So what form does the resistance take?

theprestige said:
In my region, "defund the police" means exactly that. It absolutely does not mean "make symbiotic with the community". It means get the police out of the community altogether. The purpose is to stop enforcing laws that disproportionately impact certain communities.

Unregistered vehicle? Not enforced. Shoplifting? Not enforced. Public drug use? Not enforced. And so on. And once you're not enforcing these things, you can cut the enforcement budget. No money for neighborhood patrols, because you don't actually want police to patrol the neighborhoods where they're needed most. No money for operators and dispatchers, because you don't actually want police responding to calls, and don't have the staffing for rapid response anyway. Because you're defunding the police.

It's true that some of these funds go to other entities that are supposed to provide a more humane and effective response. But they're also underfunded, and woefully ill-equipped to handle the kinds of situations they're being called out on.

And! They're not actually a government agency, but rather a non-profit subcontractor. This turns out to be a fantastic opportunity for grift. Here in the Pacific Northwest, we call it "the homeless-industrial complex": A miserable pile of nonprofits that are really good at taking in a lot of tax money, and really bad at delivering even the value a well funded police force would.
Click to expand...
I think it depends on where you are. Portland has been made into a poster child, but I lived in Seattle for 3 years, still have family there. Last I checked laws were still being enforced. No doubt there is a small group of radicals who want to eliminate the police, and as I pointed out in my original post the reasoning is that the system itself is bankrupt. But there are very few in a community who want lawlessness and vigilantism to prevail. That's just a right wing fantasy. Anyhow this is wayyyyy off topic from this thread, so If you want to argue the merits of "defund the police police"--start your own thread, I might even join in if I'm not too overwhelmed trying to keep up with all the lawless behavior of our new oligarchy.
 
Emily's Cat said:
They can be as hypocritical as they want to be I guess. I don't oppose them exercising their constitutionally protected right to protest for whatever reason they want to. I just think it's dumb and a bit contradictory.
Click to expand...
Well, explain why it's hypocritical and contradictory, and then I can tell you why you're wrong.
 
Thermal said:
What is hypocritical? "We don't like what you're doing and you're going to hear about it" is a pretty damned red-blooded message.
Click to expand...
That's not it. Look, my brain is screwy. I don't think in words or in pictures, my mind is full of stretchy squishy relationship and impact rubberbands and stuff. I can't explain it well, it's a very fuzzy way of thinking that ends up being great for math and great for actuarial work, but a huge barrier to translate for other people.

This is overly generalized, so bear that in mind.

Obama got elected, and a pile of idiot tea partiers spent eight years insisting that Obama wasn't a legal president because birth certificate baloney. To this, liberals generally responded in the vein of "Shut up you absolute loons, Obama was legally elected by the legal process and is the president, so you shouldn't be carrying on like idiots about them not being a legitimate president. Obama is perfectly legitimate, the process worked exactly how it was supposed to, and you're a ninny." Obama reversed a bunch of EOs and issued a bunch of new EOs and nobody paid attention because the morons were too busy yelling about Hawaii not being part of the US and such.

Trump got elected the first time, and a pile of people staged marches in pussy hats proclaiming "not MY president". And I thought that was pretty damned hypocritical at the time, given than Trump won by the exact same rules of the game that those same liberals were venerating during the prior administration. But you know, at least they could point and say "popular vote!" even though that's not how the rules work in the first place. But there was some basis for the complaint, even if I didn't agree with it. Trump reversed a bunch of EOs and issued a bunch of new EOs and nobody paid attention because they were distracted by crocheted headwear and never-ending investigations into everyone associated with Trump's administration.

Biden got elected, and conservatives got angry that their guy didn't win. Liberals pretty much told them to STFU and deal with it, because them's the rules and you lost so shove it. Biden reversed a crap ton of EOs and issued a whole bunch of new EOs and conservatives hated it and liberals loved it, and liberals pretty much said "too bad, so sad, that's how it works, that's what the President gets to do".

Trump got elected again... and this time they also got the popular vote. And the group of people who've been banging the drum about how the system works are now bitching that the system worked exactly the same way it's always worked, and even their proposed popular vote takes everything would have resulted in the exact same result we have now... but NOW they're going to protest about it. And Trump did the same thing Biden did and dumped the prior Admin's EOs and started issuing their own EOs, but no, no, no, no we can't have Trump doing it, that's a problem so let's have massive protests to tell everyone we're mad that the game didn't go our way.

So at the end of the day, it's not so much "we don't like what you're doing and you're going to hear about it"... it's "we're just fine with it when our guy does it but we don't like it when YOU do it so we're going to make a stink about you doing the same thing our guy did"
 
stanfr said:
I think it depends on where you are. Portland has been made into a poster child, but I lived in Seattle for 3 years, still have family there. Last I checked laws were still being enforced. No doubt there is a small group of radicals who want to eliminate the police, and as I pointed out in my original post the reasoning is that the system itself is bankrupt. But there are very few in a community who want lawlessness and vigilantism to prevail. That's just a right wing fantasy. Anyhow this is wayyyyy off topic from this thread, so If you want to argue the merits of "defund the police police"--start your own thread, I might even join in if I'm not too overwhelmed trying to keep up with all the lawless behavior of our new oligarchy.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, is your family actually *in* the city of Seattle, or are they in the Seattle-Metro area? Because things inside the actual city limits aren't quite the same as things in the sprawl.

I dunno. I mean, sure, technically the laws are being enforced, sort of. When the city decriminalizes public drug use and provides wet shelters, and declares that it's a violation of someone's rights to make them move their tent off of a public thoroughfare, I guess the laws are being enforced, I'm just not sure that makes a lot of sense.
 
Emily's Cat said:
That's not it. Look, my brain is screwy. I don't think in words or in pictures, my mind is full of stretchy squishy relationship and impact rubberbands and stuff. I can't explain it well, it's a very fuzzy way of thinking that ends up being great for math and great for actuarial work, but a huge barrier to translate for other people.

This is overly generalized, so bear that in mind.

Obama got elected, and a pile of idiot tea partiers spent eight years insisting that Obama wasn't a legal president because birth certificate baloney. To this, liberals generally responded in the vein of "Shut up you absolute loons, Obama was legally elected by the legal process and is the president, so you shouldn't be carrying on like idiots about them not being a legitimate president. Obama is perfectly legitimate, the process worked exactly how it was supposed to, and you're a ninny." Obama reversed a bunch of EOs and issued a bunch of new EOs and nobody paid attention because the morons were too busy yelling about Hawaii not being part of the US and such.

Trump got elected the first time, and a pile of people staged marches in pussy hats proclaiming "not MY president". And I thought that was pretty damned hypocritical at the time, given than Trump won by the exact same rules of the game that those same liberals were venerating during the prior administration. But you know, at least they could point and say "popular vote!" even though that's not how the rules work in the first place. But there was some basis for the complaint, even if I didn't agree with it. Trump reversed a bunch of EOs and issued a bunch of new EOs and nobody paid attention because they were distracted by crocheted headwear and never-ending investigations into everyone associated with Trump's administration.

Biden got elected, and conservatives got angry that their guy didn't win. Liberals pretty much told them to STFU and deal with it, because them's the rules and you lost so shove it. Biden reversed a crap ton of EOs and issued a whole bunch of new EOs and conservatives hated it and liberals loved it, and liberals pretty much said "too bad, so sad, that's how it works, that's what the President gets to do".

Trump got elected again... and this time they also got the popular vote. And the group of people who've been banging the drum about how the system works are now bitching that the system worked exactly the same way it's always worked, and even their proposed popular vote takes everything would have resulted in the exact same result we have now... but NOW they're going to protest about it. And Trump did the same thing Biden did and dumped the prior Admin's EOs and started issuing their own EOs, but no, no, no, no we can't have Trump doing it, that's a problem so let's have massive protests to tell everyone we're mad that the game didn't go our way.

So at the end of the day, it's not so much "we don't like what you're doing and you're going to hear about it"... it's "we're just fine with it when our guy does it but we don't like it when YOU do it so we're going to make a stink about you doing the same thing our guy did"
Click to expand...
Ok, I hear that, but I really don't get the vibe that anyone, anywhere I'd saying he is not their president (I remember that) or that he was not lawfully elected (a la Presidents Obama and Biden). The feeling I'm getting is "we didn't like you before, we don't like you now, and you're going to hear about it constantly".

While the marches might not help anything much, it's not a protest of legitimacy (Birtherism, Stop the Steal), but about the first amendment to the bone.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Why bother? You're going to tell me I'm wrong regardless of whether I have a point or not. Just skip the in-between and jump straight to the condemnation and save us all some eye fatigue.
Click to expand...
Okay, you're wrong -- according to you, Trump can do whatever he wants, including hypothetical Hitler stuff, and it will always be hypocritical and contradictory to protest his actions.
 
In what region in the US did the police get actually defunded?
None.
Everywhere, they had their budget increased year after year even when crime fell on its own and other services had to be cut.
If we paid cops by their clearance rate, they would need food stamps.
Why are PDs exempt from having to do their job if they want to get paid?
 
Last edited:
My county SERT team got a tricked out military surplus assault vehicle. As far as I know, it's only been used once, and that was to intimidate some suburban mommies who organized a little George Floyd March about 5 years ago. It looks really expensive though. I'm thinking they could use a little less funding.
 
I don't think it gets very good gas mileage. I'm pretty sure driving it over to intimidate the suburban mommies cost them the GDP of Lichtenstein in gas.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Just out of curiosity, is your family actually *in* the city of Seattle, or are they in the Seattle-Metro area? Because things inside the actual city limits aren't quite the same as things in the sprawl.

I dunno. I mean, sure, technically the laws are being enforced, sort of. When the city decriminalizes public drug use and provides wet shelters, and declares that it's a violation of someone's rights to make them move their tent off of a public thoroughfare, I guess the laws are being enforced, I'm just not sure that makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...
Right up the street from Pikes Market, in the highest crime area of the city. He nearly got killed by a hit and run a few years ago...
Anyhow, FWIW, I'm a small business owner (career number 3) and im in the heart of a town that has a history of homeless people and druggies roaming around, (along with the rich, sort of Manhattan-like only much smaller) so Im quite grateful that the cops roam the street here constantly. I just wish they would enforce the noise ordinance cause the bikers with their aftermarket pipes are far worse than any of the street crazies ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom