Jump to content

Our Commitment To The Black Lives Matter Movement


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, rpbobcat said:

I have a problem when people say they want to "demilitarize" the police , and eliminate funding for "military hardware".

Organizations like police,fire ,etc. have to able to function in any emergency situation,be it man made or natural.

That requires a clear "chain of command".

That, in and of itself ,requires a quasi military model.

Same thing,what exactly is "military hardware " ?

Everyone seems to have have their own definition.

At one time,the standard procedure in N.J. ,when dealing with an "active shooter (s)" situation,

including schools,was for a police officer to wait for back-up.

Not now.

An officer is expected to go in immediately.

That requires more "fire power" then a semi automatic pistol.

Police have carried shot guns for years.

Given their "spread", they aren't well suited for "close quarters"  with "civilians"

possibly in the "line of fire".

Hence,an AR-15 or something similar is now  standard in police vehicles.

Does every police department need an armored vehicle ?

No.

But the terrorist attack in Jersey City last December showed the necessity of hainvg this

type of equipment available on at least a County basis.

 

 

We think alike. I thought selling military hardware (armored vehicles, higher power firearms, etc) was to be used in full scale riots where life is at stake (Watts CA late 60s), active shooter or hostage stand off. Last few years there have been claims some of these have been used in crowd control in areas not having any violence or standard patrol. If true then the original intent has been changed by (I think) the police depts getting the equipment 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Mello Dude said:

Reallocate is the term you are looking for.  Making excuses for inaccurate verbiage is kinda of pointless and self defeating.  Either words mean something or they don't.  It's pretty easy, "Sorry, we meant reallocate resources not defund the police force."  Not hard.  Defund has been used many times to mean precisely what it means.   So I don't buy into the scramble to save face by altering word meanings.  The polarization is ONLY coming from people that utter it, not the people listening and understanding it.  "But this is what I meant" and continue to use inaccurate terms...sorry not being sold that bill of goods.

 

Cool story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

“Save face” by describing what some people mean? And if they use inaccurate words then what do we do about the real message “I’m going to ignore or speak against it until you come up with more accurate term”? Ok folks no more signs until we can figure out how to make “reallocate” fit.

personally I think using defund when reallocate is meant is really dumb. But I’m not about to down people because of word use, however confusing it may be

Thank you. Plugging your ears with your fingers and going “blah blah blah blah not listening until you change it” is accomplishing nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cappybara said:

Thank you. Plugging your ears with your fingers and going “blah blah blah blah not listening until you change it” is accomplishing nothing. 

Yeah how many meetings have I been at where there have been arguments and then someone says “oh #### is that what you meant?”.  Turned out they agreed but word use screwed the pooch. (Get techies and non-techie management together as a good example)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Yeah how many meetings have I been at where there have been arguments and then someone says “oh #### is that what you meant?”.  Turned out they agreed but word use screwed the pooch. (Get techies and non-techie management together as a good example)

Agreed. I obviously did not coin the phrase, nor do I particularly like it, but I’m not going to keep my head in the sand because of it. 
 

A few minutes of googling is all it takes to figure out what the phrase means. If you’re not doing even that much of research on an unfamiliar topic in 2020, I’m not sure what you’re doing. Educate yourself. (obviously not directed at you Jim)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, most people use Cappybara's interpretation, and that is where the "normal" people are trying to take the reform movement.  These ideas appear to have a lot of support across demographics, based on polling.  That said, maintaining or increasing police funding also has broad support across demographics. 

But there are in fact people saying "no, defund means to defund and abolish". This has very little support (10-15%) based on polling.

Edited by soccerguy315
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cappybara said:

A few minutes of googling is all it takes to figure out what the phrase means. If you’re not doing even that much of research on an unfamiliar topic in 2020, I’m not sure what you’re doing. Educate yourself. (obviously not directed at you Jim)

We now live in an era where so many expect the exact correct information - all the time.  Undisputed.  Why should we use the power of all this information at our fingertips to have to look up anything for ourselves?  Why should I think for myself - you must think for me.  You must tell me how I should think.  

If we find fault in anything reported, then all that is reported is questionable. 

So much information.  So much stupidity.  So much ignorance. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Cappybara said:

Cool story. 

 

Educate yourself indeed.

"Nor have you,  as your continued predilection for irrelevancy ..."

 

Edited by Mello Dude
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Continental said:

We now live in an era where so many expect the exact correct information - all the time.  Undisputed.  Why should we use the power of all this information at our fingertips to have to look up anything for ourselves?  Why should I think for myself - you must think for me.  You must tell me how I should think.  

If we find fault in anything reported, then all that is reported is questionable. 

So much information.  So much stupidity.  So much ignorance. 

 

Also think lot of people have an unrealistic idea of how long it takes to resolve things or figure them out. Decades back heard lot of this was from tv shows solving crimes or healing people in 30 minutes.
 

I’m thinking another problem is with tv characters we know what they are thinking when they speak or act. So when a stranger speaks or posts we think we “know” what they mean or think. Had it yesterday with the BLM posts from someone no longer a DCPer and wide spread on SM

Edited by JimF-LowBari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Mello Dude said:

 

Educate yourself indeed.

"Nor have you,  as your continued predilection for irrelevancy ..."

 

How’s the sand taste? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...