Rayshard Brooks

[kallend 1,620]

14 hours ago, jakee said:

Your timing is so, so bad. Make progress by not talking about it?

Hey, we can cure covid-19 by not testing for it.  The President says so.

[turtlespeed 212]

43 minutes ago, kallend said:

Hey, we can cure covid-19 by not testing for it.  The President says so.

Racism is a mindset that is perpetuated, not a virus that can be killed with a vaccine.

I'm hoping you actually knew that, and the difference.  You wouldn't really being comparing two completely different things would you?

[kallend 1,620]

19 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Racism is a mindset that is perpetuated, not a virus that can be killed with a vaccine.

I'm hoping you actually knew that, and the difference.  You wouldn't really being comparing two completely different things would you?

Abstraction seems to be a concept that is lost on you.

[Phil1111 908]

50 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Racism is a mindset that is perpetuated by the GOP, not a virus that can be killed with a vaccine.

I'm hoping you actually knew that, and the difference.  You wouldn't really being comparing two completely different things would you?

FIFY

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

FIFY

No you didn't. 

You say that like is to the exclusion of every other person that is NOT a part of the GOP.

We already heard from the Canadians on this forum and they admit they have a problem with racism.  

Are they part of the GOP as well?

You are being dishonest.

[BIGUN 1,049]

The police in Atlanta are calling in sick to protest the murder charges against the cop. Two thoughts:

1. Fuck 'em

2. Fire 'em 

[Phil1111 908]

15 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

The police in Atlanta are calling in sick to protest the murder charges against the cop. Two thoughts:

1. Fuck 'em

2. Fire 'em 

It takes time to change bureaucracies. Its also a indicator as to how much work needs to take place to bring that change about.

[BIGUN 1,049]

7 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

It takes time to change bureaucracies.

It can take a day. Get rid of police unions. 

*For anyone tracking. Yea, I have cop issues. 

[normiss 620]

Today, Atlanta is trying to bribe them with $500 bonuses paid for their efforts during the protests.

I agree, fire the cops who refuse to work because they suppport criminal police behavior, and end relations with police unions who support those same criminal cops.

We should return to community policing and drop the military policing approach.

[gowlerk 1,902]

18 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Get rid of police unions. 

Police unions have become very powerful because they have been more popular with the public than the civic politicians who regularly cave into their demands. Local elections get low turnout, that needs to change. Police unions in Canada are also so powerful that it is nearly impossible to fire an officer. And for the same reasons.

[Phil1111 908]

IMO there will be police unions that will want to change. The emphasis on community policing to deal with drugs, gangs and other local issues are most important.

The anchor in the equation is the GOP. The GOP is the "tough on crime" and protect our officers on the "front lines" party.

"The Boston Globe editorial board(2016) urged the FOP(Fraternal order Police) to refrain from endorsing Trump.

“Officially aligning thousands of rank-and-file police officers with such a bigoted candidate would feed negative views of the police, chill community relationships, and ultimately make officers’ jobs harder,” the board wrote, adding that a Trump endorsement “risks pouring fuel on the fire.” LE unions and the GOP are lockstep. The new GOP amendments, trump executive order prove that. trump never even mentioned racism in his address over that new order. Last week, the president said chokeholds seem "perfect" and "innocent"

 

[Phil1111 908]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

The police in Atlanta are calling in sick to protest the murder charges against the cop. Two thoughts:

1. Fuck 'em

2. Fire 'em 

Are there enough GOP whores to fulfill #1?

[gowlerk 1,902]

39 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

IMO there will be police unions that will want to change. The emphasis on community policing to deal with drugs, gangs and other local issues are most important.

I don't see any evidence that any police unions are willing to give up any power. And I expect most of them to fight tooth and nail against the idea. They will give lip service to the idea of other changes, but they have one function and that is to look after their members. They are the enemy of real change. They are not the source of the problem, but they will protect the status quo.

 

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

2 hours ago, BIGUN said:

The police in Atlanta are calling in sick to protest the murder charges against the cop. Two thoughts:

1. Fuck 'em

2. Fire 'em 

Hi Keith,

I could not agree more.

All agreements between all gov'ts & all police unions should not be renewed when they expire.

Jerry Baumchen

[gowlerk 1,902]

9 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

All agreements between all gov'ts & all police unions should not be renewed when they expire.

I don't know how it is where you are, but labour laws here do not make it so easy to bust a union or a collective agreement. And for good reason. Doing away with police union and agreements will require passing legislation. This will be a huge struggle.

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

16 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I don't know how it is where you are, but labour laws here do not make it so easy to bust a union or a collective agreement. And for good reason. Doing away with police union and agreements will require passing legislation. This will be a huge struggle.

Hi Ken,

I do not have intimate knowledge of the agreements.  That is why I said just to not renew them.  I think most of them would have a no 'bust' clause.

Jerry Baumchen

[gowlerk 1,902]

3 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

I do not have intimate knowledge of the agreements.  That is why I said just to not renew them.  I think most of them would have a no 'bust' clause.

Jerry Baumchen

There are laws requiring good faith negotiations with unions. It is fine to "not renew" an agreement, but you must negotiate a new one if that is what you want. Generally if a new agreement is not agreed upon the old one remains in force. Laws at the state level will be needed to bust those unions and even then there will be constitutional issues. That is why public service unions have not been banned by red state governments. They have protections.

[wmw999 2,116]

2 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Police unions have become very powerful because they have been more popular with the public than the civic politicians who regularly cave into their demands. Local elections get low turnout, that needs to change. Police unions in Canada are also so powerful that it is nearly impossible to fire an officer. And for the same reasons.

People want to feel safe. That's very, very, high on most people's list, and the police are the first public line of defense along with firefighters. Doctors and hospitals are next, but po-po and firefighters "keep you safe" in your own home. It's a powerful card, but too many people aren't safe in their own home -- not in spite of the police, but because of them. And it's too highly correlated with being a minority, and then with being poor.

Wendy P.

[gowlerk 1,902]

3 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

People want to feel safe. That's very, very, high on most people's list, and the police are the first public line of defense along with firefighters.

Count me in. We clearly need police. But we need the police to be less of a military operation.

[Phil1111 908]

2 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Police unions have become very powerful because they have been more popular with the public than the civic politicians who regularly cave into their demands. ...

I don't know of any police unions that are popular with the public in the US or Canada. Before or subsequent to BLM.

48 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I don't see any evidence that any police unions are willing to give up any power. And I expect most of them to fight tooth and nail against the idea. They will give lip service to the idea of other changes, but they have one function and that is to look after their members. They are the enemy of real change. They are not the source of the problem, but they will protect the status quo.

 

Substantially they are the source of the problem because they seek to protect members as their number one objective. As far a lip service goes. There are contracts that state the protocols for disciplinary actions and terminations. Disagreements are sent to arbitration then the courts with the contracts interpretation not "lip service" the rule for interpretation.

7 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

There are laws requiring good faith negotiations with unions. It is fine to "not renew" an agreement, but you must negotiate a new one if that is what you want. Generally if a new agreement is not agreed upon the old one remains in force. Laws at the state level will be needed to bust those unions and even then there will be constitutional issues. That is why public service unions have not been banned by red state governments. They have protections.

The objective is not to "bust the union". Its to effect change in the behaviors of the officers on the streets. Together with the necessary changes when discipline fails in the interactions between LE and the public.

Its easier to change the behaviors of officers and their unions with the unions intact without trying to burn the whole house down. Furthermore as you and others have stated these LE unions are powerful. Historically changing union contracts starts with one and other unions will follow suit. That works when the side opposing unions has the stronger hand. Also when the unions have weaker hands. The airline industry's negotiations with pilots is a good example.

"Union Busting" is a pipe dream.

[gowlerk 1,902]

1 minute ago, Phil1111 said:

Substantially they are the source of the problem because they seek to protect members as their number one objective.

The source of the problem is far deeper than the police. Police racial attitudes are a reflection of societal attitudes. But that said the behavior of police should be controllable. We have allowed a certain amount of accountability as long as we feel safe and that most of us are not victims. Yes, we need disciplined police. But we also need deeper reforms.

[gowlerk 1,902]

5 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

I don't know of any police unions that are popular with the public in the US or Canada.

I merely said they are more popular than the politicians they are supposed to answer to. That is not a high bar.

[gowlerk 1,902]

6 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

The airline industry's negotiations with pilots is a good example.

The airline industry did not succeed in getting labour costs under control until deregulation happened. The police are still a public service monopoly. It is far easier for a politician to deal with the fallout of a bad contract than it is to deal with a police strike. Or rotating walkout, or whatever political pressure the union brings to bear.

[Phil1111 908]

1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

The source of the problem is far deeper than the police. Police racial attitudes are a reflection of societal attitudes. But that said the behavior of police should be controllable. We have allowed a certain amount of accountability as long as we feel safe and that most of us are not victims. Yes, we need disciplined police. But we also need deeper reforms.

I'd disagree on most of that. LE is where the rule of law meets the road. The attitudes of society aren't pulling the triggers. Rouge officers are.

One change at a time. Its hard enough negotiating new contracts let alone creating a new utopia of equality.

[Phil1111 908]

1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

The airline industry did not succeed in getting labour costs under control until deregulation happened. The police are still a public service monopoly. It is far easier for a politician to deal with the fallout of a bad contract than it is to deal with a police strike. Or rotating walkout, or whatever political pressure the union brings to bear.

Not true at all because deregulation only occurred in the US. Money loosing airlines led to increased flexibility, through new contracts with pilots and reduced wages for new pilots in the entire global market.

Furthermore deregulation didn't allow the old contracts to be ripped up. It allowed new airlines to fly new routes. Those new routes allowed competition with the old carriers that made their contracts noncompetitive.