the problem is the defund the police folks dont understand economics. there isnt enough money as it is for maintaining the police presence for the criminal side of things. taking that money and paying for a bunch of counsellors doesnt lead to having enough cops. Removing police from schools is a 1 percent thing, the other 99 percent will pull their kids out without resource officers. Mental health still will need police, they dont go to a hot environment because they dont have arrest powers if it goes downhill, and you dont want jonna the counselor having to fight the loon. They want to disarm the police. thats a big no, complete non starter. They consider the bullet proof vests to be a mechanism of intimidation, anyone who has actually had a vest do its job would never let somebody else go in without one. Maybe they try an actual wholistic approach, stop making everything illegal, and you immediately have less criminals stop overcharging for pleas, Mike flynn being an ally example I wish they would recognize. The media says if he wasnt guilty, why would he take a plea? I can find you thousands of young black men who can answer that question without skipping a beat. Get rid of plea bargains all together, make DAs actually work for their conviction rates at trial, bet you see a less burdened court and prison system right quick. Prisons cost 30-70k annually per inmate. Thats a whole lot of dough to put into those other programs, and over time that cost goes down as guards age out and dont need to be replaced because the cells are empty.
defund the police is targeting a symptom of a virus and giving it an antibiotic (its the wrong treatment) On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 7:38 PM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > For many people, that seems to mean stop funding the police to deal with > issues like mental health, homelessness, domestic disputes, street vendors, > routine discipline in schools, etc., and instead use that money to fund > specialists, and let the police handle murders and robberies and stuff. > > > > I had a discussion with someone who is all for defund the police and I > said if that’s what they mean, the term really sucks, because it conveys > something totally different and many people are not going to support > something that sounds like disband the police and then nobody handles > murders and robberies. Rather than saying reform the police, or narrow > their focus, or move some of their responsibilities to other agencies. But > he said I was wrong, without really explaining why I was wrong. I think he > meant we can call it what we want to, who cares if it’s unnecessarily > provocative. Or maybe he really does want to disband the police. > > > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *justsumname . > *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2020 6:14 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* [AFMUG] OT: batcrazy > > > > is it just the 'news' that I'm reading or are things really going totally > bathshitcrazy ?!? "de-fund the police" .... is just ONE thing. > > > > --- > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
