gowlerk 1,912 #76 June 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, Phil1111 said: 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. Ummm.....yes, and several legacy carriers failed. Deregulation happened here at roughly the same time as in the US. There were no money losing airlines before deregulation. That's what regulation was, protected markets leading to a guaranteed profit. Which lead to inflated labour agreements, which in turn led to failed carriers when the protections were removed. But the real point I'm making is that private airlines and public services are completely different in nature. Society can handle turmoil in the airline industry as an inconvenience. Turmoil in the police is far more concerning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 910 #77 June 18, 2020 Just now, gowlerk said: Ummm.....yes, and several legacy carriers failed. Deregulation happened here at roughly the same time as in the US. There were no money losing airlines before deregulation. Ask Warren Buffet about that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #78 June 18, 2020 1 hour ago, gowlerk said: Count me in. We clearly need police. But we need the police to be less of a military operation. I'm pretty sure that is the majority sentiment here. I'm on board with that. Where do we draw the line? What metrics do we use? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #79 June 18, 2020 1 hour ago, Phil1111 said: 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. We seem to be agreeing more, Phil. I agree with the first part 100%. Its not the society that I'm a part of that is condoning this and protecting the officers that are bad eggs. I don't know if I agree that the reality reflects your views on the unions though. I think that even if the unions are chopped in half power wise, I fear that they would still have the potential to become worse in the long run. It might be better to start with a clean slate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timski 80 #80 June 18, 2020 On 6/16/2020 at 8:46 AM, turtlespeed said: I think a big first step is not discharging a Fire Arm. I don't know if it is possible to effectively retrain the existing forces to not fire, unless there is absolutely no other choice. a novel solution: take the guns away. They get away with it in the UK right? Yes, obviously there will be highly trained teams with heavily armed dudes because, well, Merica. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #81 June 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, timski said: a novel solution: take the guns away. They get away with it in the UK right? Yes, obviously there will be highly trained teams with heavily armed dudes because, well, Merica. That doesn't really work when a good portion of the criminals, that don't care about the law, are armed and just shoot them. High percentage scenario? Not really. What is the acceptable rate of unarmed cops being shot? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timski 80 #82 June 18, 2020 1 minute ago, turtlespeed said: That doesn't really work when a good portion of the criminals, that don't care about the law, are armed and just shoot them. High percentage scenario? Not really. What is the acceptable rate of unarmed cops being shot? We all know there is no hard and fast fix. This will take some considerable time to gain the trust of the general public. IMO the entire police model will have to be transformed. And yes, that starts with cops walking the streets unarmed. ALSO the entire jail system and how we deal with violent/non violent criminal needs serious addressing... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #83 June 18, 2020 37 minutes ago, turtlespeed said: That doesn't really work when a good portion of the criminals, that don't care about the law, are armed and just shoot them. High percentage scenario? Not really. What is the acceptable rate of unarmed cops being shot? If it's the same as the rate of armed cops being shot, then it's worth it. If it's lower than the rate of armed cops being shot, then go for it as quickly as possible. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #84 June 18, 2020 You'll have a very difficult time hiring police who are not allowed to be armed. What is needed is more training and a more thorough psychological review. Also, getting rid of the mechanism that protects them in these situations. I'm wondering if you need to match the race of cops assigned to an area with the racial makeup of said area. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,254 #85 June 18, 2020 24 minutes ago, airdvr said: You'll have a very difficult time hiring police who are not allowed to be armed. What is needed is more training and a more thorough psychological review. Also, getting rid of the mechanism that protects them in these situations. I'm not sure about that either. Sounds more like overhauls of hiring, training and general philosophy is more the issue. You have other police forces which are always armed who don't shoot many people at all, and other forces like the UK where only a small amount of specialist units are armed but still make some high profile fuck ups. Quote I'm wondering if you need to match the race of cops assigned to an area with the racial makeup of said area. Aside from the issue of introducing purely racist hiring practices to solve racism, racial makeups are not homogenous. How does it help anyone in the minority if a predominantly white town is only allowed to hire white policemen? I don't know for sure if that's absolutely the worst idea I've ever heard, but I can't say that any other contenders are springing to mind right now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,053 #86 June 18, 2020 5 hours ago, Phil1111 said: The emphasis on community policing to deal with drugs, gangs and other local issues are most important. I don't know how it is where you are, but around here they show up with black fatigues with large white lettering "Gang Task Unit." Cause you know, nothing says I'm here to help more than - I'm here and you must be in a gang. Several states have passed an Anti-motorcycle Profiling Bill - “The primary responsibility of this legislation is to help manage and improve the relationship between law enforcement and the citizenry,” Heider said. “Profiling is unconstitutional. The principles have been established judicially, so codifying these principles legislatively ... clarifies, strengthens and solidifies these concepts.” https://apnews.com/d40ba23c87f942468fc8a029c036f634#:~:text=In December 2018%2C the U.S.,— period%2C” Anderst said. So my questions are these: 1. Why in the fuck does it need to be for motorcycles specifically. 2. Why can't it be anti-profiling - period. 3. Why in the hell do we need laws to prevent profiling AT ALL. The cops really need to be told this?!?!? <Bigun steps off his soapbox> 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,912 #87 June 18, 2020 37 minutes ago, airdvr said: You'll have a very difficult time hiring police who are not allowed to be armed. In a society filled with as many killing machines as the USA unarmed police would be ineffective. It wouldn't even work in Canada. It only works where there is effective restrictions on weapons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistercwood 287 #88 June 19, 2020 (edited) 50 minutes ago, airdvr said: You'll have a very difficult time hiring police who are not allowed to be armed. What is needed is more training and a more thorough psychological review. Also, getting rid of the mechanism that protects them in these situations. I'm wondering if you need to match the race of cops assigned to an area with the racial makeup of said area. I believe they tried racial match-ups in the past and it didn't really have any sway on outcomes. The issue seems to be policing attitudes and priorities still, and the lack of true accountability when things go bad. EDIT: Also agreed on the arming thing, I don't think that's a suitable model for the US. Definitely demilitarise the uniforms/gear though. Edited June 19, 2020 by mistercwood Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,340 #89 June 19, 2020 4 hours 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. Here in Wisconsin, the then-Governor shoved legislation through that took away the ability of civil servants to collectively bargain. Essentially shutting down the public sector unions... For everything but police & fire. He did this as one of his first legislative actions in office, yet had never mentioned it during his campaign. The backlash was pretty significant. He was recalled, but survived the recall election and served out his term. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,048 #90 June 19, 2020 58 minutes ago, BIGUN said: I don't know how it is where you are, but around here they show up with black fatigues with large white lettering "Gang Task Unit." Cause you know, nothing says I'm here to help more than - I'm here and you must be in a gang. Several states have passed an Anti-motorcycle Profiling Bill - “The primary responsibility of this legislation is to help manage and improve the relationship between law enforcement and the citizenry,” Heider said. “Profiling is unconstitutional. The principles have been established judicially, so codifying these principles legislatively ... clarifies, strengthens and solidifies these concepts.” https://apnews.com/d40ba23c87f942468fc8a029c036f634#:~:text=In December 2018%2C the U.S.,— period%2C” Anderst said. So my questions are these: 1. Why in the fuck does it need to be for motorcycles specifically. 2. Why can't it be anti-profiling - period. 3. Why in the hell do we need laws to prevent profiling AT ALL. The cops really need to be told this?!?!? <Bigun steps off his soapbox> Hi Keith, Re: '<Bigun steps off his soapbox>' As much as I disagree with you on a number of issues, you stay right up there and continue to keep on keeping on. Jerry Baumchen PS) “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #91 June 19, 2020 16 hours ago, airdvr said: You'll have a very difficult time hiring police who are not allowed to be armed. Good! You'll have to pay them more - and end up with a higher quality police force. Law enforcement will go from a job people do who can't get other jobs to a job people are willing to train and prepare for. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #92 June 19, 2020 Dear Biggun, Police near my home town profiled ... er ... banned motorcycles from main street for good reason. For the last half-century, certain groups of motorcycle enthusiasts who prefer not to be mentioned in public dominated the drug and prostitution business in the Province of Quebec. Different groups killed each other and even killed rogue members of their own gangs. One group bought a club house near where the city limits of my home town abutted the city limits of a neighbouring city. There was only one road (paralleling a river and railway line and a steep wooded hillside) between the two towns, so police banned motorcycles from Wellington Street. When I unintentionally violated that law, a city police constable politely told me about the law and suggested a route off Wellington Street. He did not hassle me because my cafe racer had out-of-province license plates and did not even vaguely resemble the rides preferred criminal motorcycle gangs. Since I was clearly from out-of-province, he even talked to me in English. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #93 June 19, 2020 Poverty has always been against the law. Stereotyping one skin colour - as more likely to be poor and criminal - On 12/2/2019 at 7:09 AM, turtlespeed said: Those facts don't mean anything when you are all worked up about Trump. is a lazy cops' way of identifying criminals. OTOH profiling potential criminals by listening to them, noticing their clothing, the type of car they drive, driving habits, work history, drinking habits, smoking habits, drug habits, wife-beating habits, daily habits, associates, fancy hand-shakes, etc. takes weeks or months of careful observation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,053 #94 June 19, 2020 1 hour ago, riggerrob said: When I unintentionally violated that law, a city police constable politely told me about the law and suggested a route off Wellington Street. He did not hassle me because my cafe racer had out-of-province license plates and did not even vaguely resemble the rides preferred criminal motorcycle gangs. Since I was clearly from out-of-province, he even talked to me in English. Afternoon Rob. I'm glad it went well. For those of us who ride the traditional biker's bike; I can't say it "mostly" goes that way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #95 June 19, 2020 21 hours ago, turtlespeed said: That doesn't really work when a good portion of the criminals, that don't care about the law, are armed and just shoot them. High percentage scenario? Not really. What is the acceptable rate of unarmed cops being shot? Quite a quandary we have ourselves in with these lax gun laws, huh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #96 June 19, 2020 22 hours ago, turtlespeed said: That doesn't really work when a good portion of the criminals, that don't care about the law, are armed and just shoot them. High percentage scenario? Not really. What is the acceptable rate of unarmed cops being shot? In the UK where the vast majority of cops are unarmed, very few get shot (3 in the last 10 years). One fatality by stabbing in that time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #97 June 20, 2020 On 6/19/2020 at 3:14 PM, kallend said: In the UK where the vast majority of cops are unarmed, very few get shot (3 in the last 10 years). One fatality by stabbing in that time. I guess their criminals are less violent then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bigfalls 110 #98 June 21, 2020 On 6/18/2020 at 4:51 PM, turtlespeed said: I'm pretty sure that is the majority sentiment here. I'm on board with that. Where do we draw the line? What metrics do we use? This came to me the other day. Soldiers go through basic training and one of the things they learn is to kill people. Not many have chance to do that this day and age. The leave the military and become police officers and are itching to shoot someone because that is what they were trained to do and didn't have a chance. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,340 #99 June 21, 2020 (edited) 49 minutes ago, Bigfalls said: This came to me the other day. Soldiers go through basic training and one of the things they learn is to kill people. Not many have chance to do that this day and age. The leave the military and become police officers and are itching to shoot someone because that is what they were trained to do and didn't have a chance. Not exactly true. Given the activities in Iraq & Afghanistan in the past 17 years, I would suspect we have more combat veterans on the street (not just ones who are cops, too) who have actually killed in battle than any time since the mid 70s. Does that mean that those who become cops have killed people and want to do it again? Maybe. I don't know. Edited June 21, 2020 by wolfriverjoe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #100 June 21, 2020 11 hours ago, Bigfalls said: This came to me the other day. Soldiers go through basic training and one of the things they learn is to kill people. Not many have chance to do that this day and age. The leave the military and become police officers and are itching to shoot someone because that is what they were trained to do and didn't have a chance. Arlo Guthrie . . . I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I want to kill! I want to seeBlood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth! Eat dead, burnt bodies! IMean Kill. Kill!" And I started jumpin' up and down, yellin' "KILL! Kill!" and he startedJumpin' up and down with me, and we was both jumpin' up and down, yellin'"Kill! Kill! Kill! Kill!" and the sergeant came over, pinned a medal on meSent me down the hall, said "You're our boy". I love that song - every once in a while . . . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites