5 ms·

Of course it does. But politicians who ramp up the rhetoric and threaten to have people killed does not. Flint and Camden and other cities where the police sat

Of course it does. But politicians who ramp up the rhetoric and threaten to have people killed does not. Flint and Camden and other cities where the police sat down or walked with the protestors have no issues. People connecting to people with understanding rarely results in violence. I think places where the police still walk a beat (or other regular outreach over a wide area) and get to know the locals rarely have issues with regular people. But cities don't want to spend that kind of money on these things as they would rather not tax people to pay for it. Yet it's an investment in cities' future; otherwise you wind up with this.

Consultant32452 6y ago
There were reports of planned riots in rural Polk County. Knowing they didn't have the resources to cover wide spread area, the sheriff instructed citizens to shoot anyone who broke into their home. I support this. Telling citizens you can't help them, and they must protect themselves is very different than threatening that the state itself will kill you. https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320 https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320
- x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago
  You can shoot a home intruder during and outside of riot conditions. I'm not sure why he posted this.
  - Consultant32452 6y ago
    I think it's clearly a message to people watching the looting in the cities thinking they can get away with that in a rural area. He says it plain and simple, rural people have guns and they will kill you.
  - userbinator 6y ago
    Laws vary depending on the state.
  - scruple 6y ago
    So that people do not waste precious time in a dangerous situation trying to call and/or rely on law enforcement help. I saw this tweet making rounds last night [0]. [0]: https://twitter.com/sbkaufman/status/1267271423527022592 https://twitter.com/sbkaufman/status/1267271423527022592
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  I couldn't agree more. A sheriff regretfully telling citizens they may need to kill a home intruder in self defense (giving the sheriff the benefit of the doubt - I haven't heard the message), is vastly morally different from a president gleefully declaring his intention to personally order the killing of citizens en mass who may have done nothing worse than stealing from a business. This distinction is lost on a terrifying number of sick people who are quite excited about the prospect of shooting criminals.
- matwood 6y ago
  Careful. That’s how Breonnna Taylor ended up dead.
- kthxbye123 6y ago
  Complete nonsense - if you believe for one second that those “reports” were legitimate or that this was a genuine public safety measure you’re an absolute rube and a mark. This was just an elected official pandering to his electoral base of suburban fascists by validating their heroic-murder fantasies.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Consultant32452 6y ago
    Citizens who kill looters are heroes. That part is not a fantasy.
    - kthxbye123 6y ago
      No, people who murder people over property are murderers
michaelmior 6y ago
> But cities don't want to spend that kind of money on these things as they would rather not tax people to pay for it. I'm certainly no expert in police budgeting, but when you see some police forces literally buying tanks, at least in some cases there must be room for money to be better spent. John Oliver did an interesting story on police militarization after the Ferguson riots following the shooting of Michael Brown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  They're not buying tanks, they're being gifted them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program
  - michaelmior 6y ago
    Thanks for clarifying as I hadn't watched recently and I was misremembering. But certainly there must still be some expense associated with training and maintenance.
thebradbain 6y ago
"As they would rather not tax people to pay for it" I think you may be underestimating how much cities dedicate their budgets to police spending: "Mayor Eric Garcetti's 2020-2021 city budget gives police $3.14 billion out of the city's $10.5 billion. That's the single biggest line item, dwarfing, say, emergency management ($6 million) and economic development ($30 million)." (In fact, LAPD is getting pay raises while LA teachers are getting a pay decrease) "New York City spends more on policing than it does on the Departments of Health, Homeless Services, Housing Preservation and Development, and Youth and Community Development combined." "A whopping 39 percent of Chicago's 2017 budget went to police, and still the department got even more money, peaking in 2020 with a 7 percent increase to nearly $1.8 billion." Note, this is, to the best of my knowledge, solely police, not even adjacent forces like e.g. fire departments or ambulances. [1] https://www.gq.com/story/cops-cost-billions https://www.gq.com/story/cops-cost-billions
- thebradbain 6y ago
  Personally, I'd love California to try a ballot initiative putting a 10-15%-of-budget cap on police spending in cities. I think it could easily pass, and if NYPD's 2017 strike is any indication, crime rate could actually go down [1]. NYPD ended their strike voluntarily because city officials were recognizing that maybe they weren't as necessary, after all! https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proactive-policing-crime-20170925-story.html https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proacti...
  - Jommi 6y ago
    Less spending on police, even less trained officers, great right?
    - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
      I live in a city with a monetarily constrained police force. It's great. They take the big stuff (violent crime and trafficking in hard drugs) seriously but don't have time to be running BS task forces, procuring military equipment they don't need and sitting around watching for "sketchy looking" people to harass. I'm sure it sucks to be them and they're all over worked but frankly it's great for the people. Not being seen as jerks gives the local police better freedom of operation than the much better funded state cops who are seen as being jerks who enforce every law to the letter and nobody wants to cooperate with. I kinda feel bad for the state cops because cities like mine are where they stick the fresh academy grads who have no connections or seniority to avoid a crap assignment and then they get locals hating them for doing what the state trained them to do (also goes to show you the conflict between what the state wants and what the people of the city want). That said, were the Real Crime(TM) to vanish I can see the local police using their newfound free time to optimize enforcement for revenue generation which would be very bad.

