Thread to Discuss The Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (#CHAZ)

Health insurance rip off lying FDA big bankers buying
Fake computer crashes dining
Cloning while they're multiplying
Fashion shoots with Beck and Hanson
Courtney Love, and Marilyn Manson
You're all fakes
Run to your mansions
Come around
We'll kick your ass in

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:18 pm

loaf angel wrote:problem is that the reports with insistent badgering and harassment from groups like the Proud Boys. if you give up guns what stops a bunch of 2A, 3%ers from just marching in and saying that its their territory now? there was already the semi-joking online campaign calling for a bunch of gun-toting assholes to go in and reclaim the area on 7/4

its a head scratcher for sure!


A lot of these people are literally cops so the question remains the same as how are you gonna get cops to turn in their guns if you abolish the police. If we're actually going to implement new models of societal living there will have to be trial and error and adjustment in real time. I know that's not a concrete proposal or anything but none of this gets solved in the lab. If we want to live in a state that exists outside the status quo we have to manifest it and part of that is actually solving these questions.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:18 pm

loaf angel wrote: if you give up guns what stops a bunch of 2A, 3%ers from just marching in and saying that its their territory now?


this is the key dilemma with America, a state monopoly on violence with the 2A and everything that comes with it as an asterisk

to me, what’s going on in Minneapolis makes more sense. they’re going to gradually phase out the police and replace them with a city department of community safety and violence prevention

since apparently about 1% of 911 calls are for violent crimes, this would be a dramatically and comprehensively different kind of department, but it feels obvious to me that there would absolutely have to still be a specialized armed response team specifically and only deployed to emergencies like active shooters and people being generally menacing/threatening with deadly weapons

which opens another can of worms considering Tamir Rice and John Crawford
Last edited by Bad Craziness on Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:19 pm

Cops shoot innocent people while responding to active shooters all the time. I don't have any faith in there being a force like that.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:21 pm

so what’s to be done about active shooters
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:24 pm

Well, living within a demilitarized society should handle a lot of that, given that nonmilitarized societies seem to have far fewer active shooters in general.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:27 pm

“make it so we’re living in a demilitarized society” doesn’t feel like much of an action item to me
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:29 pm

Sorry, I didn't feel like typing out "abolishing the police, which in the US are a uniquely militaristic force in a society wherein military worship is not unpopular" but that is what I meant by demilitarizing US society
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:33 pm

I am suggesting, to be perfectly clear, that the amount of active shooter violence we have in the United States of America is a symptom of our militarized society and that much of it would be extinguished by the removal of the country's police forces, which are inherently antagonistic and violent and have since the cold war become militarized in every sense and patrol our streets as though they are a war zone. I believe that this creates a mentality in our country that promotes violence as a primary language and that the removal of this element would greatly diminish the amount of active shooters in this country.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:37 pm

it’s an interesting theory, but I feel like there would have to be a significant increase in civilian gun control laws to go along with demilitarizing the police

so it’s almost like in order to abolish the police you have to abolish the second amendment

and I feel like it’s just not realistic to expect America to swallow those two pills at the exact same time
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:39 pm

If less than 1% of 911 calls are for violent crime I don't follow that we need to abolish the second amendment for civilian gun crime purposes, unless you're suggesting people would grow more violent without police and not less (the latter is my argument).
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:45 pm

sure, but 1% of a lot is still a lot, and the shooting in CHAZ is an important microcosm

but I still feel like Minneapolis makes more sense to me than CHAZ, if Minneapolis is “gradually phase out the police” and CHAZ is “all cops gone in a single day”
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:48 pm

it just doesn’t seem realistic to aim for ripping the band-aid off and firing all cops everywhere in one day

it’d obviously be a catastrophic shock to the system, and I can only see the kind of de-escalation you’re describing happening gradually
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:59 pm

But if the 2nd Amendment continues to exist, then how will Minneapolis' venture succeed where CHAZ fails?
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:01 pm

I mean if the idea is "ultimately you still need cops with guns, just in different ways" then isn't that ultimately still just calling to reform the police? What's the goal?
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby loaf angel » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:01 pm

big zorb raises a valuable point: americans are uniquely angry and violent
goldsoundz wrote:i'd bang that moron
User avatar

loaf angel
 
Posts: 41662
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:28 pm
Location: Jerklyn

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:11 pm

People always throw around the term "unrealistic" in moments like this but it doesn't seem remotely realistic to me, when you take US history into account, that civilians could ever work with a police force, "reformed" or not.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:25 pm

I guess the goal that makes sense to me is "ultimately you need 98% of the police budget to go to community support, counseling, non-violent intervention, and mediation, and 2% to a highly specialized highly trained armed force that's only deployed when there's dire need", which is what most "demilitarized" countries have

right now, "bully with a gun and less required training hours than a hairdresser" is the answer to every dispatch

