Police decide who ingested exactly which drugs based on a 12-step collection of clues gathered by staring into suspects’ eyes, pinching their muscles, taking their blood pressure and watching closely how they walk and talk and balance.
How many of those 40,000 hit and runs with 8000 deaths were prevented by police officers?
Your strategy doesn’t work.
If police and prisons made us safer, we’d be the safest country on the planet. We’re not. Police hurt people after a crime has been committed, not before. Your strategy does. not. work.
That’s the point of police reform. They weren’t prevented because reckless driving isn’t enforced here. The police here suck, and have always sucked, and should be replaced and reformed.
Now, if you’re done misconstruing my argument to fit your virtue signaling, why don’t you say the solution to hit and run drivers, and while you’re at it, street take overs?
I’m not working signaling because I never hear anyone say this: The police should be fully abolished, the prisons should be emptied, and the judicial system should be forced to find a way to solve societal problems without them. This is because they are a for-profit, corrupt, wildly inhumane and ineffective system that has resulted in generations of Americans losing their lives behind bars for harmless crimes.
You keep bringing up reckless driving, but the majority people in jail aren’t there for vehicle offenses. They’re mostly kids who got caught with marijuana. Do you really want a wildly racist institution, which takes away people’s freedom for profit to continue to operate just because you’re inconvenienced by other people driving?
Stop being selfish. The problem affects more than just you.
They keep bringing up reckless driving because that was the thesis of their original comment. They’re concerned about reckless driving because it results in violence, bodily harm, and death in their community.
You came stomping in here about police reform and the disproportionate rate of incarceration for non-violent offenders. And while those criticisms are valid, they’re misplaced here.
Further arguing the point is demeaning to everyone involved
I would argue they are perfectly placed, not misplaced.
My counter argument is that injury and death caused by reckless driving is not solved by the police. And worse, the prison crisis is doing great harm to our society, mostly to people of color.
I was countering what that person said, and you think it’s misplaced? I think what you mean is it’s not convenient to you. Seems to be a trend.
Friend, it’s not inconvenient to me. I just thought it was kind to alert you to the social blunder you’re committing.
You both largely agree with each other. The other commenter is advocating for police reform and admits that the police aren’t doing a good job of protecting the community. Doubling down on your stance while the person you’re debating is trying to work with you ultimately prevents cooperation, and neither of you needed to resort to personal attacks.
All cops are bastards, but abolishing the police isn’t something that’s going to happen overnight - it’ll be procedural and subject to reform. And if things go as you hope, and the judicial system is to find a way to solve societal problems, it would be a great benefit to use existing resources. You can dismantle the police while splintering them into more wholesome services that actually serve the will of the community.
Even if we end the war on drugs and criminalizing people due to their circumstance, there’s still going to be traffic. Traffic doesn’t have to be enforced by an armed thug, or threat of incarceration, but it’s too dangerous of a problem to simply ignore.
How many of those 40,000 hit and runs with 8000 deaths were prevented by police officers?
Your strategy doesn’t work.
If police and prisons made us safer, we’d be the safest country on the planet. We’re not. Police hurt people after a crime has been committed, not before. Your strategy does. not. work.
That’s the point of police reform. They weren’t prevented because reckless driving isn’t enforced here. The police here suck, and have always sucked, and should be replaced and reformed.
Now, if you’re done misconstruing my argument to fit your virtue signaling, why don’t you say the solution to hit and run drivers, and while you’re at it, street take overs?
I’m not working signaling because I never hear anyone say this: The police should be fully abolished, the prisons should be emptied, and the judicial system should be forced to find a way to solve societal problems without them. This is because they are a for-profit, corrupt, wildly inhumane and ineffective system that has resulted in generations of Americans losing their lives behind bars for harmless crimes.
You keep bringing up reckless driving, but the majority people in jail aren’t there for vehicle offenses. They’re mostly kids who got caught with marijuana. Do you really want a wildly racist institution, which takes away people’s freedom for profit to continue to operate just because you’re inconvenienced by other people driving?
Stop being selfish. The problem affects more than just you.
They keep bringing up reckless driving because that was the thesis of their original comment. They’re concerned about reckless driving because it results in violence, bodily harm, and death in their community.
You came stomping in here about police reform and the disproportionate rate of incarceration for non-violent offenders. And while those criticisms are valid, they’re misplaced here.
Further arguing the point is demeaning to everyone involved
I would argue they are perfectly placed, not misplaced.
My counter argument is that injury and death caused by reckless driving is not solved by the police. And worse, the prison crisis is doing great harm to our society, mostly to people of color.
I was countering what that person said, and you think it’s misplaced? I think what you mean is it’s not convenient to you. Seems to be a trend.
Friend, it’s not inconvenient to me. I just thought it was kind to alert you to the social blunder you’re committing.
You both largely agree with each other. The other commenter is advocating for police reform and admits that the police aren’t doing a good job of protecting the community. Doubling down on your stance while the person you’re debating is trying to work with you ultimately prevents cooperation, and neither of you needed to resort to personal attacks.
All cops are bastards, but abolishing the police isn’t something that’s going to happen overnight - it’ll be procedural and subject to reform. And if things go as you hope, and the judicial system is to find a way to solve societal problems, it would be a great benefit to use existing resources. You can dismantle the police while splintering them into more wholesome services that actually serve the will of the community.
Even if we end the war on drugs and criminalizing people due to their circumstance, there’s still going to be traffic. Traffic doesn’t have to be enforced by an armed thug, or threat of incarceration, but it’s too dangerous of a problem to simply ignore.