African-American Asphyxiated by Police in Minneapolis - Page 161 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15107142
@wat0n

1. What is your argument here? It seems like you are against any change or budget cuts to police whatsoever.

2. I am not interested in your speculations about how it might be applicable. I have explained the two reasons why it would be illogical to assume that the same thing can happen in NA.

3. Are you arguing that cops need to be paid more? Despite the fact that they already get paid record high amounts, budegts always increase, but performance does not? Is that the point?

————————

@Unthinking Majority

The numbers are wrong. I cna think of two unarmed black men killed by white police in October alone.

—————————-

@Wulfschilde

What is your argument?
#15107149
Pants-of-dog wrote:@Unthinking Majority

The numbers are wrong. I cna think of two unarmed black men killed by white police in October alone.

Read the stats I posted again: 14 unarmed black men were shot dead by cops in 2019. Of those 14, 5 of them were not attacking cops at the time, and of those 5, 2 were killed by white cops.

If you have evidence to the contrary, provide it.
#15107151
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

1. What is your argument here? It seems like you are against any change or budget cuts to police whatsoever.


My argument is that if you want to improve policing, it seems unlikely that defunding is the way to go since some investment would be necessary to that effect according to the experts cited in the article you posted yourself

Pants-of-dog wrote:2. I am not interested in your speculations about how it might be applicable. I have explained the two reasons why it would be illogical to assume that the same thing can happen in NA.


And I questioned them, since they are completely speculative - just like your proposal to defund the police to decrease crime. The paper compares between blocks in the same city (in fact, in the same neighborhood) so the comparisons themselves would not be out of place.

Pants-of-dog wrote:3. Are you arguing that cops need to be paid more? Despite the fact that they already get paid record high amounts, budegts always increase, but performance does not? Is that the point?


No, see my answer to your point 1 above among many others. I have explained it many times already.
#15107152
Unthinking Majority wrote:Read the stats I posted again: 14 unarmed black men were shot dead by cops in 2019. Of those 14, 5 of them were not attacking cops at the time, and of those 5, 2 were killed by white cops.

If you have evidence to the contrary, provide it.


You did not present evidence. You just posted a single link.

Elijah McClain is one unarmed black man killed by white cops.

Nekiylo Dawayne Graves is another.

Dennis Wayne Tuttle was armed, but since cops broke into his home and started shooting without identifying themselves, it is hard to justify this one.

D'Ettrick Griffin is another.

So we have at least three unarmed black men killed by police, Your numbers say two.

Note that I am only looking at the first few weeks of 2019 with the exception of Elijah McClain.

—————————-

@wat0n

1. I do not want to improve policing. I want to abolish it.

2. Your belief that this study is relevant is entirely speculative.

3. Please clarify your argument. If your argument is that more cops equals less crime, we have seen that the evidence for that is weak.
#15107155
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

1. I do not want to improve policing. I want to abolish it.


Good luck on enforcing the law with no sorts of policing.

The KKK activates itself once again? Sorry African Americans, you are on your own.

Do you want to tax people to pay for social programs? Tax law isn't enforced anymore since policing has been abolished, too bad for you if you are poor.

Foreign powers meddle in your communist island in the Caribbean? Ooops, too bad, the police can't engage in counterespionage because it has been abolished too (oh wait, I assume this only applies to the US, right? Nevermind if Cuban police routinely arrest and fry dissidents' balls with electricity while doing their thing).

:roll:

Pants-of-dog wrote:2. Your belief that this study is relevant is entirely speculative.


The relevance of a study suggesting police presence deters crime when wondering if policing helps to stop crime is "entirely speculative"? :eh:

Pants-of-dog wrote:3. Please clarify your argument. If your argument is that more cops equals less crime, we have seen that the evidence for that is weak.


My argument is that defunding the police is a bad idea, among other reasons, because investment is required to improve on it. Also, increasing funding for the police is not the same as having more cops in the streets. Staffing consultants are not cheap.

Do you have any cases where defunding the police was preceded by decreases in crime rather than the other way around? Just to know if you have any facts to possibly stand on here.
#15107157
@wat0n

1. I never claimed I was aim8ng for total anarchy, so strawman.
The KKK and other racist far right groups have almost certainly infiltrated police and probably avoid being policed for this reason. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/fbi ... nforcement
Police do not enforce tax law.
Cuba is a whataboutism.

2. Your insistence that it helps understand violent crime in NA is speculation.

3. provide evidence that giving cops more money will reduce police brutality and killings.
#15107161
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

1. I never claimed I was aim8ng for total anarchy, so strawman.


Abolishing policing (your term here) leads to exactly that.

Pants-of-dog wrote:The KKK and other racist far right groups have almost certainly infiltrated police and probably avoid being policed for this reason. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/fbi ... nforcement


And yet it is also the police which has helped stop KKK activity, particularly in arresting KKK muderers, regardless of the feelings of some officers.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Police do not enforce tax law.


Who arrest tax dodgers?

Pants-of-dog wrote:Cuba is a whataboutism.


Not really, I'm simply showing the absurdity of your position and the hypocrisy behind your moral posturing.

Pants-of-dog wrote:2. Your insistence that it helps understand violent crime in NA is speculation.


Why? You still haven't explained why police presence would deter Argentinians yet not Americans.

Pants-of-dog wrote:3. provide evidence that giving cops more money will reduce police brutality and killings.


I did not claim that. I said (and this is from the article you posted yourself) that it is necessary to improve their deployment to better reduce criminality - which is obviously a form of better policing.

I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence of any defunding of police that preceded a reduction in crime. Note that this is a rather lax standard, if you find examples we can assess whether there is a causal relationship between both.
#15107162
@wat0n

1, No, abolishing the police does not lead to total anarchy.

2, A Gish gallop is a debating technique where one person throws out a large number of arguments (true or not, unsupported or not) to overwhelm the other. You took three comments and turned it into seven different ways of attacking me or my position. I am not going to address all of them, especially since I already have addressed many of them. Please pick one argument or two and I will be happy to address those. If not, please understand why I will choose to only address those that I think are relevant, not fallacious or personal attacks, and have not already been addressed.
#15107165
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

1, No, abolishing the police does not lead to total anarchy.


How would law enforcement work under your proposal? If, say, a wealthy person doesn't want to pay taxes, how do you enforce tax law?

Pants-of-dog wrote:2, A Gish gallop is a debating technique where one person throws out a large number of arguments (true or not, unsupported or not) to overwhelm the other. You took three comments and turned it into seven different ways of attacking me or my position. I am not going to address all of them, especially since I already have addressed many of them. Please pick one argument or two and I will be happy to address those. If not, please understand why I will choose to only address those that I think are relevant, not fallacious or personal attacks, and have not already been addressed.


OK, then feel free to provide examples of decreases in crime (and, to be more specific, understood as a newly decreasing trends of criminal behavior) that were preceded by defunding of police departments. Surely this is the very first step to show that abolishing the police may help decrease crime - if there are none, then I would severely question that claim from the outset.
#15107171
@wat0n

1. If the taxes are federal, I would simply have the IRS enforce tax laws, as they already do.

2. That is a strawman. For the third (or perhaps fourth) time: Reducing cops does not reduce crime, except for the obvious case of crimes committed by police (e.g. George Floyd, Elijah McClain, Breonna Taylor). My actual claim is that communities should gradually abolish police through defunding. At the same time, funds that are now freed can be sued to address the root causes of crime, and by addressing these causes, crime itself will be reduced.
#15107173
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

1. If the taxes are federal, I would simply have the IRS enforce tax laws, as they already do.


Does the IRS have its own police force to arrest dodgers?

Pants-of-dog wrote:2. That is a strawman. For the third (or perhaps fourth) time: Reducing cops does not reduce crime, except for the obvious case of crimes committed by police (e.g. George Floyd, Elijah McClain, Breonna Taylor). My actual claim is that communities should gradually abolish police through defunding. At the same time, funds that are now freed can be sued to address the root causes of crime, and by addressing these causes, crime itself will be reduced.


That's why I'm asking you if you have any examples of police defunding that led to decreases in crime. After you show so, we can begin to discuss why did this happen (hint: The optics are not good for your position).
#15107175
Pants-of-dog wrote:You did not present evidence. You just posted a single link.


That's incorrect, I posted 2 links. One is for a database, you can literally calculate the numbers yourself. Here's the data again that I already posted:

The numbers for police interactions with black Americans was 6,146,600 in 2015, published in 2018 by the Department of Justice: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpp15.pdf

You can filter data on police shootings by year, weapon, race of victim, armed/unarmed etc. compiled here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... -database/


Elijah McClain is one unarmed black man killed by white cops.

Nekiylo Dawayne Graves is another.

Dennis Wayne Tuttle was armed, but since cops broke into his home and started shooting without identifying themselves, it is hard to justify this one.

D'Ettrick Griffin is another.

So we have at least three unarmed black men killed by police, Your numbers say two.

No. As I've already said TWICE, statistics that I quoted shows 14 unarmed black Americans were shot and killed by police in 2019. Of those 14, only 5 were not attacking the police at the time. Of those 5, only 2 of the cops were white.

Run the numbers yourself. You're making strawman arguments because you're misquoting what I'm saying because you're misreading what I'm stating and have done so twice now. Read carefully the statistics i'm quoting and how they are worded before responding with claims that don't correspond.
#15107178
@wat0n

1. I do not know. Does the IRS have its own police force?

2. Since I just described again why this is a strawman, I will not he addressing that for the fourth or fifth time.

————————-

@Unthinking Majority

You are claiming that in 2019, only two unarmed black people were killed by white cops. Is that correct?

I have provided examples of three.

And no, I cannot use that database to filter data.

Also, the WP database only includes officer shootings, which is only a fraction of police killings. For example, Mr, Floyd’s death would not show up in the database.

There is also the problem that the WP database is not comprehensive. In fact, there is no such database. We honestly have no idea how many police killings there are every year.
#15107179
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

1. I do not know. Does the IRS have its own police force?


Not as far as I'm aware. The arrests would be carried by the corresponding Federal or State police depending on whether the defrauded IRS was the Federal or the State one.

Pants-of-dog wrote:2. Since I just described again why this is a strawman, I will not he addressing that for the fourth or fifth time.


:roll:

OK, then I take it you don't know of any.
#15107181
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Do we even need to arrest non-violent offenders? Simply charge them, let them know their court date, and if they fail to show up, find them guilty and seize the fine. This can all be done by accountants and lawyers.


No, because tax evasion carries a prison term. The IRS will usually do its audit and then refer it to the DOJ or the US Attorney for prosecution to be carried out.
#15107183
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Are you arguing that we should jail non-violent offenders because we do that now? That seems like an appeal to tradition. As part of police abolition, the US should also work towards abolishing or vastly reducing its prison population.


Depends on the offence don't you think? Why shouldn't tax dodgers face jail time if the dodging was severe? :eh:
  • 1
  • 159
  • 160
  • 161
  • 162
  • 163
  • 182
The End of Lukashenko is near.

And what will that achieve? Increasing Western in[…]

I hope it's real, and it works.

Depends where you live to be honest. In Russia yo[…]

The two are clearly related. If you can remove t[…]