‘Defund police’ Squad members are biggest spenders on private security

I know the article is old but its worth on pointing out their hypocrisy when it comes to certain issues.

Remember those who were screaming the screaming loudest on getting rid of Weapons/assault Weapons?
Defund the Prisons? defund the police?

It appears that the same ‘Defund police’ Squad members are the biggest spenders on private security when it comes to their own security but not to the security of their voters, taxpayer/resident of their area that they are supposedly representing.

As it is noted in NYpost those who are calling for less policing in the most violent, crime-ridden neighborhoods. They themselves pay heavily for private security while demanding for it to be less security in communities and neighborhoods.

Where Crime is high, and at some times, police wont able to provide security for ordinary residents.

‘Defund police’ Squad members are biggest spenders on private security

This also should remind me some people when the Iraqi war was happening at time several politicians came into into Baghdad green's zone. Turing the surrounding neighborhoods with mercenaries.

The same mercenaries killed innocent Iraqi civilians.
While several politicians were silent on the ordeal.

Romney silent on Blackwater shooting
John McCain's "Stroll" Through the Shorja Market (One Year Later)

That's how Banana Republics work.

Gonna need to update some textbooks in our schools with the newest shining example.

a reply to: vNex92

They better pay well, or else someone is going to get bought and rectify this problem from within.

They literally hired mercenaries. If they don’t think that could go wrong they’re nuts.

Of course. They don't want the poor to be able to have any access to a policing agency. Security will only be available to those who can afford it or have a contract with someone that includes protection.

It'll be a terrible time for those who can't afford it and are stuck between the various private security personnels' clients interests.

Especially if they continue to chip away at people's ability to defend themselves.

originally posted by: AutomateThis1v2
Of course. They don't want the poor to be able to have any access to a policing agency. Security will only be available to those who can afford it or have a contract with someone that includes protection.

It'll be a terrible time for those who can't afford it and are stuck between the various private security personnels' clients interests.

Especially if they continue to chip away at people's ability to defend themselves.

how does the squat, i mean squad afford it?

Doesn't that kind of prove their point? Police in the US have a budget larger than most militaries and yet even politicians feel like they can't rely on the police to protect them. Let's never forget that the police successfully argued in court that their job is not to protect & serve despite our being their motto.