Change human behavior eliminate their need to identify themselves with a country, group, ethinicity. Teach them they are human beings to advance themselves through science. Eliminate all countries. There only needs to be One World Order. Eliminate religion. The leaders of the world should be from science and technology. Like Elon Musk. Like Bill Gates. Embrace Artificial Intelligence.
I think it's less captain obvious and more captain tunnel vision. There are any number of important bills passed by the House that Mitch McConnell has refused to even take up and discuss. Corruption bills, election security bills, voting rights bills, pre-existing condition bills, climate change bills, worker's rights bills, background check bills. I mean seriously. Donald Trump still in the White House, and as long as I'm Majority Leader of the Senate, I get to set the agenda, that's why I call myself the Grim Reaper. - Mitch McConnell https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/...unsel-to-get-to-the-bottom-of-fisa-abuse-case
Would you mind adding the black on black crime, for context? Black on black crime is a pet conservative issue that they provide no solutions for other than boot strapping. It's a huge problem that they have zero interest in solving but a lot of interest in talking about. Actually, instead of using a racial chart can we please have a socio-economic chart. Switching race with socio-economics is a tool of conservative politics whenever they want to help poor white people instead of poor brown and black people so I'd like to see those results. Does the white on black crime include police? Banks? Corporations? Politicians? Curious.
Both pieces of legislation are about police reform, ding-dong. And the Dem's are known to pack theirs with **** that has nothing to do with the purpose of the legislation. Like hiding funding for abortion clinics. If you are so intent on fighting for black lives, dig into the statistics of what race gets disproportionally aborted. It's obvious you've politicized it yourself and would prefer to WAIT so it can be campaigned on along with Dem's who own your mind because you can't think outside of what the party lines tell you to think. You really should try digging in on who own's the Dem's. You'd be sick and ashamed of yourself for falling for it.
Color me shocked. Politicians engaging in politics! I actually agree with you. The Dems are playing politics with this. That said so are the Republicans. If they were honest about it then they would also be willing to debate the House bill. As far Dems hiding stuff in bills. Have you read what Republicans hide in billls? Mitch McConnel has been a master of the poison pills.
Oh yeah, it goes both ways for sure. But Scott's bill was at the very least an opportunity for both sides to discuss & debate on the floor so the house could have a heads up and get theirs right and have a better chance at passing.
I don't expect anything to happen regarding LE reform on the federal level, at least until after the election, and honestly this should be addressed on the state and local level. PD's are run locally and I don't think federalizing the issue is really that helpful. Change is happening on the local level such as what is happening here in Minneapolis.
Again you're ignoring that the House is co-equal to the Senate. Neither body is obligated to take up bills originating from either chamber but in the interests of getting things passed they are required to work with each other. Your argument boils down to that only the Scott bill in the Senate has any chance so Senate Dems should've debated it and that it is up to the House to respond to the Scott Bill. That's not the way it works. The house isn't subservient to the Senate.
Oh lord. Let me guess, George Soros is controlling me and preventing me from thinking critically about Mitch McConnell's role in bringing the legislative branch to a halt. Mkay. Hey Jack, please detail for me what Tim Scott's bill does, does not do, and the specifics of why Democrats might oppose it. Look forward to this conversation.
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/17/879081319/read-senate-republicans-proposed-police-reform-legislation Dig in if you're really interested. It's a moot point now. You and I are not having the conversation, so manage your time as you see fit. The point I made is that there was opportunity to have constructive conversations about police reform. One side walked away from it. There is nothing you can dispute there.
First, there was already a unanimous consent bill on lynchings that Rand Paul blocked. So yeah I didn't see you b****ing about politics then. Second, Democrats introduced a Justice in Policing Act on June 8th that banned chokeholds and no knock warrants among many other things. ALL Republicans in the House voted against it, every last one of them. I again did not see you complain about these Republicans playing poitics. Grant power to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division to issue subpoenas to police departments as part of "pattern or practice" investigations into whether there has been a "pattern and practice" of bias or misconduct by the department[8] Provide grants to state attorneys general to "create an independent process to investigate misconduct or excessive use of force" by police forces[9] Establish a federal registry of police misconduct complaints and disciplinary actions[9] Enhance accountability for police officers who commit misconduct, including by restricting the application of the qualified immunity doctrine for local and state officers,[8][10] and by changing the federal statute on police violation of constitutional rights to lower the standard of criminal intent from violation conducted "willfully" to a violation "knowingly or with reckless disregard"[4] Require federal uniformed police officers to have body-worn cameras[9][4] Require marked federal police vehicles to be equipped with dashboard cameras.[9] Require state and local law enforcement agencies that receive federal funding to "ensure" the use of body-worn and dashboard cameras.[4] Restrict the transfer of military equipment to police[9] (see 1033 program, militarization of police) Require state and local law enforcement agencies that receive federal funding to adopt anti-discrimination policies and training programs, including those targeted at fighting racial profiling[4] Prohibit federal police officers from using chokeholds or other carotid holds (which led to the deaths of George Floyd and Eric Garner), and require state and local law enforcement agencies that receive federal funding to adopt the same prohibition[4] Prohibit the issuance of no-knock warrants (warrants that allow police to conduct a raid without knocking or announcing themselves) in federal drug investigations, and provide incentives to the states to enact a similar prohibition.[4] Change the threshold for the permissible use of force by federal law enforcement officers from "reasonableness" to only when "necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury."[4] Mandate that federal officers use deadly force only as a last resort and that de-escalation be attempted, and condition federal funding to state and local law enforcement agencies on the adoption of the same policy.[4] Yes, there was an opportunity to have a constructive debate but Republicans refused and instead trotted out their token black Senator to promote a bill that did not go nearly as far to curb police abuses as the Democratic bill put out weeks before. Shame on Tim Scott letting himself be used by that cadre of loser human beings. I guess you guys didn't learn your lesson from the Michael Steele debacle. Good job, good effort.
[QUOTE="CometsWin, post: 12991425, member: 1451" Yes, there was an opportunity to have a constructive debate but Republicans refused and instead trotted out their token black Senator to promote a bill that did not go nearly as far to curb police abuses as the Democratic bill put out weeks before. Shame on Tim Scott letting himself be used by that cadre of loser human beings. I guess you guys didn't learn your lesson from the Michael Steele debacle. Good job, good effort.[/QUOTE] I'll leave your post alone and let this sink in. I don't know why you have so much anger and hate behind your posts and whatever the reason is doesn't excuse the rhetoric you consistently turn to. If everything is about race with you, why do you stoop down to the level of a racist? You could've easily made your point without it. The irony is that you're not black. But I guess you feel you were selected to speak for them, to fight for them and now your can label them, because you're the white dude sticking up for the black cause. Skinny jeans I'm sure. Sad, pathetic and no longer worth my time.
Your response is again lacking in substance and a failure in discussing the legislation that you brought up. You addressed absolutely no points whatsoever. I’m selected to speak up about injustice to anyone because I’m a human being with a conscience. Why don’t you speak up? Your refusal to acknowledge that Republicans contrived to throw Tim Scott out there with this legislation to undercut existing more comprehensive legislation because he’s black is disingenuous. It’s exactly what the GOP did when Obama was elected, they threw Michael Steele out there just out of the blue. Pointing out the race based political motives of the Republican Party isn’t racist, it’s the motives that are racist. Just like pointing out Republican economic policy that favors the rich isn’t class warfare, it’s the policy that’s class warfare. You decry the politics while simultaneously getting suckered in by them. Anyway, best of luck. I hope you find a better understanding of why these issues should be important to everyone, regardless of race.
This might be better off discussed in another thread but the more I think about it the more concerned I am about banning of these techniques. I agree these are dangerous techniques, there is no absolutely safe way of restraining a human. Having done and had these techniques done on me I think they can be used provided they are used properly and for a limited period of time. What I'm concerned about is if these techniques are banned what are the alternatives? I get the feeling that LEO might go for lethal force quicker if they can't use these type of techniques. Instead of banning these techniques I would like to see better policies about use of force in general. For example in the Eric Garner case relying upon more deescalation techniques. In the Elijah McClain case not use force at all but bringing in someone with mental health training.
It is beyond hilarious that you would accuse Democrats of not discussing an issue of importance to the nation. Have you conveniently forgotten that after every school or mass shooting, we get “thoughts and prayers” but Mitch McConnell will not allow a single bill on something that over 90 percent of Americans support — enhanced background checks. This is not one time. It is literally after every mass shooting. For years. Republicans have exactly zero basis for complaining about “politics”.
In the final wash of the CHAZ, does anyone even know the names of the two young black men who died there? Here:- Lorenzo Anderson Jr., 19 Antonio Mays Jr., 16 RIP.
