What is this about Minneapolis "defunding" its PD?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
5,798
6,320
136
I think the police have always had to "do to much". I don't think they are properly equipped to handle social problems. Many cops have been vocal about decriminalizing social issues such as drugs, but many cops think such decriminalization would cost them revenue. The latter is an attitude that's part of the problem. Policing didn’t invent America’s institutionalized racism, social inequity was more the culprit, along with toxic masculinity. If we were to get rid of policing tomorrow, those two pathologies would remain. And they would continue to be deadly.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
69,459
5,028
126
So this is not making a change but to seem to be doing so? I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case.
I lean a different way. I think it is overly worded in the direction that the changes are going to be major without any real knowledge or idea of how to do it. It is in that, I think, that lack of any real idea of how to create a profession with the duty to police, while exposing them on a daily basis to the most worst our society produces, and then expecting that exposure to keep them nice and gentle with the rest of us. When you deal with shit everyday you tend to see it everywhere and act accordingly. The easiest way to end a dangerous encounter is by overwhelming force that on a hair trigger.

These issues reach deep into the human psyche and are not going to be fixed by ignorant people including politicians whose general expertice involves knowing how to be reelected.

To solve the issue of policing will require an the understanding that people act in criminal ways because they were told and treated as children as if they were already. It's how we tell our parents or society, OK fuck you, you are right and now I have the chance to satisfy myself by getting even. Crime will never stop so long as the denial that we hate ourselves keeps the criminal alive and well suppressed within us.

So I won't be surprised either, even if there are systemic changes, that the real issue will not be addressed.

And then there is the matter of funding. Do we want to be protected from becoming victims of crime today or or spend the money educating and protecting our children from ourselves, and just how, in self blindness, are we going to do that.

Anyway, I just hope the pain we inflict upon ourselves is reaching such a point that some sympathy for our plight will be devoted to soul searching.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,969
11,597
136
What did I say? Well gee, CNN has finally figured it out.


While those moves are unlikely to impact the political futures of either de Blasio or the Minneapolis City Council members -- both are in strongly liberal enclaves -- the push for defunding the police following Floyd's death carries massive political risk for Democrats more broadly.
These selfish pols are trying to gain local political advantage while sacrificing the national outlook for democrats.

To understand why, look no further than President Donald Trump's Twitter feed Monday morning.
"LAW & ORDER, NOT DEFUND AND ABOLISH THE POLICE," he tweeted. "The Radical Left Democrats have gone Crazy!"
Or on Sunday:
"Not only will Sleepy Joe Biden DEFUND THE POLICE, but he will DEFUND OUR MILITARY! He has no choice, the Dems are controlled by the Radical Left."
Or again, on Sunday:
"Sleepy Joe Biden and the Radical Left Democrats want to "DEFUND THE POLICE". I want great and well paid LAW ENFORCEMENT. I want LAW & ORDER!"
And you can see Trump already trying to tie this to Biden who, AFAIK, hasn't spoken up on it yet. I think he needs to do so right now. He needs to say he supports reform of law enforcement, not getting rid of it.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
69,459
5,028
126
These selfish pols are trying to gain local political advantage while sacrificing the national outlook for democrats.
I can see those selfish pols potentially worried about violence in the streets and trying to prevent it by making emphatic assurances that things at long last are actually going to change. Don't know about you, but I would personally like to evolve from where we are rather than starting over from the cave.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,969
11,597
136
I can see those selfish pols potentially worried about violence in the streets and trying to prevent it by making emphatic assurances that things at long last are actually going to change. Don't know about you, but I would personally like to evolve from where we are rather than starting over from the cave.
The violence in the protests had already died down before they made those statements. These pols literally clipped the "defund the police" from signs held up by some protesters. They are playing to an angry, local base, knowing full well that their ambiguous words mean they don't literally ever have to do what the words imply to many that they mean.

Further evidence of my conclusion is that De Blasio has now gotten on board. De Blasio is a raging asshat. This has been known by democrats for quite some time. He was smacked down fast when he tried to run for POTUS, and for good reason, so he now views his political future as local.
 
Last edited:

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,969
11,597
136
Here you go.

OK I heard the entire thing. I still think she's an idiot. A "police free future" means accepting the utopian notion that so long as we structure society in a certain way, people will just commit no crime, because people are born "good."

I am hoping this moment passes soon, and these people will be off the air for the remainder of the election cycle.
 

zzyzxroad

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2017
3,219
2,243
136
OK I heard the entire thing. I still think she's an idiot. A "police free future" means accepting the utopian notion that so long as we structure society in a certain way, people will just commit no crime, because people are born "good."

