Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30672097

So, for the funeral of police officer Wenjian Liu, the NYPD once again turned their backs on Mayor Bill DeBlasio, as they had at the funeral of officer Ramos a week ago. Only one police officer was seen facing the mayor during the funeral.

The police officers believe that the mayor hasn't shown them enough support and has disrespected them, which has prompted these silent protests against the mayor.

Here's the sore point for the police and other critics of DeBlasio:



In a related development, the NYPD has apparently begun a "virtual work slowdown," to remind the people of New York why they need to be appreciated.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-30659528

While arrest rates have gone down noticeably, no one seems to be complaining yet, because the police are still working on important/major cases, they've just stopped giving out so many parking tickets and other such minor activities that the average citizen may not consider all that necessary.

Here's where my editorializing begins.

The police's position seems facile to me. Their sense of being wronged stems from what I believe is their presumption that the mayor shouldn't even indirectly criticize the police, even when their effectiveness and fairness in serving New York's citizens comes into question. It's true that being a cop is a dangerous, often thankless job, especially in a city like New York City, but by blaming the mayor's relatively innocuous comments about latent racism in the police for any perceived elevation in the threat the average officer faces, the police are attempting to change the subject and obviate any discussion about their tactics and approach to law enforcement.

Here are my thoughts on this situation (and feel free to disagree with them with extreme vitriol as I am not married to my thoughts on this):

1. The Police State
I am not happy with the police-state that America has turned into. From no-knock warrants, spying on American Citizens without warrants, illegal detainment (it is illegal due to the supremacy clause and the 4th amendment), and the over-the-top aggression from police forces that seems to be escalating. If some mayor is not happy with the racist, overly-aggressive and violent behavior of the local police-force, whoopty-f*cking-do. Perhaps they should use this as an opportunity to address some of the racist policies that they have? Perhaps they should use this as an opportunity to learn how to win the hearts and minds of the people they protect? The police have it wrong: they are not the boss. They are servants of the people. They view themselves as superior. A super-class of citizens who get more rights and privileges than the regular one.

2. The Silent Protest is Actually a Good Thing
The reduction in low-priority law-enforcement? This is a good thing. I find much of this to be a waste of police resources. (a.)Parking tickets, (b.)petty-theft investigations, (c.)public urination, (d.)drug possession arrests, (e.)public intoxication, (f.)traffic violation citations: these are all things I think law enforcement all over the US has taken too much of an interest in. Let's go down my list:

a. Parking Tickets
I don't think parking tickets should be a thing. Mostly because of the oppression of self-driving car technology (because of how much would be lost in the insurance and audo industry if we had level 4 SDCs driving around in our cities), we are stuck without SDCs. In 1996, we had a matured level 2.5 SDC technology meaning it could drive itself, for the most part, with little human intervention (sounds like level 3, but it could not drive in city streets: only highways). Where is the $50 billion annual investment into SDCs? The number of lives saved, alone, is worth the investment. The amount of money saved by regular Americans is much greater than $50 billion. There are talks of a level 3 to level 4 SDC infrastructure saving hundreds of billions to low trillions, annually. I'm not talking out of my ass:

"Morgan Stanley provided an extract from the initial report which provides an outline of how they arrived at the annual $1.3 trillion in savings."

http://robohub.org/morgan-stanley-reports-on-the-economic-benefits-of-driverless-cars-2/

So where am I going with all of this? Parking tickets are such a lame and archaic waste of resources. Cars should be parking themselves and people should never worry about parking tickets. Also, the technology exists to make ticketing for parking, automate-able. Meaning, there's no reason a human ever has to enter the equation for issuing parking citations. This is not an expensive technology to implement: we already use it with stop-light cameras. But, here we are, pretending it is the 1950s, still, by having humans enforce parking.

