer is not what as you state at the end of your post, the answer is to fund the police even more.  Do more reviews to weed out those no longer suitable for the work on the street and much more regular situational training so that when they are in an actual situation that may result in violence currently, they will have more and better solutions and more experience dealing with dangerous confusing situations.  It would be very similar to the fake Arab towns full of actors where Americas special forces are situationally trained for weeks before deployment.  I would say that for every twelve months six weeks should be spent in such training annually.  This would cost us more money but we would end up with a more professional force able to serve the interest of society much more effectively and positively. 

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
6 minutes ago, OverSword said:

You are quite right on most points.  But here is how it would really work even after the police were defunded and money reallocated to a social services approach.  When the emergency number is called there is non-professional person taking that call on behalf of every emergency service available.  These people are not qualified to determine by a phone call if the emergency is about a dangerous person or not.  So naturally to avoid getting social workers killed by dangerous people having a psychotic breakdown and being legally responsible for inured or killed social workers, the city will send out armed police who are in the area and possibly a social worker trained as a psychologist will be dispatched from wherever they're office is at.  If the police are having difficulty such as the man has a knife in his hand and refuses to drop it on command he's likely to be shot.

 

Yep.  Social workers handling dangerous situations would be a joke.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
aztek

but social workers already do that,  my mother used work for the city, she was a caseworker, she would be sent to worst hoods in NY, to see if a person there has enough medical attention, if the nurse of home attendants do proper jobs, not only some people were seriously mentally ill, the projects she, and her coworkers go into, are gang infested, with addicts shooting up right in playgrounds, staircases, those caseworkers have no gun, no vest, no cops to protect them, and they are being assaulted, you wont find it in paper and news wont tell you about it either. those people are the  real heroes, not cops who would not even enter projects unless there is a back up.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon the frog
56 minutes ago, Myles said:

Yep.  Social workers handling dangerous situations would be a joke.  

I don't see problems with social workers, they will not do the cops jobs, they will prevent bad events of happening. If you can have less dangerous situations because you used social workers to prevent them it's clearly not a joke. You still have cops, maybe less geared for war, but you have less dangerous situations to care off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
12 minutes ago, Jon the frog said:

I don't see problems with social workers, they will not do the cops jobs, they will prevent bad events of happening. If you can have less dangerous situations because you used social workers to prevent them it's clearly not a joke. You still have cops, maybe less geared for war, but you have less dangerous situations to care off.

How will they know when to deploy social workers?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon the frog
20 minutes ago, Myles said:

How will they know when to deploy social workers?   

You don't deploy them, they work full time to solves issues before they become problems.... for example providing poor family help and guidance so their kids don't become gangsta...or fall into drugs, roberry, etc. It's less glamour than shooting people but it help a lot more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
1 hour ago, aztek said:

but social workers already do that,  my mother used work for the city, she was a caseworker, she would be sent to worst hoods in NY, to see if a person there has enough medical attention, if the nurse of home attendants do proper jobs, not only some people were seriously mentally ill, the projects she, and her coworkers go into, are gang infested, with addicts shooting up right in playgrounds, staircases, those caseworkers have no gun, no vest, no cops to protect them, and they are being assaulted, you wont find it in paper and news wont tell you about it either. those people are the  real heroes, not cops who would not even enter projects unless there is a back up.

Not the same as being called in by a 911 operator, though still dangerous.  And would your Mother not be escorted by police if she requested for certain cases?  I know that's what social workers do here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Not the same as being called in by a 911 operator, though still dangerous.  And would your Mother not be escorted by police if she requested for certain cases?  I know that's what social workers do here.

nope. no escort ever in her 20+ years of service.  it is not even the cases themselves, but hoods and projects where those cases are. 

 

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
12 minutes ago, Jon the frog said:

You don't deploy them, they work full time to solves issues before they become problems.... for example providing poor family help and guidance so their kids don't become gangsta...or fall into drugs, roberry, etc. It's less glamour than shooting people but it help a lot more.

So this is a potential help 10-12 years in the future.   That is good, but police still have to deal with dangerous situation until crime goes away.  

