inherit
140147
0
Apr 30, 2024 0:07:08 GMT -8
Nscalerr 🐺
Throw me to the wolves and I'll return leading the pack!
3,007
May 2009
nscalerr
|
Post by Nscalerr 🐺 on Jun 4, 2020 22:04:27 GMT -8
Well it's an excellent time to get free electronics. Isn't that a little naughty ?
|
|
inherit
180565
0
Apr 18, 2024 10:29:18 GMT -8
User 180565 is taking donation
I forgot you were a person
10,423
June 2012
keenk
Pink Stars
|
Post by User 180565 is taking donation on Jun 5, 2020 5:48:21 GMT -8
Well it's an excellent time to get free electronics. Isn't that a little naughty ? Not if you dont get caught
|
|
inherit
Passionate Peruser of Prose
89748
0
Apr 5, 2024 12:09:43 GMT -8
📚 Dianne 📚
"Never Judge A Book By Its Movie"
10,522
September 2006
cats57
|
Post by 📚 Dianne 📚 on Jun 12, 2020 3:54:50 GMT -8
|
|
inherit
39202
0
Oct 22, 2023 17:31:59 GMT -8
Minime
1,976
March 2005
minime098710
|
Post by Minime on Jun 12, 2020 15:43:08 GMT -8
I actually support the idea of defunding the police, if it means that the money goes towards putting in place, trained professionals in specific areas of expertise. As said in that CNN article, the police are expected to respond to all these different situations, with only the barest amount of adequate training to properly respond to them; it’s no wonder so many tragic occurrences happen, when there could have been a better resource or person(s) to contact. I like the idea of different professionals, such as therapists, youth counselors, social workers, education specialists etc get the funding they need to be placed in communities. I think with clear planning, and addressing what issues need to be tackled, relocating the funds could be a realistic goal. I suppose that’d tie in with disbanding the police, but I don’t have clear thoughts on that yet. It’s all I’ve known, but if there’s a huge chunk of our population that have never felt the safety that the police are supposed to represent, it’s something worth really taking the time and researching about.
|
|
inherit
17836
0
Apr 29, 2024 15:20:43 GMT -8
daniel
27,203
December 2003
danielsmith
|
Post by daniel on Jun 12, 2020 15:50:08 GMT -8
Defunding the police is a bad hashtag, a bad way to name an idea. It's too extreme and not constructive.
Let's reform the police and criminal justice system. Let's increase funding for education, health, and social services that help minimize crime. Let's change the nature of police work so that they spend less time dealing with things that are more in the realm of public health.
Constructive change involves working with police, not against them. Any movement or grand idea needs to keep that in mind. Naming it "defund" immediately draws bad connotations. You or I understand what defunding means, but that takes a page to explain. Instead of that, let's keep as many allies as we can by not naming a movement something antagonizing.
|
|
inherit
39202
0
Oct 22, 2023 17:31:59 GMT -8
Minime
1,976
March 2005
minime098710
|
Post by Minime on Jun 12, 2020 19:09:34 GMT -8
Defunding the police is a bad hashtag, a bad way to name an idea. It's too extreme and not constructive.
Let's reform the police and criminal justice system. Let's increase funding for education, health, and social services that help minimize crime. Let's change the nature of police work so that they spend less time dealing with things that are more in the realm of public health.
Constructive change involves working with police, not against them. Any movement or grand idea needs to keep that in mind. Naming it "defund" immediately draws bad connotations. You or I understand what defunding means, but that takes a page to explain. Instead of that, let's keep as many allies as we can by not naming a movement something antagonizing.
I totally get where you are coming from with the name. It is very drastic sounding, which I suppose was part of the point when the phrase became popular. I do know though, that those who want to defund the police, have made a clear distinction between defund and reform, even though they are both in agreement about funding other sectors better. As in, as well as changing the police system, as you said, they are striving for portions of the police funding to actually be cut from the budget. For the police department to lose funding that would typically go towards (and I say this next part from what I’ve read, and not from my actual thoughts) unnecessary expenses, and for that to be a consistent fixture. That to increase funding for other education and public health sectors, “defunding” a portion of the police is how to begin the funding of the process. I would say both defund and reform roughly have the same ideals anyway, but I think that it is worth mentioning that they aren’t completely the same. I guess what I’m trying to say, is that is that in order for reform to begin, you would have to defund first, as negative sounding as that word might sound. Thanks to you, though, I am going to take a step back from using the phrase “defund the police” as lightly as I have, and look more into what exactly are the different distinctions. I don’t promise to know what all the steps to defunding and reforming would be completely, but it’s good to see the options.
|
|
inherit
252032
0
Apr 26, 2024 23:51:41 GMT -8
Retread
Tribbial Pursuit.
5,014
January 2018
retread
|
Post by Retread on Jun 13, 2020 6:03:07 GMT -8
Defunding the police-a good idea or needs more thought? It all depends on what you mean by 'defunding'. There is no singular universal definition of this concept. In many cases a city gets it's funding for their police force primarily from local sources such as taxes along with some funding from the state and/or federal government. If a city's police force has a history of improper actions, the state or federal government might choose to withhold their contributions pending the city making corrective actions in their rules and procedures (and/or change of leadership). Doing this as an incentive to change could be a very good idea, depending on the circumstances. But what many are suggesting is basically a complete dismantling of police departments with no replacement whatsoever. For them, 'defunding' means diverting all funds which would normally go to the police department to social programs. Doing this, in my opinion, would be one of the worst ideas ever conceived.
|
|
#e61919
Product Manager
12218
0
1
Mar 11, 2017 17:47:30 GMT -8
Matej
This is my status!
