iNow

Such as? I know New York has said that people from certain other states (like mine) must self-quarantine for 2 weeks upon arriving, but that’s not possible to enforce in any way. IMO, it’s a bit like putting the tag on the bottom of a mattress which says do not remove under penalty of law. I’ve removed tens of them and nobody was ever the wiser. I can also fly into any airport and walk right out the sliding doors into an Uber without so much as a temperature check. I can kayak from South Dakota into North Dakota and go into town and wander the streets going into and out of shops and food services as I see fit without any identification... and other countless similar examples. Given this, I’m unclear on the point your communicating. Did you have any specific restrictions in mind?

Also, the virus doesn’t recognize state borders. I can drive to any state from any state, so having one approach in Ohio that differs from the approach in Michigan is pretty dumb. National standards are the only way to do this right.

It sort of has to be. If the logistics are centralized at the federal level, who other than the WH would manage it? They’re the executive branch and consequently are responsible for executing national policies and programs.

This was a good article that speaks neatly to many of the same issues we’ve explored in this thread: We train police to be warriors — and then send them out to be social workers https://www.vox.com/2020/7/31/21334190/what-police-do-defund-abolish-police-reform-training More at the link. Agree / disagree? Anything you’ve found insightful or inciteful?

He was banned as a sock puppet of a previously banned member

I think it’s more of a “they all look the same to” vibe

More sad than funny, but sorry, Marco. Wrong black guy https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/07/18/sen-marco-rubio-mixes-up-john-lewis-elijah-cummings-tribute/5465516002/ Humiliating that he also made the pic of him with the wrong black guy his profile photo

You're raising a valid and sound / reasonable point overall, but the qualified immunity police enjoy due to the insane power the police unions have has prevented charges from being brought in 97% of all police killings between 2013 and 2019. I think maybe one cop went to jail during all those years. We've seen a few more go to jail this year in response to protests, but the number is still somewhere around 5 total. Hope you're not vacationing in Florida, mate 😎

This is not an accurate generalization. I always have my knife with me, and have guns in the home or when hunting / camping. Just can't have either at the airport or government building.

Okay, so basically item #3 above, with the new variable if “nighttime” included, and without the addition of police presence. Got it. Have you ever considered that some people are just scared of the dark and that this has little to do with actual danger? To be clear, I’m not suggesting things are perfectly safe nor that there aren’t real dangers, just that your claims are not as rooted in facts as you seem to think. You’re own biases are coloring your stance (and, in fairness, my biases do the same to me). Also, did you notice your Gallop survey didn’t ask how the presence of police... specifically the pretense of police with martial arts training and new non-lethal toys... would affect those feelings of being unsafe at nighttime walking down the street, yet that’s the argument you’re attempting to support with your survey link? Hell, sometimes I feel unsafe walking around the woods at night; and I promise you having a cop there wouldn’t make me feel any better. 😂 Then let me address this head on. More funding isn’t required for this. They already receive tons of funding and they could use it for more training in better ways already today. It doesn’t require new revenue injections to do what you propose. Hiring a sensei from the Cobra Kai dojo down the street to train some beat cops doesn’t require a ton of extra cash. Extra money also doesn’t equate to extra accountability, nor does extra training equate to extra discipline. It may help, but you’re building castles made of sand IMO if you think this will kill this weed at the root. I say this as a firm believer in the benefits of martial arts training and discipline. You’re advocating additional expenditures to already balance sheet bloated police departments, and that IMO is well intentioned, but misguided. If we’re to spend more money, the higher ROI very clearly comes from increased social services and engagement on the mental health side of this equation.

I know. It was an analogy. I’m stunningly bad at them so it’s unsurprising you missed it. The word you’re looking for is pedantic. Just to clarify, are you saying: 1) People CAN’T safely walk down the street without police present anywhere in all of the 50 US states 2) People CAN’T safely walk down the street without police present, but only in some areas 3) People FEEL LIKE they can’t walk safely down the street without police present anywhere in all of the 50 US states 4) People FEEL LIKE they can’t walk safely down the street without police present, but only in some areas 5) Violent crime data SUGGESTS people can’t walk down the street without police present anywhere in all of the 50 US states 6) Violent crime data SUGGESTS people can’t walk down the street without police present, but only in some areas 7) Something similar to one of the items above, but police presence isn’t the relevant variable Or... Something else? Asking because you said, “There will always be a need for police, especially in the current situation where citizens CAN'T safely walk down the street...” ... and you seemed to use it to argue that fewer police or fewer physical response options for them like new martial arts techniques or additional non lethal toys would lead to some sort of dystopian hellscape where we’re defending grandmas house with a spiked baseball bat and 50-cal.

You've shifted the goalposts, though. Your initial comment: "There will always be a need for police, especially in the current situation where citizens CAN'T safely walk down the street." You said, "citizens CAN'T safely walk down the street." When challenged, you submitted violent crime statistics. When challenged on those and asked what threshold of violent crime does/does not allow one to walk safely down a street, you shifted to "people FEEL unsafe." Okay, so what? Lots of racists "FEEL" unsafe when walking near a black person in the grocery store. That doesn't mean they ARE unsafe. Your original point was crap, and the updated moved goalposts version isn't much better. I agree with you that this is an unrealistic assumption. Where I think we may differ, however, is in the idea that every single cop in every single neighborhood and every single experience level needs to be armed and ready to deal with these folks at every second of every day, as opposed to specialized forces who are called in and only engaged in the rare situations where they're needed. I'm pretty sure police are not the primary thing preventing this from happening. Human nature is. Most humans are actually rather cooperative. There are clearly important exceptions, but a huge part of the reason our species has enjoyed success is our nature to help one another and our tendency to follow group norms. As I said, important (and regional) exceptions exist, but I struggle to accept your premise that police are the only thing stopping criminals from controlling others and driving us into a Mad Max dystopian hellscape. There. FTFY We seem to disagree in a fundamental way about human nature. This seems to drive most of our disagreements on the topic of policing. That's okay and you're clearly welcome to your opinion, just thought I'd point it out.

That doesn’t answer the question I asked. Violent crime rates are neither equivalent to not evidence of citizens being unable to walk safely down the street. Your hyperbole does a disservice to your otherwise reasonable points.

Wait, where is this happening exactly? I suspect the voices in your head mostly. There’s lots of opportunity to address inequality, but this is not the path... nor is this the thread. While I applaud your vigorous brother of the Marseillaise shtick, it’s totally off topic.

Can we please just agree that the risk from knives is not equivalent to the risk from firearms and move on from this silly tangent? Yes. Not perfect, but much better

Your higher critical functions can affect your more autonomous functions. Think of a fear or attractive loved one and your heart accelerates. Think of a gentle breeze or waves at the beach and your heart and related functions slow. I may not fully comprehend what you’re describing, but my first instinct is that this is not only common, but expected. Our thoughts and breathing have a tremendous impact on our physiology. It’s at the heart of meditation. Some of what happens within us occurs even absent executive control or higher critical intervention, but this does not mean these same processes cannot be influenced or affected or overridden by those higher processes. For example, you can consciously decide to hold your breath and stop breathing... but only to a point. Eventually, the more archaic reptilian parts of your brain will say, “hey idiot, stop that” and will take over so these processes persist even if you pass out. Honestly, this just sounds like you’re focusing on some things and noticing physiologist changes while you do that. Not really a big deal unless I’m totally missing what you’re trying to describe.

No. That’d perhaps make it easier to accept, though

I also take issue with the conflation of “lack of training” with “not enough funding.” There’s lots of money there already, it’s just not being applied to training.

My Trump supporting family members have already declared they’ll refuse the vaccine even if one becomes available, because freedom... or something. It’s not just the lack of leadership will and competence that’s an obstacle here, but ignorance and acceptance of anti-vax style propaganda

Please, my friend. Do not tempt the fates

I suspect your problem is with my use of the quantity “one”... lol

I agree, but is it equally unrealistic to suggest maybe not every single crime committed needs to be apprehended or enforced? Surely all of us have broken one law or another at some point in our lives and I suggest we’re better off as a whole for not being booked and prosecuted each time. “Each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve ever done.” ~Bryan Stevenson

First time interacting with dimreepr, eh?

Except, no. Even if I post as a full adherent to the stance YOU'VE personally been advocating... even then, AT BEST we could call them UNDER-trained. As we all know, however, they are NOT UNtrained, but the citizenry (as a general rule) very much are.