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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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 <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