I'd rather it be specialists assigned to each call type, and yeah "psycho with a gun is shooting people" is a thing that sometimes happens, even in demilitarized countries. You could call Norway a model for a demilitarized society, but they still got Anders Brievik, and they still had to send cops with guns to stop him

to me, based on this chart, it should be

Image
https://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/police_dispatch_stats/

disorderly conduct - medic and de-escalation specialist
domestic dispute - mediator
theft - investigator
trespass/unwanted person - de-escalation specialist
noise complaint - community organizer
public hazard - traffic control officer
welfare check - medic and counselor
assault/fight - de-escalation sepecialist and moderator
psychotic episode/suicidal - medic and counselor
motor vehicle stop - traffic control officer
harassment - mediator/de-escalation specialist
tenant/neighbor issues - mediator
suspicious person - de-escalation specialist
fraud - investigator

and then way down at the bottom that's not even on the chart would be

active shooter - armed response

if saying "police as we currently understand them should no longer exist, but we should still have a handful of specialists with guns to respond to psychos with guns, you know, like Norway", makes me a feckless liberal reformist who doesn't actually want to abolish the police like the cool kids do then I guess I'm ok with that
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:42 pm

I don't think it really makes sense to compare a place like Norway, where the police are not and have not been militarized, to the US, where the police are an inherently antagonistic, violent force who view the civilian population as combatants. The very conception of the thing is rotten and you can't build on a rotten foundation.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:45 pm

I empathize with the urge to continue to have a "good guys with guns" quotient with the abolition of police, though. But I am suggesting the very idea is not possible given our historical context.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:48 pm

it seems like you seized on the Norway thing without a real counter-proposal to the substance of what I posted

or would the counter-proposal still be the three words of “abolish the police” and leaving it at that and hoping for the best
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:49 pm

I made a nice little list and everything
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:52 pm

big zorb wrote:I empathize with the urge to continue to have a "good guys with guns" quotient with the abolition of police, though. But I am suggesting the very idea is not possible given our historical context.


ok but let’s say we run with that and have no armed officers of the law whatsoever

what does the 911 dispatcher say to the person who just called in Dylan Roof shooting up a church

like

specifically
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:02 pm

Dylann Roof was arrested during a traffic stop later, which suggests that a special force ops wouldn't have solved the situation any differently.

But to answer your question: I'm not entirely sure. It seems like having some sort of hostage security situation would be helpful but I don't think they would need to be armed; most of the time when people have hostages they don't harm them and if they do it's because police have increased the pressure in the situation.

I think probably that as long as hateful ideologies exist there will be terrorist acts, unfortunately. Most of the time those terrorists aren't killed by police; they either kill themselves so that they don't have to live through the legal process or else they WANT to be arrested so they can continue to preach their ideology.

Anyway, I know that you want it to be true, but saying "abolish the police" doesn't mean that I am unserious about longer-term solutions to problems like terrorism or mass murder, just that I don't think that there is much evidence special forces really stop them either so I don't see why I need to have some airtight plan to stop Dylann Roof this very moment or else we can't abolish the police.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby rt1 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:03 pm

Bad Craziness, the issue with saying reform rather than abolish is that reform is often used a cudgle to reestablish norms. Reform suggests there's a good foundation that only needs some tweaks whereas the police state is rotten and needs to be completely redesigned.

Demilitarizing the police is a good start. Having a small team of the "good cops" who only deal with (edit: emergency/active scenarios) such as your active shooter example is a good start. With the militarization of the police already happening/happened its not possible to only reform as eventually it will spiral out of control like it has already done in the U.S.. Furthermore, there is only an active shooter scenario due to the militarization in the first place.

In the mean time, when someone is sleeping in their car at a Wendy's, and the police are called, the police can call them a taxi. When there is an impromptu violin concerto in a public park, let them play the violin. Yet the police escalated those and obviously many other scenarios that lead to violence and sometimes death. The ethos of responding to nonviolent situations with violence is so deeply ingrained in this institution that reform alone is not possible. It needs to be abolished and then reformed.
Last edited by rt1 on Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
rt1
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:59 pm

Postby Bad Craziness » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:23 pm

I’d like to think I’ve made it abundantly clear that I want to do away with the police as they’re currently understood entirely, and I’ve attempted to spell out specifically how each 911 call could be answered by non-police, so reducing it to a semantic hair-splitting re: “reform” vs. “abolish” is much less interesting to me.

so waiting until his latest post for evidence that zorb is taking concerns about terrorism/mass murder seriously doesn’t mean I’m wanting it to be true that he’s unserious about it

I’m just sick of taking a complicated issue and reducing it to literally either the word “abolish” or the word “reform”, and this appraisal of a nuanced approach as “well either that’s reform, or that’s abolishment, and that’s all that needs to be said” as if that accomplishes anything.

I just prefer talking about specifics. I see an equation that says “if [murder/domestic dispute/busted taillight] then [cop]” and then I grant that cop isn’t working, so then I’m only interested in solving for [x]. everything else feels like noise to me.
User avatar

Bad Craziness
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: la la land

Postby Sobieski » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:23 pm

i mean i think we should definitely try some minneapolis style reformism


but i think there’s a danger that won’t address the deeper sorta structural questions of the police and why there are 2.3 million people incarcerated in the US
sm//o/ke le/ss weed
and sleep more
always/ tip %20
User avatar

Sobieski
Comptroller
 
Posts: 23796
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:13 am
Location: rare turtle

Postby gucci man » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:30 pm

not a single post on the shooting being an inside job? i'm not a big tin foil guy but they are itching to take space back.
girl i can't remember nothing but my last post.
User avatar

gucci man
 
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 2:52 am

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:38 pm

Bad Craziness wrote:I’d like to think I’ve made it abundantly clear that I want to do away with the police as they’re currently understood entirely, and I’ve attempted to spell out specifically how each 911 call could be answered by non-police, so reducing it to a semantic hair-splitting re: “reform” vs. “abolish” is much less interesting to me.

so waiting until his latest post for evidence that zorb is taking concerns about terrorism/mass murder seriously doesn’t mean I’m wanting it to be true that he’s unserious about it

I’m just sick of taking a complicated issue and reducing it to literally either the word “abolish” or the word “reform”, and this appraisal of a nuanced approach as “well either that’s reform, or that’s abolishment, and that’s all that needs to be said” as if that accomplishes anything.

I just prefer talking about specifics. I see an equation that says “if [murder/domestic dispute/busted taillight] then [cop]” and then I grant that cop isn’t working, so then I’m only interested in solving for [x]. everything else feels like noise to me.


but abolish vs reform isn't hairsplitting; it is the issue. they mean fundamentally different things.

i suppose i didn't explicitly map this out but the reason i think that is particularly true in the united states is that united states is a militarized nation; we cannot be "unmilitarized", only "demilitarized." western european nations are unmilitarized. these are fundamentally different psychologies. someone in norway conceives of police, even special armed task forces, in a way that americans never will.

this isn't splitting hairs or semantics; we have to understand the foundations of our situation in order to solve it. this also suggests--at least to me--that ideas imported from states with completely different contexts for police, security, authority, etc., are not especially helpful, because the psychological foundations of those ideas are so profoundly different that they can't possibly be replicated here. it's like trying to build a house on a mountainside with plans from a house built on the plains.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby big zorb » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:41 pm

and while i understand that you want to talk specifics, they mean nothing in a vacuum. if we don't have a context then there's nothing to actually discuss and it just becomes vanity of ideas stuff.
Woman: [Possibly smiling or laughing].
User avatar

big zorb
smiling drinker
 
Posts: 44670
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:56 am

Postby rt1 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:53 pm

gucci man wrote:not a single post on the shooting being an inside job? i'm not a big tin foil guy but they are itching to take space back.


The shootings are bizarre for sure. Need to hear more. Something doesn't smell right.
rt1
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:59 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Mamma Mia... Here We Go Again....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alice, ARealGirl, ashtrayheart, auspice, average deceiver, Bartatua, becky, bluemovers, boddy, brent, brittle, building jumper, butter, CelticFC#1, chowder julius, coop, davideotape, deadwolfbones, deebster, didier, doublethink0, down with homework, draw, endless dave, ero guro vidal (aka todd), FedLemming, Flossed Out, FourLegsGood, Franco, Frank, fresh salad, gershon, gobot, goofjan, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], goovis young, grass tacks, growinging, guidance, guy forget, hadlex, hbb, hiddenicon, hideout, Hugh, i am rich, Jabberwocky, Jackalope, jalapeño ranch, jca, Jerk., Jerry Lundegaard, jewels, joymonger, Julius Sumner Miller, Kevin McCallister, Kiki, klubrick, Kuboaa, landspeedrecord, light rail coyote, lights, Limoges, Locke, Longarm, lordofdiapers, lotso, Lucky, Marcus, Meeps, meeshpotato, messier object, Milquetoaster Strudels, mudd, Night porter, nocents, nonoperational, number none, Paul, pink snake, Post Modern, powderfinger, pretty yeoman, provm, rankoutsider, sadville, Sam Bash, screaming emphysema, scrumptown, secondskin, sevenarts, Shotfrog, shrinemaidens, sliiimer, smartphone, Smelly_Elevator, snow wave, Sobieski, speakers, Spooky Jim, sunrise, tgk, This Guy, trampoline, trigross, truncated, turquoise albino, v h g, virile, walt, warmjets, Warrenandstimpy, wish, wolfie, wong, Wrong Titus, wuk, xxx-xxx-xxxx