Federal troops helping suppress protests in Portland OR

[skepticalbip]

Only after the fact? So, in every case when a cop is called, there is a potential situation requiring violence? That sure sounds wrong. And biased

Actually this is good idea. If we could just teach potential abusers to announce their intentions in advance, then poof, we wouldn't need the police meanies. But it's not clear how we get them to announce in advance. What is your idea here?

Since it is difficult to convince potential abusers to announce their plans in advance to the police, I would suggest hiring psychic 911 operators. If they 'sense' that the disturbance is a mother and son loudly arguing about the son cleaning his room then they can dispatch a social worker to negotiate a resolution. If they 'sense' the disturbance is a home invasion then they can dispatch the police. (Or maybe a very persuasive social worker that can convince the intruder to drive himself to the police station and turn himself in.)

 

[Testy Calibrate]

Only after the fact? So, in every case when a cop is called, there is a potential situation requiring violence? That sure sounds wrong. And biased

Actually this is good idea. If we could just teach potential abusers to announce their intentions in advance, then poof, we wouldn't need the police meanies. But it's not clear how we get them to announce in advance. What is your idea here?

My idea here is that it's idiotic to claim that every call that police respond needs a cop. There are lots of categories that don't. If domestic violence is not one of those categories then it's a dumb example. I think you'd need to know quite a bit about domestic violence calls to have any idea whether there are a variety of categories of such events though. But getting hung up on it as some kind of black swan issue is equivocating swans with crayons. There are a few non white swans, there are mostly non white crayons.

 

[Testy Calibrate]

Only after the fact? So, in every case when a cop is called, there is a potential situation requiring violence? That sure sounds wrong. And biased

Actually this is good idea. If we could just teach potential abusers to announce their intentions in advance, then poof, we wouldn't need the police meanies. But it's not clear how we get them to announce in advance. What is your idea here?

Since it is difficult to convince potential abusers to announce their plans in advance to the police, I would suggest hiring psychic 911 operators. If they 'sense' that the disturbance is a mother and son loudly arguing about the son cleaning his room then they can dispatch a social worker to negotiate a resolution. If they 'sense' the disturbance is a home invasion then they can dispatch the police.

or, you know, if the caller says the disturbance is a mother and son loudly arguing about the son cleaning his room then they can dispatch a social worker to negotiate a resolution.

 

[Testy Calibrate]

Regardless, the level of collateral damage from police behavior that you are willing to accept is a lot different from the level I am willing to accept.

We need accountability from the police and they have worked very hard to make that impossible and now the system is broken and needs fixed.

 

[skepticalbip]

Since it is difficult to convince potential abusers to announce their plans in advance to the police, I would suggest hiring psychic 911 operators. If they 'sense' that the disturbance is a mother and son loudly arguing about the son cleaning his room then they can dispatch a social worker to negotiate a resolution. If they 'sense' the disturbance is a home invasion then they can dispatch the police.

or, you know, if the caller says the disturbance is a mother and son loudly arguing about the son cleaning his room then they can dispatch a social worker to negotiate a resolution.

Neighbors who call in disturbances next door don't have any idea what the hell is going on. They only know that there is a hell of a racket and fear the worse.

That is except for something like loud parties. In these cases someone showing up with a badge is quite effective at convincing them to turn down the stereo. A social worker showing up without arrest authority would likely be invited to join the party or only evolve into an argument until a back-up cop showed up.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Only after the fact? So, in every case when a cop is called, there is a potential situation requiring violence? That sure sounds wrong. And biased

Actually this is good idea. If we could just teach potential abusers to announce their intentions in advance, then poof, we wouldn't need the police meanies. But it's not clear how we get them to announce in advance. What is your idea here?

My idea here is that it's idiotic to claim that every call that police respond needs a cop. There are lots of categories that don't. If domestic violence is not one of those categories then it's a dumb example. I think you'd need to know quite a bit about domestic violence calls to have any idea whether there are a variety of categories of such events though. But getting hung up on it as some kind of black swan issue is equivocating swans with crayons. There are a few non white swans, there are mostly non white crayons.

Why would someone call in a potential domestic phone call if there was no potential domestic violence? I so want to continue with the sarcasm. But maybe people who never been in a household with violence just can't understand what it's like? If so, I'd say that you're lucky. According to the CDC, 1 in 4 women are physically abused.

 

[Derec]

Above is it for you. 'twas a Portland jury that let that Nevada Bundy family bunch of Gun Nuts and range raiders off without as much as a hideho. A silver spike and clove of Garlic to your bogus claim of Portland as a hot bed of leftists falsehood.

No, it was an Oregon jury. The entire state is part of the federal court district and thus the jury would have been selected from the entire state, not just the leftist hotbed that is Portland.

 

[Derec]

Lotta nostradamus in there. However, all the points I was trying to make entirely eluded you. I guess you're going with us and them. Maybe you'll get lucky and choose the winning side.

If your side (leftist extremist rioters) ends up being the "winning side" that will be the end of US. I guess FBI needs to dust off COINTELPRO before the "them" start planting bombs like the left-wing radicals of the 70s did.

 

[Testy Calibrate]

Lotta nostradamus in there. However, all the points I was trying to make entirely eluded you. I guess you're going with us and them. Maybe you'll get lucky and choose the winning side.

If your side (leftist extremist rioters) ends up being the "winning side" that will be the end of US. I guess FBI needs to dust off COINTELPRO before the "them" start planting bombs like the left-wing radicals of the 70s did.

You and I have different visions of what the US is and should be. You have very little idea of my vision. You are painting yours as fascism. That you can not reflect on what you wrote there is sadly normal in this climate. Us against them is the new happy birthday

 

[lpetrich]

Trump consults Bush torture lawyer on how to skirt law and rule by decree | US news | The Guardian

The Trump administration has been consulting the former government lawyer who wrote the legal justification for waterboarding on how the president might try to rule by decree.

John Yoo told the Guardian he has been talking to White House officials about his view that a recent supreme court ruling on immigration would allow Trump to issue executive orders on whether to apply existing federal laws.

“If the court really believes what it just did, then it just handed President Trump a great deal of power, too,” Yoo, a professor at Berkeley Law, said.

“The supreme court has said President Obama could [choose not to] enforce immigration laws for about 2 million cases. And why can’t the Trump administration do something similar with immigration – create its own … program, but it could do it in areas beyond that, like healthcare, tax policy, criminal justice, inner city policy. I talked to them a fair amount about cities, because of the disorder.”

Can anyone say "Imperial Presidency"?

In a book titled Defender in Chief, due to be published next week, Yoo argues that Trump was fighting to restore the powers of the presidency, in a way that would have been approved by the framers of the US constitution.

“They wanted each branch to have certain constitutional weapons and then they wanted them to fight. And so they wanted the president to try to expand his powers but they expected also Congress to keep fighting with the President,” he said.

That seems almost too nonsensical to be worth a comment.

 

[Angry Floof]

NRA Accidentally Forgets To Rise Up Against Tyrannical Government

He said the morale around the NRA has been pretty low. “The guys feel pretty silly. We had our well regulated militia stocked up and ready to go, just waiting for the moment when the Government would turn on its own people. And then the government started shooting protesters and rolling tanks down the street, and we were like ‘guys this is the one we’ve been talking about, let’s go!’. But then something else came up and we forgot to do it. Damnit!”.

 

[Angry Floof]

Lotta nostradamus in there. However, all the points I was trying to make entirely eluded you. I guess you're going with us and them. Maybe you'll get lucky and choose the winning side.

If your side (leftist extremist rioters) ends up being the "winning side" that will be the end of US. I guess FBI needs to dust off COINTELPRO before the "them" start planting bombs like the left-wing radicals of the 70s did.

They're not extreme, though. 99% of protests have been peaceful, and those that have become violent have been due to law enforcement escalating to violence. It's almost like you share law enforcement's seething animal brain bloodlust to the point where your frontal lobes are also starved of glucose and oxygen just like theirs. Must be frustrating to sit at home watching instead of joining in the shooting and beating.

You continue to believe protesters are "extremists" while going to extremes yourself to ignore police brutality and abuse of power. Why are you all so scared? You're terrified of phantoms. You've allowed fear mongering to distort your perceptions and all but kill off your ability to empathise with other humans. Stop the fear fantasy and learn to hold power accountable. Right wing ideology has become viscerally depraved. How could you allow that to take over your world view?

 

[Politesse]

NRA Accidentally Forgets To Rise Up Against Tyrannical Government

He said the morale around the NRA has been pretty low. “The guys feel pretty silly. We had our well regulated militia stocked up and ready to go, just waiting for the moment when the Government would turn on its own people. And then the government started shooting protesters and rolling tanks down the street, and we were like ‘guys this is the one we’ve been talking about, let’s go!’. But then something else came up and we forgot to do it. Damnit!”.

Did anyone not know that they were always full of shit with their feigned libertarian nonsense?

 

[Elixir]

Cops like to play with guns. They are largely selected for that attribute.
Then they spend more time playing (training) with guns than learning to solve human problems - other than with guns.
So when there's a problem, they naturally try to solve it with guns.

It shouldn't require a PhD to learn to solve SOME problems without guns.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Cops like to play with guns. They are largely selected for that attribute.
Then they spend more time playing (training) with guns than learning to solve human problems - other than with guns.
So when there's a problem, they naturally try to solve it with guns.

It shouldn't require a PhD to learn to solve SOME problems without guns.

The problem is that when a domestic threat is called in, there's something going on. There is a situation that is unpredictable and potentially dangerous. Someone needs to respond, put down the threat, stabilize the situation. Anyone who thinks that this is an easy situation is either crazy or has no experience in this field. And it's just laughable to say just send in the therapists! Ask anyone in mental health, there is an incredible shortage of therapists who are highly paid to work with people in safe settings. How much would we have to pay to therapists to go into potentially dangerous situations. And where would we find these people?

