Truck Drivers Say They Won’t Deliver To Cities with Defunded Police Departments

a reply to: TheRedneck

Whats wrong with someone paying for a service and then complaining when they don't get good service?

a reply to: Identified

So you are not willing to reply to my post? Go figure, I'm glad I live 2000km apart from you (and yes that is an estimated distance).

Regards,

T

originally posted by: ketsuko
But it is about the riots.

The thread title says otherwise.

It's also a post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy. A police department that has been reformed does not equate to producing riots.

a reply to: Toinski

Ask a question that wasn't already answered in the very thread you are posting and I might be inclined to engage.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
It's sort of like people who call for the abolition of the police, except when they need them to stop the guy who is breaking down the front door... then why are the police taking so damn long?!?

How many times have we heard on this site when it comes to the Second Amendment that this isn't what the police are for but this is what my Desert Eagle Point Five Zero is for?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Clearly the police force they had is what got us into all this to begin with...

originally posted by: Identified
Clearly the police force they had is what got us into all this to begin with...

Which is the irony.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yuuge irony.

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

I think that the very systems that are being dismantled in the US are the stumbling blocks behind doing things like deploying the robots.

Problematic as those systems may, or may not be.. They are stemming the tide of some pretty nightmarish stuff.

Its a global plan, with localized chipping away at the current system. People would get freaked out if this stuff was deployed in unison, in every major city in the world.

People should be very wary about the world we are marching towards. Those pesky human police would really get in the way of some of this stuff..

Once the Constitution is a bit further weakened, and forces like the police are out of the way.. We will probably see a lot more of this sprouting up worldwide. Probably under the auspices of fighting injustice, racism, or The Virus.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: ketsuko
But it is about the riots.

The thread title says otherwise.

It's also a post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy. A police department that has been reformed does not equate to producing riots.

You want to tell me we don't need a thing; you don't base that movement off the backs of violent criminal behavior that the thing in question is there to help keep in check.

It's similar to the person with half the teeth left in their head telling me I don't need to ever see dentist in my life.

originally posted by: ketsuko
You want to tell me we don't need a thing; you don't base that movement off the backs of violent criminal behavior that the thing in question is there to help keep in check.

Why is it that I'm able to not equate protests and asking for police reform with looting and you're having a really hard time doing the same?

I can disassociate the bad apples from the ones that are law abiding, it isn't difficult, and recognize that the people who are protesting for change have legitimate concerns.

a reply to: ketsuko

Hell nah! They have squat.

You've spoken with all of them and know all their plans?

a reply to: Serdgiam

Interesting links, the last one specially.

You know what is somewhat ironic to me? This:

Police officers have raised concerns about using "biased" artificial-intelligence tools, a report commissioned by one of the UK government's advisory bodies reveals.

The study warns such software may "amplify" prejudices, meaning some groups could become more likely to be stopped in the street and searched.

but they explain it with this

"That human bias is then introduced into the datasets and bias is then generated in the outcomes of the application of those datasets."

And I think this will be a problem. However, what about pure statistics, cold hard numbers derived from the data set of convictions? Sure the human bias factor will still be there but these cold hard numbers might lead to a "bias" that is not bias.

And that is what the good-people are frightened about, I think. When something can not be explained away by anecdotes or feelings.

originally posted by: Identified
a reply to: Toinski

Ask a question that wasn't already answered in the very thread you are posting and I might be inclined to engage.

I asked your opinion and thoughts. Not what other people say or think.

What do you think? My question is valid.

Regards,

T

* If you are already answered my multiple question please direct me to your answers which are related to my questions. Thanks!

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: ketsuko
You want to tell me we don't need a thing; you don't base that movement off the backs of violent criminal behavior that the thing in question is there to help keep in check.

Why is it that I'm able to not equate protests and asking for police reform with looting and you're having a really hard time doing the same?

I can disassociate the bad apples from the ones that are law abiding, it isn't difficult, and recognize that the people who are protesting for change have legitimate concerns.

Perhaps because the people who want change don't denounce the criminals? They're fine with letting suspected arsonists out on bail immediately? Little things like that.

a reply to: Toinski

You asked me specifically:

When there is no police, no laws enforced, what do you think will happen? 

I have answered this in this thread.
In fact, I already answered the loaded assumption no police means no laws enforced as well.

Read back. I'm not going to break it down for you snce it will require you to follow the entire thread to completely understand.

a reply to: drussell41

That's a wild generalization based on nothing but your beliefs.

originally posted by: drussell41
Perhaps because the people who want change don't denounce the criminals? They're fine with letting suspected arsonists out on bail immediately? Little things like that.

You're doing the same thing, lumping them all together.

This is why when it happens, and I'm fairly certain there will be some reform, your side wont be a part of it because you're too busy being petty. It's something pretty much every sane person can agree upon, that a government employee shouldn't be able to wantonly murder someone due to systemic failures in their department, and you're botching it up bigly.

originally posted by: Identified
a reply to: Toinski

You asked me specifically:

When there is no police, no laws enforced, what do you think will happen? 

I have answered this in this thread.
In fact, I already answered the loaded assumption no police means no laws enforced as well.

Read back. I'm not going to break it down for you snce it will require you to follow the entire thread to completely understand.

I will, maybe I misunderstood you. Then I apologize.

I will read back, maybe I missed something. If I did, sorry. If I didn't hell will break lose lol.

Just kidding though, but if I cannot find it I'm still waiting for a proper answer.

Regards,

T

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What some folks aren't picking up is the defunding issue is forcing most everyone else to quickly scramble for reform before they find themselves in a city where they are forced to defund.

Interesting how that threat seems to be an impetus for change.