National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (and now ICE)

[Locksteady]

So honest question; is BLM a loose movement of groups with somewhat similar goals or an organized operation?

Because I mentioned a few days ago about the boog boi killing cops and basically had multiple members attempt to argue "they aren't a real movement", even though people associated with that camp keep getting arrested for terrorism plots/murder.

By the same token, we'll see basically ever act of violence in this thread attributed to BLM/ANTIFA, even if there isn't a good link.

Is this a rhetorical question - or an HONEST question? 50 pages in and you ask this question? 3yrs of BLM, burning, rioting, protesting, Ferguson, well proven coordination, donations, websites, foundations, etc, etc... Where have you been?

15yrs SF may have made me too cynical but I'm one of those that doesn't believe that NO question is a DUMB question. This one ranks right on up there as unbelievably naive.

I think a lot of the hyperbole in this piece of dialogue is unnecessary, because you both seem to be operating off one specific understanding of BLM while entertaining a false dilemma.

BLM is a organized movement that officially advocates for nonviolent civil disobedience in response to incidents of police brutality against black people in America. Additionally, its founders expressly and repeatedly advocate for nonviolent civil disobedience. It is important to start with this basic and unconflated description of BLM's self-definition and the strategy prescribed by its 'leaders' : nonviolent civil disobedience.

BLM also contains rhetoric in its description of the state and its behavior towards its black constituents that people (including some of its own members, not just agent provocateurs) have and continue to use as justification for violent retaliation. This should be acknowledged, but it is equally important not to unnecessarily conflate it with the movement as a whole or its advocacy of nonviolent action.

@Cookie_ 's question was not 'dumb' or 'naive', because BLM as an 'organized' movement operates on an extremely decentralized network, and it has no official hierarchy beyond the unifying message of its founders and whatever subgroups developed in their own communities. This means that any person or group of people can claim BLM membership, and deviations in what the founding leadership deemed to be appropriate responses to police brutality are bound to occur. The variance of some of these responses makes it extremely easy for a person to either extend the violent divergences from the nonviolence appeals of their national 'leaders' towards the entire movement (@Rabid Badger), or to question how unified its message is and whether it is, in fact, an organized movement with a united approach to resolving police brutality against black people (@Cookie_ ).

I find it helpful to assume the best intent in these discussions, particularly when it comes to questioning the sincerity of a person asking these questions (especially after they state so themselves, in @Ooh-Rah's case ), and even moreso within a community as mature and accomplished as this one. Let us continue to keep this forum (and 'Murca!) great by holding the standard.

 

[AWP]

Let us continue to keep this forum (and 'Murca!) great by holding the standard.

Thank you for your post, but the staff has already addressed this. If you have an issue with someone's post, please use the Report feature in the lower left-hand corner of the offending post.

 

[Locksteady]

Thank you for your post, but the staff has already addressed this. If you have an issue with someone's post, please use the Report feature in the lower left-hand corner of the offending post.

I don't hold any current issue - this is a resubmission of a message I wrote posted three minutes after @Ooh-Rah closed the thread.

You are more than welcome to delete that specific line if it is less relevant now due to the vitriol being sorted.

 

[Ranger Psych]

I don't get what reallocating the funds has to do with the legal ramifications that LE's required for parking enforcement. You'd need more funds for more officers to be able to enforce the laws as they stand now.

 

[amlove21]

Lemme just check in here...

 

[ThunderHorse]

Rioters continue to tear down statues. Ulysses S Grant this time.

Protesters tear down statues of Union general Ulysses S. Grant, national anthem lyricist Francis Scott Key

 

[R.Caerbannog]

Proud Boys origin, not KKK. It's a goof...

Rioters continue to tear down statues. Ulysses S Grant this time.

Protesters tear down statues of Union general Ulysses S. Grant, national anthem lyricist Francis Scott Key

Hate at the useful idiots destroying our collective history, not you bro.

If anything... I think this serves as an excellent example of how much the education system has failed in the teaching of our history and civics.

 

[RackMaster]

Now this.

Protesters paint 'defund the police' on street in front of Toronto police headquarters

 

[Sigaba]

I don't get what reallocating the funds has to do with the legal ramifications that LE's required for parking enforcement. You'd need more funds for more officers to be able to enforce the laws as they stand now.

If the county were to stand up a department that handled parking enforcement, the work could be done by non-sworn employees who would be paid less but probably in the role longer because there would be a career path that led to managerial roles.

An upside for law enforcement is that officers would be able to do more of the work they want to do than the work they don't want to do.

The bowdlerized version of "defund the police" can very easily get in the way of a serious conversation about "what's the best way to spend public funds." There's a website Transparent California that allows one to look at how much public employees earn. And budget information for municipalities and counties are readily available, as are job descriptions.

Officers are not paid as much as they should and their job descriptions include tasks that may not be the best use of their time. If boxes were moved around on organizational charts and money were reallocated, you could get more bang for the buck without necessarily firing anyone or cutting anyone's pay. (You get rid of a couple of bad apple officers, fill their roles with officers who were previously doing parking.)

 

[ThunderHorse]

If the county were to stand up a department that handled parking enforcement, the work could be done by non-sworn employees who would be paid less but probably in the role longer because there would be a career path that led to managerial roles.

An upside for law enforcement is that officers would be able to do more of the work they want to do than the work they don't want to do.

The bowdlerized version of "defund the police" can very easily get in the way of a serious conversation about "what's the best way to spend public funds." There's a website Transparent California that allows one to look at how much public employees earn. And budget information for municipalities and counties are readily available, as are job descriptions.

Officers are not paid as much as they should and their job descriptions include tasks that may not be the best use of their time. If boxes were moved around on organizational charts and money were reallocated, you could get more bang for the buck without necessarily firing anyone or cutting anyone's pay. (You get rid of a couple of bad apple officers, fill their roles with officers who were previously doing parking.)

There are a lot of departments that specifically have parking enforcement roles. And many cities that have separate departments for that. LA as one example:

Parking Enforcement Home - LADOT

 

[Sigaba]

The relationship between civil disturbances and a lack of economic development years later is not always linear.

Sorry, I wholly disagree.

For your position to be correct, every decision to not invest in a project in areas of the greater L.A. region is driving by a single consideration every time.

FWIW, my point of view is based upon my work at a consultancy that does a lot of work in the L.A. area, it remains my position that the decision making process is complicated and, IME, the assessment of risk is not about the possibility of riots or natural disasters.

 

[RackMaster]

Now this.

Protestors paint 'Defund The Police' in front of Toronto police headquarters - CityNews Toronto

 

[Dvr55119]

If the county were to stand up a department that handled parking enforcement, the work could be done by non-sworn employees who would be paid less but probably in the role longer because there would be a career path that led to managerial roles.

An upside for law enforcement is that officers would be able to do more of the work they want to do than the work they don't want to do.

The bowdlerized version of "defund the police" can very easily get in the way of a serious conversation about "what's the best way to spend public funds." There's a website Transparent California that allows one to look at how much public employees earn. And budget information for municipalities and counties are readily available, as are job descriptions.

Officers are not paid as much as they should and their job descriptions include tasks that may not be the best use of their time. If boxes were moved around on organizational charts and money were reallocated, you could get more bang for the buck without necessarily firing anyone or cutting anyone's pay. (You get rid of a couple of bad apple officers, fill their roles with officers who were previously doing parking.)

In much of urban California, police are very well compensated. My cousin ( SD county Sheriffs deputy) made well over 150k in total compensation, and over 105k just in base salary(no overtime or shift differential included) That is two years old, (as that is how Transparent California normally works.) Police in most of California are very well paid, especially considering there is very little educational requirement. Idk how much you think police should be paid, but that seems like it is enough.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

I cannot even imagine trying to a cop under these circumstances.

Minneapolis officers responding to shootings met with 'hostile' crowds

Minneapolis police officers responding to separate shootings Friday night were met with angry crowds that impeded them from doing their job, a department spokesman said Saturday.

Around 11:25 p.m. in the 3800 block of Chicago Avenue — near the site where George Floyd was killed May 25 while in police custody — officers responded to a reported shooting. A man had shot himself and bystanders were administering CPR, according to police.

Officers tried to provide aid upon arrival but encountered “hostile” crowds that impeded them, police spokesman John Elder said. The man was taken to HCMC, where he died. Elder said it is not clear if the shooting was a suicide or an accident. Police are investigating.

 

[NovemberWhiskey]

Police in most of California are very well paid, especially considering there is very little educational requirement. Idk how much you think police should be paid, but that seems like it is enough.

One could very well argue that's actually pretty shit pay, considered the costs, starting with health insurance and expenses and prices of living in Cali, not even going into departments that have to fund everything themselves - and like solid gear were cheap...

So yeah. Nah. Don't think more messages of the 'cops are soo well paid', while rioting crowds about everybody scream for even less funds, are an useful thing to put up.

Not a cop and it's not that personal to me either, but respect the everloving hell of still serving officers.

 

[Ranger Psych]

If the county were to stand up a department that handled parking enforcement, the work could be done by non-sworn employees who would be paid less but probably in the role longer because there would be a career path that led to managerial roles.

An upside for law enforcement is that officers would be able to do more of the work they want to do than the work they don't want to do.

The bowdlerized version of "defund the police" can very easily get in the way of a serious conversation about "what's the best way to spend public funds." There's a website Transparent California that allows one to look at how much public employees earn. And budget information for municipalities and counties are readily available, as are job descriptions.

Officers are not paid as much as they should and their job descriptions include tasks that may not be the best use of their time. If boxes were moved around on organizational charts and money were reallocated, you could get more bang for the buck without necessarily firing anyone or cutting anyone's pay. (You get rid of a couple of bad apple officers, fill their roles with officers who were previously doing parking.)

You're ignoring the major issue.

The LAW requires SWORN ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS to issue citations.

Moving the money around and standing up another specific department that handles parking enforcement with non-sworn officers won't do SHIT till you CHANGE THE FUCKING REQUIREMENTS specifically about citations.

The first task is getting legislators at the STATE level that will change things. Good luck with that.

 

[ThunderHorse]

For your position to be correct, every decision to not invest in a project in areas of the greater L.A. region is driving by a single consideration every time.

FWIW, my point of view is based upon my work at a consultancy that does a lot of work in the L.A. area, it remains my position that the decision making process is complicated and, IME, the assessment of risk is not about the possibility of riots or natural disasters.

LA is not the only model. You can look at several cities as @Polar Bear listed. Following these riots the cities lost massive investment that they previously had. Red tape or not these companies choose to go elsewhere.

 

[ThunderHorse]

In much of urban California, police are very well compensated. My cousin ( SD county Sheriffs deputy) made well over 150k in total compensation, and over 105k just in base salary(no overtime or shift differential included) That is two years old, (as that is how Transparent California normally works.) Police in most of California are very well paid, especially considering there is very little educational requirement. Idk how much you think police should be paid, but that seems like it is enough.

You're using his salary number as a basis for your personal position, which is clearly agenda based. Cost of living in San Diego county is stupid. You have to compensate people well enough for them to live close enough to the locale they work in. There is no cheap place to live in SD County.

For example, the different between living and Raleigh and in San Diego based on cost of living is +51%. So if I'm going to reverse that, based on your cousin's base salary moving from San Diego to Raleigh that is a difference of -34%. The starting salary for a police officer in Raleigh is $42,300. In San Diego county that puts you below the poverty line.

You may believe that there is "very little education requirements". But ask around, it's almost impossible to make it deep into the hiring process without a 4-year degree. Especially in California.

 

[Kraut783]

Cost of living vs salary. If you look at NYPD and LAPD, the pay looks great....but the cost of living kills you. Many stay, knowing that in the long run their retirement will be good....and even fantastic if they move to lower cost of living area....which most do.

 

[AWP]

I think @Sigaba is onto something, but like @Ranger Psych said, you have to change the laws. I think that point is missing from the debate: reform is law, not money, driven.

There is absolutely nothing simple about the changes required in America, but people distill their talking points into binary, easy solutions. Nah, son, society doesn't work that way and the longer we cling to that idea the worse this becomes.

Defund the police to improve society is like saying we should go to the moon. Great concepts, but incredibly complex to pull off.