The City on Fire

Quote: terapined

The problem is the Feds are against any investigation of their officers.
These Feds have free reign to abuse their powers
That's why they don't have to wear name tags. The abuse of power by breaking the law against peaceful citizens has been approved

Okay, you don't think there will be a proper investigation. Got it. We will see what happens.

Quote: RonC

That being said, what say you on all of the nights of violence BEFORE the feds stepped in? You and I both know that these are not "peaceful protesters" attacking the Federal building. Do you even watch the videos of the anarchists trying to destroy OUR property?

You simply ignored this question...do you support violence committed by anarchists?

Quote: RonC

You simply ignored this question...do you support violence committed by anarchists?

You are talking about the guy who said he was BLM, IOW, unconditional support for them.

Quote: AZDuffman

So, are you still going to vote against Trump because you do not like how he acts? Or Biden who supports the looter and rioting groups and is of the party these local officials are from?

I will not vote FOR Trump. I will once again write my own name in. I do agree that the country will be far worse off with the liberal Democrat policies that will be enacted with a Biden presidency than it would be with doofus Trump in charge. My vote, fortunately?, is in a state where Trump has zero chance to win. Meaning that my vote for myself is essentially a protest against Trump the man, and all the Democrats as well.

I've mentioned it many times how sad it is that we essentially have to choose between a bad man (Trump) and a senile man who is not strong enough to resist the far left crazies of his party (Biden).

Quote: RonC

You simply ignored this question...do you support violence committed by anarchists?

Of course not
Never have, never will. Vast majority of protestors are against violence

Quote: SOOPOO

a senile man who is not strong enough to resist the far left crazies of his party (Biden).

BS
He's not senile
BS
He has not called for defunding the police so he is resisting the far left crazies

Quote: terapined

BS
He's not senile
BS

I don't think he is nearly as sharp as he was in his previous campaigns. He mumbles a lot and does not want to take questions. His only recent presser was a softball set of "gimme" questions. He is, at least, trying to minimize spontaneous interaction with the press overall. He has been invited to talk to Chris Wallace, as President Trump did. I know others have asked.

Quote: terapined

He has not called for defunding the police so he is resisting the far left crazies

Well, not exactly:

"When asked during a Now This interview with activist Ady Barkan if he agrees “that we can redirect some of the [police] funding,” Biden responded, “Yes, absolutely.”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-has-called-to-redirect-funding-from-police-but-stopped-short-of-defund-embrace


That sounds like a call to take funding from the police for other things. I'd love to see us be able to take funds from the police but it can't happen successfully until we actually do things that reduce crime to levels that allow for that. For example, better housing and better education for our poor could lead to less crime but it will not do so instantly. Once we actually provide those things and reduce crime would be the appropriate time to move funds.

Simply taking funds from the police is a stupid idea.

Quote: terapined

Of course not
Never have, never will. Vast majority of protestors are against violence

The "vast majority" are not the people we are talking about in Portland. Violence for fifty-some nights in a row. If they were entirely peaceful, no one would even know about the nightly protests. If Portland got rid of the violent folks the peaceful protesters would be just fine.

Quote: RonC

I'd love to see us be able to take funds from the police but it can't happen successfully until we actually do things that reduce crime to levels that allow for that. For example, better housing and better education for our poor could lead to less crime but it will not do so instantly. Once we actually provide those things and reduce crime would be the appropriate time to move funds.

Simply taking funds from the police is a stupid idea.

That has NEVER worked. Give a person a house and they have no pride in it. Many will physically destroy it. Ever seen public housing? I have seen some looks like a concentration camp. As the people in public housing to do some cleanup around the place and they say "work without compensation is slavery!" We spend nearly 3 times in real dollars for education since 1960. Was crime lower in 1960 or in the decades since? We have spent trillions, some say the entirety of the national debt, on anti-poverty since LBJ. What has it gotten us?

We started, under Rudy first, to do "broken window policing." It worked, it was the first thing to work. But to liberals it is "mean" so they have now reversed it. NYC, Seattle, Portland, and others will in a few years look like a war zone again.

In a op-ed in The USA Today, Biden declared definitively, "I do not support defunding police.”

Are the top ten safe cities due to the size of the police force per citizen?

Quote: rxwine

In a op-ed in The USA Today, Biden declared definitively, "I do not support defunding police.”

"When asked during a Now This interview with activist Ady Barkan if he agrees “that we can redirect some of the [police] funding,” Biden responded, “Yes, absolutely.”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-has-called-to-redirect-funding-from-police-but-stopped-short-of-defund-embrace

Potato, Patato