Link | 2,839 Posted Monday at 05:03 PM Share Posted Monday at 05:03 PM 14 minutes ago, Silent Hill said: link you provided is full of misleading propaganda You linked FOP. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Hill | 276 Posted Monday at 05:25 PM Share Posted Monday at 05:25 PM (edited) 21 minutes ago, Link said: You linked FOP. Ah, you're right. They're probably fibbing about how many police were shot and/or killed. Oh wait, that was also a USA Today article. They're probably full of it too. Edited Monday at 05:25 PM by Silent Hill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khromak | 802 Posted Monday at 06:11 PM Share Posted Monday at 06:11 PM 42 minutes ago, Silent Hill said: Ah, you're right. They're probably fibbing about how many police were shot and/or killed. Oh wait, that was also a USA Today article. They're probably full of it too. I don't want to speak for others but I would point out that propaganda is not the same as lying or fibbing. It's a heavily slanted and one-sided view of things. Misleading is similarly not lying. There are plenty of ways to provide absolute facts in misleading ways, or to use provocative language while stating facts. See: lots of clickbait news media in 2024 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammerfestus | 4,003 Posted Monday at 06:29 PM Share Posted Monday at 06:29 PM (edited) 4 hours ago, Silent Hill said: Police serve a critical purpose and do the right thing in a vast majority of situations. I bet a lot of the "thin blue lives sniveling cowards" understand this. No one ever said they didn’t. I absolutely respect their role in society but they also need to be held to a standard orders of magnitude higher than “video gamers”. Not absolved of responsibility in all but the most egregious cases. And certainly not fetishized as the TBLSCs do. 4 hours ago, Silent Hill said: Shit like this is so out of touch - "There is a significant American subculture rooting for these dudes out there playing Rambo shooting black kids" Is there not? We’ve all seen the signs, bumper stickers, tshirts, hats, flags, billboards, shit painted on the side of an RV next to some serial killer-looking crosses on a deliverance ass looking hill in Pennsylvania etc. I guess maybe I didn’t. 1 hour ago, Silent Hill said: I'll never understand the extreme position of those who want to abolish the police, or ACAB folks, or views like Hammerfestus shared. What’s extreme about my position? The right is constantly peddling one fear after another to the American people and then waving around their arsenal of guns and puffing their chests out with their little Punisher stickers. Nothing about that behavior plays to others like they think it does. Edited Monday at 06:31 PM by Hammerfestus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Hill | 276 Posted Monday at 06:53 PM Share Posted Monday at 06:53 PM 39 minutes ago, Khromak said: I don't want to speak for others but I would point out that propaganda is not the same as lying or fibbing. It's a heavily slanted and one-sided view of things. Misleading is similarly not lying. There are plenty of ways to provide absolute facts in misleading ways, or to use provocative language while stating facts. See: lots of clickbait news media in 2024 Sure, that's a fair point, and that FOP/USA Today link I shared didn't read like propaganda at all to me. Now if it boils down to "source is related to police therefore propaganda, regardless of content", then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Hill | 276 Posted Monday at 07:13 PM Share Posted Monday at 07:13 PM 24 minutes ago, Hammerfestus said: 4 hours ago, Silent Hill said: Police serve a critical purpose and do the right thing in a vast majority of situations. I bet a lot of the "thin blue lives sniveling cowards" understand this. No one ever said they didn’t. I absolutely respect their role in society but they also need to be held to a standard orders of magnitude higher than “video gamers”. Not absolved of responsibility in all but the most egregious cases. And certainly not fetishized as the TBLSCs do. Totally agree with everything besides the sweeping notion that people who are pro-police = thin blue lives sniveling cowards = fetishizing police no matter the circumstance. Maybe I'm interpreting your stance on the latter incorrectly. 4 hours ago, Silent Hill said: Shit like this is so out of touch - "There is a significant American subculture rooting for these dudes out there playing Rambo shooting black kids" Is there not? We’ve all seen the signs, bumper stickers, tshirts, hats, flags, billboards, shit painted on the side of an RV next to some serial killer-looking crosses on a deliverance ass looking hill in Pennsylvania etc. I guess maybe I didn’t. The part I take issue with is "rooting for dudes out there playing Rambo shooting black kids", not the concept of people who support police existing . I shouldn't even have to explain why the former is wildly dishonest. Actually, I feel like you're kind of contradicting yourself. Do you respect the role of police in society, similarly to the TBL/pro-police folks, or are they just dudes playing Rambo shooting black kids? I must be missing the nuance here. 2 hours ago, Silent Hill said: I'll never understand the extreme position of those who want to abolish the police, or ACAB folks, or views like Hammerfestus shared. What’s extreme about my position? The right is constantly peddling one fear after another to the American people and then waving around their arsenal of guns and puffing their chests out with their little Punisher stickers. Nothing about that behavior plays to others like they think it does So far, your (extreme to me) position seems to involve things like: "rooting for dudes out there playing Rambo shooting black kids" Misrepresenting police killings vs. police deaths to minimize threats to police and/or embellish the threat they pose on society "an army of armed enforcers taking the lives of the people they are supposed to be protecting and serving on a whim" "Look at how many people crossing guards murder because of how scurred they are..." Reads to me like demonizing police as a whole, and would seem to fit nicely into something like the ACAB camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avatar! | 1,862 Posted Monday at 07:23 PM Share Posted Monday at 07:23 PM 2 hours ago, Silent Hill said: I agree that such statistics are completely misleading. What does "only solve 2% of crimes" mean -- Are we talking about police not finding the power tools borrowed by your neighbor and never returned? The police have very limited resources, and understandably spend most of the time trying to solve murders and other violent crimes. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/04/24/what-the-data-says-about-crime-in-the-us/ The most frequently solved violent crime tends to be homicide. Police cleared around half of murders and nonnegligent manslaughters (52.3%) in 2022. The clearance rates were lower for aggravated assault (41.4%), rape (26.1%) and robbery (23.2%). When it comes to property crime, law enforcement agencies cleared 13.0% of burglaries, 12.4% of larcenies/thefts and 9.3% of motor vehicle thefts in 2022. There were some studies done decades ago that claimed police had no substantial effect on reducing crime. Those articles are now believed to have been biased or in the very least egregiously incorrect -- While researchers have tended to find that police have only a small impact on crime (e.g. Levitt, 1997), recent studies suggest that in some cases the effect of concentrated policing may be substantial. https://crimesciencejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40163-023-00193-4 In summary: big difference between police reform and education (good idea) and defunding the police (bad idea). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khromak | 802 Posted Monday at 07:41 PM Share Posted Monday at 07:41 PM 18 minutes ago, avatar! said: defunding the police (bad idea). What do you mean when you say "defunding the police" is a bad idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khromak | 802 Posted Monday at 07:47 PM Share Posted Monday at 07:47 PM 51 minutes ago, Silent Hill said: Sure, that's a fair point, and that FOP/USA Today link I shared didn't read like propaganda at all to me. Now if it boils down to "source is related to police therefore propaganda, regardless of content", then so be it. IDK...this seems pretty pro-police to me: Quote Yoes said repairing the”adversarial relationship” between the public and the police could help keep officers safer. He urged Congress to pass laws that would increase federal penalties against people who intentionally target law enforcement officers. Quote Patrick Yoes, national president of the fraternal order, called the number of officers shot “drastic” and attributed the increase in nonfatal shootings to a number of factors, including the “long-term effects of a lack of respect for law enforcement.” Quote I do think that the number we’re reporting for 2023 is masking that in the real world, on the streets, officers are facing really dangerous and increasingly dangerous circumstances I'm not saying it's the worst thing in the world, I think the article is...alright? But I wouldn't go to the NRA for balanced reporting on gun control legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avatar! | 1,862 Posted Monday at 08:13 PM Share Posted Monday at 08:13 PM 20 minutes ago, Khromak said: What do you mean when you say "defunding the police" is a bad idea? Defunding the police is about removing funds from police departments. I believe in better police education and more police accountability (for example, every police officer needs to wear a bodycam, tracking overtime, etc.), but police departments are already stretched too thin, and studies have shown that cities that did indeed "defund" the police are now quickly backtracking as crime has skyrocketed. For example -- https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2023/08/council-approved-budget-contains-record-high-police-funding-sparking-dissent-from-both-sides/ Three years after mass protests against police violence and racial injustice spurred the now-defunct Reimagining Public Safety initiative, City Council on Wednesday voted 10-1 to approve the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget, which includes record-high police funding and sets a new minimum for future city spending. Council’s decision has provoked both the police union and police reform advocates, who agree that increased funding will do little to alleviate police staffing shortages – and on little else. “The end … result of policy decisions are felt for many years, and the reality is that we’re not going to hire our way out of this problem for 10 to 15 years down the road,” he said. However, as Austin is learning, you can't throw the police department under the bus and then when you realize your mistake just hire a bunch of new people and everything will be dandy. At the end of the day, we do indeed need police reforms and to make sure they are held accountable. BUT, we also need to support the police and provide them with more funds to do their work properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Hill | 276 Posted Monday at 08:21 PM Share Posted Monday at 08:21 PM 23 minutes ago, Khromak said: IDK...this seems pretty pro-police to me: I'm not saying it's the worst thing in the world, I think the article is...alright? But I wouldn't go to the NRA for balanced reporting on gun control legislation. Definitely pro-police but it also reads just fine to me, definitely wouldn't categorize as propaganda. Patrick Yoes, national president of the fraternal order, called the number of officers shot “drastic” and attributed the increase in nonfatal shootings to a number of factors, including the “long-term effects of a lack of respect for law enforcement. I do think that the number we’re reporting for 2023 is masking that in the real world, on the streets, officers are facing really dangerous and increasingly dangerous circumstances For example, I'd be inclined to agree with the term "drastic" as accurate representation of a record number of police shot and a 14% increase from the previous year. I'd also agree with lack of respect for police being a factor in the rise in those numbers. Some comments on this very thread, show the disdain against LE, and the sensationalism around situations that are legit rare and some that may even be justified, doesn't help that sentiment. That last comment is accurate too IMO as you commonly see, again even on this thread, people undermine the dangers of being in LE because roofers fall off roofs and pizza delivery drivers get into car crashes. Never mind that LE are normally equipped to, and will, actually defend themselves thus not becoming a statistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Hill | 276 Posted Monday at 08:33 PM Share Posted Monday at 08:33 PM 1 hour ago, avatar! said: I agree that such statistics are completely misleading. What does "only solve 2% of crimes" mean -- Are we talking about police not finding the power tools borrowed by your neighbor and never returned? The police have very limited resources, and understandably spend most of the time trying to solve murders and other violent crimes. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/04/24/what-the-data-says-about-crime-in-the-us/ The most frequently solved violent crime tends to be homicide. Police cleared around half of murders and nonnegligent manslaughters (52.3%) in 2022. The clearance rates were lower for aggravated assault (41.4%), rape (26.1%) and robbery (23.2%). When it comes to property crime, law enforcement agencies cleared 13.0% of burglaries, 12.4% of larcenies/thefts and 9.3% of motor vehicle thefts in 2022. There were some studies done decades ago that claimed police had no substantial effect on reducing crime. Those articles are now believed to have been biased or in the very least egregiously incorrect -- While researchers have tended to find that police have only a small impact on crime (e.g. Levitt, 1997), recent studies suggest that in some cases the effect of concentrated policing may be substantial. https://crimesciencejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40163-023-00193-4 In summary: big difference between police reform and education (good idea) and defunding the police (bad idea). I recall something specific out of Oakland CA years ago that correlated a drop in crime with increased police presence. Can't recall it off hand though. I really can't fathom how adding more (mentally healthy, well-trained, community-driven) would not have a positive impact on crime rates. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khromak | 802 Posted Monday at 08:37 PM Share Posted Monday at 08:37 PM (edited) Yeah IDK @avatar! that's a tough example to go by because as they state in the article, their recruitment was already down for 2 consecutive years before they slashed the budget. It's not as though they were doing great and then a budget cut caused them massive problems. They also don't ever talk about an increase in crime at all. All they say is they're understaffed and want more staff. Depends on the type of crime, it's kind of up? But really hard to draw a causal conclusion. Some up, some down, not really much trend going on... https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Austin-Texas.html I'd also argue that giving < 1 year to overhaul emergency services, in a single city, is probably not enough time to prove whether a model works or not... Edited Monday at 08:40 PM by Khromak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khromak | 802 Posted Monday at 08:43 PM Share Posted Monday at 08:43 PM 21 minutes ago, Silent Hill said: For example, I'd be inclined to agree with the term "drastic" as accurate representation of a record number of police shot and a 14% increase from the previous year. https://fop.net/2024/01/fop-monthly-update-officers-shot-and-killed-26/ OK, why aren't they talking more about the -28% decrease in officers being killed then? That should be a...whatever double drastic is, decrease in officer deaths. Yay! It's safer to be a police officer now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avatar! | 1,862 Posted Monday at 08:50 PM Share Posted Monday at 08:50 PM 9 minutes ago, Khromak said: Depends on the type of crime, it's kind of up? But really hard to draw a causal conclusion. Some up, some down, not really much trend going on... That's a fair point. I should say that there's no doubt that the "worst crime", namely homicide, skyrocketed during covid. That said, studies always say "it's complicated, numerous reasons" but the "defund the police" and virulent attacks on police officers which led to record-low policing was absolutely a large factor. This is from 2022 -- https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/gun-deaths-spiked-during-the-pandemic Over the last two years, gun homicides increased by 45%, and gun suicides increased by about 10%. 45%... that number is just insane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Hill | 276 Posted Monday at 09:30 PM Share Posted Monday at 09:30 PM 43 minutes ago, Khromak said: https://fop.net/2024/01/fop-monthly-update-officers-shot-and-killed-26/ OK, why aren't they talking more about the -28% decrease in officers being killed then? That should be a...whatever double drastic is, decrease in officer deaths. Yay! It's safer to be a police officer now. It was mentioned as a "welcomed trend" albeit an anomaly due to shootings increasing. The total deaths would have been higher if more/all shootings were fatal. Also, it was a 25% decrease from 2022, 28% decrease was in comparison to 2021. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khromak | 802 Posted Monday at 09:38 PM Share Posted Monday at 09:38 PM 7 minutes ago, Silent Hill said: It was mentioned as a "welcomed trend" albeit an anomaly due to shootings increasing. The total deaths would have been higher if more/all shootings were fatal. Also, it was a 25% decrease from 2022, 28% decrease was in comparison to 2021. In their presentation they don't mention the decreases at all, only focus on the increases. Some might call that misleading propaganda. I certainly would never do that though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Hill | 276 Posted Monday at 10:55 PM Share Posted Monday at 10:55 PM 1 hour ago, Khromak said: In their presentation they don't mention the decreases at all, only focus on the increases. Some might call that misleading propaganda. I certainly would never do that though. ? The first three paragraphs referenced the decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khromak | 802 Posted Monday at 11:30 PM Share Posted Monday at 11:30 PM 30 minutes ago, Silent Hill said: ? The first three paragraphs referenced the decline. Should've said "report". Referring to this document: https://national.fop.net/reportshotkilled112024#page=3 Technically that stuff is in here too, but they chose to put the +14%, 46 (which is part of the decrease), and 378 in the big boxes with bold text and not the -25% or -28%. It goes to show the message they want to put forth, is all I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avatar! | 1,862 Posted 18 minutes ago Share Posted 18 minutes ago The more I think about it, the more it sounds like perhaps President Biden should step aside... but who would replace him? At any rate, apparently many of our allies think it's likely time for President Biden to retire -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts