Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LiterateStylish

Minneapolis city council votes 12-0 to abolish police department

Recommended Posts

Under their plan, the police department will be replaced by a “violence prevention” program / department.

 


96769446_10102201393347587_5716922665810264064_n.jpg
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is pure insanity

this is going to get that motherfucking evil bastard reelected

idiots

  • Trump 1

One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'ma check back in on these guys in 5 years.


Sack "The Buffalo Range's TRUSTED News Source!"

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” ~ Dresden James

Parler @NYexile

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to Bizarro world.

  • Thanks 1

Ed Oliver is my adopt-a-Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LiterateStylish said:

The police department will be replaced by a “violence prevention” program / department.

The people didn’t say abolish, they said defund. Big difference. Can’t wait to see how this works out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Meathead said:

five years? how about five days?

i dont expect them to really pull police from the streets, but if they start severely restricting their power to use deadly force its only going to be replaced by incidents of criminals shooting/stabbing/whatever people skyrocketing

the entire force should quit in protest. theyd be begging them to come back in three days

Meat, have you read the articles?

The plan is to literally END the police department. No police on streets.

A CNN reporter asked the city council President what would happen if someone went on a shooting rampage. Their answer was “we don’t have all the answers” yet.

  • Haha 1

96769446_10102201393347587_5716922665810264064_n.jpg
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, LiterateStylish said:

The police department will be replaced by a “violence prevention” program / department.

Will this new community safety approach be locally, or federally funded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Philly'sFinest said:

Complete and utter lunacy.

Just when you think these morons couldn't take it any further...

They're not morons!  They're geniuses!!  :niterider:

the lost boys vampire GIF

  • Haha 1

process.jpg

 

Fuck this team

I'll tie a frying pan to my ass so you hurt your penis, you ****ing homo!

Shut the fuck up dark cloud pussy

Anyone who is foolish enough to not be a Buffalo Bills fan can go f*ck themselves with a wooden shovel handle.

image-trump-emoticon.png

also, all that shit in your signature is beyond annoying. just like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very stable geniuses!


One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LiterateStylish said:

Meat, have you read the articles?

The plan is to literally END the police department. No police on streets.

A CNN reporter asked the city council President what would happen if someone went on a shooting rampage. Their answer was “we don’t have all the answers” yet.

again, thats insane

either they are just going to make superficial changes to make it sound like they are getting rid of the police but really just changing the name ...

or they are going to have criminals running the streets, stealing everything in sight, and hurting/killing people

sounds like a reasonable plan :classic_huh:

  • Thanks 1

One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JoeFerguson said:

So who's going to show up at the door for domestic violence? 

Social workers. The real question is, who’s going to show up for mass shootings? Like Lit posted earlier  their still working on that. 


Ed Oliver is my adopt-a-Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nuke said:

Social workers. The real question is, who’s going to show up for mass shootings? 

Ummm, police?

Five things ‘defund the police’ is not

 

The nationwide calls to “defund the police” in the wake of the brutal killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25 embody both the anger at continuing gratuitous police violence and a strategy for dealing with it. But do defunders want to constrain police, replace them, reimagine them or simply abolish them? Not everyone who chants or hashtags the slogan agrees on the details. For now, though, here are some things that “defund the police” is not:

* It’s not new.

One of the leading strategies to encourage better police behavior over the last 40 years has been ever-greater investments in technology to surgically pinpoint public safety problems, and in larger police forces to enable more humane community-oriented rather than occupation-style policing. But there has been a strong counter-narrative from communities in which more surveillance and more cops has meant more oppression rather than safer streets.

 

* It’s not a panacea.

The Marshall Project has reported at length on the continuing problems in Chicago and Memphis, which cut their police budgets but did not reduce excessive force or improve the community’s regard for officers. Smaller forces meant larger backlogs of unsolved crimes and longer wait times for police response.

That experience is at the core of the fear voiced by critics of “defund the police”: What do you do when you really need a cop? Defunders answer that many times you need the kind of help best provided by a mental health professional, not an armed law enforcement officer who may be as likely to exacerbate the situation as resolve it. But still — sometimes you need a cop.

 

* It’s not what happened in Camden, N.J.

The city across the river from Philadelphia had a police department beset by deep corruption, so it was disbanded and replaced by a new law enforcement agency. The move could best be seen as a “reset” rather than a full-scale defunding.

Nor is “defund the police” N.W.A.‘s Compton, which disbanded its department in 2000 but replaced it with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, an agency with plenty of its own problems. Other cities, too, have had police do-overs, including Stockton, Calif., where municipal bankruptcy meant layoffs and early retirements that did some good by purging the department of many of its old-school warrior cops and paved the way for more constructive thinking and practices. Stockton, though, remains one of California’s most violent cities.

 

* It’s not “reform.”

The “defund the police” movement critiques traditional police reforms such as body cams, oversight commissions, better training and more restrictive use-of-force policies. Defunders note that these things have been tried, but police killings, especially of black people, continue.

Backers of reforms called #8cantwait recently apologized for putting forward a reform package, because they said it distracted attention from the more radical defunding campaign. Last week congressional Democrats proposed a package of sweeping yet traditional police reforms, and a majority of Americans (including Republicans) appear to support it — perhaps because they see it as a more comfortable approach than defunding or abolishing police agencies.

 

* It’s not crazy.

Transferring funding from armed law enforcement to other first responders is not, in and of itself, insane. Even many police would agree that they are the wrong people to deal with mental health crises. Defunding police does not mean defunding public safety. But at its best it should mean reconsidering the most effective means to attain public safety, how much it should cost, who should pay the freight, and who should do the job.

 

 

 

 

 


“There he goes. One of God's own prototypes.

A high-powered mutant of some kind, never even considered for mass production.

Too weird to live, and too rare to die.”

 

Twitter: @HKTheResistance

 

HipKat, on *** other h***, is genuine, unapoli***tically nasty, and w**** his hea** on his ******. jc856

I’ll just forward them to Bridgett. comssvet11

Seek help. soflabillsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The brown shirts are born - they can enforce “new” laws. This is insane - we’re steering left in governance at 150MPH. The new world order is dominating right now.


[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HipKat said:

Ummm, police?

Five things ‘defund the police’ is not

The nationwide calls to “defund the police” in the wake of the brutal killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25 embody both the anger at continuing gratuitous police violence and a strategy for dealing with it. But do defunders want to constrain police, replace them, reimagine them or simply abolish them? Not everyone who chants or hashtags the slogan agrees on the details. For now, though, here are some things that “defund the police” is not:

* It’s not new.

One of the leading strategies to encourage better police behavior over the last 40 years has been ever-greater investments in technology to surgically pinpoint public safety problems, and in larger police forces to enable more humane community-oriented rather than occupation-style policing. But there has been a strong counter-narrative from communities in which more surveillance and more cops has meant more oppression rather than safer streets.

* It’s not a panacea.

The Marshall Project has reported at length on the continuing problems in Chicago and Memphis, which cut their police budgets but did not reduce excessive force or improve the community’s regard for officers. Smaller forces meant larger backlogs of unsolved crimes and longer wait times for police response.

That experience is at the core of the fear voiced by critics of “defund the police”: What do you do when you really need a cop? Defunders answer that many times you need the kind of help best provided by a mental health professional, not an armed law enforcement officer who may be as likely to exacerbate the situation as resolve it. But still — sometimes you need a cop.

* It’s not what happened in Camden, N.J.

The city across the river from Philadelphia had a police department beset by deep corruption, so it was disbanded and replaced by a new law enforcement agency. The move could best be seen as a “reset” rather than a full-scale defunding.

Nor is “defund the police” N.W.A.‘s Compton, which disbanded its department in 2000 but replaced it with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, an agency with plenty of its own problems. Other cities, too, have had police do-overs, including Stockton, Calif., where municipal bankruptcy meant layoffs and early retirements that did some good by purging the department of many of its old-school warrior cops and paved the way for more constructive thinking and practices. Stockton, though, remains one of California’s most violent cities.

* It’s not “reform.”

The “defund the police” movement critiques traditional police reforms such as body cams, oversight commissions, better training and more restrictive use-of-force policies. Defunders note that these things have been tried, but police killings, especially of black people, continue.

Backers of reforms called #8cantwait recently apologized for putting forward a reform package, because they said it distracted attention from the more radical defunding campaign. Last week congressional Democrats proposed a package of sweeping yet traditional police reforms, and a majority of Americans (including Republicans) appear to support it — perhaps because they see it as a more comfortable approach than defunding or abolishing police agencies.

* It’s not crazy.

Transferring funding from armed law enforcement to other first responders is not, in and of itself, insane. Even many police would agree that they are the wrong people to deal with mental health crises. Defunding police does not mean defunding public safety. But at its best it should mean reconsidering the most effective means to attain public safety, how much it should cost, who should pay the freight, and who should do the job.

You really need to do some research before spouting off.

You do this all too often.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

Minnesota didn’t vote to join the defund the police movement. They voted to ABOLISH it.

No police. Zero.

They want to replace the department with a violence prevention program.

When they were asked “what will happen in the event of a mass shooting” they literally said they don’t know.

They didn’t say “umm the police”. They said, they don’t know. Because there will be no police.

So, no, “umm police” is not the answer. As they will no longer exist under this proposal.
 

 

  • Like 1

96769446_10102201393347587_5716922665810264064_n.jpg
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HipKat said:

Ummm, police?

 

Hip, read the title again. You seem to having a real problem with the difference between “abolish” and “defund “. Then you start the whole broken record and quote some piece of crap story spinning defund police into a good time. Well, Minneapolis “abolish” the police department. Mean slightly more then defund, meaning NO POLICE. Meaning none, nada, zero or cero for our Spanish posters. So if they “abolish” the police who responded to a mass shooting? Dur umm police? Go to the tenth post or so in the thread where Lit posted that the board was asked the same question. They didn’t give your bullshit response  educating us how defunding the police is a good thing. They said “we don’t have all the answers. Well they better figure them out soon, because this is going to be a disaster. 
 

 

 

  • Like 1

Ed Oliver is my adopt-a-Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's get this fucking party started Minneapolis!!  Do it now!

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

48372057_1969525509802965_4664389317303468032_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=8fd3638a10a1407561bc1873032b72c4&oe=5C95B70A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DannyBoy said:

Let's get this fucking started Minneapolis!!  Do it now.  

Powderhorn Park is a sign of what's to come for Minneapolis.  :niterider:

 

  • Sad 1

process.jpg

 

Fuck this team

I'll tie a frying pan to my ass so you hurt your penis, you ****ing homo!

Shut the fuck up dark cloud pussy

Anyone who is foolish enough to not be a Buffalo Bills fan can go f*ck themselves with a wooden shovel handle.

image-trump-emoticon.png

also, all that shit in your signature is beyond annoying. just like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...