I hope the "guidance would include educating and preaching against teen pregnancies and single parent households.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
1 minute ago, Myles said:

 

I hope the "guidance would include educating and preaching against teen pregnancies and single parent households.   

that is an assault on black culture, aka cultural genocide,  not in this day and age, liberals will not let anyone do that. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon the frog
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Myles said:

So this is a potential help 10-12 years in the future.   That is good, but police still have to deal with dangerous situation until crime goes away.  

I hope the "guidance would include educating and preaching against teen pregnancies and single parent households.   

Yep it take some times, it's why ''defunding'' cannot be done in one day, it's more about transforming police forces than defunding anyway.  That stuff take time, and with politician getting rid of last government doings all the time... it's quite hard to get long term stuff on track. The mess will grow bigger and bigger until mayhem.

Edited by Jon the frog
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword

Here is a big issue where crime is concerned is Seattle, and was all over the local newscasts yesterday:

Quote

 

SEATTLE — A 35-year-old man was arrested Thursday after he allegedly assaulted a woman in a King County Courthouse bathroom. 

The victim went into the bathroom and found the man inside, according to the Seattle Police Department (SPD). 

After the man attempted to assault her, the woman screamed for help and fought back. A courthouse employee entered the bathroom and subdued the suspect, according to SPD. Court staff then called the police department. 

SPD's sexual assault unit is interviewing the suspect who was booked into the King County jail. 

Court records show the suspect was recently released from the King County Jail after he was found guilty of "indecent liberties" and three charges of assault in the fourth degree stemming from an incident in 2019. The suspect attacked four women "all of whom were strangers to him who were simply going about their day working in downtown Seattle," according to court documents. 

 

Link

This type of thing, with repeat offenders who are a danger to society and obviously mentally ill, is becoming extremely common here.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2
Posted (edited)

So my city started a few years back a Mobile Crisis Unit. Which sends out cops +social workers to certain calls. It's the model I support most.

 

But some places have been piloting things like CAHOOTS model in Oregon. Which does entirely filter certain calls to social workers.

Here is the city released data from the pilot so far for anyone who wants to look closer into it.

https://www.eugene-or.gov/DocumentCenter/View/56717/CAHOOTS-Program-Analysis

 

On a local anecdote level I have seen some changes even without social workers answering calls. Like I saw a job posting a few months back. A police department from one of our city's suburb areas was hiring a social worker to work on the department and set up it's side of things basically.

Edited by spartan max2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
Posted (edited)

I wasn't able to find how many "tanks" the police in the US have, but I did find many articles that said the armored vehicles mostly were sold for a fraction of their cost. Basically given away under expensive Federal programs under Bush, Clinton, Bush2 and even Obama.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarization_of_police

I suspect several local municipalities here in northern Oregon have such vehicles, but I've yet to see one, even on TV. No such vehicle was used during the Portland riots, I believe. 

Problem with cutting police funding is you just end up with even less officers, being paid less, so less happy, and worse trained, with less experience.

If anything they should increase funding to get the best officers, with the best training.

In Portland part of the money "Defunded" went toward helping the homeless. What that entailed, I have gathered, is feeding them, providing sanitary facilities, and tents/survival goods. Thus NOT helping these people, but enabling their lives on the streets. Which has attracted even MORE homeless into the city.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
DieChecker
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, OverSword said:

Here is a big issue where crime is concerned is Seattle, and was all over the local newscasts yesterday:

Link

This type of thing, with repeat offenders who are a danger to society and obviously mentally ill, is becoming extremely common here.

It was relatively common back ten years ago when I used to go up to Seattle every couple weekends. Me and the wife were in a downtown mall and I went into the rest room, and found a man living in there under the sinks. He ranted and raved at me to leave his home. We also were approached outside on the sidewalk, several times, in broad daylight, by men selling drugs. 

Security apparently did nothing to remove the crazy man. And police coverage was likely already sparse if the drug dealers where so bold, even during the day. Everyone who seemed to live there seemed to just be ignoring all this.

Thats when we stopped going to Seattle. Even the Pikes Place was quickly going downhill.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.