Marjorie Taylor Greene
Comments
-
Yeah I agree. It's the phrase that is beyond ridiculous. It was music to Trump's mouth when it was first uttered last year.OnWis97 said:
I think the average moderate understands that there are problems with the way police act, particularly in how they relate to blacks. That said, I don’t think the average person understands that phrase and I think it scares them. I understand that “reform the police” sounds soft/pragmatic/slow but I think that is what would resonate. Ultimately, most of the people we need voting want continued police protection and that phrase scares them. It is frustrating to think about the long-haul that might be needed to improve policing in the United States and I hate the idea of telling black America to be patient while more of them are killed with impunity. But realistically, it’s the only possible path to improvement. Scaring off moderate voters and making him a GQP the only party in power is going to be a disastrous results for everybody.The Juggler said:
It wasn't the far left who won the house, senate, and presidency over the last few years. You scream "defund the police" and you lose a portion of the moderate democrats and independents who brought that party to power....while also firing up the very racist base you want to defeat.static111 said:
The majority of people who vote for these racists will vote for the racists whether people are screaming defund the police or not.The Juggler said:
If 2018 and 2020 taught us anything, Lerx is correct. Yeah there are a bunch of racists in the republican party. But shouting "defund the police" at the top of your lungs is only going to help them rise to power again.static111 said:
Yes let’s blame those things rather than admit we have a racist problem and a racist party.Lerxst1992 said:
If that power is not in red states, it matters very little in US elections Despite bungling a deadly pandemic, trump came within a certified millimeter of winning the election and the GOP was a handful of seats of winning the House. Let’s go ahead and defund the police and hand law enforcement over to meter maids. That should help in the midterms.Halifax2TheMax said:
The power of the (Soon to be white) minority. Midterms will tell.mrussel1 said:
Yes I do think that still. Fundraising numbers don't change my mind on it. I'm saying this is not a growing % of the population that ascribe to nativism, it's shrinking.Halifax2TheMax said:
That you think the POOTWH Party is a lost cause and won’t amount to anything other than dying on the vine.mrussel1 said:What optimism do you mean?
It's a fine line to walk, for sure.
If George Floyd isn’t murdered, we don’t really know what would have happened but I suspect the 2020 wave would have been much of bluer.www.myspace.com0 -
It's pretty f'ing amazing how the democrats continually shoot themselves in the foot.The Juggler said:
Yeah I agree. It's the phrase that is beyond ridiculous. It was music to Trump's mouth when it was first uttered last year.OnWis97 said:
I think the average moderate understands that there are problems with the way police act, particularly in how they relate to blacks. That said, I don’t think the average person understands that phrase and I think it scares them. I understand that “reform the police” sounds soft/pragmatic/slow but I think that is what would resonate. Ultimately, most of the people we need voting want continued police protection and that phrase scares them. It is frustrating to think about the long-haul that might be needed to improve policing in the United States and I hate the idea of telling black America to be patient while more of them are killed with impunity. But realistically, it’s the only possible path to improvement. Scaring off moderate voters and making him a GQP the only party in power is going to be a disastrous results for everybody.The Juggler said:
It wasn't the far left who won the house, senate, and presidency over the last few years. You scream "defund the police" and you lose a portion of the moderate democrats and independents who brought that party to power....while also firing up the very racist base you want to defeat.static111 said:
The majority of people who vote for these racists will vote for the racists whether people are screaming defund the police or not.The Juggler said:
If 2018 and 2020 taught us anything, Lerx is correct. Yeah there are a bunch of racists in the republican party. But shouting "defund the police" at the top of your lungs is only going to help them rise to power again.static111 said:
Yes let’s blame those things rather than admit we have a racist problem and a racist party.Lerxst1992 said:
If that power is not in red states, it matters very little in US elections Despite bungling a deadly pandemic, trump came within a certified millimeter of winning the election and the GOP was a handful of seats of winning the House. Let’s go ahead and defund the police and hand law enforcement over to meter maids. That should help in the midterms.Halifax2TheMax said:
The power of the (Soon to be white) minority. Midterms will tell.mrussel1 said:
Yes I do think that still. Fundraising numbers don't change my mind on it. I'm saying this is not a growing % of the population that ascribe to nativism, it's shrinking.Halifax2TheMax said:
That you think the POOTWH Party is a lost cause and won’t amount to anything other than dying on the vine.mrussel1 said:What optimism do you mean?
