d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Minneapolis Cops
Prev1312313314315316326Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 53,552
Joined: Mar 6 2008
Gold: 1,908.33
Sep 23 2020 02:29pm
Quote (Saucisson6000 @ Sep 23 2020 04:07pm)
When Trickle down gone down syndrome.


As expected you are incapable of anything more than awkwardly parroting a strawman catch phrase.
An ignorant anti-intellectual that doesn't even know the bare minimum of an ideology you mock and dismiss.
Wholly pathetic.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Sep 23 2020 02:29pm
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
Sep 23 2020 02:30pm
Quote (cambovenzi @ 23 Sep 2020 22:29)
As expected you are incapable of anything more than awkwardly parroting a strawman catch phrase.
An ignorant anti-intellectual that doesn't even know the bare minimum of an ideology you mock and dismiss.
Wholly pathetic.


And you are hidding if we start to talk about ecosystems destruction.
Member
Posts: 93,001
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Sep 23 2020 02:32pm
Quote (cambovenzi @ Sep 23 2020 03:24pm)
Parroting leftist/BLM talking points and catch phrases that could be found on a teenage socialist's blog is not the sole libertarian position or even a good libertarian position.

A better one is supporting police reform (or more radical libertarian solutions) while simultaneously condemning the leftist riots that target and victimize innocent people and violate property rights.



You think that guy in your sig supports leftist riots and chants 'no justice no peace'? No way.

'The marginalized community' didn't tell anyone shit.
Various individuals said an array of different things, ranging from police reform to marxism and everything in between.
Defund the police w/o private replacements to let rioters and other criminals roam free, fraudulent racism narratives, and ending the nuclear family.

The idea that the request from the leftist mobs are clear, concise, uniform and valid and that people just aren't listening to their supposedly just demands is ridiculous, as is the idea that it would make rioting justified.

Some random guy or a random business isn't guilty of a police shooting. They aren't the government or the police.
Its immoral and against the core of libertarianism to target innocent people and their property, even if you think you have a justified problem with police.

Code
The non-aggression principle is an ethical stance which asserts that "aggression" is inherently illegitimate. "Aggression" is defined as the "initiation" of physical force against persons or property, the threat of such, or fraud upon persons or their property.


Its easy to identify the phony leftist core of the rioting. Fake and omnipresent racism claims and the pursuit of the abolition of capitalism are prominent themes.

Reforming qualified immunity isn't going to stop Marxist riots and to think otherwise is very naïve.

This isn't some intellectual justice movement.
Time and again violent criminals are glorified and the details are pushed under the rug and ignored to push false narratives.


i mean, i dont get why people take the bait of thinking "defund police" = get rid of police entirely.

its been said time and again that the movement is about demilitarizing police, and even suggested armored vehicle funding and the like could instead be spent on training for officers to de-escalate situations with non-lethal force.

but instead the few idiots who are literally calling for no police at all are focused on, this would be like calling wannabe 14 year old libertarians who just like the idea of no taxes the face of the party.
Member
Posts: 78,723
Joined: Nov 30 2008
Gold: 493.00
Sep 23 2020 02:38pm
Quote (Santara @ Sep 23 2020 04:26pm)
The elimination of qualified immunity. The requirement of professional liability insurance for cops, and a legal mandate that you cannot practice law enforcement without it.


Is this on any political candidates platform already? If so its just a matter of people voting for that candidate and the candidate following through?

This post was edited by duffman316 on Sep 23 2020 02:38pm
Member
Posts: 52,226
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
Sep 23 2020 02:41pm
Quote (cambovenzi @ Sep 23 2020 03:24pm)
Parroting leftist/BLM talking points and catch phrases that could be found on a teenage socialist's blog is not the sole libertarian position or even a good libertarian position.

A better one is supporting police reform (or more radical libertarian solutions) while simultaneously condemning the leftist riots that target and victimize innocent people and violate property rights.


Let's examine that though: know justice, know peace. No justice, no peace.

At the end of the day, the police no-knocked the wrong house on bad information, prompting the legitimate expression by the occupants of the right to self defense, to which the police fired a hail of bullets (and pretty indiscriminately based on the charge they were willing to file), killing one of the occupants. The police as a whole are no facing no criminal sanction for this. Honest question: has the victim (Breonna) gotten justice for what befell her?
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Sep 23 2020 02:41pm
Quote (bogie160 @ Sep 23 2020 12:36pm)
And big state authoritarians should be the angriest when state authority is shaken by small-minded, corrupt officials. But lawlessness and riots are just other forms of rot. Both require surgery.


I think for rioting, we need to understand why it happens. I agree that they should be arrested and what not but that doesn't really deter people if there are legitimate grievances that are ignored. I do think the vast majority of them are opportunist scumbags though.

We should always watch the watchmen. We give up our power in order to protect society and to ensure progress. If that's abused, that needs to be dealt with harshly. If the people don't have faith in institutions, we're dangerously close to anarchy.

People have lost faith in far too many institutions and it's up to us to hold them accountable and the institutions to reform. Failure to do so will lead to tragic consequences.
Member
Posts: 53,552
Joined: Mar 6 2008
Gold: 1,908.33
Sep 23 2020 02:41pm
Quote (thesnipa @ Sep 23 2020 04:32pm)
i mean, i dont get why people take the bait of thinking "defund police" = get rid of police entirely.

its been said time and again that the movement is about demilitarizing police, and even suggested armored vehicle funding and the like could instead be spent on training for officers to de-escalate situations with non-lethal force.

but instead the few idiots who are literally calling for no police at all are focused on, this would be like calling wannabe 14 year old libertarians who just like the idea of no taxes the face of the party.




John Oliver might have cucksplained that meaning of 'defund the police' to you, but that is not what it means to everyone who says it, and no its not just some 14 year old somewhere who thinks it means something beyond demilitarizing the police. Thats a poor attempt to reframe it into something more moderate and palatable to the average person.
There are numerous examples of people who support 'defunding the police' clarifying that isn't what they mean.

Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police
was published in the New York Times

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, it should be obvious the widespread violence and chants of 'fuck 12', "ACAB" and abolish / defund the police mean a little more than "I want moderate reform, don't actually defund them".

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Sep 23 2020 02:53pm
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Sep 23 2020 02:45pm
Quote (cambovenzi @ Sep 23 2020 01:41pm)
John Oliver might have cucksplained that meaning of 'defund the police to you', but that is not what it means to everyone who says it, and no its not just some 14 year old somewhere who thinks it means something beyond demilitarizing the police. Thats a poor attempt to reframe it into something more moderate and palatable to the average person.
There are numerous examples of people who 'defunding the police' clarifying that isn't what they mean.

Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police
was published in the New York Times

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, it should be obvious the widespread violence and chants of 'fuck 12', "ACAB" and abolish / defund the police mean a little more than "I want moderate reform, don't actually defund them".


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

I'm sure it's a spectrum. Regardless, it's an idiotic slogan but I'd expect nothing less from liberals.
Member
Posts: 52,226
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
Sep 23 2020 02:48pm
Quote (duffman316 @ Sep 23 2020 03:38pm)
Is this on any political candidates platform already? If so its just a matter of people voting for that candidate and the candidate following through?


Jo Jorgenson 2020
Member
Posts: 53,552
Joined: Mar 6 2008
Gold: 1,908.33
Sep 23 2020 02:58pm
Quote (Santara @ Sep 23 2020 04:41pm)
Let's examine that though: know justice, know peace. No justice, no peace.

At the end of the day, the police no-knocked the wrong house on bad information, prompting the legitimate expression by the occupants of the right to self defense, to which the police fired a hail of bullets (and pretty indiscriminately based on the charge they were willing to file), killing one of the occupants. The police as a whole are no facing no criminal sanction for this. Honest question: has the victim (Breonna) gotten justice for what befell her?


Wholly irrelevant to whether or not rioting and victimizing innocent people is justified and good. (or in accordance with libertarian principles)

My position is not that the police never act wrongfully or that the police are held sufficiently accountable.

But sure lets check in on the Breonna Taylor case.
The police raid that ended in the death of Breonna Taylor wasn't actually a no knock raid.
It wasn't the wrong house.
The criminal boyfriend opening fire on police probably wasn't justified or legitimate self defense.

Like I said, the facts get buried.
Even you got several things about the case wrong several months after the case was made famous and pushed to the forefront.

Her death was the unfortunate result of a shootout with police.
I don't know what 'justice' for her looks like in that case.
That doesn't mean we should be supporting perpetual leftist riots and parroting their talking points and rhetoric.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Sep 23 2020 03:04pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1312313314315316326Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll