It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's Plan for Fighting Crime - Tougher Cops

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: WanderingNomadd
a reply to: jedi_hamster



even if it requires police state tactics as a temporary solution, you don't really have a choice. the alternative is not being safe in your own country


Ouch. If there are to many people thinking like that America is in for a rough time. Anyone keeping an eye on politics, even Mainstream Politics, would understand "Temporary Solutions" are not going anywhere. Remember America is waging a "War on Terror" Amongst a "War on drugs" And a "War on Poverty". Next is the new "War on Crime".

I always thought police state would be forced but Im starting to wonder now if it will just be accepted, even encouraged.


those solutions that shouldn't be required in the first place, were put in places because of the war on terror that shouldn't happen. 9/11 happened for a reason, it all began much earlier, and it's all US government fault. Trump knows this, afaik he said the US shouldn't have started messing with the middle east in the first place.

so true, it's not that easy to remove a temporary solution when the reason for that solution to be in place hasn't been eliminated. still, willing to fight with the reason helps.




posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 03:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: WanderingNomadd
a reply to: jedi_hamster



what you're saying, may happen,

Thats good enough for it not to happen then. It won't go away. once you have it, its there to stay. This is exactly what they want, they already have military freedom, political freedom, economical freedom, control of speech and censorship, Media control, Control of law, Immunity to the law. Police freedom is the final nail in the coffin and its practically already there it just needs to be implemented offically.


as i've said, may - doesn't have to. depends on the police - how good they are at their job.

do you really think that some local high ranking police officer in chicago would want to go after your freedoms? if something like that would be about to happen, the order would come from the very top and local police officers would be against it - but they would have a choice: "do as you're told to do or GTFO".

besides, you're spewing a lot of BS. for example, there's no way for the police to control people armed to the teeth and outnumbering the police to such a degree they're afraid to go to some places. you would have to disarm the population first, and that is simply not going to happen.

calm down and stop acting like a drama queen.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 03:26 AM
link   
a reply to: jedi_hamster



Trump knows this, afaik he said the US shouldn't have started messing with the middle east in the first place.


I know your not a supporter of trump but you have to remember how every single president has made major claims on policies then performed a complete 180. Smoke and Mirrors. If it keeps happening you have to start accepting it could happen at anytime by candidate.


as i've said, may - doesn't have to. depends on the police - how good they are at their job.

May should be enough to prevent a permanent police state.


do you really think that some local high ranking police officer in chicago would want to go after your freedoms? if something like that would be about to happen, the order would come from the very top and local police officers would be against it - but they would have a choice: "do as you're told to do or GTFO".

I think you underestimated to police group mentality. I think you overestimate the decency of those in power. The higher ranking an officer the more worried I would be. Means he has probably made the "right" connections. It is well known military works that way, those that fall in line best are those considered for promotion. Same with police. It is a mixture of peer presure and brotherhood.


besides, you're spewing a lot of BS. for example, there's no way for the police to control people armed to the teeth and outnumbering the police to such a degree they're afraid to go to some places. you would have to disarm the population first, and that is simply not going to happen.

You should deny Ignorance. Police abuse armed citizens all the time, cause the armed citizens know they will spend a long time in prison for murder, police will at worse lose their job.


calm down and stop acting like a drama queen.



Good luck


edit on 23-8-2016 by WanderingNomadd because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-8-2016 by WanderingNomadd because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 03:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: LifeMode
a reply to: pheonix358

He is actually correct on this issue. I have served 20 years in the military and if you want to control a situation you have to take control of it with uncommon force. There is no other way if you want to control it long term and not just for a small window of time. Chicago is a war zone. Totally out of control with gun violence. Their Democratic leaders have failed them. I would even step it up to a military operation along with police. It could be cleaned up in less than 6 months. The violence would come to a grinding halt.


In other words, you'd either impose martial law, a literal police state, or much worse. How many "collateral damage" deaths would your policies create? And how many constitutional amendments will your warzone tactics violate? Do you even care? You obviously don't care about the constitutional rights of the millions of Americans in and around Chicago, otherwise you wouldn't suggest such an atrocious plan.

And no, Chicago is NOT a warzone. It's a US city of 2.7 million people, with a metropolitan population of more than 9 million Americans. The vast majority of Chicagoans have nothing to do with its notorious violence. Can you even identify specifically what the problem is there or who the "combatants" are? Or would you simply target hundreds of thousands of ethnic minorities because of your nonexistent intel?

And since members of every demographic commit crimes in Chicago, would you also target their demographics too?



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 03:46 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Well apparently they can solve it in a week so....either they are going to nuke them all or lock them all up via curfews and heavy vehicles patrolling the streets.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 03:49 AM
link   
a reply to: WanderingNomadd

Who will they target? People from all demographics commit crimes there. There's even the Chicago Stock Exchange, which has its share of corporate criminals. So which crimes will they tolerate and which ones are supposedly unacceptable?



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 03:56 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I am not talking about demographics. If you are going to solve crime in 1, ONE, Week you don't do inspections and look for clues. You go in heavy and view everyone as the enemy. Regardless of resouces, even with military involvment, you will be outnumbered by the citizens. So would have to be curfews and sweeping raids of houses until you have found enough drugs (probably regardless off amounts), Illegal guns, etc etc... Then you lock aload of people up and everyone thinks your special when in actual fact you could'nt solve crime in a week in a city with the whole police/army.

Intimidation only works for aslong as you are there. Question becomes when do they leave. Answer is never. Propaganda tells the worlds how great it is going down in chicago lets try it someplace else. Or WW3/Imminent Threat of WW3 kicks off and it can be pushed into place anyway.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Cleaning up Chicago. Where have I heard that before?

Oh yeah! It's been done already.

The Feds have to step in, that's all.

Won't be easy tho, they have to takedown the dems ruling the city.





edit on 8 23 2016 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: WanderingNomadd

I figured it would be something like that, hence my other post. Basically, it's declaring war on 2.7 to 9 million Americans, depending on how far outside of the city limits they'd go with it.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 04:24 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

A lack of substance. It's been a problem with Donald Trump since day 1. I find it hilarious when his answers are very simple and than he always says he's going to accomplish everything very quickly. The only way to enforce his will quickly, is to strip the public of their constitutional rights, declare Martial Law, and than march in there like the gestapo!

It's like sitting down at a table with a bunch of guys at a bar who had a little to much to drink. We've heard conversations like this before..."I would take care of it if I was president. I would just send the police in and have them beat the # out of every hooligan and gang member on the street, nobody would mess with me." Maybe that's why he has so much support from white males, lol.

He gives simple answers to huge problems. If he can quickly build a wall estimated to cost over 10 billion dollars, needing enormous manpower, and to top it all off have a poor country like Mexico pay for it, he will prove to be one hell of a magician!



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 04:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: mOjOm

A lack of substance. It's been a problem with Donald Trump since day 1. I find it hilarious when his answers are very simple and than he always says he's going to accomplish everything very quickly. The only way to enforce his will quickly, is to strip the public of their constitutional rights, declare Martial Law, and than march in there like the gestapo!

It's like sitting down at a table with a bunch of guys at a bar who had a little to much to drink. We've heard conversations like this before..."I would take care of it if I was president. I would just send the police in and have them beat the # out of every hooligan and gang member on the street, nobody would mess with me." Maybe that's why he has so much support from white males, lol.

He gives simple answers to huge problems. If he can quickly build a wall estimated to cost over 10 billion dollars, needing enormous manpower, and to top it all off have a poor country like Mexico pay for it, he will prove to be one hell of a magician!



escort all illegal imigrants to the mexican border and make them an offer: "you're building a wall here or you'll end up on the other side of it. oh, and if you'll build it fast enough, you'll all get citizenship."

you would have thousands of mexicans coming to the border to help with building the wall, carrying mexican bricks with them.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 05:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: mOjOm

A lack of substance. It's been a problem with Donald Trump since day 1. I find it hilarious when his answers are very simple and than he always says he's going to accomplish everything very quickly. The only way to enforce his will quickly, is to strip the public of their constitutional rights, declare Martial Law, and than march in there like the gestapo!

It's like sitting down at a table with a bunch of guys at a bar who had a little to much to drink. We've heard conversations like this before..."I would take care of it if I was president. I would just send the police in and have them beat the # out of every hooligan and gang member on the street, nobody would mess with me." Maybe that's why he has so much support from white males, lol.

He gives simple answers to huge problems. If he can quickly build a wall estimated to cost over 10 billion dollars, needing enormous manpower, and to top it all off have a poor country like Mexico pay for it, he will prove to be one hell of a magician!


Actually what I have seen Trump do, throughout the Primaries and now the General Election, is to:

1) Very clearly identify problems that need to be solved
2) Make a broad statement (sometimes over-the-top) saying that, as President, he would quickly solve the problem
3) Then consult with senior people who know the problems, and workable solutions, more intimately than he does (nobody can be an expert in all things)
4) Then begins to flesh out an action plan, that takes into consideration the complexities, the nuances and the legalities involved in solving the issue
5) Begins to make more detailed and nuanced statements about the problem, and how he intends to solve it

The key thing here is that he never wavers from the identified problem, and that he will fix it as quickly as possible. He is not afraid to walk back his initial statements as he learns more about specific issues - but he never backs down from his commitment to fix the problem.

This progression was witnessed (and still is) on the issue of illegal immigration, dealing with radical Islam, trade imbalances, the war against ISIS and Al Qaeda, Obamacare, the VA, etc.

Like any successful businessman, he can quickly identify serious problems (call them opportunities to improve, if you will). He will then study the matter, using experts to guide him to a quick but long-term solution. He will decide on an action plan, that as much as possible balances all conflicting considerations.

Then...and this is the part that traditional politicians can't seem to bring themselves to...he will act!

The inner cities of what were once great American metropolises are crumbling, literally rotting and decaying. This is due to a combination of factors...a dramatic decline in meaningful employment opportunities, the near disappearance of the societal glue of nuclear families, dysfunctional schools, the growth of the drug and gang culture, a never ending cycle of despair and dependence on Government hand outs, limited mental health care resources and facilities, etc., etc.

Sometimes, to save the patient, the first thing you have to do is to stop the bleeding - then you can turn your attention to treating all of the secondary infections, side-effects and affected organs.

Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, Milwaukee...and many more American cities...are bleeding. Drastic action needs to be taken to stop the bleeding, and to normalize and to stabalize the situation.

Hillary Clinton, and for the most part Democrats in general, seem to be perfectly okay with how things are in the inner-cities and how things are progressing.

Trump, at least, is not afraid to step up and say there is a big problem here that needs to be addressed pronto. While everybody is getting their shorts in a knot here about him saying that a "tough" and experienced Chicago cop thinks he knows how to put a quick stop to the rampant killings in Chicago...let's not forget that Trump has also been saying that, to completely solve the problem, the education system needs to be fixed, good jobs need to be available, taxes need to go down, illegal workers need to be sent home - and, yes, law and order needs to be restored.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: jedi_hamster




do you really think that some local high ranking police officer in chicago would want to go after your freedoms?


Have you seen the the top cop in Chicago?
When concealed carry was passed here 3 years ago, he threw a fit and basically said he'd tell his officers to shoot first and ask questions later. He was fired over the shooting of a black teenager by a white police officer. The Chicago Police had "black sites" where they took people and tortured them for days. He would have had no problem violating your rights and the new one is no better.

The Mayor, Rahm Emanuel, is an old buddy of Obama's and he's just as crooked as Hillary and Obama.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Why are you complaining about, M0j0m, how you seen the new police force in this nation, they are no Tough they are mostly very much out of shape, that is why they are shooting first and asking questions later because they don't want to deal with the chasing, too much work.

Perhaps Hillary will bring a Robocop type of police force or better yet, why no use drones to shot the bad guys, no humans in site no guilty party, after all you can not sue a drone, I am right? I am right.

Killer drums under Hillary.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: LifeMode
a reply to: pheonix358

He is actually correct on this issue. I have served 20 years in the military and if you want to control a situation you have to take control of it with uncommon force. There is no other way if you want to control it long term and not just for a small window of time. Chicago is a war zone. Totally out of control with gun violence. Their Democratic leaders have failed them. I would even step it up to a military operation along with police. It could be cleaned up in less than 6 months. The violence would come to a grinding halt.



In other words, you would impose martial law. Fortunately, we have the Second Amendment to prevent that. Still think putting troops on the street (in violation of Posse Comitatus) is a good idea?
edit on 23-8-2016 by DJW001 because: Edit to add link.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 07:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
Don't tell me this man isn't a Fascist Dictator in the making. He has no idea what the hell he's doing!!! WTF people. What do you think will happen after he brutalizes some ghettos for a bit?? Who will be next on the list??? People who criticize him, or the media, or the Sovereign Citizen Movement or perhaps Democrats, I mean it could be anyone. Maybe he'll send them after everyone who made jokes about his tiny hands for all we know. The man is completely out of his mind and dangerous. Not just because he wants to allow such things but for the fact that he has no idea what is even legal or constitutional.


Who's next? The media and the 1st Amendment.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 07:45 AM
link   


listen to Trump and try to figure out on your own what he means.


That's the problem. He doesn't even know. He seems to be the ultimate example of talk is cheap.



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Yeah make the police tougher!

Remove there arms and give them guns for arms and Rocket launchers!

And forget trial by jury! Allow execution on site for any infraction!
edit on 23-8-2016 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
Yeah make the police tougher!

Remove there ares and give them guns for arms and Rocket launchers!

And forget trial by jury! Allow execution on site for any infraction!

America 4 years after Trump is elected:



posted on Aug, 23 2016 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

When did you become such a pessimist? I seriously doubt that it would take an entire Presidential term for things to get that bad. I think that realistically we would be seeing that roll out by next Memorial Day



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join