It's a fine line to walk, for sure.
If George Floyd isn’t murdered, we don’t really know what would have happened but I suspect the 2020 wave would have been much of bluer.0 -
I've said this about a million times but republicans are so much better at branding and politics. If democrats would somehow be able to unite behind the simple goal of remaining in power like the republicans always do, they'll eventually get to accomplish the things they want to accomplish immediately. All too often they are unwilling to play the long game, instead choosing to fight amongst themselves until things blow up in their faces...or feet. lolMerkin Baller said:
It's pretty f'ing amazing how the democrats continually shoot themselves in the foot.The Juggler said:
Yeah I agree. It's the phrase that is beyond ridiculous. It was music to Trump's mouth when it was first uttered last year.OnWis97 said:
I think the average moderate understands that there are problems with the way police act, particularly in how they relate to blacks. That said, I don’t think the average person understands that phrase and I think it scares them. I understand that “reform the police” sounds soft/pragmatic/slow but I think that is what would resonate. Ultimately, most of the people we need voting want continued police protection and that phrase scares them. It is frustrating to think about the long-haul that might be needed to improve policing in the United States and I hate the idea of telling black America to be patient while more of them are killed with impunity. But realistically, it’s the only possible path to improvement. Scaring off moderate voters and making him a GQP the only party in power is going to be a disastrous results for everybody.The Juggler said:
It wasn't the far left who won the house, senate, and presidency over the last few years. You scream "defund the police" and you lose a portion of the moderate democrats and independents who brought that party to power....while also firing up the very racist base you want to defeat.static111 said:
The majority of people who vote for these racists will vote for the racists whether people are screaming defund the police or not.The Juggler said:
If 2018 and 2020 taught us anything, Lerx is correct. Yeah there are a bunch of racists in the republican party. But shouting "defund the police" at the top of your lungs is only going to help them rise to power again.static111 said:
Yes let’s blame those things rather than admit we have a racist problem and a racist party.Lerxst1992 said:
If that power is not in red states, it matters very little in US elections Despite bungling a deadly pandemic, trump came within a certified millimeter of winning the election and the GOP was a handful of seats of winning the House. Let’s go ahead and defund the police and hand law enforcement over to meter maids. That should help in the midterms.Halifax2TheMax said:
The power of the (Soon to be white) minority. Midterms will tell.mrussel1 said:
Yes I do think that still. Fundraising numbers don't change my mind on it. I'm saying this is not a growing % of the population that ascribe to nativism, it's shrinking.Halifax2TheMax said:
That you think the POOTWH Party is a lost cause and won’t amount to anything other than dying on the vine.mrussel1 said:What optimism do you mean?
It's a fine line to walk, for sure.
If George Floyd isn’t murdered, we don’t really know what would have happened but I suspect the 2020 wave would have been much of bluer.www.myspace.com0 -
it's always easier to brand fear than hope.The Juggler said:
I've said this about a million times but republicans are so much better at branding and politics. If democrats would somehow be able to unite behind the simple goal of remaining in power like the republicans always do, they'll eventually get to accomplish the things they want to accomplish immediately. All too often they are unwilling to play the long game, instead choosing to fight amongst themselves until things blow up in their faces...or feet. lolMerkin Baller said:
It's pretty f'ing amazing how the democrats continually shoot themselves in the foot.The Juggler said:
Yeah I agree. It's the phrase that is beyond ridiculous. It was music to Trump's mouth when it was first uttered last year.OnWis97 said:
I think the average moderate understands that there are problems with the way police act, particularly in how they relate to blacks. That said, I don’t think the average person understands that phrase and I think it scares them. I understand that “reform the police” sounds soft/pragmatic/slow but I think that is what would resonate. Ultimately, most of the people we need voting want continued police protection and that phrase scares them. It is frustrating to think about the long-haul that might be needed to improve policing in the United States and I hate the idea of telling black America to be patient while more of them are killed with impunity. But realistically, it’s the only possible path to improvement. Scaring off moderate voters and making him a GQP the only party in power is going to be a disastrous results for everybody.The Juggler said:
It wasn't the far left who won the house, senate, and presidency over the last few years. You scream "defund the police" and you lose a portion of the moderate democrats and independents who brought that party to power....while also firing up the very racist base you want to defeat.static111 said:
The majority of people who vote for these racists will vote for the racists whether people are screaming defund the police or not.The Juggler said:
If 2018 and 2020 taught us anything, Lerx is correct. Yeah there are a bunch of racists in the republican party. But shouting "defund the police" at the top of your lungs is only going to help them rise to power again.static111 said:
Yes let’s blame those things rather than admit we have a racist problem and a racist party.Lerxst1992 said:
If that power is not in red states, it matters very little in US elections Despite bungling a deadly pandemic, trump came within a certified millimeter of winning the election and the GOP was a handful of seats of winning the House. Let’s go ahead and defund the police and hand law enforcement over to meter maids. That should help in the midterms.Halifax2TheMax said:
The power of the (Soon to be white) minority. Midterms will tell.mrussel1 said:
Yes I do think that still. Fundraising numbers don't change my mind on it. I'm saying this is not a growing % of the population that ascribe to nativism, it's shrinking.Halifax2TheMax said:
That you think the POOTWH Party is a lost cause and won’t amount to anything other than dying on the vine.mrussel1 said:What optimism do you mean?
It's a fine line to walk, for sure.
If George Floyd isn’t murdered, we don’t really know what would have happened but I suspect the 2020 wave would have been much of bluer.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
My problem with a term like Police Protection is what are they protecting from? Usually they show up after the fact. Some detectives break big cases, but the average cop spends about 2% of their time stopping actual violent crimes.OnWis97 said:
I think the average moderate understands that there are problems with the way police act, particularly in how they relate to blacks. That said, I don’t think the average person understands that phrase and I think it scares them. I understand that “reform the police” sounds soft/pragmatic/slow but I think that is what would resonate. Ultimately, most of the people we need voting want continued police protection and that phrase scares them. It is frustrating to think about the long-haul that might be needed to improve policing in the United States and I hate the idea of telling black America to be patient while more of them are killed with impunity. But realistically, it’s the only possible path to improvement. Scaring off moderate voters and making him a GQP the only party in power is going to be a disastrous results for everybody.The Juggler said:
It wasn't the far left who won the house, senate, and presidency over the last few years. You scream "defund the police" and you lose a portion of the moderate democrats and independents who brought that party to power....while also firing up the very racist base you want to defeat.static111 said:
The majority of people who vote for these racists will vote for the racists whether people are screaming defund the police or not.The Juggler said:
If 2018 and 2020 taught us anything, Lerx is correct. Yeah there are a bunch of racists in the republican party. But shouting "defund the police" at the top of your lungs is only going to help them rise to power again.static111 said:
Yes let’s blame those things rather than admit we have a racist problem and a racist party.Lerxst1992 said:
If that power is not in red states, it matters very little in US elections Despite bungling a deadly pandemic, trump came within a certified millimeter of winning the election and the GOP was a handful of seats of winning the House. Let’s go ahead and defund the police and hand law enforcement over to meter maids. That should help in the midterms.Halifax2TheMax said:
The power of the (Soon to be white) minority. Midterms will tell.mrussel1 said:
Yes I do think that still. Fundraising numbers don't change my mind on it. I'm saying this is not a growing % of the population that ascribe to nativism, it's shrinking.Halifax2TheMax said:
That you think the POOTWH Party is a lost cause and won’t amount to anything other than dying on the vine.mrussel1 said:What optimism do you mean?
It's a fine line to walk, for sure.
If George Floyd isn’t murdered, we don’t really know what would have happened but I suspect the 2020 wave would have been much of bluer.Scio me nihil scire
There are no kings inside the gates of eden0 -
I would imagine just a police presence in any given community probably "protects" the community through deterrence, no?Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0
-
Oh man. Now we're up in arms about the phrase "protect and serve?"
