# At least 6 dead in Mass Shooting du Jour

#### Toni

##### Contributor
Well, poor people are charged with more crimes. Also held pending trial, convicted and sentenced at higher rates than more wealthy people.

#### Metaphor

Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
I wonder how that stark-looking list would look if it included the racial breakout for the other top countries. What’s the rate for Lithuanian Blacks? What’s the rate for ‘Murka overall?

Seems like the list was compiled to mislead.

I do agree the list was compiled for deceptive purposes, but it does show something important anyway: Murder is concentrated in a small portion of the population. That's why many people don't get that upset at the murder rate--we know most of it is bad guys killing bad guys. The same pattern applies everywhere--murder is highly concentrated in the criminal subset of the population. In the US there is enough of a racial pattern that you can make a chart like this, but race is just a proxy for the true issue.
Excuse me, but I have watched the long-running documentary series Murder, She Wrote and it is clear to me that murders in America are highly concentrated in New England fishing villages and hardly ever involve criminal gangs but revolve around infidelity, inheritances, family feuds and blackmail.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
There's often much validity in your posts. I'd be more supportive of you if you followed your problem descriptions by suggesting remedies to improve the flaws in American culture. But all too often, you offer only what almost seems like a bitter self-interested perspective.
I am trying to do just that. I am not coming from the "bitter self-interested perspective". There is self-interest, for example with legalizing sex work (hello, Elixir!), but I genuinely think these things will help US society in general as well. Same goes for my opinion on locking up violent gun criminals.

I'm sure you're a good-spirited citizen who wants to uplift all Americans but sometimes — let me be frank — your perspective seems not dissimilar to that of right-wing hate-mongers.

I disagree.

The WHITE incarceration rate is very high. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Black incarceration is even higher; that's unfortunate whatever the reason.

I misunderstood your main point then. I thought you were complaining about the "inequity" of incarceration rates.

Hunh? I absolutely did NOT intend to imply the bizarre claim you impute to me. Do you have some sort of tunnel vision that leads you to assume the least intelligent meaning of any sentence you encounter?

I am glad you find this "bizarre" and "least intelligent". Unfortunately, these attitudes are rather common on the "woke" left, where everything is about "disparate impact" or criminal laws.

I could have written "Dear Derec, I do NOT infer the insane conclusion that white incarcerations should be increased to equal black incarcerations" but it would be too tedious to guess WHICH bizarre viewpoint you might impute to me.
The thing is, if your desire is to eliminate "disparities" in incarceration rates while there are underlying difference in crime rate is to sentence white people more harshly for same crimes than black ones. I.e. abandon equality in mindless pursuit of "equity". Again, glad that you do not seem to be subscribing to this, but it is a common attitude among your fellow leftists.

Sorry for adding information by itemizing the incarcerations by race — perhaps I should have enclosed that in Spoiler tags with an admonition like "Derec shouldn't click; it will confuse him."
It really seemed that you were focusing on the difference.[/QUOTE][/quote]

#### Derec

##### Contributor
It's called black-on-black crime, not a mass shooting.
The two are not mutually exclusive.

I always thought a mass shooting was the intent to indiscriminately kill a bunch of random people. Not a shooting like this one where a bunch of hoodlums trying to kill each other kill innocent bystanders in the process.
No, it has to do with the number of victims, usually around 4 or 5. There are several definitions, but they tend to be similar and none exclude gangbangers shooting at each other.

It doesn't make it any less of a Gun Control, law enforcement, Prison system, and most importantly a community issue. It's a wonder where young black men get so much hatred for each other from? Handed down from the parents? Where did the parents get it from? It's like this is a major issue in the black community while not very much so with others. I wonder why?
That is indeed a good question.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
It should be about trimming the criminal code to get rid of crimes that should not be crimes (either totally legal - e.g. adult sex work or just infractions - e.g. most moving violations). That way police and the courts can focus on the actual bad guys.
I quoted part of my previous post because you are trying to conflate these two issues even though I made a point to keep them very much separate. Adult sex work should be fully legal, as should things like weed. There is a good reason to enforce traffic laws however. But I do not think most moving violations - excluding things like DUIs or reckless driving - should be a criminal offense (in GA they are misdemeanors, punishable with up to 12 months in county if you decide to fight your ticket) but rather infractions. That does not mean people should not be stopped and ticketed for traffic violations though.

I believe you were one of the persons adamant that the officers in the Duante Wright shooting were absolutely 100% justified in pulling him over despite Minneapolis having in place a policy to not pull over drivers for expired vehicle registrations due to COVID.
We already went over this. If he only had an expired tag he would have probably been sent on his way with a warning and no ticket.
But he had an active warrant. So they had to arrest him. That's a good side effect of traffic stops. Best way to reduce gun crime is to go after gun criminals.
This is also why new policies in many cities to not even stop people for traffic violations is stupid. You do not only making driving more dangerous by not ticketing those who violate traffic laws (including people driving with no license or insurance), but are also making it easier for people with active warrants to avoid arrest.

That aside, relatively few moving violations end up in court.
No kidding! Unless you plead guilty and pay the fine you face jail time. Even for things like speeding. So few people fight them.

As far as 'focussing on the actual bad guys:' Almost all arrests and trials involve substance abuse or are substance abuse adjacent, from alcohol to whatever the kids are doing these days in some way, shape or form, including most assaults, break ins, thefts, etc.
[citation needed] on "almost all". You brought up St. Daunte aka "Prince of Brooklyn Center". He robbed a woman at gunpoint. He might have shot and paralyzed a man. Bad guy.

If we really are serious about unclogging the court system, we should decriminalize pot, at least, and invest a great deal more money into substance abuse treatment and mental health treatment. And we should also do more restorative justice. And we should really pay public defenders more. Our social safety network is very frayed and stretched way too thin.
I agree on all of these except "restorative justice". Too kumbaya.

And since we are on a roll, we really need to tackle the proliferation of assault weapons and the mythology that surrounds carrying weapons, concealed or not.
So-called assault weapons are not the major driver of gun crime. Instead of another ill-conceived "assault weapons ban" written by people who don't know what barrel shrouds are and think AR-15s shoot .50 cal bullets, we need to make sure gun criminals are held accountable.
As far as actual gun control, we need to close background check loopholes. I would also be in favor of things like gun registration and mandatory liability insurance. But mindless banning of certain weapons that are not a major problem solely because what they look like is not the way to go.

And we should absolutely stop equipping our police departments as though they are militia occupying a hostile territory.
What particular piece of equipment do you begrudge them? Riot shields? Bearcats?

Last edited:

#### Toni

##### Contributor
I still disagree about legalizing all adult sex work for all the reasons we've battled about many times.

No one has claimed that Wright was a saint but no, I don't think he deserved to die. The officers should never have pulled him over in the first place per pandemic instructions in effect at the time. They did NOT know there was a warrant out for his arrest until he was pulled over. It is still unclear whether or not he was ever served a warrant so it is possible he was unaware. Do I think he was a good person? Almost certainly not but I also don't believe in the death penalty and certainly not prior to even being arrested on those charges, much less tried and convicted. It was a terrible tragedy all around.

I think our current catch/try/jail/imprison and release system is not very effective in terms of serving society, the victims of these crimes and those convicted very well. Restorative justice can be used with some criminal offenses and can be more effective than our current system of incarceration. Here's a linkhttps://ca.ctrinstitute.com/blog/5-principles-of-restorative-justice/

There are all sorts of weapons involved in gun crime. Assault weapons have no place in our society. I don't care if school shootings and theater shootings, etc. are a small fraction of the gun deaths in the US, their removal is only one first step in quelling the violence. Registration, licensure, mandatory background checks and mandatory gun safety and mandatory gun safe or other means to secure weapons should be enacted but honestly, we need to get rid of most of the guns.

As for what police equipment I think police should NOT have: I'm very concerned about policing and police equipment that trains police and arms them as though they are an occupying force in a hostile territory rather than members of the community whose job it is to serve and protect. Notable is that both the CATO Institute and the ACLU oppose the overmilitarization of police: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milit... police is,special weapons and tactics) teams.

#### Rhea

##### Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Registration, licensure, mandatory background checks and mandatory gun safety and mandatory gun safe or other means to secure weapons should be enacted but honestly, we need to get rid of most of the guns.
Add to this, ALWAYS ADD TO THIS, tightly controlled and deeply accurate audits of gun sellers’ records and inventory.

The guns get out to the criminal through legal shops that are not monitored. The gun industry fights tooth and nail to preserve a condition where gun sellers can make straw sales without consequences.

I would argue that we START THERE.
As for what police equipment I think police should NOT have: I'm very concerned about policing and police equipment that trains police and arms them as though they are an occupying force in a hostile territory rather than members of the community whose job it is to serve and protect. Notable is that both the CATO Institute and the ACLU oppose the overmilitarization of police: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milit... police is,special weapons and tactics) teams.
Our county got a fucking tank as well as armored trucks and then smugly showed them off in parades and talked about how great they would be against meth labs. A fucking tank. As well as military arms and explosives.

#### Rhea

##### Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
An example of the armored vehicles being drven around in local communities by police

For police and sheriff's departments, which have scooped up 165 of the mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles, or MRAPS, since they became available this summer, the price and the ability to deliver shock and awe while serving warrants or dealing with hostage standoffs was just too good to pass up.

"It's armored. It's heavy. It's intimidating. And it's free," said Albany County Sheriff Craig Apple, among five county sheriff's departments and three other police agencies in New York that have taken delivery of an MRAP.

The new MRAP truck will go into service after technicians remove the gun turret and change the paint from military sand to civilian black.
Sheriff Apple rejected the idea that the nation's police forces are becoming too militaristic.

#### Toni

##### Contributor
Thanks, Rhea. This is a very good example of something I really do not think our police departments need.

#### Rhea

##### Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Also, as I look for a icture of the one our county had in a parade, I want to address the “that’s not a tank” reply that is likely to be made (Such as by this group at NY firearms dot com)

Since the topic of this tangent is overly militarizing the police, I argue that it does not matter if it is a “real tank” or “just an armored personnel carrier that looks like a tank,” because my argument is about the way the police interact with the community - like they are a military unit and the people are the enemy.

So if it is a tracked armored personnel carrier with a turret that doesn’t actually shoot anything (because the gun itself has been removed) but looks like it does, we are still having exactly the problem that I am complaining about. Intimidation of a populace by an overly militarized police force.

#### bilby

##### Fair dinkum thinkum
I’m skeptical that legalization of all drugs would reduce most crime except for crimes related to use and distribution of a controlled substance. Sure, drug dealers would not be killing each other abs any innocent person in their periphery. Legalizing alcohol did not mean that alcohol use/abuse is not responsible for many crimes, especially assault, sexual assault, vehicular homicide, theft, child abuse, all manner of domestic violence, etc.

Legalization ended the bootleggers shooting it out with each other.

And these days alcohol is affordable enough that the wino commits only minor crimes to support his habit. The crackhead sticks people up because he needs a lot more money to support his habit.
Prohibition doesn't cause gangs.

It just makes them hugely profitable and powerful.

That's probably something we ought to not do.

#### Toni

##### Contributor
I’m skeptical that legalization of all drugs would reduce most crime except for crimes related to use and distribution of a controlled substance. Sure, drug dealers would not be killing each other abs any innocent person in their periphery. Legalizing alcohol did not mean that alcohol use/abuse is not responsible for many crimes, especially assault, sexual assault, vehicular homicide, theft, child abuse, all manner of domestic violence, etc.

Legalization ended the bootleggers shooting it out with each other.

And these days alcohol is affordable enough that the wino commits only minor crimes to support his habit. The crackhead sticks people up because he needs a lot more money to support his habit.
Prohibition doesn't cause gangs.

It just makes them hugely profitable and powerful.

That's probably something we ought to not do.
I realize most people think of drug related crimes to be gang related, etc. while that’s true, substance abuse—including legal prescriptions misused, perfectly legal alcohol and recreational drugs ( illegal) DO cause substantial negative effects and are eve proximal cause of a lot of crimes. I’m thinking about domestic abuse, all manner of assaults and of course sexual assaults and raped —and child abuse, and neglect. Abuse of these substances is also responsible for substantial absenteeism and loss of legal employment, disability, fraud, embezzlement and theft. I mean no, they don’t make blockbuster movies out of this. No Hollywood type will play the rogue cop or FBI agent making the raids, no glamorous rough but sexy criminals. There will be low birth weight babies, born addicted to whatever or with fetal alcohol syndrome. Disabled from
birth.

Just a lot of ordinary people whose lives are destroyed by the abuse of drugs and alcohol.

Every single attorney I know who has worked in any capacity in small towns and rural areas will tell you these cases clog the court systems. People with these convictions have difficulty securing employment or housing. They have difficulty maintaining stable relationships. They get sicker and stay sicker and die younger than they should.

I honestly don’t care if people want to spend their waking hours high on whatever. But the damage done does not stop at the one who had the fun.

#### bilby

##### Fair dinkum thinkum
That's a good side effect of traffic stops
No, it fucking isn't.

It's a bad loophole in the right not to be searched or arrested without a warrant, and is the antithesis of freedom.

Once the cops are permitted to stop and search any citizen on suspicion of a trivial breach of a minor traffic regulation, the right not to be arbitrarily stopped and searched has ceased to exist.

Of course, I don't expect an American to grasp what freedom actually is; Because they are so completely immersed in a society thst uses it as a mindless slogan, where it's just a placeholder for 'oppressive actions I don't personally object to'.

#### bilby

##### Fair dinkum thinkum
I’m skeptical that legalization of all drugs would reduce most crime except for crimes related to use and distribution of a controlled substance. Sure, drug dealers would not be killing each other abs any innocent person in their periphery. Legalizing alcohol did not mean that alcohol use/abuse is not responsible for many crimes, especially assault, sexual assault, vehicular homicide, theft, child abuse, all manner of domestic violence, etc.

Legalization ended the bootleggers shooting it out with each other.

And these days alcohol is affordable enough that the wino commits only minor crimes to support his habit. The crackhead sticks people up because he needs a lot more money to support his habit.
Prohibition doesn't cause gangs.

It just makes them hugely profitable and powerful.

That's probably something we ought to not do.
I realize most people think of drug related crimes to be gang related, etc. while that’s true, substance abuse—including legal prescriptions misused, perfectly legal alcohol and recreational drugs ( illegal) DO cause substantial negative effects and are eve proximal cause of a lot of crimes. I’m thinking about domestic abuse, all manner of assaults and of course sexual assaults and raped —and child abuse, and neglect. Abuse of these substances is also responsible for substantial absenteeism and loss of legal employment, disability, fraud, embezzlement and theft. I mean no, they don’t make blockbuster movies out of this. No Hollywood type will play the rogue cop or FBI agent making the raids, no glamorous rough but sexy criminals. There will be low birth weight babies, born addicted to whatever or with fetal alcohol syndrome. Disabled from
birth.

Just a lot of ordinary people whose lives are destroyed by the abuse of drugs and alcohol.

Every single attorney I know who has worked in any capacity in small towns and rural areas will tell you these cases clog the court systems. People with these convictions have difficulty securing employment or housing. They have difficulty maintaining stable relationships. They get sicker and stay sicker and die younger than they should.

I honestly don’t care if people want to spend their waking hours high on whatever. But the damage done does not stop at the one who had the fun.
Sure.

But substance abuse isn't lessened by prohibition. Therefore the fact that substance abuse has unwanted and severe consequences isn't an argument for not ending prohibition.

Making something illegal doesn't stop it from happening, and in the case of recreational substances, there's very strong evidence that making them illegal actually increases their level of use.

#### Elixir

The really perverse thing about the US drug abuse industry, is the pretense that legalization is a radical leftist thing that would bring ruin. But it turns out that there are numerous counterexamples to those claims. In fact, national decriminalization policies have become common, and don't bring ruin. All these States have decriminalized to some degree.

Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nervada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington D.C.

What's missing from the list? Red US States (exc Alaska).

Countries (and States) that have decriminalised drug use

• Antigua + Barbuda
• Argentina
• Armenia
• Australian States: South Australia, Australian Capital Territory, Northern Australia
• Belize
• Bolivia
• Chile
• Colombia
• Costa Rica
• Croatia
• Czech Republic
• Estonia
• Germany
• Italy
• Jamaica
• Mexico
• Netherlands
• Paraguay
• Peru
• Poland
• Portugal
• Russian Federation
• South Africia
• Spain
• Switzerland
• United States of America: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nervada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington D.C.
• Uruguay
• Virgin Islands (US Territory)

#### Toni

##### Contributor
I’m skeptical that legalization of all drugs would reduce most crime except for crimes related to use and distribution of a controlled substance. Sure, drug dealers would not be killing each other abs any innocent person in their periphery. Legalizing alcohol did not mean that alcohol use/abuse is not responsible for many crimes, especially assault, sexual assault, vehicular homicide, theft, child abuse, all manner of domestic violence, etc.

Legalization ended the bootleggers shooting it out with each other.

And these days alcohol is affordable enough that the wino commits only minor crimes to support his habit. The crackhead sticks people up because he needs a lot more money to support his habit.
Prohibition doesn't cause gangs.

It just makes them hugely profitable and powerful.

That's probably something we ought to not do.
I realize most people think of drug related crimes to be gang related, etc. while that’s true, substance abuse—including legal prescriptions misused, perfectly legal alcohol and recreational drugs ( illegal) DO cause substantial negative effects and are eve proximal cause of a lot of crimes. I’m thinking about domestic abuse, all manner of assaults and of course sexual assaults and raped —and child abuse, and neglect. Abuse of these substances is also responsible for substantial absenteeism and loss of legal employment, disability, fraud, embezzlement and theft. I mean no, they don’t make blockbuster movies out of this. No Hollywood type will play the rogue cop or FBI agent making the raids, no glamorous rough but sexy criminals. There will be low birth weight babies, born addicted to whatever or with fetal alcohol syndrome. Disabled from
birth.

Just a lot of ordinary people whose lives are destroyed by the abuse of drugs and alcohol.

Every single attorney I know who has worked in any capacity in small towns and rural areas will tell you these cases clog the court systems. People with these convictions have difficulty securing employment or housing. They have difficulty maintaining stable relationships. They get sicker and stay sicker and die younger than they should.

I honestly don’t care if people want to spend their waking hours high on whatever. But the damage done does not stop at the one who had the fun.
Sure.

But substance abuse isn't lessened by prohibition. Therefore the fact that substance abuse has unwanted and severe consequences isn't an argument for not ending prohibition.

Making something illegal doesn't stop it from happening, and in the case of recreational substances, there's very strong evidence that making them illegal actually increases their level of use.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure it’s accurate to say that making substances illegal doesn’t cut down on substance abuse. Plenty of people get addicted to things they tho k are harmless or ‘ok’ because they are perfectly legal and prescribed by their doctor…

And there are a certain set of people who, no matter what is legalized…will always go for what isn’t legal—because that stiff’s gotta be good, right?

Probably if you did the numbers, you’d be right: overall, crime, including the everyday crimes I’ve described would decrease.

I cannot stop thinking about a couple of kids—well, they’re adults now—whose lives were turned upside because of their parents’ addictions. Both are doing ok right now but one took a detour if his own abs did a bit of time. Their siblings, though? Not great. At all. One young man in particular really really really gets to me because once he turned 28, his family announced that now he was a man and responsible for his grandmother. Who stole the rent money to give to her addicted son and to spend on her own bad habits. Kid ended up having to drop out of college—which was something of a miracle that he was admitted. The real reason this is so horrendous is that he managed an extremely good GPA despite being forced by his unstable grandmother to change high schools 10 times. That’s a lot in 4 years. He’s a very bright young man who deserved much better. He’s stable, employed and has a young family of his own.

I keep thinking about the damage done to do many kids.

#### Elixir

Our county got a fucking tank as well as armored trucks and then smugly showed them off in parades and talked about how great they would be against meth labs.
I'd bet that your garden variety meth lab has stuff that would be effective against a tank if deployed correctly.

#### Metaphor

Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
The really perverse thing about the US drug abuse industry, is the pretense that legalization is a radical leftist thing that would bring ruin. But it turns out that there are numerous counterexamples to those claims. In fact, national decriminalization policies have become common, and don't bring ruin. All these States have decriminalized to some degree.

Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nervada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington D.C.

What's missing from the list? Red US States (exc Alaska).

Countries (and States) that have decriminalised drug use

• Antigua + Barbuda
• Argentina
• Armenia
• Australian States: South Australia, Australian Capital Territory, Northern Australia
• Belize
• Bolivia
• Chile
• Colombia
• Costa Rica
• Croatia
• Czech Republic
• Estonia
• Germany
• Italy
• Jamaica
• Mexico
• Netherlands
• Paraguay
• Peru
• Poland
• Portugal
• Russian Federation
• South Africia
• Spain
• Switzerland
• United States of America: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nervada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington D.C.
• Uruguay
• Virgin Islands (US Territory)
"Decriminalised drug use" is too broad. "Legalised some previously-banned recreational drugs" would be better.

Many countries and states/localities are moving towards legalising marijuana use, but I don't see much good from legalising crystal meth. I've been on the receiving end of a person in ice psychosis and it's not pleasant.

#### Loren Pechtel

##### Super Moderator
Staff member
I’m skeptical that legalization of all drugs would reduce most crime except for crimes related to use and distribution of a controlled substance. Sure, drug dealers would not be killing each other abs any innocent person in their periphery. Legalizing alcohol did not mean that alcohol use/abuse is not responsible for many crimes, especially assault, sexual assault, vehicular homicide, theft, child abuse, all manner of domestic violence, etc.

Legalization ended the bootleggers shooting it out with each other.

And these days alcohol is affordable enough that the wino commits only minor crimes to support his habit. The crackhead sticks people up because he needs a lot more money to support his habit.
Winos only commit minor thefts, sure. But alcoholics or drunks commit many other types of crime: vehicular manslaughter, assault, murder, rape, a variety of domestic assaults. Also a fair amount of white color crime, medical malpractice, etc.

You are right: liquor store owners are not shooting it out in the streets nor are beer distributors. But there is still a lot of crime committed while under the influence of alcohol, including crimes that probably would not happen if alcohol were not a factor.

So, while I am not opposed to legalizing marijuana, I do have some concerns with regards to public safety. As for other drugs: those include everything I've mentioned above plus crimes related to impure or misrepresented drugs being used, etc.

Of course, there is the absolute fact that alcohol abuse leads to many deaths annually, as does drug use/abuse.

I'm not proposing criminalizing alcohol. I'm just pointing out that a lot of crimes are committed by people who are abusing alcohol or under the influence. Those types of crimes with the root cause being drug use will not lessen with legalization and in fact may increase.

The real issue is that we very much need to address mental health issues---and also chronic pain treatment. Both are seriously underfunded, scare, and too often overlooked.

The highest DUI rates are in dry counties. And alcohol consumption at the end of prohibition was about the same as before prohibition--it didn't help with the consequences of consumption.

As for the deaths--there is no question that the deadliest drug out there is nicotine. About 4x the alcohol deaths. It's not so clear beyond that because the reporting is bad (if someone is both drunk and on any degree of drugs it gets reported as drugs; contaminated drugs get reported as drugs rather than contamination; murder by overdose is pretty much undetectable etc), but it looks like alcohol is well ahead of any of the illegal drugs.

Make all recreational drugs either legal or prescription for addicts and you'll cut the crime rate (not counting drug use) in half right there. Now you have twice as much police power to go after the remaining criminals and you have deprived the criminal organizations of a big source of funding, making them much weaker and thus less able to hide their crime. Expect the crime rate to drop even further. Direct savings to the government of $50B/year (old data, it's most likely higher now) and indirect savings that are probably even higher. #### Loren Pechtel ##### Super Moderator Staff member And note that "rifles" includes more than just assault rifles. Assault rifles have been demonized but in practice they are simply too big to be desirable to most criminals. They are certainly the weapon of choice of many mass murderers. There is simply no legitimate reason for people to use assault rifles or semiautomatic weapons. And mass murders are less than 1% of all murders. And do you realize the majority of guns are semi-auto? #### Loren Pechtel ##### Super Moderator Staff member In the US there is enough of a racial pattern that you can make a chart like this, but race is just a proxy for the true issue. And that issue is poverty. But since it correlates with race due to long term structural economic racism, it makes a great tool with which to claim, without lying, that black people commit disproportionate amounts of homicides, implying a race based proclivity for crime. Then they chant ‘lock em up’ as if that was a solution. Poor people also commit more crimes. We should lock them up too. And anyone else who can be identified with a carefully constructed crime profile. / It's more than just poverty. You don't see as much crime in poor white areas--density matters. Poor white areas are generally fairly low population density, poor black areas are generally high population density. #### Loren Pechtel ##### Super Moderator Staff member I still disagree about legalizing all adult sex work for all the reasons we've battled about many times. No one has claimed that Wright was a saint but no, I don't think he deserved to die. The officers should never have pulled him over in the first place per pandemic instructions in effect at the time. They did NOT know there was a warrant out for his arrest until he was pulled over. It is still unclear whether or not he was ever served a warrant so it is possible he was unaware. Do I think he was a good person? Almost certainly not but I also don't believe in the death penalty and certainly not prior to even being arrested on those charges, much less tried and convicted. It was a terrible tragedy all around. Note that he was committing two offenses at the time--the tag which they weren't stopping people for at that time and the air freshener hanging from the mirror (obstructed windshield) that we have no indication they weren't stopping people for. #### Loren Pechtel ##### Super Moderator Staff member Our county got a fucking tank as well as armored trucks and then smugly showed them off in parades and talked about how great they would be against meth labs. A fucking tank. As well as military arms and explosives. I'm sure they didn't get a tank, they are too destructive to the terrain. Rather, what you are calling a tank is no doubt some sort of armored vehicle. They have legitimate police use in barricade situations. #### Toni ##### Contributor I still disagree about legalizing all adult sex work for all the reasons we've battled about many times. No one has claimed that Wright was a saint but no, I don't think he deserved to die. The officers should never have pulled him over in the first place per pandemic instructions in effect at the time. They did NOT know there was a warrant out for his arrest until he was pulled over. It is still unclear whether or not he was ever served a warrant so it is possible he was unaware. Do I think he was a good person? Almost certainly not but I also don't believe in the death penalty and certainly not prior to even being arrested on those charges, much less tried and convicted. It was a terrible tragedy all around. Note that he was committing two offenses at the time--the tag which they weren't stopping people for at that time and the air freshener hanging from the mirror (obstructed windshield) that we have no indication they weren't stopping people for. The air freshener was also something that drivers are rarely stopped for. However during the time period in question, stops for hanging air fresheners were also suspended. The vehicle he was driving was one he had borrowed. He did not let the registration lapse but even if he did, during that time period, there was wide forgiveness for lapsed registration because most people had difficulty updating their registration. Most DMVs were not open and could not handle even the online registrations. Those ‘offenses’ were minor at any time and were supposed to be ignored during the time he was pulled over. No one is suggesting that Wright was a good guy. But he should never have been pulled over. Do you need for me to find links to prove it? #### Loren Pechtel ##### Super Moderator Staff member Registration, licensure, mandatory background checks and mandatory gun safety and mandatory gun safe or other means to secure weapons should be enacted but honestly, we need to get rid of most of the guns. Add to this, ALWAYS ADD TO THIS, tightly controlled and deeply accurate audits of gun sellers’ records and inventory. The guns get out to the criminal through legal shops that are not monitored. The gun industry fights tooth and nail to preserve a condition where gun sellers can make straw sales without consequences. The primary means criminals obtain guns is theft, or a purchase on the street of a gun that somebody else stole. While I don't like straw purchases the obsession with them is really a backdoor means of getting the holy grail of the gun banners--a list of all firearms in civilian hands. Street guns are cheaper than legal guns, there simply isn't much market for straw purchases other than by those without the connections to buy a street gun. #### Toni ##### Contributor Registration, licensure, mandatory background checks and mandatory gun safety and mandatory gun safe or other means to secure weapons should be enacted but honestly, we need to get rid of most of the guns. Add to this, ALWAYS ADD TO THIS, tightly controlled and deeply accurate audits of gun sellers’ records and inventory. The guns get out to the criminal through legal shops that are not monitored. The gun industry fights tooth and nail to preserve a condition where gun sellers can make straw sales without consequences. The primary means criminals obtain guns is theft, or a purchase on the street of a gun that somebody else stole. While I don't like straw purchases the obsession with them is really a backdoor means of getting the holy grail of the gun banners--a list of all firearms in civilian hands. Street guns are cheaper than legal guns, there simply isn't much market for straw purchases other than by those without the connections to buy a street gun. And yet there are many many straw purchases. #### Loren Pechtel ##### Super Moderator Staff member I realize most people think of drug related crimes to be gang related, etc. while that’s true, substance abuse—including legal prescriptions misused, perfectly legal alcohol and recreational drugs ( illegal) DO cause substantial negative effects and are eve proximal cause of a lot of crimes. I’m thinking about domestic abuse, all manner of assaults and of course sexual assaults and raped —and child abuse, and neglect. Abuse of these substances is also responsible for substantial absenteeism and loss of legal employment, disability, fraud, embezzlement and theft. I mean no, they don’t make blockbuster movies out of this. No Hollywood type will play the rogue cop or FBI agent making the raids, no glamorous rough but sexy criminals. There will be low birth weight babies, born addicted to whatever or with fetal alcohol syndrome. Disabled from birth. Just a lot of ordinary people whose lives are destroyed by the abuse of drugs and alcohol. Every single attorney I know who has worked in any capacity in small towns and rural areas will tell you these cases clog the court systems. People with these convictions have difficulty securing employment or housing. They have difficulty maintaining stable relationships. They get sicker and stay sicker and die younger than they should. I honestly don’t care if people want to spend their waking hours high on whatever. But the damage done does not stop at the one who had the fun. In other words, making them illegal doesn't stop the problem. Look at that data from Portugal, though--legalization does reduce the problem. England used to have nearly zero heroin addicts because they went with a policy of making it available to addicts. The illegal marketplace couldn't compete, you couldn't obtain bootleg heroin and thus the addiction rate was basically zero--the addicts were people that got addicted while not in England. Step #1 when you find yourself in a hole: stop digging! #### Loren Pechtel ##### Super Moderator Staff member The really perverse thing about the US drug abuse industry, is the pretense that legalization is a radical leftist thing that would bring ruin. But it turns out that there are numerous counterexamples to those claims. In fact, national decriminalization policies have become common, and don't bring ruin. All these States have decriminalized to some degree. "Decriminalised drug use" is too broad. "Legalised some previously-banned recreational drugs" would be better. Many countries and states/localities are moving towards legalising marijuana use, but I don't see much good from legalising crystal meth. I've been on the receiving end of a person in ice psychosis and it's not pleasant. Note that your quote omits some important words: "....to some degree." I'm in one of those places that legalized pot. The only bad things I've heard about it stem from government actions--keeping them out of the financial system and apparent bias in issuing licenses. I have accidentally driven to one of the dispensaries here, no shady characters about, it didn't seem seedy. (Google said "turn left", I turned left. My actual objective was the next driveway.) I didn't even realize what the place was until someone came out thinking I was hesitant about entering--yeah, I wasn't going to enter the door with the wrong number on it, I was just trying to find the right number. #### bilby ##### Fair dinkum thinkum the air freshener hanging from the mirror (obstructed windshield) If that's an excuse to stop and search, then the cops basically have the right to stop and search on a whim. I don't think you should be OK with the cavalier abandonment of the fourth amendment without so much as a debate. But it's your freedom. It's not my place to defend it. #### Elixir ##### Made in America I still disagree about legalizing all adult sex work for all the reasons we've battled about many times. … and Derec successfully derails yet another thread to feed his hobbyhorse. #### Gospel ##### Unify Africa The two are not mutually exclusive. Agreed. No, it has to do with the number of victims, usually around 4 or 5. There are several definitions, but they tend to be similar and none exclude gangbangers shooting at each other. I'd go with what the term mass shooting has historically been used for the most. Such as shooter(s) deliberately trying to kill as many innocent bystanders as possible. It's my preference. That is indeed a good question. I'd love to get into the details of why black on black crime happens more than other race on race but I'm certain that the discussion between you and I would look something like this You seeing a human enjoying nature Me seeing an asshole ruining a good hangout spot for the birds I'll save us time. #### TomC ##### Celestial Highness I'd love to get into the details of why black on black crime happens more than other race on race but I'm certain that the discussion between you and I would look something like this You're black. You could start such a thread without getting as much flack as us wipepo would. Tom #### Toni ##### Contributor I'd love to get into the details of why black on black crime happens more than other race on race but I'm certain that the discussion between you and I would look something like this You're black. You could start such a thread without getting as much flack as us wipepo would. Tom Wipepo? Who you trying to fool? #### Gospel ##### Unify Africa I'd love to get into the details of why black on black crime happens more than other race on race but I'm certain that the discussion between you and I would look something like this You're black. You could start such a thread without getting as much flack as us wipepo would. Tom This is a derail. But there is no point in my starting that discussion, as my opinion is that poverty is the most dominant force of crime rates. It just so happens that we live in one of the universes where African countries are the poorest (not that they don't have wealth it's just that it is being siphoned out). If we could visit an alternate universe where African Countries weren't the least wealthy I'd be able to prove my argument. Being that there aren't any graphs from a bunch of people with time on their hands (for example) tracking crime rates in Ethiopia during the 1300s I'm at a loss. #### TomC ##### Celestial Highness I'd love to get into the details of why black on black crime happens more than other race on race but I'm certain that the discussion between you and I would look something like this You're black. You could start such a thread without getting as much flack as us wipepo would. Tom This is a derail. But there is no point in my starting that discussion, as my opinion is that poverty is the most dominant force of crime rates. It just so happens that we live in one of the universes where African countries are the poorest (not that they don't have wealth it's just that it is being siphoned out). If we could visit an alternate universe where African Countries weren't the least wealthy I'd be able to prove my argument. Being that there aren't any graphs from a bunch of people with time on their hands (for example) tracking crime rates in Ethiopia during the 1300s I'm at a loss. It's definitely a derail, that's why I suggested a new thread. I didn't mean discussion on such a large level, around the globe and across the centuries. USA, in the 21st century, is quite large and complex enough for a IIDB thread. Frankly, I don't pretend to understand anywhere else to have a particularly informed opinion. Maybe Canada, certainly not South Africa. Tom #### Jimmy Higgins ##### Contributor An example of the armored vehicles being drven around in local communities by police For police and sheriff's departments, which have scooped up 165 of the mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles, or