Conclusion: Automate parking citations in the immediate future. The SDC technology should invalidate the prior measure. Cops should stop wasting their time with parking citations.

b. Petty Theft
Petty theft is a poverty, education, and drug problem. By citing, arresting, and imprisoning people who steal things; such as food, bikes, and other non-"it is a felony if you still this"-possessions; you are trying to solve a symptom, not a problem. Let's look at bike theft (this applies to NYC). Most thieves are amateurs trying to sell stolen bikes or bike parts for quick bucks. Why? Some have drug problems and need to get a fix, some are poor and out of work and need money for food, some need transportation, and some have a mental problem (such as kleptomania). There are probably other issues (perhaps gang related) but those do not constitute that majority or large portion of big theft. It seems like much of this could be resolved with a basic income and better drug and mental health support systems (uhhh....you know....better healthcare for the poor?).

c. Public Urination
Yeah, this should always be a low priority. Other cities, such as The Hague, have put up urinals around their city streets to lower public urination (and it works to reduce public urination (onto buildings, sidewalks, and such). Rightfully so, this should always be a low priority.

d. Drug Possession Arrests
There should be no such thing as a "drug possession arrest." Some drugs should not be legal but the penalties for using and selling those drugs should be rehab and fines, respectively. Some drugs should probably never be used such as krokodil and meth, but the research is quite clear the that legalization and support systems are better for keeping the use and distribution down for all types of drugs. I think there should be an immediate executive order that stops all drug possession arrests. There should then be an amendment that says no drug use or drug sales will ever result in prison time. Then we should invest the a portion of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on drug law enforcement and jailing and imprisoning drug offenders, on rehab and other mental health issues (hey...it could go towards funding a healthcare system where a universal healthcare option).

e. Public Intoxication
This is similar to the above (d.). What many Americans don't want to think about is alcohol is a drug and the abuse or misuse of alcohol is a drug problem. Le gasp!

f. Traffic Violations (moving violations)
See point a.: this should not exist, at this current moment in time due to SDCs.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
The police's position seems facile to me. Their sense of being wronged stems from what I believe is their presumption that the mayor shouldn't even indirectly criticize the police, even when their effectiveness and fairness in serving New York's citizens comes into question. It's true that being a cop is a dangerous, often thankless job, especially in a city like New York City, but by blaming the mayor's relatively innocuous comments about latent racism in the police for any perceived elevation in the threat the average officer faces, the police are attempting to change the subject and obviate any discussion about their tactics and approach to law enforcement. Seems the thin blue line has become a circle of wagons.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Here are my thoughts on this situation (and feel free to disagree with them with extreme vitriol as I am not married to my thoughts on this):

1. The Police State
I am not happy with the police-state that America has turned into. From no-knock warrants, spying on American Citizens without warrants, illegal detainment (it is illegal due to the supremacy clause and the 4th amendment), and the over-the-top aggression from police forces that seems to be escalating. If some mayor is not happy with the racist, overly-aggressive and violent behavior of the local police-force, whoopty-f*cking-do. Perhaps they should use this as an opportunity to address some of the racist policies that they have? Perhaps they should use this as an opportunity to learn how to win the hearts and minds of the people they protect? The police have it wrong: they are not the boss. They are servants of the people. They view themselves as superior. A super-class of citizens who get more rights and privileges than the regular one.

2. The Silent Protest is Actually a Good Thing
The reduction in low-priority law-enforcement? This is a good thing. I find much of this to be a waste of police resources. (a.)Parking tickets, (b.)petty-theft investigations, (c.)public urination, (d.)drug possession arrests, (e.)public intoxication, (f.)traffic violation citations: these are all things I think law enforcement all over the US has taken too much of an interest in. Let's go down my list:

a. Parking Tickets
I don't think parking tickets should be a thing. Mostly because of the oppression of self-driving car technology (because of how much would be lost in the insurance and audo industry if we had level 4 SDCs driving around in our cities), we are stuck without SDCs. In 1996, we had a matured level 2.5 SDC technology meaning it could drive itself, for the most part, with little human intervention (sounds like level 3, but it could not drive in city streets: only highways). Where is the $50 billion annual investment into SDCs? The number of lives saved, alone, is worth the investment. The amount of money saved by regular Americans is much greater than $50 billion. There are talks of a level 3 to level 4 SDC infrastructure saving hundreds of billions to low trillions, annually. I'm not talking out of my ass:

"Morgan Stanley provided an extract from the initial report which provides an outline of how they arrived at the annual $1.3 trillion in savings."

http://robohub.org/morgan-stanley-reports-on-the-economic-benefits-of-driverless-cars-2/

So where am I going with all of this? Parking tickets are such a lame and archaic waste of resources. Cars should be parking themselves and people should never worry about parking tickets. Also, the technology exists to make ticketing for parking, automate-able. Meaning, there's no reason a human ever has to enter the equation for issuing parking citations. This is not an expensive technology to implement: we already use it with stop-light cameras. But, here we are, pretending it is the 1950s, still, by having humans enforce parking.

