Police decide who ingested exactly which drugs based on a 12-step collection of clues gathered by staring into suspects’ eyes, pinching their muscles, taking their blood pressure and watching closely how they walk and talk and balance.
I would argue they are perfectly placed, not misplaced.
My counter argument is that injury and death caused by reckless driving is not solved by the police. And worse, the prison crisis is doing great harm to our society, mostly to people of color.
I was countering what that person said, and you think it’s misplaced? I think what you mean is it’s not convenient to you. Seems to be a trend.
Friend, it’s not inconvenient to me. I just thought it was kind to alert you to the social blunder you’re committing.
You both largely agree with each other. The other commenter is advocating for police reform and admits that the police aren’t doing a good job of protecting the community. Doubling down on your stance while the person you’re debating is trying to work with you ultimately prevents cooperation, and neither of you needed to resort to personal attacks.
All cops are bastards, but abolishing the police isn’t something that’s going to happen overnight - it’ll be procedural and subject to reform. And if things go as you hope, and the judicial system is to find a way to solve societal problems, it would be a great benefit to use existing resources. You can dismantle the police while splintering them into more wholesome services that actually serve the will of the community.
Even if we end the war on drugs and criminalizing people due to their circumstance, there’s still going to be traffic. Traffic doesn’t have to be enforced by an armed thug, or threat of incarceration, but it’s too dangerous of a problem to simply ignore.
I would argue they are perfectly placed, not misplaced.
My counter argument is that injury and death caused by reckless driving is not solved by the police. And worse, the prison crisis is doing great harm to our society, mostly to people of color.
I was countering what that person said, and you think it’s misplaced? I think what you mean is it’s not convenient to you. Seems to be a trend.
Friend, it’s not inconvenient to me. I just thought it was kind to alert you to the social blunder you’re committing.
You both largely agree with each other. The other commenter is advocating for police reform and admits that the police aren’t doing a good job of protecting the community. Doubling down on your stance while the person you’re debating is trying to work with you ultimately prevents cooperation, and neither of you needed to resort to personal attacks.
All cops are bastards, but abolishing the police isn’t something that’s going to happen overnight - it’ll be procedural and subject to reform. And if things go as you hope, and the judicial system is to find a way to solve societal problems, it would be a great benefit to use existing resources. You can dismantle the police while splintering them into more wholesome services that actually serve the will of the community.
Even if we end the war on drugs and criminalizing people due to their circumstance, there’s still going to be traffic. Traffic doesn’t have to be enforced by an armed thug, or threat of incarceration, but it’s too dangerous of a problem to simply ignore.