https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/c...e-traffic-stops-instead-of-police/ar-BB17k19a
What could possibly go wrong?
What could possibly go wrong?
Liberals are living in bizarro world
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
They want to send social workers to deal with lunatics without knowing if they're armed or not; this is just a natural next step for the lunatic left.
I would have to look into this more before I form my opinion of it, but you realize it would still be city employees right? Why do you think it is going to lead to sex traffickers pulling people over? I will say thats there is an argument that police should be involved in fewer traffic stops. If someone runs a red light without incident for instance, we can get that information from cameras in the lights. Now obviously excessive speeding or a driver that is impaired is another story, but a lot of traffic issues can be handled with cameras.
It would be much easier for someone to impersonate a city employee than a police officer. I've told my daughters if someone ever tries to pull them over and the car doesn't say police on it, don't stop. This approach would condition people to stop for anyone that wants to pull them over.
I’m with you except for the fact that cameras are being struck down in courts all over America. Or removed on the will of the people.
I highly doubt they will be in umarked cars. It is essentially just creating a unit that only deals in certain types of traffic violations.
Do you know how many cops end up shot and killed in traffic stops when pulling over lunatics with outstanding warrants?
This is an insane policy that only insane people would support.
Yes, the idea behind this it to prevent those sorts of things. These people wouldnt be working outstanding warrants. Again, I will have to read more on it to decide if I am for it or not, but the thinking is that if there is less of a threat when giving a ticket, that it actually benefits both sides.
Maybe, just maybe, that's why its only a Cambridge city council proposal supported by a couple council members.
I love how the Usual Suspects turn a blind eye to Trump's daily insanity but spotlight a stupid proposal that will never pass by some city council member. Good job, guys!
Can you get through a single thread without bringing up Trump?Maybe, just maybe, that's why its only a Cambridge city council proposal supported by a couple council members.
I love how the Usual Suspects turn a blind eye to Trump's daily insanity but spotlight a stupid proposal that will never pass by some city council member. Good job, guys!
My bad.
Sorry for interrupting this riveting expose' of 'liberals living in a bizarro world.'
The two most dangerous interactions that officers have are traffic stops and domestic violence calls. Police start training for these situations in the academy and then go through additional training every year. The people pushing the social experiments are playing with the lives of the responders and, in many cases, the victims of domestic violence.
Dude, you really need to go on a ride-along in a city of any decent size. As do the people pushing these theories. It will open your eyes and help provide some perspective to form more informed opinions about issues involving policing and the community.
What's yours? You've created like 6 threads in the past 2 days, 50% of them being rage spam.
130/85, Slightly high but I'm watching my salt and doing more mountian biking. Got to drop about 20lbs probably.
How about your blood pressure. Youre in a state of constant rage your heart could probably pump up a bike tire.
THis has nothing to do with what I said. Look at the post I responded to which said cops are killed all the time with traffic stops. If that is the case, then obviously the way we do things now isnt working. It might not be this, I agree, and I would have to see more about this before forming an opinion. But we cant have this argument both ways. We cant argue on one side that police are injured, killed, etc in traffic stops, frequently but then also act like the way things are done now is working and that we shouldnt look at new ways of doing things.
Last edited:
You said "I will have to read more on it to decide if I am for it or not." What I said is directly relevant to that statement.
You form opinions on reading things. Most of what is out there is straight opinion based upon ignorant common myths. There is some factual information filtered through a perspective and then presented along with some opinions. In the rare cases that we're getting straight studies, they are retracted by the authors (as in the case of the Fryer study) because the authors take an enormous amount of heat for contradicting the narrative. So it's hard to just read up on this and have a complete understanding to form an opinion. Hence why I suggested going on a ride along to get some first hand perspective and an ability to ask whatever questions you would like and get direct answers.
If cops are being killed all the time during traffic stops (which was 85s point I responded to), then explain to me how the way things are done now is a successful way of doing things?
Last edited:
So......because cops are being blown away conducting routine traffic stops, the solution is to send unarmed city workers instead?
I didnt say that, and said several times that I would have to read more about this before forming my opinion (sk8 even went off on me telling me reading does no good). What I am saying is that you cant have this both ways. If cops are being shot and injured frequently, then looking at new ways of doing things is not a bad thing. We can disagree on what will or wont work, but unless you are ok with cops being killed, which I am pretty sure you arent, then why in the world would you be opposed to looking at other ways of doing things?
I fully agree with looking at ways to prevent these situations in the future, but veering in these directions is just nuts.
One way I'd fully support is to stop letting felons out of prison and keep them behind bars. Whenever you hear of someone killing a cop over a traffic stop, that person routinely has a laundry list of arrests and time spent in prison. Our justice system is a joke.
This is getting into a whole new topic. I agree our justice system is a joke, but probably wouldnt agree with you why it is a joke.
I'm all for looking at new ways of policing and employing technology to make it safer. But that's not what is going on. They're trying to remove the police from the equation with the implication that the police are the problem. You're still going to have people conducting traffic stops on the side of the road getting mowed over by drivers, getting shot by people that don't want to get caught, etc.
You mentioned earlier that the new traffic enforcement won't be able to check for arrest warrants. Since you brought that up, can we take a minute to discuss warrant enforcement as a whole? Warrants are issued for a number of reasons, from simple failure to appear in court to an authorization to arrest someone for heinous and violent crimes, such as the arrest warrant issued for Markeith Lloyd. So the urgency of picking people up varies but, for the most part, you don't want to miss out on chances to pick people up. Traffic stops are perfect opportunities for this because its an interaction that the subject of the warrant most likely doesn't plan for or can't avoid. Losing this opportunity means less chances to take violent offenders off the road or to ensure that a single mother gets her child support paid by the deadbeat dad.
I was going to try to dispute your point, but with your reading comprehension being so awful, you're probably right that reading does you no good. You're just going to insert your own bias into what you read anyways so it'll all just be a confirmation exercise regardless.
But since I'm a glutton for punishment, I'll make one more effort. Just reading about it will only provide you with an incomplete understanding of the issues. You have the opportunity to request and take a ride along with actual police officers as they conduct their daily duties. Doing so will provide you a perspective on the issue that you will never see in any articles, studies, or blogs. If you want all of the perspectives on the issue before forming your opinion, you can avail yourself of the opportunity and augment the incomplete set of information that is available on the internet.
Or you can not and be comfortable making your decision on incomplete information. Obviously it's your choice.
Dude, I am talking about reading the actual policy. At this point this isnt a policy, it is literally just an idea thrown out by 2 city council members. If/when, it proceeds, it will obviously go through more conversation and have to be voted on, etc etc.
I wish I could satisfy your irrational and obsessive demand but I’m a healthy person and I don’t have blood pressure equipment in my home. It’s also Friday evening so it’s weird this is the first thing you think to ask about. Go make your own happy hour in the corn fields, I’m sure the birds won’t mind.
Imagine It being Friday night and him bumping a thread to check your safety.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Updated: CJ Walker decommits from TCU, later commits to ECU 🏀- Latest: UCF_SystemsEng
-
-