17,630
August 2003
wooper
|
Post by Matej on Jun 17, 2020 9:58:10 GMT -8
Defunding the police-a good idea or needs more thought? But what many are suggesting is basically a complete dismantling of police departments with no replacement whatsoever. For them, 'defunding' means diverting all funds which would normally go to the police department to social programs. Doing this, in my opinion, would be one of the worst ideas ever conceived.This isn't exactly accurate. People are more than aware that there is a need for a service that protects people with weapons if required. When dismantling the police is mentioned, it is absolutely not true that there would be no replacement whatsoever. Your bold emphasis on that is extremely misleading as the worst idea, and I encourage you to do some reading on that. The police force would be replaced by a new, different force, with a different authority. Effectively, they would still be police, but they would serve an entirely different function. Look at London for an example of a metropolis that also has unarmed police. Or many European nations. Police serve an entirely different function, and are not sent to every single emergency call. There are other first responders that can provide much more help. When there's a fire, emergency dispatch will send the Fire Department. When there's a medical emergency, dispatch will send EMTs. When there's ____ (literally anything else), dispatch will send armed police forces. Is this really necessary? Could we not split this up - traffic enforcement, mental health help, agricultural help,... (and more), leaving a smaller armed force that can deal with criminal issues and are trained in de-escalating and non-lethal resolutions of issues. Again, let's look across the world and how many police forces manage to de-escalate crisis situations, including those with guns, without anyone being hurt at all. This is literally how most of European police functions. Why is this such a weird idea to some? Is the only way to solve a problem with a gun?
After seeing literally hundreds of police brutality videos during these protests there's hardly a conclusion that can be reached that isn't negative towards some of the police forces in the US. The videos are far too graphic to be posted here, which should say something about what's going on. George Floyd. Arrested for allegedly using a counterfeit bill. Murdered by police by sitting on his neck. Rayshard Brooks. Fell asleep in his car. Murdered by police because "he ran away". Breonna Taylor. Asleep in her own apartment. Murdered by police entering the wrong apartment. Eric Garner. Arrested for selling loose cigarettes. Murdered by police by choking him. These are just 4 examples out of literally thousands of unjust killings. More training and more money isn't solving this problem. It's a systemic problem and something needs to be done about it. Black lives matter.
|
|
inherit
160672
0
May 1, 2024 8:37:29 GMT -8
angeldeb82
1,665
December 2010
angeldeb82
|
Post by angeldeb82 on Jun 20, 2020 9:23:03 GMT -8
Well, here's "The Bullseye" review of the Trump photo-op incident on Entertainment Weekly Issue #1591:
|
|
inherit
190874
0
Nov 4, 2023 5:43:57 GMT -8
daylilydude
305
March 2013
daylilydude
|
Post by daylilydude on Jun 23, 2020 2:07:21 GMT -8
What is the reason you keep bringing up our President Mr. Trump into this?
|
|
inherit
Passionate Peruser of Prose
89748
0
Apr 5, 2024 12:09:43 GMT -8
📚 Dianne 📚
"Never Judge A Book By Its Movie"
10,522
September 2006
cats57
|
Post by 📚 Dianne 📚 on Jun 23, 2020 3:08:09 GMT -8
What is the reason you keep bringing up our President Mr. Trump into this? Because to some people he is the instigator of EVERYTHING no matter when the issue started and he causes everything new! *we really need the sarcasm font*. I'm more curious about what is eventually going to happen to Mt Rushmore.
|
|
inherit
28486
0
Apr 30, 2024 16:21:45 GMT -8
Artemis
20,776
August 2004
lray2
|
Post by Artemis on Jun 24, 2020 4:22:26 GMT -8
I get why people don't like the riots and looting. I really do. It doesn't seem to help when people cause damage, it's not a super PR move, and people are going to point to those while ignoring the far more numerous peaceful protests to delegitimize an entire movement. It sucks for a lot of reasons and for a lot of people.
But on the other hand, I just can't bring myself to judge them for it. Sure, there are some opportunists in there taking advantage of things to mess things up, and I think those people are absolutely in the wrong, but for a lot of people, this is the only avenue they have left. After years and years and decades of trying to be nice and polite about things like not wanting to be senselessly murdered, at some point, people's frustrations are going to boil over. I cannot imagine being in a position where someone or a group of people could ask for something like trying to fight racism or stopping murder and stereotyping and violence by police and my response being, "Well sure, maybe, but only if you ask very nicely."
No, it's not perfect. Innocent people have been harmed, businesses will go under if they can't recover, and a lot of people just aren't going to like the destruction. But I get where it comes from. And I would hope that if people want to stop seeing broken windows, flipped cars, and stolen goods, that they might work that much harder at fixing the problems that spurred many riots in the first place. There are a lot of problems that have been going on for a very long time here, and property damage, while it sucks, absolutely pales in comparison to those problems.
|
|