I am hoping this moment passes soon, and these people will be off the air for the remainder of the election cycle.
HMM I took her to mean it is something to strive for and that the status quo isn't go in ng to cut it. Either way the snippet being posted is intentionally misleading.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
69,459
5,028
126
What did I say? Well gee, CNN has finally figured it out.




These selfish pols are trying to gain local political advantage while sacrificing the national outlook for democrats.



And you can see Trump already trying to tie this to Biden who, AFAIK, hasn't spoken up on it yet. I think he needs to do so right now. He needs to say he supports reform of law enforcement, not getting rid of it.
There are no answers to the problems society faces that Trump won't use to his advantage. The Republican party is build to prevent answers from becoming policy. But don't those answers have to be posed and fought for on the political scene? Do you think fskimospy is going to say, 'Jesus, the democrats want to take away the police.' Why, because he has knowledge and information that make a joke of Trump's ginned up attempt to create fear. The democrats are going to have to educate people as to what de-funding means in terms of progressive change now that the term is out there on the battle field.

We will see just how bad the Democrats form up in a circular firing squad but, with or without Biden, I think Trump is way ahead is self destruction.

But as you and if I may include myself, knew the moment we saw the words in the OP the we would be in for a new Mr. Toad's wild ride of the current news cycle.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,969
11,597
136
There are no answers to the problems society faces that Trump won't use to his advantage. The Republican party is build to prevent answers from becoming policy. But don't those answers have to be posed and fought for on the political scene? Do you think fskimospy is going to say, 'Jesus, the democrats want to take away the police.' Why, because he has knowledge and information that make a joke of Trump's ginned up attempt to create fear. The democrats are going to have to educate people as to what de-funding means in terms of progressive change now that the term is out there on the battle field.

We will see just how bad the Democrats form up in a circular firing squad but, with or without Biden, I think Trump is way ahead is self destruction.

But as you and if I may include myself, knew the moment we saw the words in the OP the we would be in for a new Mr. Toad's wild ride of the current news cycle.
You, me and fskimospy are rational enough to understand that what they're saying is not as extreme as what they seem to be implying. Many people are not.

The larger issue is this: the left's identity politics often do not play to its favor in national electoral politics. Remember when I said one thing I liked about Sanders was that he tended to de-emphasize identity politics in favor of a more class based approach? This sort of thing is exactly why.

Class based means you are supporting the 99% against dominance by the 1%. Race based mean you are supporting certain minority groups over the rest of us. The left's version means that even poor whites are "privileged" even if their lives suck, yet we need their votes.

I don't think this one thing is going to sink Biden, but if the dialogue is going to be all about race between now and November and Biden is forced into this dialogue, I fear the end result.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
69,459
5,028
126
The violence in the protests had already died down before they made those statements. These pols literally clipped the "defund the police" from signs held up by some protesters. They are playing to an angry, local base, knowing full well that their ambiguous words mean they don't literally ever have to do what the words imply to many that they mean.

Further evidence of my conclusion is that De Blasio has now gotten on board. De Blasio is a raging asshat. This has been known by democrats for quite some time. He was smacked down fast when he tried to run for POTUS, and for good reason, so he now views his political future as local.
A point I am trying to emphasize is that we have, as a society, a deep systemic problem with self policing, because any real solution is blocked by a catch 22. We do not want to know what to do because we do not want to know what the problem is. And if I may add, because we have no idea as to what the real problem is, we have no real idea as to what our true nature is. You have mocked the notion that we are all born good without any real idea as to whether that is true or not. But I believe that question is central to this issue and the attitude you have toward our true nature is part of the problem. What if we really are born good? When would you be able to produce any real solution holding an opposite assumption? When I say we do not want to know the solution, I am talking about you and me. We do not want to know how we really feel.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,969
11,597
136
A point I am trying to emphasize is that we have, as a society, a deep systemic problem with self policing, because any real solution is blocked by a catch 22. We do not want to know what to do because we do not want to know what the problem is. And if I may add, because we have no idea as to what the real problem is, we have no real idea as to what our true nature is. You have mocked the notion that we are all born good without any real idea as to whether that is true or not. But I believe that question is central to this issue and the attitude you have toward our true nature is part of the problem. What if we really are born good? When would you be able to produce any real solution holding an opposite assumption? When I say we do not want to know the solution, I am talking about you and me. We do not want to know how we really feel.
Look around in nature. Animals kill and eat other animals. Human beings are animals. Fear and aggression evolved as survival tools and we can't make them go away. When we are born, even our intellect which separates us from other animals is not present. We are biological entities. We have needs. We have desires. As individuals. There is no way a being locked in his or her own skull could ever be truly selfless. We can be better, perhaps. We can't even be close to perfect.

