> They are not legally allowed to strike, but they can just really slow things down. Then fire them for performance? I also don't think a judge would be hoodwi

> They are not legally allowed to strike, but they can just really slow things down. Then fire them for performance? I also don't think a judge would be hoodwinked that easily. They aren't generally that stupid, and the law isn't generally that inflexible. As terrible of an idea as it would be, I get a perverse sense of glee out of imagining replacing the police with the National Guard and then having them harass the FOP until they drop the inevitable lawsuits, like the FOP has done to many others. Terrible idea, but fantastic daydream. > I don't feel democracy is really working, where the police are concerned. This is going to be the police's downfall, though they appear to be too dense to realize it yet. The only difference between the police and a street gang is that the police are ostensibly directed by and accountable to the people. The whole monopoly on violence, except now the people are no longer the ones wielding that monopoly. The system will respond with the only reaction it knows when faced with a perceived existential threat: massive, overwhelming force and the abandonment of core principles like innocent until proven guilty. Guilt will be presumed by association until the traditional systems feel in control again. To be clear, I think that's a bad thing, and literally everyone would be better off if we didn't get there, but I don't see any indications of that happening this far. The citizens keep getting more pissed, and the police keep convincing themselves they're invulnerable.