Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
The Hong Kong situation needs some careful analysis I think. Whilst not being against the offer of citizenship to three million residents I do feel that this could supercharge populism. All we need is a Farage type figure exploiting the fears of " Red Wall" type members of the electorate for their own purposes and we could end up with a nasty situation. It appears quite similar to the Kenyan episode of the 1970's.

What must not be allowed to happen is the poorer and less well educated paying for this in terms of worse job prospects, housing and health care. The wealthier members of society must play their part.
 
Osvaldorama said:
That 'share of deaths' statistic is literally meaningless on its own. . He even says himself it includes war deaths, and there is less war going on now. Without a really in-depth analysis of American deaths, that graph is just a pretty picture.
Click to expand...

There are more American war deaths in the past twenty years than in the twenty preceding. By a considerable margin. 1981 - 2000 had a little over 500 combat deaths; 2001 - 2020 had more than ten times that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war

But if I take your general point that 'Police are all white supremacist and unsalvageable', you would think that American society was a horrendous place.

This simply not true, the very fact people are allowed to be out protesting in the first place - in the middle of a pandemic no less - shows that America is by no means a white supremacist totalitarian regime.
Click to expand...

Wow, they allow the most basic of civil rights. I mean, they'll beat you, tear gas and summarily arrest you for exercising that right, and the president will threaten extreme violence against you, but it's not totally outlawed. Neat!

Again, I mostly agree with the sentiment of what you're saying. But it just needs to be thought about very carefully. Police are an essential cog in a well-functioning society, and a bit of fear of doing the wrong thing is actually an essential thing to keep law & order.

The massive, massive majority of interactions between police and the community are peaceful. Defunding the police is likely throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Another question I would ask, honestly, how much are the community doing to prevent these sort of things happening. I fear that at this point it has become a catch-22 situation. Are people genuinely complying and trying to defuse situations, or has the 'f*ck the police' mentality exacerbated the issue massively? I've no idea, as I'm white and not dealing with these issues myself. But it's another thing worth thinking about
Click to expand...

I mean, I'd look at the situations and determine how much defusing needs to take place. In most of these violent interactions, there would be nothing to defuse if the police did not immediately escalate them. Exactly how much defusing needs to happen in "skinny kid listens to music while coming home from the store" until several police officers tackle them?

I'd also look at what "compliance" means to the police. In a lot of cases, it means that you are resisting, where 'resisting' means 'moving after the police have taken you to the ground', often for no reason. Now, on paper, that seems reasonable: it's in your best interests not to resist. Even if the police action is illegal, as a great many are. You cannot summarily tackle or arrest people; the 4th Amendment (which protects against unlawful search and seizure) is a thing. But given that your choice is generally to comply with an unlawful order or potentially be killed, you probably shouldn't stand on principle.

However, that means setting aside all of human nature, because the means by which the police attempt to get compliance guarantees resistance. They inflict pain in the hopes that it will cause the person to stop moving, and inflict more pain if it does not. That, my friend, is not how human beings work. When placed in extremely painful positions, human beings will try to relieve the discomfort. Especially placed in those positions for an extended duration.

If you doubt me, I'd suggest that you search out your local Brazilian jiu jitsu studio, and ask them to put you in a joint lock. Tell them that, any time that you struggle, they should increase the amount of pressure. Even if means damaging the joint. Obviously, they won't do it, because anyone with two grains of sense will know that it'll only end one way: with your arm ripped out of your socket. Yet this is precisely how the police try to compel people to be still. It's almost as if the cruelty is not incidental.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: davecg69
Schad said:
There are more American war deaths in the past twenty years than in the twenty preceding. By a considerable margin. 1981 - 2000 had a little over 500 combat deaths; 2001 - 2020 had more than ten times that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war
Click to expand...

Fair enough - that is really bad in context. Honestly, until gun laws, racism and wealth inequality are addressed, America will continue to see more shocking stats.

Wow, they allow the most basic of civil rights. I mean, they'll beat you, tear gas and summarily arrest you for exercising that right, and the president will threaten extreme violence against you, but it's not totally outlawed. Neat!
Click to expand...

Come on, setting up autonomous zones, burning down buildings, even being allowed to protest and vent frustrations during a global pandemic. Its hardly China is it. It's an extremely volatile situation, with people actively trying to make all cops look as bad as possible.

Trump did also condemn the George Floyd death, and said he'd look into it... I know you can't trust a word he says, but it is worth pointing out.

I mean, I'd look at the situations and determine how much defusing needs to take place. In most of these violent interactions, there would be nothing to defuse if the police did not immediately escalate them. Exactly how much defusing needs to happen in "skinny kid listens to music while coming home from the store" until several police officers tackle them?

I'd also look at what "compliance" means to the police. In a lot of cases, it means that you are resisting, where 'resisting' means 'moving after the police have taken you to the ground', often for no reason. Now, on paper, that seems reasonable: it's in your best interests not to resist. Even if the police action is illegal, as a great many are. You cannot summarily tackle or arrest people; the 4th Amendment (which protects against unlawful search and seizure) is a thing. But given that your choice is generally to comply with an unlawful order or potentially be killed, you probably shouldn't stand on principle.

However, that means setting aside all of human nature, because the means by which the police attempt to get compliance guarantees resistance. They inflict pain in the hopes that it will cause the person to stop moving, and inflict more pain if it does not. That, my friend, is not how human beings work. When placed in extremely painful positions, human beings will try to relieve the discomfort. Especially placed in those positions for an extended duration.

If you doubt me, I'd suggest that you search out your local Brazilian jiu jitsu studio, and ask them to put you in a joint lock. Tell them that, any time that you struggle, they should increase the amount of pressure. Even if means damaging the joint. Obviously, they won't do it, because anyone with two grains of sense will know that it'll only end one way: with your arm ripped out of your socket. Yet this is precisely how the police try to compel people to be still. It's almost as if the cruelty is not incidental.
Click to expand...

I have actually done a couple of BJJ classes, so i know what you mean when you say it's brutal <laugh>. All I will say is it has to be taken on a case by case basis, and both the community and the police have to be held accountable properly, without witch hunts and without making people fear for their lives and/or their careers.

I really hope someone can come up with a solution to these issues that will appease everyone. It's really not hard to treat everyone equally regardless of race/gender/anything and it boggles my mind that we are still having to talk about this stuff.

I saw earlier that 8.3 million guns have been sold in America since March. Yikes.
 
Osvaldorama said:
I have actually done a couple of BJJ classes, so i know what you mean when you say it's brutal <laugh>. All I will say is it has to be taken on a case by case basis, and both the community and the police have to be held accountable properly, without witch hunts and without making people fear for their lives and/or their careers.

I really hope someone can come up with a solution to these issues that will appease everyone. It's really not hard to treat everyone equally regardless of race/gender/anything and it boggles my mind that we are still having to talk about this stuff.
Click to expand...

But if an organization consistently, over the course of a century, demonstrates that it's fundamentally incapable of treating everyone equally, routinely violates the civil rights of the populace, kills an ever-escalating number of people that dwarfs that of other countries (for every 1 person killed by UK police in 2018-2019, US police killed more than 500), and responds with open hostility to the notion that any reform is necessary, at what point do we admit that marginal reform isn't going to cut it? Because if this was any other group, if not for the veneration of authority and uniform, it would have been destroyed root and branch decades ago. Policing agencies in their current form in the United States do not make things more safe, they make things less safe. They have such a perverse culture that a significant portion of the population will not call them under any circumstances, because the risks of them utilizing force against the wrong person are too high. Like when a black shop-owner called police to report a white shoplifter; they broke the shop-owner's jaw and arrested him, while letting the shoplifter go, and the police department defended their actions:

