YES.
I’ve campaigned for a sheriff in the Primary spent a lot of time with ride alongs I’ve seen both sides. Still think the worse threat to liberty is unaccountable police.
I think Geneva conventions are absurd, they only apply to small countries. There is no fairness in war it is destroy at any cost.
There is none. I have looked and maybe my Google-fu is not up to it. When I say “proof” what I mean is some sort of study that wasn’t made by a BLM/ACAB activist group or a Blue Lives Matter/Killology propaganda site. The Attorney General and the Department of Justice also don’t seem to be inclined to do a study - the only report I could find was this dated 22 years ago.
So, I guess all we have left is anecdotes. What is disturbing is that each and every one of these anecdotes follow the exact same pattern. Good cops covering bad cops.
And here’s the interesting thing. Whilst looking for the proof you want (which I admit I don’t have), I stumbled across a new phrase; The Blue Wall of Silence. I honestly never heard of it being described like that, but is certainly sounded familiar. Kind of like New South Wales cops in the 1980s - except that was called The Brotherhood.
Of course police will cover for each other.
I too have no proof of what I believe here, but I believe that there are several factors involved.
(1) Professions where ‘covering’ for each other is worst, are those where the people have to physically be with each other a lot. You’re unlikely to report someone with whom you’re going to be working, or near whom you’re going to be working, in the future. Especially if he has a gun.
(2) Professions where the individuals in it believe – rightly or wrongly – that the public just don’t know what the people in that profession have to put up with. Which is why every person critical of the police needs to spend a month in the back of a squad car. And why everyone here ought to look up Colin Flaherty : for example, his book
** White Girl Bleed a Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It**
The image in America (and, I suppose, in Oz) is of cruel, racist white policemen looking for every opportunity to beat or kill an innocent young Black man who was just walking down the street to his tutor, preparing to become a doctor or aeronautical engineer, or to volunteer work helping the poor.
This is not the reality of life in the Black inner city (or of life among the Aboriginals). Replace every policeman with a sweet kind well-meaning liberal/progressive, wait a year, and see how the ones who are left have been transformed.
It’s an intractable problem. All we can do is whatever we can to insist that police be professional … while at the same time understanding that kind words and a gun will be far more effective than kind words alone.
Or maybe it’s not intractable.
I have a proposal which I would like to canvass liberal/progressive opinion about.
How about this: we find all the neighborhoods which are both well-off (family income above $125,000 a year), and anti-racist, as shown by their voting steadily 75% or more for progressive Democrats.
Then the government buys up some land in that area, and builds a high-rise block of apartments, so that a couple of hundred families can be housed in it.
Then the government houses families (ie, mainly single mothers and their offspring ) in these apartments, moving them from the terrible crime-ridden areas of the inner city.
Now, instead of these children going to dreadful inner-city schools, they can go to posh mainly-white schools. The mean old police will have the eyes of kindly white progressives on them.
This would have a dramatic impact on social/racial relations, especially on the white progressives who were lucky enough to get poor inner-city residents as their close neighbors. Instead of just seeing the faces of unsmiling young Black males on the news, being unfairly arrested for rapes and robberies and murders, they could meet them face to face, as their near neighbors, and see how nice they really are.
A lot of misconceptions would vanish quickly.
What about rural meth crime? What about rural sexual assault within the family? These are rural crimes… why aren’t they as bad as crack cocaine and gang murder?
I’m missing your point here. I’m sure white progressives believe that when whites commit crimes, it’s their own fault. They’re ‘deplorables’, remember? You won’t be seeing a ‘Poor White Lives Matter’ movement, funded by wealthy progressives and big corporations. White progressives aren’t interested in poor whites – they want to help Blacks. My proposal gives them a chance to do that.
Fun fact democrats were the party of the poor like all the poor. Yet the white poor felt the black poor got more attention and Ronald Regan kind of played on that. Google Infrastructure and Rural Health Outreach West Virginia Democratic party. Then we realized that got us nowhere at the polls so we quit trying. I’m poor and I’m white. I’m gonna be frank no lives matter this machine will keep turning no matter who dies. Then in 1 or 2 years whatever little bit of that person is remembered from is a iota of what it is when they were alive. No one cares about dead people theres no money in dead people.
The United States is the world’s leader in incarceration. There are 2 million people in the nation’s prisons and jails—a 500% increase over the last 40 years. Changes in sentencing law and policy, not changes in crime rates, explain most of this increase.
OK so there are the first 2 million to be liquidated in times of scarcity
Only 4.5 percent (about 1.5 million ) of older adults live in nursing homes and 2 percent (1 million) in assisted living facilities.
Okay so we have another 3.5 million up next for liquidation in times of war/food shortages
522,475
Food Stamp Benefits in 2022
another half a million lives that could easily be explained away
41.1 million or 12.7%
The total civilian noninstitutionalized population with a disability in the United States in 2019.
The final liquidation under war times without a shrug out of the ruling elite
I would argue Americans over 65 would be next after that. They would be told at first it was option and for testing and then by force due to starvation.
Now if there was a massive and sustained shortage it wouldn’t be hard to see surgical strikes in the inner city to combat mass starvation.
We already have infants dying under formula shortages and NOW IS A GREAT TIME TO OVER RULE ROE V WADE. Their wishes will come with costs some will be unable to pay. They have no idea how feeding people running a nation and politics actually work.
300000 disabled/feeble/old died during the T4 Aktion program started in the early days of hitlers rule years before the holocaust. Also around that time they were killing prominent trade unionists, Homosexuals, Communists, and intellectuals. Then came the Jews and the Roma.
Now tell me who’s life matters Doug?
I know that we always look to the past as a guide to the future, and this is not wrong, but we must not be prisoners of the past.
I do not believe we will see mass executions in the US. You could find more than a few people on the Right who would agree with you, and not me, by the way.
As for what will happen, in response to the developing crisis, I have no idea. I suppose progressives would deal with the prison population by essentially letting them go, while building even stronger fences around their gated communities and hiring more armed guards.
(I left out a point on my plan to help the inner-city residents by re-locating them into the middle of well-off white anti-racist progressive neighborhoods: we must also outlaw ‘gated communities’, which are clearly racist.)
Since no one knows the future in detail, but since there is good reason to think it will not be rosy, the first thing sensible people should do is to ‘prepare’, on an individual/family level. Then they should try to form local community defense organizations with like-minded people.
People who haven’t done their military service yet, and are eligible, should enlist in the National Guard.
Even better, move to a ‘redoubt state’ like Idaho and do it there.
People of all races work hard to leave the bad neighborhoods where the gangs and thugs rule. The situation there has gotten worse since the “progressives” have decided to do away with bail laws and not prosecute crimes.
Now the government wants to move the lawless to the suburbs in subsidized housing, which has already been a dismal failure. And yes, the super wealthy “progressives” will live in guarded, gated communities to protect them and their property. The decent, honest people will be subject to the gangs and the thugs.
Only a small minority make up the criminal element. Yet, those law breakers are at the top of the list for special treatment from the “progressives.” Decent, honest people are nothing but taxpayers for the “progressive movement.”
I think the phrase ‘small minority’ is a concession to Political Correctness. But your motivation is honorable, and your implied political strategy is correct: we must not fall into the trap of seeing Blacks, or any other group, as a homogeneous entity.
We have to design policy proposals that will split the ambitious, the law-abiding, the decent people, from the depraved.
In particular, we need to push hard on creating schools that really educate the children who come from ‘deprived’ backgrounds, whose mother actually wants them to succeed in life.
The shining model here is Michaela School in England. It’s a ‘Free School’ – similar to a Charter School in the US – and the Left hate it like poison. It’s very strict – no talking in the corridors, no personal phones in class, etc etc. Most of its pupils are non-white, from non-middle-class backgrounds. It gets wonderful exam results.
The Left hate it because it gives the lie to their worldview, and the Right ignfore it because they don’t care about children from poor backgrounds. (Plus, these kids successfully compete for places at top universities with the children of wealthy people who send their own children to exprensive private schools.)
More about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michaela_Community_School
This is what I am talking about:
“A spokesperson with DPS also told KVUE that Uvalde CISD Police Chief Pete Arredondo has not responded to the Texas Rangers in two days for a follow-up interview from his initial statement immediately after the mass shooting.”
Somehow I suspect Pete Arredondo will be fine despite not cooperating with an investigation.
I don’t think this fits the ‘good cops covering for bad cops’.
This is the whole police force covering for itself for not doing its duty.
We’ve seen the situation of an officer of the law not doing his duty in the face of danger before – I think it was in Florida.
My guess is that this will become more common – not just policemen afraid to deal with Black suspected criminals, because of liberals’ defense of Black criminals, but not risking their lives in many other situations.
Why? Because, like soldiering, policing is something that, at least in the past, has not – for most people who take up this profession – been done just for material benefit. You became a soldier (or Marine, or sailor, or airman) because of the respect the rest of us gave to someone who was willing to put his life on the line to defend the rest of us. Same for policemen – you respected them in a way you did not respect insurance salesmen.
But as the Left destroys America, that is changing: young people are taught that policemen are wicked brutal racists, every month killing dozens of innocent young Black men on their way to tutorial sessions so they could become aeronautical engineers and doctors.
So if the public despise you, why risk your life for them?
Okay, it’s a theory. In the nature of these things, it probably can’t be proved or disproved. And there may be other causes. Or, I may be idealizing the willingness of the police in the past to risk their lives.
But I reckon there’s something to it.
Oh yes: one myth that is circulating re. Uvalde is that the killer was finally taken down by an off-duty border patrol agent, not the Uvalde police. Not true. He did turn up, rescue people, but it was the Uvalde police who finally broke down the door behind which the killer was, and killed him.
So I’m wondering why we pay them if they don’t work. No other job in the world has such a massive failure rate (clerance rate) and so much controversy and you can’t sue. You can sue a neuro-suergon but you can’t sue the police. The courts say the police are not legally obliged to protect you, but you are legally obligated to Assist them in all 50 states. They can violate your civil rights and claim good faith and walk scott free. That’s changing in a lot of states by the way. We need reform even modest reform. Licking boots will get you nowhere. They like taking younger healthier men off the street with an attitude. They’re horse wranglers.
So what reforms to the police would you propose?
Emphasis on “finally”
Yes. I would be interested to know what the real story was. Did they think everyone but the killer inside the school was dead? If so, it would make sense to wait for overwhelming support, including support that may have been more effective at dealing with siege situations.
But I assume it’s reasonable in a situation like that to assume there are still living victims, perhaps wounded. So I would think you would go in … although I absolutely understand that this doesn’t mean the first policeman on the scene just runs in blind …
My guess is that the Uvalde police didn’t have a plan… hadn’t practiced an ‘active shooter inside a building’ before, and didn’t have the technical equipment that urban policeforces probably have for these situations, like tear gas grenades.
And I also guess that departments that have practiced this have some sort of basic plan … quick intelligence gathering if possible from living victims [is he wearing body armor, how is he armed, where is he?] or clever technology [and did they have a ‘plan’ of the school?]; put a team at every building entrance, do a distraction at one point and enter in force at others … did they even have proper equipment for this kind of situation, like tear-gas and flash-bang grenades?
There’s been a lot of condemnation of the Uvalde police. People like me, who oppose most gun control, would of course rather blame inadequate police, and unprotected schools. We’re not living in the old America any more.
But we really need to hear all sides, include the side of the police, before we make judgement.
Loss of qualified immunity
Civilian Over-site Boards
Use Of Force Regulations
Approval of warrants of arrest based on clear and convincing not probable cause
Increase Threshold for arrest-able offense to felony rather than misdemeanor.
Right now there are 250+ regulations for pulling someone over in the Michigan vehicle code, we should reduce that number.
Oregon did this, I feel in time we will.
We have 9 officers we have 6 events a day one is usually a lost dog the rest are code and vehicle regulations.
Honestly if they just loosened the laws on vehicles I’d be way more chill.
I honestly hate speed limits in rural areas (freeways) (highways). I’ll be honest they always try to get me for speeding and I always pull into a private drive and that annoys them. Then they baby sit me for like a week after.
The true inequity of power and unaccountability of it is what drives me nuts. No I don’t like rapist, killers, and home invasions. They seem to be the least equipped to handle that kind of investigation it’s all rent collecting stuff, lawn ordinances, speed limits, insta-cash things.
We need detectives not police. We need Sherlock Holmes not a baby-sitter to tell you how long your grass is or why your are too close to a lake to have chickens etc.