Human history is littered with barbarism. As civilization has advanced and liberal democracy adopted, we have moderated our behavior somewhat, but the technologies we have created allow a smaller number of bad people to inflict a much greater level of harm. I speak here not only of physical weapons. I speak of using the internet to pollute our minds with lies, a digital assault on truth. And we embrace it willingly because of how these lies make us feel. We cannot escape our emotions: fear, anger, tribalism, greed.

Our best hope is that liberal democracy becomes the standard model that humans live under, and that it satisfies our basic needs to an extent that we can for the most part keep our worst instincts under control. But even that is now under major threat of regression. The Visigoths are at the gate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uclaLabrat

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
69,459
5,028
126
You, me and fskimospy are rational enough to understand that what they're saying is not as extreme as what they seem to be implying. Many people are not.

The larger issue is this: the left's identity politics often do not play to its favor in national electoral politics. Remember when I said one thing I liked about Sanders was that he tended to de-emphasize identity politics in favor of a more class based approach? This sort of thing is exactly why.

Class based means you are supporting the 99% against dominance by the 1%. Race based mean you are supporting certain minority groups over the rest of us. The left's version means that even poor whites are "privileged" even if their lives suck, yet we need their votes.

I don't think this one thing is going to sink Biden, but if the dialogue is going to be all about race between now and November and Biden is forced into this dialogue, I fear the end result.
I agree. The problem is that race issues are the leading edge of class issues and it is racial injustice that is the most visible, the bleeding edge of class injustice. It is up to progressives to expand and unite the concepts into a larger shared conscious recognition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IronWing

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
69,459
5,028
126
Look around in nature. Animals kill and eat other animals. Human beings are animals. Fear and aggression evolved as survival tools and we can't make them go away. When we are born, even our intellect which separates us from other animals is not present. We are biological entities. We have needs. We have desires. As individuals. There is no way a being locked in his or her own skull could ever be truly selfless. We can be better, perhaps. We can't even be close to perfect.

Human history is littered with barbarism. As civilization has advanced and liberal democracy adopted, we have moderated our behavior somewhat, but the technologies we have created allow a smaller number of bad people to inflict a much greater level of harm. I speak here not only of physical weapons. I speak of using the internet to pollute our minds with lies, a digital assault on truth. And we embrace it willingly because of how these lies make us feel. We cannot escape our emotions: fear, anger, tribalism, greed.

Our best hope is that liberal democracy becomes the standard model that humans live under, and that it satisfies our basic needs to an extent that we can for the most part keep our worst instincts under control. But even that is now under major threat of regression. The Visigoths are at the gate.
I posted about this somewhere here. Not sure where at the moment. Will edit here when I do..

Edit: In response to Jhhnn:

Jhhnn said: Trump speaks the language of emotion, not of rational thought. It's all about the feelz, about hopes & fears.

I replied: I think you speak of emotions as if they were negative things. I think all of the things we feel we feel because our ability to feel them made us more fit to survive. I think, further, that what we feel reflect the laws of the universe in that our evolutionary history is a response to those laws right up to the human sense of curiosity that led us to want to figure out what they are. From sensory response to light or chemicals in the water, right up to the capacity to love ones neighbor, these gifts the universe has embedded in it nature. The more a living thing mirrors those laws the better chance it has to survive. I think that what attracts people to Trump is that he validates our deepest and most primitive instincts, selfish self interest, because he was never socialized as a human being. Capitalism itself is pretty much based on the destruction of feelings that make us human. But it is a parasitic form of behavior because it can only exist in a humanly socialized society, and the collective that goes down its path will become extinct.

So I would say that Trump speaks the language of the dead, the tongue of those who don't feel much of anything humans can.
-------------------------------------------------------------

And will add now:

We are three brained beings. We have the reptilian brain, the mammalian brain, and the human brain, each evolved to provide survival value. The primitive animal brain was designed to preserve the individual, the mammalian the individual and its offspring, and the human brain, the tribe. When the sense of connection and care of the tribe is lost it is replaced by a human brain in the service of the animal. What will add to the survival of the species in the future is conscious evolution, that the survival of the individual is dependent on the realization there is only one tribe and that is all of us. The American cult of individualism breed into our bones must give way to an inclusive viewpoint. We are all one and hatred for the other is nothing more than hatred of the self. I think if we could love our neighbor we would no longer be human in the way you believe us to be, but human in a way we can't yet imagine. As someone put it as best I remember. "It's the ant heap or the stars." May your caravan of riches arrive.
 
Last edited:

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
5,798
6,320
136
The Camden model looks interesting.... though is that what these activists actually want. More police? I'm not sure anything is clear...


On May 1, 2013, Camden laid off its entire force and the county took over. The city paid the county $62 million for operational costs and leased its police administration building for $1. Critics decried the reorganization as nothing more than union busting. By laying off the officers and rehiring them as county employees, Camden was able to slash officer pay and cut benefits roughly in half. In all, average per officer costs were trimmed from $182,168 to $99,605, according to county figures.

With those savings, the department, which has since unionized, hired scores of new officers while keeping overall costs about the same. An analysis of police employment data indicates that in the course of a year, Camden has gone from a bare-bones force to having at or near the highest police presence of any larger U.S. city on a per capita basis.
Not everyone is thrilled with "more police"

For Camden residents, the influx of additional police has taken some getting used to. Officers are making more traffic stops and issuing tickets for minor violations, such as tinted windows and obstructed license plates. They’re citing bicyclists for failing to have a bell or other audible device on their bikes. Even pastor King expressed frustration over being pulled over five times within a month for, among other things, driving with a broken headlight during the day. Many locals view the citations, which they say were never before enforced, as harassment. Police, however, say the city’s most egregious offenders also commit these types of minor violations. Armed robbery suspects, for instance, often drive cars with tinted windows. Drug dealers deploy lookouts on bikes. “We are going to leverage every legal option that we have to deter their criminal activity,” says Thomson.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,076
15,892
126
I would LOVE federal laws that hold city police to higher standards. But I bet that will never happen, even with a Democrat controlled house, senate, and Oval Office.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
31,406
5,138
126
You, me and fskimospy are rational enough to understand that what they're saying is not as extreme as what they seem to be implying. Many people are not.
My first reaction re: the topic was "wtf is this !@#$!?"
The extreme implication is all I had to work with until I heard the rational explanation. Reform is what we need and I endorse proposals to do so.

Fox News has been harping the extremist view of this ALL DAY, probably every day until the election.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
5,798
6,320
136
What did I say? Well gee, CNN has finally figured it out.




These selfish pols are trying to gain local political advantage while sacrificing the national outlook for democrats.



And you can see Trump already trying to tie this to Biden who, AFAIK, hasn't spoken up on it yet. I think he needs to do so right now. He needs to say he supports reform of law enforcement, not getting rid of it.
Trump is holding a law enforcement roundtable today. No press allowed.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-law-e...family-1509288

I imagine it'll go something like:

Trump: "How do you guys feel about this 'Defund the Police' stuff they're yelling about?"
Police: "We hate it. Terrible idea"
Trump: You're still endorsing me in November, right
Police: As long as you don't defund us
Trump: "OK...good meeting. Let's have lunch."

The White House is even considering having Trump deliver a speech on "race and unity". Trump is frantically rushing to the front of the parade in hopes it looks like he's leading it...but without pissing off his base. I don't think he can pull that off convincingly.

This will go down one of two ways

If his handlers can convince him that he needs to appear conciliatory in order to improve his election chances then Trump will read a very boring speech in a very bored robotic voice. That speech will say that we all need to come together as a country, that black and blue lives matter, that what happened to George Floyd was an aberration and should never happen again, and include a couple of MLK quotes.

The racists and bigots in his base will realize that it was all an act, those members of his base who don't like to be called racist will clutch onto it as proof that they and Trump aren't actually racist (he mentioned MLK so he can't be racist). And an hour later Trump will tweet something that completely contradicts everything he just said.

If he starts ad libbing and appears with his underpants on his head, then it will be a rant about the evil Democrats, the terrorist Antifa, and how the police need to quit being so nice. Sprinkled with statements that he is the least racist president ever, and how good the blacks have it under his administration, and that the Democrats are the true racists.

Trump - "I would say more but my staff said something about how my speech was supposed to have fourteen words in it for some reason."

But, I do agree with the article that you linked that this is a calculated risk
 
Last edited:

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
31,108
19,334
136
Joe Biden came out against defunding police departments. Necessary and tactical because Trump will completely misrepresent what defund the police means.

Just like he calls all Democrats socialists.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY