Why would disbanding a plain clothes unit and transferring them to uniformed officers increase shootings? Wouldn't the existence of more uniformed officers help prevent crime as people would refrain from criminal activity when they know the cops are around?

It’s much easier to catch people when they don’t know you’re the police from 3 blocks away. And a plain clothes unit is not tied to a radio so they won’t be dispatched to domestics, mental, shopliftings, etc., which gives them more time to be proactive.

Doesn't that run counter to broken windows policing? Theory being people are less willing to perform crimes when the police are right there?

As for the radio, can't you have a specific uniformed officers who aren't on everything else duty?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Broken windows is more about controlling public disorder by targeting what people consider low level offenses. And of course people are less willing to commit crimes in the presence of a uniformed officer, but someone (most people?) will just wait until that uniform is gone and continue whatever they were doing/going to do.

As far as keeping something like a uniformed gun/drug unit, of course you can. But people won’t know that they aren’t on everything else duty and will still approach them with domestics, mental, etc., And telling people, “Sorry, I know I’m a cop but that’s not my job,” doesn’t go over very well.

It does seem like one of the big reasons NYPD dismantled the plain clothes unit is that they tend to kill a disproportionate amount of civilians (partially due to what they are looking at and partially due to people thinking some criminals are trying to take them down rather than the cops). Which, of course, erodes public trust:

https://theintercept.com/2018/05/09/...plain-clothes/

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Right, but in order to do so you have to put a lot more police on the streets. Part of that is to give the impression that the area is patrolled well - like the rich areas of the city.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I don’t know about New York but I know my city’s distribution of officers is directly related to the volume of calls. So the “rich” areas tend to have significantly less police presence as there aren’t nearly as many calls for service.

Dont worry you have actually answered every one of his questions so he just moves on onto another talking point.

NYC has a good deal more districts in Manhattan and Brooklyn (& Queens) than the Bronx, even though the Bronx has the highest crime of any borough (and it's population is similar to Manhattan). Part of it is undoubtedly wanting to make the touristy parts squeaky clean (like 5 years ago DeBlasio added 50 more cops to patrol Times Square even though it's well past time it's been cleaned up - while the Bronx still had issues, though it's much much better than it was in the 80s and 90s). This has led to the Bronx having slower 911 response times than the rest of the city as well. (Oh, and in case any of y'all are wondering there is no 99th precinct in Brooklyn)

On a side note, I was reading that between 1990 and 1999, NYC under Bratton and Guiliani increased police officers by 41%. The vast majority of those uniformed patrol officers. Seemingly Camden did similarly when it repurposed it's police force.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Panerd, these guys are admittedly over the top, but they basically reaffirm a lot of the things you're saying.

Pretty neat.

Image of Thomas Jefferson alongside Black descendant holds 'a mirror' to America

Interesting pic, odd combination.

Open carry does make me somewhat uncomfortable (good trigger finger discipline though unlike the MO couple) but assume these guys had the right permits etc.

Armed Black Lives Matter activists and right-wing groups unite at gun rights rally | Daily Mail Online

That has to be fake news. We've been repeatedly told in recent weeks that such a thing could never happen in America - the nation's far too racist to permit it and the protestors would be immediately disbanded if not shot if they were openly carrying and didn't have the right pigmentation on display.

Unless they then proceeded to storm up the capitol steps and got in police officers face, i do see a few differences. No ?

Umm, I'm not going to argue that black people could never protest like this, but let's not pretend that every picture of this event wasn't predominantly white, just like the one above.

There are large groups of people that have a big desire that this becomes less a protest and more a shooting war.

Yeah, there's twice as many folks in hawaiian shirts & boogaloo branded gear than there are black people, which seems just as remarkable to me. I mean it was a savvy move to invite some BLM protesters, but the article clearly says it was organized by the Virginia Knights and the keynote guest was a Republican senator. Some armed black people at a right-wing rally is still a right-wing rally.

Here's a better example for anybody's libertarian hot take needs (though it contains only references to video and a photo of an entirely different day):

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-g...-idUSKBN24605G

More. Video of nice peaceful, armed protest.

(I like the guy in the gas mask)


https://twitter.com/i/status/1279506948334006272

And all wearing face protection.

I guess this is one way to get conservatives to want more gun control :D (I keed, but seriously, you know this video makes lot of people that are otherwise very pro gun uncomfortable)

My understanding - which is not full and complete by any means - is that the group in Stone Mountain is intentionally distanced from Black Lives Matter and is actually a militia group and may as well be as far right as the KKK, just for aims of black supremacy instead of white.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I know there are some groups that BLM and many local/regional organizations fighting for change have distanced from, I believe this is one.

So I don't really know if there's a whole heck of a lot to cheer about here other than that no one was shot.

Goes to show, there's issues everywhere of course: Germany's 'Secretary of the Interior' canceled a proposed study on racial profiling with an all time lazy/condescending argument: Such a study is not necessary, because such practices are already illegal.
I kid you not ...

Another thing: Police brutality, systemic racism, and a hidden ideology helped shape American policing - Vox

Not going to claim it will pass as 100% unbiased, but to me at least it seems a well researched and genuine attempt to show some of the existing issues. Starting with an analogy whose faults were mentioned a few times here:

It got Reagan and the NRA to enact gun control in California.

They are Black Hebrew Israelites. There was a mass shooting and attempted bombing I believe in New Jersey less than a year ago with a couple.

You're right, it's a hard right fascist group. Really hate the Jews and like Hitler. I think a leader of a white supremacist group nailed it when he said they're just like us, just colors reversed.

SPLC has a bunch on them. They are not good people and another example of how stupid our gun laws are.

A good apple stepped up to call out some bad apples. They stripped him of police powers.

Joliet Police Sgt. Javier Esqueda, Who Blew Whistle On Death Of Eric Lurry In Police Custody, Stripped Of Police Powers – CBS Chicago

I don't get this. I'm all for people have plenty of space to modify and adjust their views, but I thought we just established not long ago that supremacist rhetoric from non-whites is just fine and dandy.

I don't recall that one. I seem to remember arguing for equality, particularly when adjusted for past grievances and disadvantages, but I don't remember supremacist being ok.

SI

Let's see what happens to Desean Jackson.

You need to remember the precedent the Eagles set with Riley Cooper when he was caught on film using the N word. 2013 was a different time, but he was fined and suspended for a week IIRC from training camp and forgiven by his teammates.

Doing anything more drastic with Jackson is going to open the floodgates of people calling out hypocrisy or saying it only matters more now because the owner is Jewish. So, probably a fine, brief suspension and sensitivity training.

Then to get ahead of any future issues maybe they release a memo advising their players and officials the going forward there will be zero tolerance for any racist/bigoted statements and players/staff engaging in any type of behavior under these auspices will be immediately released, or whatever punishment they deem fitting.

I think if this was about any other team but Philly that didn't have that precedent set he would probably be released.

Oh, I've already seen "the Eagles have cut DeSean Jackson and signed Riley Cooper" jokes on my FB feed, so yeah.

That is a good point, a very good point. I'm guessing absolutely nothing will happen to him though (not even a game) and Riley Cooper would be banished from the league in 2020.

Riley Cooper played a few more years after the incident and even got a lucrative extension. He is out of the league now because he is not good.

Cooper was also never suspended or fined by the NFL. The Eagles fined him an undisclosed amount but otherwise nothing negative happened to him.

Are you referring to the issue we had regarding the author's twitter bio awhile back?

Not only that - there were statements by others around the same time, other conversations further back about supremacism in general, etc. - but that's part of it, yes.

Chicago PD got caught lying about arrests and then took down the API to records when reporters spotted it and called them on it.

Chicago Police Department arrest API shutdown is its own kind of ‘cover up’ - Chicago Reporter

That St. Louis couple turned out to be giant sacks of shit so congrats to those who defended them I guess.

Portland Place couple who confronted protesters have a long history of not backing down | Metro | stltoday.com

Damn, those really are some world class assholes! Suing his dad while he's in a memory facility, suing to get their absurd mansion, then suing to keep gay people out of their neighborhood, taking a neighbor's property via a previous owner's squatter rights, kicking families out of trailers for bouncing a rent check during the covids and then suing them for the outstanding balance of the lease, smashing some Jewish organization's property and then demanding they clean it up, making the younglings cry.....they're like Dickens villains.

That's irrelevant. The only thing that really matters in this incident are whether the actions taken by the McCloskeys are allowable under the law.

Speaking of which, Kimberly Gardner, St. Louis Circuit Attorney, is considering filing charges against the McCloskey couple, stating “I am alarmed at the events that occurred over the weekend, where peaceful protesters were met by guns and a violent assault.” Interestingly, Gardner wasn’t “alarmed” by how protestors had broken the law by trespassing on private property. She added that her office would use the full power of Missouri law to hold the McCloskey’s accountable.

I don’t know if Real Property Law was an elective or a required course at Ms. Gardner’s law school. If the latter, perhaps she ditched class or slept through it. Clearly she has no knowledge on the bundle of rights associated with private property ownership, the definition of “private streets”, “private sidewalks” or “trespass.”

Albert Watkins, the McCloskey’s attorney said “If Kimberly Gardner wants to press charges against two attorneys who are protecting their home and their family and themselves on their own property, I will tell you that it will be nothing short of the proverbial clusterf--- with the ensuing assertions that she's doing this for political purposes.”

Well, sounds like she's in good company...

Watkins, the lawyer representing the couple, is a friend of theirs and former neighbor who sued the Portland Place trustees in 2010 with a claim that he had tried to get them to take down a sick oak tree which later fell and damaged his property. Watkins lost and was ordered to pay the trustees court costs of $52,000.

I don't care whether they did something illegal or not. Just pointing out they are giant pieces of shit who like to start trouble. Article makes it clear what they are about.

Yep typical democrats.

I figured this was snopes worthy:

Did Mark McCloskey Donate to Democrats?

What's True
Over the past 20 years, Mark McCloskey has made political contributions to both Democratic and Republican political campaigns. Between 2004 and 2012, FEC records show he donated to Democratic candidates, and more recently McCloskey has donated to a few Democrats on the local level.

What's False
However, the majority of McCloskey's political donations since 2012 have gone to Republicans, including many contributions to U.S. President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign.

I would think it would be extremely easy to simply stop (repeatedly) defending these assholes? YMMV I guess.

And there's the crux of it. Like so many issues, we can't come to agreement when we aren't even interested in asking the same questions.

Some people are assholes and like/admire other assholes. That's just the way it is, it seems.

Since I'm one of these people that admire assholes I'm guessing... here's a small lesson on St. Louis politics. The current prosecuting attorney does not prosecute anyone. Looting, assault are those in the criminal code?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...X3tHKZ&ampcf=1

However she has decided this is worthy of following up on and likely prosecuting. She worked for the former prosecutor Jennifer Joyce who decided to charge a policeman five years later with first degree murder knowing full well there was no case for murder.

Former St. Louis cop arrested, charged with first-degree murder for 2011 police shooting | Law and order | stltoday.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...olice-officer/


However shockingly the city erupted in violence when a not guilty verdict came (from a judge who was confused with why he was charged with murder) on someone who should have been prosecuted for manslaughter and would have been convicted.

It either gross incompetence or (IMO) by design and she knows exactly what she is doing.

These are horrible people but they have broken no laws and its all about stoking the flames of race in good old St. Louis.

Overall I have a lot of respect for Malcolm Jenkins, but this comes off as hypocritical. He ripped Drew Brees for being out of touch and ignorant after his comments about the anthem, then he posts some shit like this. News flash Malcolm, the problems of the Black community are all of societies problems, just like the problems of the Jewish community are all of societies problems.

Things get better when, and only when we ALL work together as a community to address injustice and equality. These issues can't be resolved as individuals or segregated groups and he, as much as anybody should know that. He is entitled to his thoughts, just as Brees is, but this is really promoting a double standard. You can stay focused and still acknowledge others and show compassion without being so dismissive.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CCd-F9Eh...ource=ig_embed

That's a great lesson and all, but is entirely unrelated (and contradictory) to you calling them out as Democrats.

No we didn't, and you know that. This is a trollish response.