Conclusion: Automate parking citations in the immediate future. The SDC technology should invalidate the prior measure. Cops should stop wasting their time with parking citations.

b. Petty Theft
Petty theft is a poverty, education, and drug problem. By citing, arresting, and imprisoning people who steal things; such as food, bikes, and other non-"it is a felony if you still this"-possessions; you are trying to solve a symptom, not a problem. Let's look at bike theft (this applies to NYC). Most thieves are amateurs trying to sell stolen bikes or bike parts for quick bucks. Why? Some have drug problems and need to get a fix, some are poor and out of work and need money for food, some need transportation, and some have a mental problem (such as kleptomania). There are probably other issues (perhaps gang related) but those do not constitute that majority or large portion of big theft. It seems like much of this could be resolved with a basic income and better drug and mental health support systems (uhhh....you know....better healthcare for the poor?).

c. Public Urination
Yeah, this should always be a low priority. Other cities, such as The Hague, have put up urinals around their city streets to lower public urination (and it works to reduce public urination (onto buildings, sidewalks, and such). Rightfully so, this should always be a low priority.

d. Drug Possession Arrests
There should be no such thing as a "drug possession arrest." Some drugs should not be legal but the penalties for using and selling those drugs should be rehab and fines, respectively. Some drugs should probably never be used such as krokodil and meth, but the research is quite clear the that legalization and support systems are better for keeping the use and distribution down for all types of drugs. I think there should be an immediate executive order that stops all drug possession arrests. There should then be an amendment that says no drug use or drug sales will ever result in prison time. Then we should invest the a portion of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on drug law enforcement and jailing and imprisoning drug offenders, on rehab and other mental health issues (hey...it could go towards funding a healthcare system where a universal healthcare option).

e. Public Intoxication
This is similar to the above (d.). What many Americans don't want to think about is alcohol is a drug and the abuse or misuse of alcohol is a drug problem. Le gasp!

f. Traffic Violations (moving violations)
See point a.: this should not exist, at this current moment in time due to SDCs.
I basically agree. Coming from a southern state where the sun is hot-hot-hot, I'm very much in favor of the police enforcing regulations against public urination, but I'm with you on decriminalizing possession. I'm also against traffic citations for the most part. I recently got into an accident (I hydroplaned into a university shuttle during a storm) and got the front of my car crumpled. 3 grand of damage, all of it paid out of pocket because I don't have collision insurance (Just catastrophic), and a 166 dollar fine on top of that for "following too closely."

Really it was unnecessary. I learned my lesson well enough without having to pay that extra money.

Part of me however thinks that there should be civil penalties for people who can easily afford to pay for the damages caused by their reckless driving, but there's no way you could enforce this without it being seen (rightfully) as aimed at the 1 Percent.

Perhaps layoff of these cops are needed or cut back to part time status of 20 hours per week. With that many cops going to funerals who is around to so call police the community. Obviously not that many are needed in the first place.

when they do something to other ppl its cool

when something happen to them its a issue

From what little I know of these recent events, I just think the mayor should not have voiced his opinion or personal concern in public. If he had serious concerns then it should've been dealt as an internal matter away the media & not openly show distrust to his own police force.

He is a very stupid individual that needs to resign.

Cops are acting like a bunch of diaperbabies over a minor comment about a known and serious issue.

If anyone should be talking shit about the police incompetence, it should be the mayor. He is one of their bosses, afterall.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
If anyone should be talking shit about the police incompetence, it should be the mayor. He is one of their bosses, afterall.

GTFO of here with your logic and reasoning.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I basically agree. Coming from a southern state where the sun is hot-hot-hot, I'm very much in favor of the police enforcing regulations against public urination, but I'm with you on decriminalizing possession. I'm also against traffic citations for the most part. I recently got into an accident (I hydroplaned into a university shuttle during a storm) and got the front of my car crumpled. 3 grand of damage, all of it paid out of pocket because I don't have collision insurance (Just catastrophic), and a 166 dollar fine on top of that for "following too closely."

Really it was unnecessary. I learned my lesson well enough without having to pay that extra money.

Part of me however thinks that there should be civil penalties for people who can easily afford to pay for the damages caused by their reckless driving, but there's no way you could enforce this without it being seen (rightfully) as aimed at the 1 Percent.

For the public urination, other than the public urinals like other cities have used to reduce that, you could offer people one of two choices: the fine or 4-8 hours of community service which includes picking up trash off the city streets or washing down the city streets/sidewalks

Originally posted by Robtard
Cops are acting like a bunch of diaperbabies over a minor comment about a known and serious issue.


It's always easier to comment one's opinion on a group of people without personally knowing each individual's decision to act the way they do so.

I stopped paying attention to them when they said that the mayor had blood on his hands simply because he gave a rather meek criticism that essentially said some cops may or may not be bad and may or may not need to be better.

They're acting like bratty kids.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
It's always easier to comment one's opinion on a group of people without personally knowing each individual's decision to act the way they do so.

Fine, as a group and maybe not as individuals as I don't personally know each and every one, they're acting like a bunch of diaperbabies over a minor comment about a known and serious issue.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
He is a very stupid individual that needs to resign.
Against my better judgment, I'm going to give you an opportunity to come up with a sound justification for why Deblasio should resign.

To my mind, if anyone should lose their job, it should be the head of the police union, who's done nothing but stoke trouble.

Look at all the liberal brainwashed drones here.

Lets throw out the fact he campaigned against cops while running for Mayor..

****ing stupid.

TI is turning his back on us all.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
TI is turning his back on us all.

He slammed cops non stop before he came mayor. He grew up in a time when new york cops were very crooked, that got cleaned up 25 years ago. NYC is literally the safest city in America today for its size. NYC is the finest PD in the nation, he has a tainted view of police from his up brining. His view is skewed and unrightfully bias from his upbringing.

Originally posted by BackFire
I stopped paying attention to them when they said that the mayor had blood on his hands simply because he gave a rather meek criticism that essentially said some cops may or may not be bad and may or may not need to be better.

They're acting like bratty kids.

Wrong.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
If anyone should be talking shit about the police incompetence, it should be the mayor. He is one of their bosses, afterall.

Typical liberal attitude, blame everyone but yourself.

He is the one that campaigned against the cops and now he is "SHOCKED" at the police attitude.

****ing nerve on people here.

"Campaign against the police" smacks of "doesn't support the troops" or "doesn't believe in free enterprise" and other reactionary hyperbole.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
"Campaign against the police" smacks of "doesn't support the troops" or "doesn't believe in free enterprise" and other reactionary hyperbole.

Facts are facts. Deal with with it and no point in spinning the argument cause you realize how stupid he is now.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Typical liberal attitude, blame everyone but yourself.

He is the one that campaigned against the cops and now he is "SHOCKED" at the police attitude.

****ing nerve on people here. Why would Blax blame himself for police corruption?

Is he God?

Originally posted by NemeBro
Why would Blax blame himself for police corruption?

Is he God?

Thats not what I said.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Typical liberal attitude, blame everyone but yourself.

He is the one that campaigned against the cops and now he is "SHOCKED" at the police attitude.

****ing nerve on people here.

You said "yourself", implying you were referring to Blax.

Originally posted by NemeBro
You said "yourself", implying you were referring to Blax.

No I am saying he is blaming the police for everything when he started it.

I don't see how Blax/Tzeen started the police problems in NY. I'm about 100% sure he lives in California, the Bay Area/not too far from me to be more exact.

I forgot. Anything other than "All cops are heroes" is blasphemous and vile.

I even sleep over at Rob's house every now and again- his daughter braids my hair.

All I know is that if there were a military funeral and the POTUS was attending, it would be completely unacceptable for those in uniform to do what these police did. And they did it twice. BS. If they can't handle their voluntarily decided upon job then they can find another one.

Originally posted by Robtard
I don't see how Blax/Tzeen started the police problems in NY. I'm about 100% sure he lives in California, the Bay Area/not too far from me to be more exact.

It's a well known fact that all of the world's problems stem from Blax.

Oh snap.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Facts are facts. Deal with with it and no point in spinning the argument cause you realize how stupid he is now.
Lol, you haven't supported any of your assertions with evidence so far, just made unsupported, most likely hyperbolic complaints.

I don't see anything "stupid" in Deblasio's position. He's been reasonable--too reasonable, I'd say--so far with an insubordinate and unreasonable police department that doesn't want to face its own shortcomings, hence turning their backs.

Originally posted by BackFire
I forgot. Anything other than "All cops are heroes" is blasphemous and vile.

I can see why Police would be upset at a comment like that.

However, that doesn't mean that the mayor is wrong for not giving them blind approval for their actions across the board. There are awful racist dickhead police officers out there. There are also genuinely good, benevolent and heroic officers.

Stating "this apple tastes bad" doesn't mean "I ****ing hate apples."

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Lol, you haven't supported any of your assertions with evidence so far, just made unsupported, most likely hyperbolic complaints.

I don't see anything "stupid" in Deblasio's position. He's been reasonable--too reasonable, I'd say--so far with an insubordinate and unreasonable police department that doesn't want to face its own shortcomings, hence turning their backs.




I supported it with facts.

When? You made claims, but without supporting evidence (say, a link to Deblasio's Mayoral campaign site that would show he was "Anti-Police" during his campaign), you're just making unsupported assertions.

Right now, the only facts I've seen are that Deblasio suggested that certain elements of the NYPD may be racist, which is not even close to being a radical statement, or anti-Police.

I also feel like you're betraying your own values by standing by the police here. I get the sense (and notice that I'm qualifying this--I'm not alleging that this IS what you would do, only what I believe you would do based on my impression of your stance on this and other issues) that if Deblasio were a conservative and he were championing a conservative value like zero tolerance drug policy and a more liberal NYPD turned their back on him because they believed that Deblasio's fixation on drug arrests was putting officers in danger for no good reason, you'd be furious and trumpet about it being their duty to respect the civilian chain of command. But that doesn't seem to matter to you here because you disagree with Deblasio's ideology.

To wit: if Deblasio WERE a conservative, and I disagreed with his stance, I'd probably sympathize with the officers but still recognize that it's their duty to show respect for the office of the mayor, especially at solemn occasions.

Let's see he re appointed a judge that released a man who shot into a police out on no bail. No bail whatsoever.

He cares nothing for cops. He generally believes that blacks oppress cops.

Did cops ever turn their backs on Rudy G?

Did Rudy G ever call out cops for having elements of institutionalized racism among their ranks?

Guiliani was pretty good at looking the other way when it came to cops and their antics. Black man gets beaten and anally-raped with a broom handle by cops, Rudy's reaction amounted to "Meh, that's not so good".

Then that unarmed black guy who was murdered after cops fired close to 50 bullets at.

Guiliani is still at it. When Eric Garner was killed Guiliani excused it basically saying he resisted arrest, and so it was fine. Guy's a joke.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Let's see he re appointed a judge that released a man who shot into a police out on no bail. No bail whatsoever.

He cares nothing for cops. He generally believes that blacks oppress cops.

Did cops ever turn their backs on Rudy G?

*cops oppress blacks.

Originally posted by BackFire
Guiliani is still at it. When Eric Garner was killed Guiliani excused it basically saying he resisted arrest, and so it was fine. Guy's a joke.

This new guy is even more of a joke.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
He slammed cops non stop before he came mayor. He grew up in a time when new york cops were very crooked, that got cleaned up 25 years ago. NYC is literally the safest city in America today for its size. NYC is the finest PD in the nation, he has a tainted view of police from his up brining. His view is skewed and unrightfully bias from his upbringing.

What is wrong with criticizing the police? If there are elements that are worthy of critique, then critique away.

Clearly the NYPD is not the flawless policing force you think it is, even if they happened to be the "best in America" that'd still put them around the level of "generally incompetent" when viewed internationally

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
*cops oppress blacks.
Yes, but that's generally true.

He's right to caution his son about the dangers of racial profiling. He'd be a bad parent not to. Commenting about it to the media around the time the police were killed was probably not the best political move, but nothing of what he said was ignorant or especially incendiary.

Originally posted by krisblaze
What is wrong with criticizing the police? If there are elements that are worthy of critique, then critique away.

Clearly the NYPD is not the flawless policing force you think it is, even if they happened to be the "best in America" that'd still put them around the level of "generally incompetent" when viewed internationally
Well, now, you're from Europe aren't you? The continent where police run away when rioters start burning cars?

I think when they're not abusing their power, American police are much better at protecting their public than the average European police.

Originally posted by BackFire
Guiliani is still at it. When Eric Garner was killed Guiliani excused it basically saying he resisted arrest, and so it was fine. Guy's a joke.

Not surprised, since his "I was the Major of NY when 9/11 happened" well has long run dry, he needs anything to draw attention to himself

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Yes, but that's generally true.

He's right to caution his son about the dangers of racial profiling. He'd be a bad parent not to. Commenting about it to the media around the time the police were killed was probably not the best political move, but nothing of what he said was ignorant or especially incendiary.


Well, now, you're from Europe aren't you? The continent where police run away when rioters start burning cars?

I think when they're not abusing their power, American police are much better at protecting their public than the average European police.

Well it depends on the country naturally, but I'd much much rather have police who've received adequate training. How long does the the police academy hold onto people in the states? 20 weeks ish? In Norway we've got 3 years+ same in Germany. With high requirements to physical and mental performance on admittance, higher than almost every part of the military in fact.

I dont have much to say against one particular remark aimed at France or whatever

Anyways, most police forces adapt to the issues they face regularly, which is why say the the French receive a lot of extra training in riot-control.
What I dont understand is why American police/state policies dont..

^Edit: https://www.ncjrs.gov/policing/eur551.htm

The general layout hasn't changed too much.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Yes, but that's generally true.

He's right to caution his son about the dangers of racial profiling. He'd be a bad parent not to. Commenting about it to the media around the time the police were killed was probably not the best political move, but nothing of what he said was ignorant or especially incendiary.


Well, now, you're from Europe aren't you? The continent where police run away when rioters start burning cars?

I think when they're not abusing their power, American police are much better at protecting their public than the average European police.

Young black men target and kill cops. Facts support this. Look it up.

Originally posted by krisblaze
What is wrong with criticizing the police? If there are elements that are worthy of critique, then critique away.

Clearly the NYPD is not the flawless policing force you think it is, even if they happened to be the "best in America" that'd still put them around the level of "generally incompetent" when viewed internationally

NYC is not the force it used to be, they cleaned up there act.

The major is a fool.

He started it and has no idea how do undo what he did. He either resigns or gets slaughtered in next election.

NYPD arrests are down dramatically. If this police strike leads to a rise in violent crime, it means the NYPD are putting petty anger towards a rightful criticism that the mayor, who was representing the criticism of the public, made at the police (who serve the public) ahead of public safety.

The fact they are allowed to do this (hell, the very fact that they were able to disrespect the mayor, at someone's funeral no less) is horrifying because it means they no longer care about the public and are acting as their own separate authoritarian entity, and the fact that anybody agrees with their petty and disrepectful reactions towards a very correct criticism of them is absurd IMO. The only thing DeBlasio did wrong was not fire everybody with a turned back on the spot.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
NYC is not the force it used to be, they cleaned up there act.

The major is a fool.

He started it and has no idea how do undo what he did. He either resigns or gets slaughtered in next election.
It very well may be the case that NYPD is a lot better than they were 25 years ago.

That doesn't justify this kind of behaviour.

If they had been protesting cutbacks, layoffs and the like then it would've been better, but they're reacting to comments/attitude.

The sensible thing to do would be to prove him wrong as opposed to giving even more grounds to his complaints.

mistake post

The first thing that came to my mind when I heard about this nypd strike was, "wouldn't it be interesting if crime dropped, then rose because of unemployed officers committing crimes." Meh.

Still, those cops don't deserve to be called officers.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Young black men target and kill cops. Facts support this. Look it up.
1) Really lazy to tell someone to look something up in a debate.
2) Lol. I'm almost certain that the number of young black men killed by cops dwarfs the reverse.

Originally posted by Lestov16
NYPD arrests are down dramatically. If this police strike leads to a rise in violent crime, it means the NYPD are putting petty anger towards a rightful criticism that the mayor, who was representing the criticism of the public, made at the police (who serve the public) ahead of public safety.

The fact they are allowed to do this (hell, the very fact that they were able to disrespect the mayor, at someone's funeral no less) is horrifying because it means they no longer care about the public and are acting as their own separate authoritarian entity, and the fact that anybody agrees with their petty and disrepectful reactions towards a very correct criticism of them is absurd IMO. The only thing DeBlasio did wrong was not fire everybody with a turned back on the spot.
They need to be reminded that they're disposable.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not surprised, since his "I was the Major of NY when 9/11 happened" well has long run dry, he needs anything to draw attention to himself

Wait, what is the implication of that quote? That he should be lauded for being unlucky enough to be in office when that took place?


Is he trying to draw attention to himself? Are others that are Republicans?



Basically, I'm a bit lost regarding the context of your statement.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Wait, what is the implication of that quote? That he should be lauded for being unlucky enough to be in office when that took place?


Is he trying to draw attention to himself? Are others that are Republicans?



Basically, I'm a bit lost regarding the context of your statement.

That he's an attention hound

Originally posted by Robtard
That he's an attention hound

Oh. Do you think he's going to run for public office doing something else? It's that or he's going to be coming out with a book, show, or something and he wants to make sales.

No idea, he seems to be happy going on Fox News though

Edit: Here's his most recent outburst http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/01/07/on-fox-former-nyc-mayor-rudy-giuliani-you-dont/202052

He wants a police presence in US Mosques

I agree with him up till the point where he suggests that probable cause is unnecessary.

I do think if you have a mosque where the imam is preaching violence (assuming these mosques are the way they're being described and it isn't just FOX News blowing smoke), then paying attention to what's going on would be prudent, just as it would be prudent to have police listen in on churches where the KKK holds rallies.

The mistake is thinking that "mosque" is the operative word in "radicalized mosque."

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I basically agree. Coming from a southern state where the sun is hot-hot-hot, I'm very much in favor of the police enforcing regulations against public urination, but I'm with you on decriminalizing possession. I'm also against traffic citations for the most part. I recently got into an accident (I hydroplaned into a university shuttle during a storm) and got the front of my car crumpled. 3 grand of damage, all of it paid out of pocket because I don't have collision insurance (Just catastrophic), and a 166 dollar fine on top of that for "following too closely."

Really it was unnecessary. I learned my lesson well enough without having to pay that extra money.

Part of me however thinks that there should be civil penalties for people who can easily afford to pay for the damages caused by their reckless driving, but there's no way you could enforce this without it being seen (rightfully) as aimed at the 1 Percent. shit, i had been driving around illegally for 2 years now and i just finally raised the money to get my license back and drive legally. on the first day i got my license back i was driving on the highway and i was actually sort of enjoying the fact that i was obeying all the laws and didn't have to be paranoid about the police. i pulled off at my exit and a trooper followed me and pulled me over. i was really stumped cause i couldn't imagine what i had possibly done wrong. he comes up to my window and says "...any reason you're not wearing your seat-belt?" FML

I never understand when people drive without seatbelts. For me it's an automatic reflex. I sit down and buckle up. I would feel incredibly off not driving with it, even if it were legal to do so and I knew I wasn't in any danger of getting into a crash.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I never understand when people drive without seatbelts. For me it's an automatic reflex. I sit down and buckle up. I would feel incredibly off not driving with it, even if it were legal to do so and I knew I wasn't in any danger of getting into a crash. I hate wearing a seatbelt when wearing a suit.

There should be a suit exemption.

Well, of course. I mean, you have to be comfortable while you're driving on your way to your next murder, Mr. Bateman.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I never understand when people drive without seatbelts. For me it's an automatic reflex. I sit down and buckle up. I would feel incredibly off not driving with it, even if it were legal to do so and I knew I wasn't in any danger of getting into a crash. for me it's the opposite . i don't even think about wearing a seat belt. for years i drove a vehicle that didn't even have seat belts. honestly it might make me a little more likely to die in some type of horrible accident but i'm willing to take that risk... i am pretty confident i won't be getting into any such accident anyways. but now i've started wearing it whenever i remember because getting tickets is just such a waste of money to me. so i guess the law works tbh... can't really knock it since it's having the effect they wanted it to have. but i still forget a lot because i've always got a million and one things on my mind and little things like that get by me easily. honestly i spend half my life in virtual autopilot mode.

Just make a habit of it. As soon as you sit down, buckle up, without exception. You don't make muscle memory unless you do it every time.