Wait till Tucker Carlson gets his writers' hands on this one. lolwww.myspace.com0 -
Let’s look at crime statistics for neighborhoods with more police presence and less police presence and see what the economic and racial makeups of those districts are. I think we will find that wealthy neighborhoods with less police presence somehow have less crime. I will actually look up some info on this and see if my conjectures are correct. I’m not sure there is a correlation between police presence in a given area and deterrence of crime.HughFreakingDillon said:I would imagine just a police presence in any given community probably "protects" the community through deterrence, no?Scio me nihil scire
There are no kings inside the gates of eden0 -
static111 said:
Let’s look at crime statistics for neighborhoods with more police presence and less police presence and see what the economic and racial makeups of those districts are. I think we will find that wealthy neighborhoods with less police presence somehow have less crime. I will actually look up some info on this and see if my conjectures are correct. I’m not sure there is a correlation between police presence in a given area and deterrence of crime.HughFreakingDillon said:I would imagine just a police presence in any given community probably "protects" the community through deterrence, no?Wouldn't it make sense, though, that wealthy neighborhoods have less crime? They are generally not as crowded. Wealthy people have more and better security systems. Wealthy people are less apt to rob their neighbors. The police they do have are better trained and have more experience because police with seniority are more likely to get jobs in wealthy neighborhoods.Poor neighborhood, on the other hand, get the short end of the stick on everything from education to less well trained police. They are an endless cycle of despair and inequity."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
This phrase needs to be taken more seriously by the departments and the individual officers. The long game needs to be a culture that has people embracing protecting and serving, as opposed to power and intimidation. A cop should not respond to "how was your day?" by saying "ugh, I wasted my time helping helping some guy in a wheelchair get up a curb and waiting for a toe truck in the dark with a woman who was scared to be stranded alone." They should embrace that. Maybe some do; I don't know, but it sure seems like a lot of them like the scaring/intimidating part a lot. It's said that power corrupts. So how do we take that sense of power away? How do they not do it for "power" but for "service.The Juggler said:Oh man. Now we're up in arms about the phrase "protect and serve?"
Wait till Tucker Carlson gets his writers' hands on this one. lolstatic111 said:
My problem with a term like Police Protection is what are they protecting from? Usually they show up after the fact. Some detectives break big cases, but the average cop spends about 2% of their time stopping actual violent crimes.OnWis97 said:
I think the average moderate understands that there are problems with the way police act, particularly in how they relate to blacks. That said, I don’t think the average person understands that phrase and I think it scares them. I understand that “reform the police” sounds soft/pragmatic/slow but I think that is what would resonate. Ultimately, most of the people we need voting want continued police protection and that phrase scares them. It is frustrating to think about the long-haul that might be needed to improve policing in the United States and I hate the idea of telling black America to be patient while more of them are killed with impunity. But realistically, it’s the only possible path to improvement. Scaring off moderate voters and making him a GQP the only party in power is going to be a disastrous results for everybody.The Juggler said:
It wasn't the far left who won the house, senate, and presidency over the last few years. You scream "defund the police" and you lose a portion of the moderate democrats and independents who brought that party to power....while also firing up the very racist base you want to defeat.static111 said:
The majority of people who vote for these racists will vote for the racists whether people are screaming defund the police or not.The Juggler said:
If 2018 and 2020 taught us anything, Lerx is correct. Yeah there are a bunch of racists in the republican party. But shouting "defund the police" at the top of your lungs is only going to help them rise to power again.static111 said:
Yes let’s blame those things rather than admit we have a racist problem and a racist party.Lerxst1992 said:
If that power is not in red states, it matters very little in US elections Despite bungling a deadly pandemic, trump came within a certified millimeter of winning the election and the GOP was a handful of seats of winning the House. Let’s go ahead and defund the police and hand law enforcement over to meter maids. That should help in the midterms.Halifax2TheMax said:
The power of the (Soon to be white) minority. Midterms will tell.mrussel1 said:
Yes I do think that still. Fundraising numbers don't change my mind on it. I'm saying this is not a growing % of the population that ascribe to nativism, it's shrinking.Halifax2TheMax said:
That you think the POOTWH Party is a lost cause and won’t amount to anything other than dying on the vine.mrussel1 said:What optimism do you mean?
It's a fine line to walk, for sure.
If George Floyd isn’t murdered, we don’t really know what would have happened but I suspect the 2020 wave would have been much of bluer.
That's almost neither here nor there, though. People perceive police as protecting them. They want to know that if they call 911, someone's coming. And they want to know that if they get jumped, attacked, etc. someone will protect them. In theory, it's a nice idea. Either way, you're never going to convert that middle-of-the-road person with things like "defund the police." I know it's more of a grass-roots phrase than a Democrat one, but really, the left needs some marketing help.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley 2025 Nashville (II)0 -
In fairness, I honestly believe that the GOP has a much more genuine objective of doing everything for the power. So it's easier for them. Do individual elected Dems like the power? Sure. But when there's no actual Dem movement to become the only party, it's going to be pretty tricky to move in that direction. Most of the GQP wants a one-party system. So it's easy for them to work towards.The Juggler said:
I've said this about a million times but republicans are so much better at branding and politics. If democrats would somehow be able to unite behind the simple goal of remaining in power like the republicans always do, they'll eventually get to accomplish the things they want to accomplish immediately. All too often they are unwilling to play the long game, instead choosing to fight amongst themselves until things blow up in their faces...or feet. lolMerkin Baller said:
It's pretty f'ing amazing how the democrats continually shoot themselves in the foot.The Juggler said:
Yeah I agree. It's the phrase that is beyond ridiculous. It was music to Trump's mouth when it was first uttered last year.OnWis97 said:
I think the average moderate understands that there are problems with the way police act, particularly in how they relate to blacks. That said, I don’t think the average person understands that phrase and I think it scares them. I understand that “reform the police” sounds soft/pragmatic/slow but I think that is what would resonate. Ultimately, most of the people we need voting want continued police protection and that phrase scares them. It is frustrating to think about the long-haul that might be needed to improve policing in the United States and I hate the idea of telling black America to be patient while more of them are killed with impunity. But realistically, it’s the only possible path to improvement. Scaring off moderate voters and making him a GQP the only party in power is going to be a disastrous results for everybody.The Juggler said:
It wasn't the far left who won the house, senate, and presidency over the last few years. You scream "defund the police" and you lose a portion of the moderate democrats and independents who brought that party to power....while also firing up the very racist base you want to defeat.static111 said:
The majority of people who vote for these racists will vote for the racists whether people are screaming defund the police or not.The Juggler said:
If 2018 and 2020 taught us anything, Lerx is correct. Yeah there are a bunch of racists in the republican party. But shouting "defund the police" at the top of your lungs is only going to help them rise to power again.static111 said:
Yes let’s blame those things rather than admit we have a racist problem and a racist party.Lerxst1992 said:
If that power is not in red states, it matters very little in US elections Despite bungling a deadly pandemic, trump came within a certified millimeter of winning the election and the GOP was a handful of seats of winning the House. Let’s go ahead and defund the police and hand law enforcement over to meter maids. That should help in the midterms.Halifax2TheMax said:
The power of the (Soon to be white) minority. Midterms will tell.mrussel1 said:
Yes I do think that still. Fundraising numbers don't change my mind on it. I'm saying this is not a growing % of the population that ascribe to nativism, it's shrinking.Halifax2TheMax said:
That you think the POOTWH Party is a lost cause and won’t amount to anything other than dying on the vine.mrussel1 said:What optimism do you mean?
It's a fine line to walk, for sure.
If George Floyd isn’t murdered, we don’t really know what would have happened but I suspect the 2020 wave would have been much of bluer.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley 2025 Nashville (II)0 -
I would think the vast majority of police officers would not respond to that question the way you described. I would also assume that most of them are good people.OnWis97 said:
This phrase needs to be taken more seriously by the departments and the individual officers. The long game needs to be a culture that has people embracing protecting and serving, as opposed to power and intimidation. A cop should not respond to "how was your day?" by saying "ugh, I wasted my time helping helping some guy in a wheelchair get up a curb and waiting for a toe truck in the dark with a woman who was scared to be stranded alone." They should embrace that. Maybe some do; I don't know, but it sure seems like a lot of them like the scaring/intimidating part a lot. It's said that power corrupts. So how do we take that sense of power away? How do they not do it for "power" but for "service.The Juggler said:Oh man. Now we're up in arms about the phrase "protect and serve?"
Wait till Tucker Carlson gets his writers' hands on this one. lol
www.myspace.com0 -
1000%OnWis97 said:This phrase needs to be taken more seriously by the departments and the individual officers.0 -
I actually had a former RCMP officer as a teacher once, and we had the discussion of "what's better for a neighbourhood: marked police cars or unmarked?". On one hand, the thinking is marked police cars give the feeling to the community of protection and deter potential crimes, while unmarked are potentially better at catching crime in the act. which is better?static111 said:
Let’s look at crime statistics for neighborhoods with more police presence and less police presence and see what the economic and racial makeups of those districts are. I think we will find that wealthy neighborhoods with less police presence somehow have less crime. I will actually look up some info on this and see if my conjectures are correct. I’m not sure there is a correlation between police presence in a given area and deterrence of crime.HughFreakingDillon said:I would imagine just a police presence in any given community probably "protects" the community through deterrence, no?
of course, in many communities this falls flat since marked police cars probably cause more fear than a sense of relief. But generally the thinking is a 50/50 approach.
I'm not sure you can really compare different communities; different demographics are going to require different approaches; rather just comparing what works in each individual community.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
The point is police presence alone doesn’t protect anyone and for the most part cops show up after the fact.HughFreakingDillon said:
I actually had a former RCMP officer as a teacher once, and we had the discussion of "what's better for a neighbourhood: marked police cars or unmarked?". On one hand, the thinking is marked police cars give the feeling to the community of protection and deter potential crimes, while unmarked are potentially better at catching crime in the act. which is better?static111 said:
Let’s look at crime statistics for neighborhoods with more police presence and less police presence and see what the economic and racial makeups of those districts are. I think we will find that wealthy neighborhoods with less police presence somehow have less crime. I will actually look up some info on this and see if my conjectures are correct. I’m not sure there is a correlation between police presence in a given area and deterrence of crime.HughFreakingDillon said:I would imagine just a police presence in any given community probably "protects" the community through deterrence, no?
of course, in many communities this falls flat since marked police cars probably cause more fear than a sense of relief. But generally the thinking is a 50/50 approach.
I'm not sure you can really compare different communities; different demographics are going to require different approaches; rather just comparing what works in each individual community.Scio me nihil scire
There are no kings inside the gates of eden0 -
This is a more well stated version of what I am trying to say.brianlux said:static111 said:
Let’s look at crime statistics for neighborhoods with more police presence and less police presence and see what the economic and racial makeups of those districts are. I think we will find that wealthy neighborhoods with less police presence somehow have less crime. I will actually look up some info on this and see if my conjectures are correct. I’m not sure there is a correlation between police presence in a given area and deterrence of crime.HughFreakingDillon said:I would imagine just a police presence in any given community probably "protects" the community through deterrence, no?Wouldn't it make sense, though, that wealthy neighborhoods have less crime? They are generally not as crowded. Wealthy people have more and better security systems. Wealthy people are less apt to rob their neighbors. The police they do have are better trained and have more experience because police with seniority are more likely to get jobs in wealthy neighborhoods.Poor neighborhood, on the other hand, get the short end of the stick on everything from education to less well trained police. They are an endless cycle of despair and inequity.Scio me nihil scire
There are no kings inside the gates of eden0 -
yeah, I wasn't trying to say anything on its own is what works. But I do think their presence has a role in protecting.static111 said:
The point is police presence alone doesn’t protect anyone and for the most part cops show up after the fact.HughFreakingDillon said:
I actually had a former RCMP officer as a teacher once, and we had the discussion of "what's better for a neighbourhood: marked police cars or unmarked?". On one hand, the thinking is marked police cars give the feeling to the community of protection and deter potential crimes, while unmarked are potentially better at catching crime in the act. which is better?static111 said:
Let’s look at crime statistics for neighborhoods with more police presence and less police presence and see what the economic and racial makeups of those districts are. I think we will find that wealthy neighborhoods with less police presence somehow have less crime. I will actually look up some info on this and see if my conjectures are correct. I’m not sure there is a correlation between police presence in a given area and deterrence of crime.HughFreakingDillon said:I would imagine just a police presence in any given community probably "protects" the community through deterrence, no?
of course, in many communities this falls flat since marked police cars probably cause more fear than a sense of relief. But generally the thinking is a 50/50 approach.
I'm not sure you can really compare different communities; different demographics are going to require different approaches; rather just comparing what works in each individual community.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
I still don't know what is worse...
These crazy ignorant people who get elected?
Or
The people who vote for them...
0 -
It is one thing to be a whack job and go around doing and saying stupid stuff. It is a whole lot of stupid to look at that person and say "Yeah, I really like what that person says!", and then vote for them and send money to their campaign.Bentleyspop said:I still don't know what is worse...
These crazy ignorant people who get elected?
Or
The people who vote for them...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.2K The Porch
- 279 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.3K Flea Market
- 39.3K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help