281–290 of 356 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Law enforcement can be dangerous but it's only #22 in occupational death rates. Lumberjacks and roofers are far more likely to get killed. https://www.ishn.com/articles/112748-top-25-most-dangerous-j...
I suspect this doesn't account for the subset of cops out on the beat versus law enforcement clerical workers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The meaning of "diverting funding to other resources" has been a consensus in the community for a very long time. It's only recently that "defund" has been conflated with "abolish," which has always been a very very small niche of the police reform community.
Is there a consensus committee that announces what 'the community' thinks? Because in my experience the community is quite divided on most topics and tends to come to a consensus using the literal meaning of words. There is always a risk that people chanting "defund the police" mean they want to, simply and literally, defund the police. If they want something different they should be chanting that instead.
Science-based activism typically does have a tactic of discussing within “committees” called peer-reviewed journals that which is considered the consensus and that which is not for that journal’s “community”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
MLK was regularly accused of burning bridges at the time, as I've demonstrated in the link.
You posted a Twitter link to one caricature cartoon in an unnamed paper. It is dishonest to say you've "demonstrated" that anything happened "regularly." And it is dishonest to conflate the entirety of the time elapsed - it's indisputably clear who has the better historical reputation. And it is dishonest to suggest that a false allegation of X is moral justification to begin doing X.
https://time.com/5099513/martin-luther-king-day-myths/
> In the 1960s, the vast majority of white people, South and North, disapproved of the movement’s tactics. In a May 1961 Gallup survey, only 22% of Americans approved of what the Freedom Riders were doing, and 57% of Americans said that the “sit-ins at lunch counters, freedom buses, and other demonstrations by Negroes were hurting the Negro’s chances of being integrated in the South.” Just before the March on Washington, Gallup found only 23% of Americans had favorable opinions of the proposed civil rights demonstration.
> Lest we see this as Southerners skewing the national sample, in 1964—a year before the passage of the Voting Rights Act—a New York Times poll found a majority (57%) of New Yorkers said the civil rights movement had gone too far. “While denying any deep-seated prejudice,” the Times reported, “a large number of those questioned used the same terms to express their feelings. They spoke of Negroes’ receiving ‘everything on a silver platter’ and ‘reverse discrimination’ against whites.” Fifty-four percent of those surveyed felt the movement was going “too fast.” Nearly half said that picketing and demonstrations hurt the Negro cause, and 80% opposed school pairings to promote school desegregation in New York City public schools.
"You're being divisive!" has long been the cry of the status quo. The arguments made against BLM and Defund - including the "it's communism!" stuff; https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Little_R... - are very, very familiar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue is accountability. Police unions are much too strong, so the bad cops are reinstated even when they're on camera doing something heinous. How is the public supposed to feel about that?
The issue should be accountability. Police unions are a root cause of the problem. Instead, ordinary officers are being treated like the first five paragraphs of this story. The most popular slogan is "defund the police". There's people non-ironically advocating for 'abolishing prisons'. This is why they're quitting, and this is why the drive to meaningfully reform police will be wasted this time around, too. It will…
The article doesn't say they're quitting because of slogans. From the article's citations, it sounds like they're quitting because they're essentially caught between a rock and a hard place; The public is angry with them because of little to no accountability and the police unions are too powerful and afraid to lose any bit of that power to be bothered to give an inch of accountability. It's an excruciating situation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed they do. The training documents that I’ve seen publicly available on the internet explicitly incorporate de-escalation techniques as the first and preferred option.
On the other hand, you have people like Dave Grossman (of the "Killology Research Group") telling cops at police seminars that one of the "perks" of the job is that, after killing another human being , they'll have the "best sex [they've] had in months". https://twitter.com/RzstProgramming/status/13852746532292853...
Is this individual representative of the mainstream?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hello Mods. I'd like to report a racist shithead. Thanks!
I’ve found that most people with your reaction typically have little first hand experience with the subject. Out of curiosity, how many homes in poor black neighborhoods did you visit last month? Unfortunately, I get to visit half a dozen or so each month.
You don't know shit about me. But your post has told me plenty about you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
MLK was regularly accused of burning bridges at the time, as I've demonstrated in the link.
You posted a Twitter link to one caricature cartoon in an unnamed paper. It is dishonest to say you've "demonstrated" that anything happened "regularly." And it is dishonest to conflate the entirety of the time elapsed - it's indisputably clear who has the better historical reputation. And it is dishonest to suggest that a false allegation of X is moral justification to begin doing X.
When he was murdered, he had a disapproval rating of 75% [1]. People accused him of being a communist. The FBI literally attempted to blackmail him into committing suicide [2].
The widespread admiration for him over the past few decades is a result of the shameless whitewashing of his legacy. In that regard, Malcolm X was far more successful — his image has not been co-opted by people to oppose the very ideals for which he fought.
[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/04/04/martin-lut...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93King_suicide_lette...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a consensus committee that announces what 'the community' thinks? Because in my experience the community is quite divided on most topics and tends to come to a consensus using the literal meaning of words. There is always a risk that people chanting "defund the police" mean they want to, simply and literally, defund the police. If they want something different they should be chanting that instead.
Our language is full of ambiguities, and this is one. Both interpretations are listed in the Cambridge dictionary. The truth is: clarity require lots of words, and that makes a terrible slogan. Most people react stronger to a slogan than a nuanced discussion, so the messy slogans will remain.
That is due to a change that was made in the last year. [1]. Historically, that dictionary has defined defund as "to stop providing the money to pay for something". The change to the Cambridge dictionary entry was made recently in response to the "defund the police" discussions, so we can't use the newly changed meaning as always having meant to "divert some money".
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/2020*/dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/defundEarlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve found that most people with your reaction typically have little first hand experience with the subject. Out of curiosity, how many homes in poor black neighborhoods did you visit last month? Unfortunately, I get to visit half a dozen or so each month.
> African American culture is largely dysfunctional and self-destructive. You don't know shit about me. But your post has told me plenty about you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, you have people like Dave Grossman (of the "Killology Research Group") telling cops at police seminars that one of the "perks" of the job is that, after killing another human being , they'll have the "best sex [they've] had in months". https://twitter.com/RzstProgramming/status/13852746532292853...
I understand your point, but it is a little disingenuous to bring that up as a point without considering the relative rates of attitudes such as that with the mainstream attitudes of law enforcement trainers. Is this individual representative of the mainstream?