MRAPS, since they became available this summer, the price and the ability to deliver shock and awe while serving warrants or dealing with hostage standoffs was just too good to pass up. "It's armored. It's heavy. It's intimidating. And it's free," said Albany County Sheriff Craig Apple, among five county sheriff's departments and three other police agencies in New York that have taken delivery of an MRAP. View attachment 38074 The new MRAP truck will go into service after technicians remove the gun turret and change the paint from military sand to civilian black. Sheriff Apple rejected the idea that the nation's police forces are becoming too militaristic. Pondering how many school lunches that thing went for. Also, aren't we trying to deter crime, not shock and awe criminals that have already committed them? #### TomC ##### Celestial Highness Pondering how many school lunches that thing went for. Also, aren't we trying to deter crime, not shock and awe criminals that have already committed them? Yeah, exactly. My small and quite peaceful county bought something similar, about 10-12 years ago. Someone wrote a rather scathing letter to the editor pointing out that the vehicle couldn't get to her neighborhood without circling out through adjoining counties. That's because a crucial bridge on County Road 800N had suffered enough damage during a recent flood that it's load limits had dropped far below that vehicle's weight. But the county hadn't yet found money in the budget to replace the elderly bridge. Priorities and all. Tom #### Trausti ##### Deleted I'd love to get into the details of why black on black crime happens more than other race on race but I'm certain that the discussion between you and I would look something like this You're black. You could start such a thread without getting as much flack as us wipepo would. Tom This is a derail. But there is no point in my starting that discussion, as my opinion is that poverty is the most dominant force of crime rates. It just so happens that we live in one of the universes where African countries are the poorest (not that they don't have wealth it's just that it is being siphoned out). If we could visit an alternate universe where African Countries weren't the least wealthy I'd be able to prove my argument. Being that there aren't any graphs from a bunch of people with time on their hands (for example) tracking crime rates in Ethiopia during the 1300s I'm at a loss. Singapore is a small mostly island country with no natural resources. Yet it's one of the most advanced economies in the world. Human capital matters more than natural resources. (See also - South Korea.) #### atrib ##### Veteran Member I still disagree about legalizing all adult sex work for all the reasons we've battled about many times. No one has claimed that Wright was a saint but no, I don't think he deserved to die. The officers should never have pulled him over in the first place per pandemic instructions in effect at the time. They did NOT know there was a warrant out for his arrest until he was pulled over. It is still unclear whether or not he was ever served a warrant so it is possible he was unaware. Do I think he was a good person? Almost certainly not but I also don't believe in the death penalty and certainly not prior to even being arrested on those charges, much less tried and convicted. It was a terrible tragedy all around. Note that he was committing two offenses at the time--the tag which they weren't stopping people for at that time and the air freshener hanging from the mirror (obstructed windshield) that we have no indication they weren't stopping people for. Oh, I see, he was committing not one but two offenses. That makes it completely OK. He has an air freshener blocking part of his mirror - lets pull him over. Even though we have explicitly been instructed not to pull people over during the fucking pandemic for minor offenses, the air freshener is so fucking over the line we have to do something about it. And he might have been planning to use said air freshener as a deadly weapon - lets fucking shoot him for that. #### bilby ##### Fair dinkum thinkum I'd love to get into the details of why black on black crime happens more than other race on race but I'm certain that the discussion between you and I would look something like this You're black. You could start such a thread without getting as much flack as us wipepo would. Tom This is a derail. But there is no point in my starting that discussion, as my opinion is that poverty is the most dominant force of crime rates. It just so happens that we live in one of the universes where African countries are the poorest (not that they don't have wealth it's just that it is being siphoned out). If we could visit an alternate universe where African Countries weren't the least wealthy I'd be able to prove my argument. Being that there aren't any graphs from a bunch of people with time on their hands (for example) tracking crime rates in Ethiopia during the 1300s I'm at a loss. Singapore is a small mostly island country with no natural resources. Yet it's one of the most advanced economies in the world. Human capital matters more than natural resources. (See also - South Korea.) It wasn't "human capital" that made the British Empire pump vast resources into Singapore; Nor that made the US Empire pump similarly vast resources into South Korea. Comes to that, Great Britain is a small island country with few natural resources. They became an advanced economy the same way Singapore and South Korea did - they took vast wealth from somewhere else. The difference is that the British went and took it, rather than having it thrust upon them for other nations' strategic purposes. And they took it from ... (drum roll) ... the countries that are today suffering low levels of economic development despite having started with large amounts of natural resources. The British (French, Belgians, Germans...) came, took their stuff (including large amounts of "human capital", aka "slaves") and shipped it to the places they wanted to develop. Human capital my hairy arse. #### Toni ##### Contributor I still disagree about legalizing all adult sex work for all the reasons we've battled about many times. No one has claimed that Wright was a saint but no, I don't think he deserved to die. The officers should never have pulled him over in the first place per pandemic instructions in effect at the time. They did NOT know there was a warrant out for his arrest until he was pulled over. It is still unclear whether or not he was ever served a warrant so it is possible he was unaware. Do I think he was a good person? Almost certainly not but I also don't believe in the death penalty and certainly not prior to even being arrested on those charges, much less tried and convicted. It was a terrible tragedy all around. Note that he was committing two offenses at the time--the tag which they weren't stopping people for at that time and the air freshener hanging from the mirror (obstructed windshield) that we have no indication they weren't stopping people for. Oh, I see, he was committing not one but two offenses. That makes it completely OK. He has an air freshener blocking part of his mirror - lets pull him over. Even though we have explicitly been instructed not to pull people over during the fucking pandemic for minor offenses, the air freshener is so fucking over the line we have to do something about it. And he might have been planning to use said air freshener as a deadly weapon - lets fucking shoot him for that. Yeah, they weren't stopping people for the air freshener thing either. #### Derec ##### Contributor I still disagree about legalizing all adult sex work for all the reasons we've battled about many times. Of course you do, but that's because you are an illiberal radfem. A SWERF even. But let's not talk any more about that here, lest we upset Elixir. No one has claimed that Wright was a saint but no, I don't think he deserved to die. Saint. Prince. Not much of a difference. Daunte Wright remembered as ‘prince of Brooklyn Center’ The officers should never have pulled him over in the first place per pandemic instructions in effect at the time. They did NOT know there was a warrant out for his arrest until he was pulled over. I disagree. It was a good thing they stopped him and checked him for warrants. It was a good thing that they tried to arrest him. Where it went south is Potter mistaking her gun and taser, but that would not have happened had Wright not decided to run. It is quite disingenuous when those on the left want to ban all sorts of guns but do not want gun criminals like Daunte Wright to be brought to justice. I think that after his bail violation (he was on bail for the robbery when he caught the gun possession case linked with the fatal warrant) he should have been remanded without bail anyway. It is still unclear whether or not he was ever served a warrant so it is possible he was unaware. He would have been aware that he missed his court case for the gun possession charge. Do I think he was a good person? Almost certainly not but I also don't believe in the death penalty and certainly not prior to even being arrested on those charges, much less tried and convicted. It was a terrible tragedy all around. It wasn't "death penalty". It was an accidental shooting, and, as you said, a terrible tragedy. Running from police is stupid, even if some, including some on here, believe that it is not. By running, you invite police to chase you, and you increase the chances of bad things happening, like a cop making a mistake. I think our current catch/try/jail/imprison and release system is not very effective in terms of serving society, the victims of these crimes and those convicted very well. Restorative justice can be used with some criminal offenses and can be more effective than our current system of incarceration. Here's a linkhttps://ca.ctrinstitute.com/blog/5-principles-of-restorative-justice/ We are talking about serious crimes here. Assaults with a deadly weapon. Armed robberies. Or worse. I do not think "restorative justice" would work for anything but the least serious of crimes, and even then not for habitual offenders. There are all sorts of weapons involved in gun crime. Assault weapons have no place in our society. I don't care if school shootings and theater shootings, etc. are a small fraction of the gun deaths in the US, their removal is only one first step in quelling the violence. Registration, licensure, mandatory background checks and mandatory gun safety and mandatory gun safe or other means to secure weapons should be enacted but honestly, we need to get rid of most of the guns. I am for stricter background checks and registration. I am against banning certain guns such as so called "assault weapons". Yes, they are involved in relatively few criminal shootings compared to handguns. But that is not all. Do you think that if assault weapons were banned, school shooters and the like could not make do with other rifles or, even better, good old handguns? Adam Lanza for example did not just have an AR-15 style rifle, he also had a Glock pistol and a good old-fashioned bolt-action rifle. The Clinton era style assault weapons ban is the wrong way to go. It should be more about people, less about the details of the gun like pistol grips or shoulder things that go up. What we need is people control. Yes to background checks and such. But also yes to locking up gun criminals. Take this article about robberies in LA where the suspects are released over and over again by the "woke" fauxgressive DA Gascon. 17 L.A. gangs have sent out crews to follow and rob city’s wealthiest, LAPD says The title is a bit deceptive, as the article makes clear that it is far more than "city's wealthiest" that are getting robbed. That said, these are the paragraphs I wanted to focus on: LA Times said: In some cases, suspects have been arrested but then released from custody, according to police, only to commit additional robberies. [...] Adams, according to Moore, was involved in eight separate follow-off robberies over a sixth-month period starting last fall, including one in which two UCLA students were robbed of two watches worth nearly$145,000 after leaving a club, a second in which two foreign tourists were robbed of watches worth $73,000, and a third in which$51,000 in property was stolen.
During the course of the eight robberies, which occurred between September and February, Adams was arrested three times. The first time was on Jan. 9, when Moore said Adams was found in a car that had been used in one of the robberies and where a gun was also found. Online court records show no charges were ever filed against Adams in that case, suggesting prosecutors were unconvinced they could win a conviction.
Adams was arrested again on Jan. 27 and a third time on Feb. 21, and in both cases charged with illegal gun possession. Court records show he was ordered released each time without having to pay bail. The reason was a pandemic-related rule, aimed at reducing the jail population, that requires L.A. County defendants to be released without posting bail for certain offenses.
After his fourth arrest, he is being kept in custody, for now. One reason he had been released is Garcon.
Moore said Adams’ earlier and repeated releases from custody endangered public safety, and that people who are repeatedly arrested for gun crimes should not be let out before trial. He also suggested that prosecutors played a part by not seeking certain charging enhancements to those brought against Adams that might have kept him in jail.
Moore said he was “disappointed” that “the full weight of our existing laws” was not brought down on Adams — not only to hold him accountable, but to provide a disincentive for other would-be robbers who might think such crimes are going unpunished in L.A.
Another repeat offender:
In a separate case, a man named Cheyenne Hale, 25, was arrested this month on suspicion of participating in the armed robbery of a man in downtown L.A. in October in which two watches estimated to be worth about $600,000 were stolen. Police said they recovered a loaded gun from Hale during his arrest and that detectives in Tippet’s unit later found seven additional handguns,$21,000 in cash and “a large quantity of drugs” including cocaine and methamphetamine when they served a search warrant at Hale’s home.Nonetheless, Hale — who could not be reached for comment — has since been released from custody, according to court records.
We need to go after gun criminals, and not give them a pass. Police are arresting them, but they are being let go. Over and over again. What cities like LA and NYC are doing is counterproductive. It is policing/criminal justice reform done badly. Hopefully Mayor Adams does some good fixing DeBlasio's deforms. But that still leaves DA Bragg and the idiotic legislature in Albany. California may be a lost cause altogether.

As for what police equipment I think police should NOT have: I'm very concerned about policing and police equipment that trains police and arms them as though they are an occupying force in a hostile territory rather than members of the community whose job it is to serve .
Too much is being made of this I think. This equipment is used for special tasks, not in everyday policing. I do not think police should be denied the equipment to respond to infrequent, but very serious scenarios. Barricaded criminals require SWAT response. Insurrections like the ones happening throughout 2020 require riot control means. If you do not want police to act as a hostile force, do not act like a hostile force yourself by being involved in an insurrection (or an "uprising" as #BLMers and Antifas prefer to refer to it). After all, it was #BLM and Antifa that actually was an occupying army in cities like Minneapolis, Seattle and Atlanta. Remember "Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone"?
It's a two way street. Peaceful protests are one thing, but what has been happening with increased frequency since #BLM was founded in 2014 (and reached a crescendo in 2020) is far from peaceful protesting.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
Thanks, Rhea. This is a very good example of something I really do not think our police departments need.
Not for regular policing, no. But those are not used for regular policing.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
Since the topic of this tangent is overly militarizing the police, I argue that it does not matter if it is a “real tank” or “just an armored personnel carrier that looks like a tank,” because my argument is about the way the police interact with the community - like they are a military unit and the people are the enemy.
These things are not used for everyday policing. They are not used for interactions with the community. Their use is limited to special circumstances.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
It's a bad loophole in the right not to be searched or arrested without a warrant, and is the antithesis of freedom.
Checking you for open warrants does not mean you will be arrested without a warrant. How is it a "bad loophole"?

Once the cops are permitted to stop and search any citizen on suspicion of a trivial breach of a minor traffic regulation, the right not to be arbitrarily stopped and searched has ceased to exist.
If police observe a violation of traffic laws (even minor ones) they are usually (except in some lefty cities) permitted to stop you. What's wrong with that? They are allowed to ticket you and check your license and registration. If you have arrest warrants, you will be taken into custody.
What's wrong with all that? Checking somebody for warrants is not "unreasonable search and seizure". I do not see where you get that notion from.

Of course, I don't expect an American to grasp what freedom actually is; Because they are so completely immersed in a society thst uses it as a mindless slogan, where it's just a placeholder for 'oppressive actions I don't personally object to'.
Are you trying to tell me that police down under can't stop you for violating traffic laws? That they can't run you for warrants once they stop you?

#### Derec

##### Contributor
Countries (and States) that have decriminalised drug use
Your map shows all land area as blue.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
I'd bet that your garden variety meth lab has stuff that would be effective against a tank if deployed correctly.
That meth labs have things that are toxic and explosive is a big reason why these departments want armor.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
Note that he was committing two offenses at the time--the tag which they weren't stopping people for at that time and the air freshener hanging from the mirror (obstructed windshield) that we have no indication they weren't stopping people for.

Apparently he was also making an illegal turn.

Minnesota Reformer said:
Potter was with the new officer she was training, Anthony Luckey, when he noticed Wright’s blinker signaling a right turn even though he was in the left turning lane. He said he also noticed the air freshener hanging from the rearview mirror, which is technically against the law, and that the car’s registration tab had expired.
Lawyers lay out opposing views of police shooting that killed Daunte Wright

After they stopped him, it turned out he had no driver's license nor insurance. I think uninsured and unlicensed drivers should be taken off the streets as they make driving more dangerous for everyone. And of course, he also had the gun warrant.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
Those ‘offenses’ were minor at any time and were supposed to be ignored during the time he was pulled over. No one is suggesting that Wright was a good guy. But he should never have been pulled over.
Given that he had no license, no insurance, and had a warrant, yes, he should have been pulled over.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
If that's an excuse to stop and search, then the cops basically have the right to stop and search on a whim.
Not stop and search. Stop and ask for license and insurance, then run the license to see if the person has any warrants.
A search of the vehicle requires more than just a traffic stop.

I don't think you should be OK with the cavalier abandonment of the fourth amendment without so much as a debate.
I know you are Australian and all, but why do you think traffic stops are a violation of the 4th Amendment? Are you going "sovereign citizen" on us? "I wasn't driving, I was travelling"?

But it's your freedom. It's not my place to defend it.
True. How are they doing things in Australia? Are there traffic stops? What happens if you are stopped? Does the cop ask for license, registration and proof of insurance?