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/na...0200609-x6mk4vwfkvhe3bzvw2rn2gakya-story.html

That **** happens all the damned time. Police treat most black people as inherently dangerous, and default to the belief that they are the perpetrator at any scene, and preemptively apply force. To be black and in the presence of police is to have your life endangered by any wrong move (or perceived wrong move). That is not upholding the peace; for a large portion of the American populace, there is no greater threat to their well-being than a police interaction, even if you were the victim of a crime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davecg69
Schad said:
But if an organization consistently, over the course of a century, demonstrates that it's fundamentally incapable of treating everyone equally, routinely violates the civil rights of the populace, kills an ever-escalating number of people that dwarfs that of other countries (for every 1 person killed by UK police in 2018-2019, US police killed more than 500), and responds with open hostility to the notion that any reform is necessary, at what point do we admit that marginal reform isn't going to cut it? Because if this was any other group, if not for the veneration of authority and uniform, it would have been destroyed root and branch decades ago. Policing agencies in their current form in the United States do not make things more safe, they make things less safe. They have such a perverse culture that a significant portion of the population will not call them under any circumstances, because the risks of them utilizing force against the wrong person are too high. Like when a black shop-owner called police to report a white shoplifter; they broke the shop-owner's jaw and arrested him, while letting the shoplifter go, and the police department defended their actions:

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/na...0200609-x6mk4vwfkvhe3bzvw2rn2gakya-story.html

That **** happens all the damned time. Police treat most black people as inherently dangerous, and default to the belief that they are the perpetrator at any scene, and preemptively apply force. To be black and in the presence of police is to have your life endangered by any wrong move (or perceived wrong move). That is not upholding the peace; for a large portion of the American populace, there is no greater threat to their well-being than a police interaction, even if you were the victim of a crime.
Click to expand...


Again, the situation is grim but if you reduce the argument to 'do we need a police force' the answer is an obvious yes.

So you have to accept and keep working some of the issues in the hope of keeping the majority peaceful.

Look at the Chaz, in less than a few weeks, the 'peaceful security team' alrrady murdered two black teenagers.

If the choice is violent police force or total societal anarchy and breakdown (which it cutrently is) - the only answer is to try and make the police better.

That state where you said they reformed the police - will Trump honestly do that everywhere? Not a chance.
 
Osvaldorama said:
Again, the situation is grim but if you reduce the argument to 'do we need a police force' the answer is an obvious yes.
Click to expand...

Almost no one is suggesting that there be no police forces. Certainly no one in any position of authority, either in politics or in the BLM movement.

What needs to happen is the abolition of police forces as currently constituted. The current police agencies have demonstrated that they simply will not reform; start fresh, with agencies with much more limited scope, far different training, and without the giant bloody arsenals. Throwing more money at police has made the problem worse; it's time for a different approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: claytonsaint
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article243932047.html

The officers’ conduct was revealed in hours of footage provided by the Fort Lauderdale Police Department in response to a Miami Herald public records request. The footage bolsters protesters’ accounts that police aggression sparked the first documented confrontation between police and protesters.

Marchers hurled plastic water bottles after Officer Steven Pohorence rushed into a crowd of protesters and pushed a kneeling woman in the head. Police responded with a round of tear gas. Still, body camera footage shows that even after that, protesters quickly moved to reestablish peace.

“Please I am begging you, we’re peaceful,” one man can be heard yelling.

“Do you see this?” another man asked to the line of riot police pointing to the protesters taking a knee in the street. “We are going to stop this. We are going to be the generation that brings peace.”

After a few tense minutes, video shows police started to throw tear gas at the group again. Within 15 minutes of Pohorence shoving the woman, Baro had emptied his six-chamber rubber bullet launcher and had to reload, he can be heard saying in his body camera video. (Pohorence was charged with misdemeanor battery on Tuesday.)
Click to expand...

Note that this came to light in no small part because the officers forgot to 'accidentally' turn off their bodycams as they thought they had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shoot_spiderman
Osvaldorama said:
Yep fully agree. We must all strive to make society more equal in terms of opportunity where we can.

But I do find it interesting to watch people on twitter who claim to be liberal, twisting views and cancelling people with different opinions.

For example, Terry Crews tweeted 'we must ensure [HASHTAG]#blacklivesmatter[/HASHTAG] doesn't turn into #blacklivesbetter' - and is now getting an absolute barrage of abuse from the BLM twittersphere.

To me, those that are abusing him for this sentiment are as racist/narrowminded as the people they are so angry about. There is a lot of hypocrisy out there at the moment.
Click to expand...


Twitter is full of arseholes, of every persuasion. Where does all that hate come from? Social Media is a cesspit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shoot_spiderman and Osvaldorama
Schad said:
I'd also strongly suggest that you learn what "Defund the Police" means. Hint: it's not "there should be no police" .
Click to expand...


David Cameron and Theresa May defunded the police in the U.K. Now Boris Johnson and the Tory press are blaming Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan for the exponential rise in knife crime in London.

“Defund the Police” may mean something other than “cut funding to the Police”, but from this side of the Atlantic, it’s a ******ed slogan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Osvaldorama
Archers Road said:
David Cameron and Theresa May defunded the police in the U.K. Now Boris Johnson and the Tory press are blaming Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan for the exponential rise in knife crime in London.

“Defund the Police” may mean something other than “cut funding to the Police”, but from this side of the Atlantic, it’s a ******ed slogan.
Click to expand...

Yet the casualty of austerity that had the greatest impact is exactly the sort of thing that BLM sorts are calling for:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-48208208

In 2004, Mr Dawes - then a police detective - was tasked with setting up a unit that would mediate conflicts and stop them from becoming deadly.

Mr Dawes helped pioneer a new approach to combating serious violence in the wake of the killing of teenagers Charlene Ellis and Letisha Shakespeare, who were gunned down in a drive-by shooting as they left a party in Birmingham in the early hours of 2 January 2003.

They were the innocent victims of a dispute between two notorious gangs in the city.

Drawing on conflict resolution tactics used to defuse disputes in Northern Ireland and among gangs in the US, Mr Dawes worked with trained mediators as part of a body called Birmingham Reducing Gang Violence (BRGV).

They shuttled between feuding groups, finding ways to settle conflict without violence.

It seemed to work: Mr Dawes says there were 27 gang-related murders in 2004. By 2010 there were three.

Then the scheme was scrapped.

By the end, he says, the 35 trained mediators, who specialised in sitting face-to-face with possible killers, were being asked to work on a zero-hours contract.

"The catalyst for that was austerity," Mr Dawes says now. "The draconian way in which money was taken away from community organisations has led to where we are now."
Click to expand...

Research published last week found that councils with large cuts to youth services were more likely to have seen an increase in knife crime.
Click to expand...

These sorts of programs are precisely what is needed. Not more random traffic stops. Not heavier weaponry. Not more violence as a prophylactic. But most activists do not believe that police departments steeped in idiotic warrior culture are capable of running such programs, either. Hence the desire to redirect money from police departments to separate agency that would take on some of the tasks currently undertaken by the police.

And THAT is what 'defund the police' means. Take the money currently being used on bloated police budgets, which have little demonstrated effect on crime, and spend that money on the forms of community engagement that have proven time and again to prevent crime from happening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schrodinger's Cat, MIsaints, shoot_spiderman and 2 others
Unfortunately, I just cannot see it happening. Least of all in America, a country that still has the death penalty in some states.

Fox news would twist it into 'going easy on criminals' etc. and it would cause outrage to republicans. Its a nice idea, but this is the country that voted to build a wall and MAGA.

People don't like to think of criminals as people that can be reformed, they always jump straight to 'PUNISH THEM'.
 
Osvaldorama said:
The systemic problems have nothing to do with this issue though. This is two people feeling very scared of a load of people trespassing on their property.

But on to your point; in the whole of america, how many blacks were killed by white cops last year.... Drum roll.... Eleven.

Look, I am for Black Lives Matter, in politics I lean to the left, and I believe there is a racism issue in America. This needs to be looked into with as much urgency as possible.

BUT defending property and property rights is literally the foundation of society. You cant ignore the laws and threaten innocent people in their homes, or you are worse than the cops youre protesting about.

And to suggest people dont have a right to defend their property is starting down the path toward communism, and communism killed way more people than facism in the last century.

So what I'm saying is we have to be very careful to look at all the facts, instead of judging each situation with RAGING EMOTIONS.

The truth, is that the majority of humans of ALL backgrounds are good people, that care about each other. Unfortunately everyone is too busy trying to score points and use every situation to cancel everyone else.
Click to expand...

Eleven?

Number of people shot to death by the police in the United States from 2017 to 2020, by race

2017 2018 2019 2020*
White 457 399 370 204
Black 223 209 235 105
Hispanic 179 148 158 66
Other 44 36 39 15
Unknown 84 204 202 116


 
shoot_spiderman said:
Eleven?

Number of people shot to death by the police in the United States from 2017 to 2020, by race

2017 2018 2019 2020*
White 457 399 370 204
Black 223 209 235 105
Hispanic 179 148 158 66
Other 44 36 39 15
Unknown 84 204 202 116

Click to expand...

Yeah, i said earlier I got the figures wrong.

I got the info from a podcast, which was talking about the killing of unarmed black people, not black people in general. The real number is 25 unarmed black people were killed in 2019.

Although that 25 are those just shot by police, not killed by choking etc. like George Floyd.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5322455002

25 is a lot. It's too much. But in a country with that much violent crime, surely a certain percentage altercations will be expected to go badly?

There have also been a range of scientific studies that show systemic racism isnt a problem, according to the wall street journal:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism-11591119883

Personally, I believe the black community that say there is a big problem. But it is very diffucult to actually know, unless youre there.

Thats why I say we have to be very careful when making big decisions about changing Police policy.
 
Osvaldorama said:
Yeah, i said earlier I got the figures wrong.

I got the info from a podcast, which was talking about the killing of unarmed black people, not black people in general. The real number is 25 unarmed black people were killed in 2019.

Although that 25 are those just shot by police, not killed by choking etc. like George Floyd.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5322455002

25 is a lot. It's too much. But in a country with that much violent crime, surely a certain percentage altercations will be expected to go badly?

There have also been a range of scientific studies that show systemic racism isnt a problem, according to the wall street journal:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism-11591119883

Personally, I believe the black community that say there is a big problem. But it is very diffucult to actually know, unless youre there.

Thats why I say we have to be very careful when making big decisions about changing Police policy.
Click to expand...

I was catching up

I’m not sure how “there” I need to be, this is an impossible test to pass
There is a big problem, how can you not believe that?
Very easy to get drawn into ALM thinking
If it’s not systemic then clearly many police officers are psychopaths and that needs a solution
Except they then get protected by the system, you know, the one that isn’t racist
 
Osvaldorama said:
Yeah, i said earlier I got the figures wrong.

I got the info from a podcast, which was talking about the killing of unarmed black people, not black people in general. The real number is 25 unarmed black people were killed in 2019.

Although that 25 are those just shot by police, not killed by choking etc. like George Floyd.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5322455002

25 is a lot. It's too much. But in a country with that much violent crime, surely a certain percentage altercations will be expected to go badly?

There have also been a range of scientific studies that show systemic racism isnt a problem, according to the wall street journal:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism-11591119883

Personally, I believe the black community that say there is a big problem. But it is very diffucult to actually know, unless youre there.

Thats why I say we have to be very careful when making big decisions about changing Police policy.
Click to expand...

Another point, ‘armed’ in the UK very different from ‘armed’ in the US where so many people carry guns
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back