cloward pivens strategy And the riots

I do look forward to the days when people can be free and go down to the local Bodega and grab a quick heroin or meth snack at a reasonable price.

I chew a little tobacco. So is it ok if when i see one OD'ing if i just spit a little chew spit in their general direction and mumble "Consequences, bitch!" or am I going to be expected to carry a little Narcan on me to bring them back to life?

a reply to: MRinder

I have known several "meth addicts" ... probably a few who use heroin.

If we changed how those substances are available, and the prices shifted, which would happen in my scenario, then all of your assumptions about what an "addict" is would also change.

SO let's go with alcohol since you have experience with that. It's available everywhere (almost) and ranges in price from really cheap to crazy expensive.

You know some folks who drink and are "ne'er do wells" I take it.

I bet you also know a good number of functioning alcoholics.

Meth and heroin could have similar outcomes; neither you nor I know.

During the early 20th century, we tried "Prohibition" for a while, and all that did was to supercharge the crime syndicates.

We see the same thing a thousand fold with the "War on Drugs."

originally posted by: MRinder
I do look forward to the days when people can be free and go down to the local Bodega and grab a quick heroin or meth snack at a reasonable price.

I chew a little tobacco. So is it ok if when i see one OD'ing if i just spit a little chew spit in their general direction and mumble "Consequences, bitch!" or am I going to be expected to carry a little Narcan on me to bring them back to life?

Why would you spit on someone?

That sounds like a personal issue, honestly.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: MRinder
I do look forward to the days when people can be free and go down to the local Bodega and grab a quick heroin or meth snack at a reasonable price.

I chew a little tobacco. So is it ok if when i see one OD'ing if i just spit a little chew spit in their general direction and mumble "Consequences, bitch!" or am I going to be expected to carry a little Narcan on me to bring them back to life?

Why would you spit on someone?

That sounds like a personal issue, honestly.

I didn't say i would spit ON THEM. Just in their general direction.

I am all for your plan. Let's do it. I am excited. I can just go to work and watch people sit in a corner in a daze mid Heroin high or have a good laugh in a meeting when some Meth addict is scratching his scabs.

I love it. I feel so free.

I am being serious when I say this whole thing fits my world view perfectly. Nothing like consequences to teach people a good lesson.

a reply to: MRinder

99.9% of all our cultural problems would indeed vanish if folks were responsible for their own actions.

Good chat.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MRinder

99.9% of all our cultural problems would indeed vanish if folks were responsible for their own actions.

Good chat.

Good chat indeed and I fully agree with your statement above. Have a Great Day!

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MRinder

99.9% of all our cultural problems would indeed vanish if folks were responsible for their own actions.

Good chat.

Good chat indeed and I fully agree with your statement above. Have a Great Day!

You too bud.

a reply to: Boadicea

Ok, I if you want to disband and dismantle police, make sure you start with where you live. You live with the consequences and then tell me how your idealism works out. Please move to Minneapolis if it isn't happening in your city. Until you are willing to live with the consequences, don't dismiss out of hand the real consequences that WILL follow.

You do know that there are only 3,000 Sherriff's offices around the nation don't you? www.bjs.gov...
What about all the places in the US where the Sherriff's offices don't exist?
So you are demanding that these places have absolutely no law enforcement at all? Brilliant
You do know there are currently 500,000 police officers in the US?
You do know there are 173,000 law enforcement officers in the Sherriff's departments nation wide? www.bjs.gov...
Therefore you are expecting way less than half the number of officers to do more than twice they job they are currently doing with less than half the funds? How well do you think that will work?
What about the places in the US that will have absolutely no officers once your plan is enacted? You think those places will magically be crime free?
Tell me how well this will work out and bring peace and justice for all?


Why are you so sure everything will be roses and happiness once the police have disappeared and the miniscule Sherrif's departments are left to do twice the job with half the resources. What about the many places in the US left with absolutely no law enforcement at all? This is simply a utopian wish of liberals who think they can send social workers out in place of police. Utopian wishes and dreams have a way of turning into Castro's Cuba, Venezuela, and Stalins USSR, and Mao's China. Millions died for those utopian causes (the people who disagreed with the liberal vision were killed, jailed, or starved to death with no justice/no mercy), followed by oppression and repression the likes of which make the March stay at home orders look like a picnic.

If you demand the dismantling of police you should also be demanding the dismantling of all private security.

No congressperson/senator/supreme court justice/the President/Hollywood/elite Tech mogel/CEO/store/bank should be allowed to have any gun toting private police. If the people are to be denied law enforcement protection then all of the elite must set the example and get rid of their private security/police forces. If you really want justice and equality, the BLM ANTIFA movement should also demand making private police or security illegal.

No elitist or rich person should be allowed to have a gun toting private police force or protection, that is elitist, and unjust! If police protection for the masses is made illegal and dismantled, then to be just and fair all private police protection for the elite class must also be made illegal and dismantled!! I think BLM and ANTIFA should also be demanding equality for all, no police for me then no private security for the elite classes, especially the politicians!

originally posted by: The2Billies
a reply to: Boadicea

Ok, I if you want to disband and dismantle police, make sure you start with where you live.

I don't know why I'm still surprised by such vacuous comments... I should be used to it by now. But somehow I always expect better.

My police are awesome. I have no problem with them, and I have interacted with them plenty of times, only once when I was the problem... and although they could have taken me in, they didn't. Why on earth would I want to disband and/or dismantle a police department with good, honorable officers??? That's ridiculous. If it ain't broke, ya don't fix it.

And when it is broke, you figure out if it can be fixed or if it needs to be replaced. Since that isn't MY problem, I will leave that decision up to the people whose problem it is. The Minneapolis Police Department is broke. If the appropriate officials and the people decide it's broken beyond repair and needs to be replaced, then I wish them the brightest blessings. Good riddance to bad rubbish. See how simple that concept is???

Why on earth would you champion the tyranny of jackbooted thugs tyrannizing the people they are sworn to serve and protect? Why are you championing the police state???

You live with the consequences and then tell me how your idealism works out. Please move to Minneapolis if it isn't happening in your city. Until you are willing to live with the consequences, don't dismiss out of hand the real consequences that WILL follow.

Stop the fearmongering. You're doomsday scenario presumes that there will be no law and no law enforcement, which is patently untrue. There is a Constitutional Sheriff with full jurisdiction over every city and town within his/her county. True Constitutionalists will always champion the ELECTED Sheriff over an APPOINTED police chief. Because an ELECTED sheriff is accountable to the public... to the voters... to the TAXPAYER.

Why are you so sure everything will be roses and happiness once the police have disappeared...

I'm not. As I've stated, the devil is in the details. What I can see is much potential.

Why are you so sure everything will go to hell??? I can give you examples of cities which have disbanded their police departments, reformed and re-established a police department, and realized much success.

... and the miniscule Sherrif's departments are left to do twice the job with half the resources.

"Miniscule"??? The Sheriff's department is whatever they make of it. There's no reason why Minneapolis cannot transfer its law enforcement budget from a municipal police department to the county Sheriff's department, as well as their buildings, vehicles, and other equipment. The additional revenue from Minneapolis will fund the additional deputies and other expenses.

That is simply a utopian wish of liberals who think they can send social workers out in place of police.

Sending police to handle a social issue is a waste of valuable resources. Of course we should send the appropriate professionals to handle whatever situation arises, and that often is NOT law enforcement. I'll stand with another member who rightly pointed out that we have been dumping our societal problems on law enforcement for far too long, and it hasn't done any of us any favors. Having a psychotic episode, for example, is not a criminal matter unless and until we make it one, and that's exactly how we have handled such crises for far too long.

Utopian wishes and dreams have a way of turning into Castro's Cuba, Venezuela, and Stalins USSR, and Mao's China.

Millions died for those utopian causes (the people who disagreed with the liberal vision were killed, jailed, or starved to death with no justice/no mercy), followed by oppression and repression the likes of which make the March stay at home orders look like a picnic.

Oh dear... No. Millions died because power was taken from the people and deposited with the leaders. And that's exactly what has happened with too many police departments. I get that you'd rather live on your knees in obeisance to the jackboot thugs than stand on your own two feet. But that's not the American way.

If you demand the dismantling of police you should also be demanding the dismantling of all private security. No congressperson/senator/supreme court justice/the President/Hollywood/elite Tech mogel/CEO/store/bank should be allowed to have any gun toting private police. If the people are to be denied police protection then all of the elite must set the example and get rid of their private police forces.

There's that strawman again. Dismantling a police department does not equal no law enforcement whatsoever. Everything else you said is just stupid. What do you have against choice? Why are you so determined to force unaccountable murderous police on the people?

If you really want justice and equality, the BLM ANTIFA movement should also demand making private police illegal. Since the little sherrif's office force of what, 5 or 6 people in most areas can handle it. No elitist or rich person should be allowed to have a gun toting private police force or protection, that is elitist, and unjust! If police protection for the masses is made illegal and dismantled, then to be just and fair all private police protection for the elite class must also be made illegal and dismantled!! I think BLM and ANTIFA should also be demanding equality for all, no police for me then no police for the elite classes, especially the politicians!

More stupidity. And more tyranny. People can choose whatever forms of security/law enforcement they deem appropriate for their needs, circumstances and resources. All or none or some combination thereof. Why on earth would you consider it your place to tell other people how to protect themselves, or who can provide their law enforcement/security? Who the hell are you to make such demands?

NO ONE, that's who.

And, quite honestly, your denigration and belittling of the Constitutional elected office of Sheriff is absolutely shameful. As well as the attendant denial of the explicit Constitional right of the people to elect their primary law enforcement official.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

What in the flying f?!

You started out with somethig that seemed like it would dovetail into a discussion of how extending the stupid $600/week unemployment bonus, or more stimulus, etc, could lead into a de facto Cloward-Pivens strategy, but then weirded out into a combination of Blackpeople being more susceptible to COVID due to vitamin D deficiency, and something about protests and riots.

#1) I win the run-on sentence of the day award for that one above.

#2) Is it possible to stray off-topic in the OP itself?