Consultant32452 6y ago

There were reports of planned riots in rural Polk County. Knowing they didn't have the resources to cover wide spread area, the sheriff instructed citizens to shoot anyone who broke into their home. I support this. Telling citizens you can't help them, and they must protect themselves is very different than threatening that the state itself will kill you. https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320 https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320

x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago
You can shoot a home intruder during and outside of riot conditions. I'm not sure why he posted this.
- Consultant32452 6y ago
  I think it's clearly a message to people watching the looting in the cities thinking they can get away with that in a rural area. He says it plain and simple, rural people have guns and they will kill you.
- userbinator 6y ago
  Laws vary depending on the state.
- scruple 6y ago
  So that people do not waste precious time in a dangerous situation trying to call and/or rely on law enforcement help. I saw this tweet making rounds last night [0]. [0]: https://twitter.com/sbkaufman/status/1267271423527022592 https://twitter.com/sbkaufman/status/1267271423527022592
happytoexplain 6y ago
I couldn't agree more. A sheriff regretfully telling citizens they may need to kill a home intruder in self defense (giving the sheriff the benefit of the doubt - I haven't heard the message), is vastly morally different from a president gleefully declaring his intention to personally order the killing of citizens en mass who may have done nothing worse than stealing from a business. This distinction is lost on a terrifying number of sick people who are quite excited about the prospect of shooting criminals.
matwood 6y ago
Careful. That’s how Breonnna Taylor ended up dead.
kthxbye123 6y ago
Complete nonsense - if you believe for one second that those “reports” were legitimate or that this was a genuine public safety measure you’re an absolute rube and a mark. This was just an elected official pandering to his electoral base of suburban fascists by validating their heroic-murder fantasies.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Consultant32452 6y ago
  Citizens who kill looters are heroes. That part is not a fantasy.
  - kthxbye123 6y ago
    No, people who murder people over property are murderers

michaelmior 6y ago

> But cities don't want to spend that kind of money on these things as they would rather not tax people to pay for it. I'm certainly no expert in police budgeting, but when you see some police forces literally buying tanks, at least in some cases there must be room for money to be better spent. John Oliver did an interesting story on police militarization after the Ferguson riots following the shooting of Michael Brown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A

ceejayoz 6y ago
They're not buying tanks, they're being gifted them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program
- michaelmior 6y ago
  Thanks for clarifying as I hadn't watched recently and I was misremembering. But certainly there must still be some expense associated with training and maintenance.

thebradbain 6y ago

"As they would rather not tax people to pay for it" I think you may be underestimating how much cities dedicate their budgets to police spending: "Mayor Eric Garcetti's 2020-2021 city budget gives police $3.14 billion out of the city's $10.5 billion. That's the single biggest line item, dwarfing, say, emergency management ($6 million) and economic development ($30 million)." (In fact, LAPD is getting pay raises while LA teachers are getting a pay decrease) "New York City spends more on policing than it does on the Departments of Health, Homeless Services, Housing Preservation and Development, and Youth and Community Development combined." "A whopping 39 percent of Chicago's 2017 budget went to police, and still the department got even more money, peaking in 2020 with a 7 percent increase to nearly $1.8 billion." Note, this is, to the best of my knowledge, solely police, not even adjacent forces like e.g. fire departments or ambulances. [1] https://www.gq.com/story/cops-cost-billions https://www.gq.com/story/cops-cost-billions

thebradbain 6y ago
Personally, I'd love California to try a ballot initiative putting a 10-15%-of-budget cap on police spending in cities. I think it could easily pass, and if NYPD's 2017 strike is any indication, crime rate could actually go down [1]. NYPD ended their strike voluntarily because city officials were recognizing that maybe they weren't as necessary, after all! https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proactive-policing-crime-20170925-story.html https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proacti...
- Jommi 6y ago
  Less spending on police, even less trained officers, great right?
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    I live in a city with a monetarily constrained police force. It's great. They take the big stuff (violent crime and trafficking in hard drugs) seriously but don't have time to be running BS task forces, procuring military equipment they don't need and sitting around watching for "sketchy looking" people to harass. I'm sure it sucks to be them and they're all over worked but frankly it's great for the people. Not being seen as jerks gives the local police better freedom of operation than the much better funded state cops who are seen as being jerks who enforce every law to the letter and nobody wants to cooperate with. I kinda feel bad for the state cops because cities like mine are where they stick the fresh academy grads who have no connections or seniority to avoid a crap assignment and then they get locals hating them for doing what the state trained them to do (also goes to show you the conflict between what the state wants and what the people of the city want). That said, were the Real Crime(TM) to vanish I can see the local police using their newfound free time to optimize enforcement for revenue generation which would be very bad.