 

[Worldtraveller]

nope. There is no fourth. The "Make my Day" law (Castle Doctrine implementation in CO) requires you are on your own property (unlike in TX where "Stand your Ground" is assignable to your neighbor), and further that an ADDITIONAL crime is being committed WHILE the trespass is occuring. And that is the end of justifiable deadly force in my state.
IOW, you cannot shoot someone for breaking into your home... until they start stealing things or threatening anyone... but you can (and should) shoot someone for attempting to murder, rape or kidnap someone. Failure to clearly identify through markings and / or verbal announcement while restraining and detaining someone, is kidnapping... an offense for which Colorado defenders can and will use extreme force to stop. They need only identify themselves / their agency and make verbally clear the source of their authority to avoid justifiably being killed by a good samaritan.

I am waiting to see if anything happens to that couple in St. Louis. The mob had broken through the gate and were threatening to take over their home, kill them and their dog. The couple got their rifle and pistol to repel the mob, never leaving their property. The weapons did repel the mob but the DA is now threatening to bring charges against the couple, but not anyone in the threatening mob.

Oh yes, the couple did call 911 but were told that the police would not show up to protect them.

You believe their BS story about the 'mob'? The video(s) (who you gonna believe, me, or your lyin eyes?) clearly show the protesters in the street, which is public property.

Seriously, you might consider changing the 'skeptical' part of your name.

And yes, they are being charged by the DA for extremely irresponsible use of firearms.

 

[Worldtraveller]

As I understand the defund idea, that money would just go directly to the services that police do but shouldn't be providing.

You don't need a gun to take a report.

And, of course, you are psychic so know which domestic dispute call will require only a social worker to respond and make a report and which turns out to be one where one of the party has a shotgun to the head of the other and requires a bit more to resolve.

Must be nice to be able to predict what the person responding will find when they get there... saves a lot of investigation and manpower.

Not being psychic so not knowing what a responder will have to deal with is the reason a call for the fire department results in a full team with hoses, pumps, trucks, fire fighting equipment showing up when one person with a hand held fire extinguisher was all that turned out to be needed.

Hospitals deal this sort of stuff all the time. They don't end in fatalities. Your argument that sending in cops by default after they've taken a course in killology is asinine and very out of touch.

That's putting it kindly.

 

[Angry Floof]

NRA Accidentally Forgets To Rise Up Against Tyrannical Government

He said the morale around the NRA has been pretty low. “The guys feel pretty silly. We had our well regulated militia stocked up and ready to go, just waiting for the moment when the Government would turn on its own people. And then the government started shooting protesters and rolling tanks down the street, and we were like ‘guys this is the one we’ve been talking about, let’s go!’. But then something else came up and we forgot to do it. Damnit!”.

Did anyone not know that they were always full of shit with their feigned libertarian nonsense?

Only the NRA itself and its fan base of gun fellators believed they weren't full of shit this whole time.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Cops like to play with guns. They are largely selected for that attribute.
Then they spend more time playing (training) with guns than learning to solve human problems - other than with guns.
So when there's a problem, they naturally try to solve it with guns.

It shouldn't require a PhD to learn to solve SOME problems without guns.

The problem is that when a domestic threat is called in, there's something going on. There is a situation that is unpredictable and potentially dangerous. Someone needs to respond, put down the threat, stabilize the situation. Anyone who thinks that this is an easy situation is either crazy or has no experience in this field. And it's just laughable to say just send in the therapists! Ask anyone in mental health, there is an incredible shortage of therapists who are highly paid to work with people in safe settings. How much would we have to pay to therapists to go into potentially dangerous situations. And where would we find these people?

You're looking at the 'problem' from the wrong end of the spectrum.

Currently, the problem(s) (they are legion) are that everything the police respond to is more likely to escalate into violence because when all you have is a hammer (gun), everything looks like a nail (target). Even break ins/robberies, cops responding after the fact don't need to be armed. They can show up, take a report, and never be heard from again without firearms.

There is zero reason the US couldn't model our policing after several European countries, where the cops aren't as a default, even armed. They have specially trained officers that they only call when it is deemed necessary. That would be a big part of 'defunding', BTW, which has been explained in the other thread, and the authoritarians here continue to ignore, which is defunding means reducing what is spent on hardware like tanks, assault rifles, grenades, etc, and focus on training, more (unarmed) cops, specific traffic enforcement (unarmed) etc.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Hospitals deal this sort of stuff all the time. They don't end in fatalities. Your argument that sending in cops by default after they've taken a course in killology is asinine and very out of touch.

That's putting it kindly.

I'd like to see some evidence that "hospitals" send workers to respond to domestic threats "all the time" and that they don't end in fatalities.