Welcome to Thunderdome

GORDON wrote:And yet, you are.

Yeah, I'm sure I'm on his "Enemies List."

I can only assume your blood fued goes back generations, the way you mock his immigrant name and the white hot hatred you have for him.

This part's just for TPR

Leisher, I'm afraid I can't disagree more.

Don't be afraid. Disagreement is fine. (Although, I think we disagree less than you think.) We can discuss it. Bigotry based on ignorance, not so much. Not even worth acknowledging.

When you give one citizen extraordinary power over the lives of other citizens, you have to hold them to a very high standard because otherwise you have institutionalized tyranny.

I agree with the sentiment (and it should be the goal and the standard), but again, it's Utopian thinking. Such a "perfect" system completely ignores human behavior, and as such, is unrealistic.

I expect much more out of cops than everyone else (with the possible exceptions of fire fighters and politicians; I also expect them to also be above reproach or removed from the job).

I laughed.

Frankly I expect a whole lot more out of cops than just policing each other to remove the blatant murderers from their ranks, but let's just start with that shall we?

What makes you think cops don't police each other for things other than just murder? I can tell you for a fact that they do, it's just not headline material. I've seen cops arresting cops and I've seen cops get away with stuff because they're cops. See? I'm not saying that the assumptions you make are entirely wrong, it's just that they're misguided because you're not getting the full story. This is something I've pointed out numerous times for years. The MSM isn't reporting on the cop whose career is over because he got arrested for a DUI or the cop whose career is over because he arrested a high ranking person for DUI and then paid the price politicially. Those stories are uninteresting to them, buried in the back pages, or they don't know about them. Although, the story of the entire police department quitting because their trustees were asking them to do illegal things like investigate political opponents got national headlines for about 3 seconds. Nobody gave a fuck.

Because anything less than expecting the highest standards of conduct from them turns into arguing about how much tyranny is an acceptable amount of tyranny.

Right? Damn this sounds a lot like stuff I've been preaching on for years but get ignored because it doesn't fit other people's agenda. Hard to maintain those high standards when non-cops are hiring folks based on skin color or sex rather than qualifications, mental stability, training, etc. (And I'm not saying minorities or people from one sex or another can't be good cops, but nobody should get a job like this based on what they look like.)

When you fill the streets with under-qualified people who lack training, pay them less, put them into dangerous situations without backup because of budget cuts, dealing with a general public that is less respectful and trusting overall, etc. what do you think is going to happen? That's where your headlines come from.

Technically, we're in total agreement, just from different angles or perspectives. You seem to think that cops are the root of the problem. I'm telling you that your approach is about as effective as getting a person with stage 4 lung cancer to quit smoking. Cops, themselves, are absolutely part of the issue, but the true roots of the issue lie in politicians (local, state, and federal) and a society reacting to headlines rather than really paying attention to how their communities are run.

Do you really think the general public would be thrilled to hear that the person who finished in 1100th place on a qualifications exam to become a cop was the one hired just because she didn't have a dick? That's not hyperbole, that's a real life example.

We're (society) part of the problem.

"You've GOT to have female fightfighters!!!!" screams the general public demanding equality. Politicians (and yes the higher ranking firefighters and cops are politicians as well) watch as female after female fail to carry a 250 pound sack up and down a ladder, so they drop the requirement to 100 pounds. Now we have female firefighters! However, when people die because said firefighters can't carry them out of a burning building, who do we blame? The firefighter?

Do you think a 120 pound female cop working alone stands a chance against one or more male suspects? Really? REALLY?

How about the 300+ pound cops, male or female, that are found everywhere now because you can't fire them for their "disability"?

Again, we should be holding cops to that higher standard, but let's hire people who can actually meet that standard. If you had to pick one person to play Operation on your behalf knowing that if they fail, you die, would you pick the world's foremost neurosurgeon or Michael J. Fox?

So to sum up, I'm not disagreeing with you on standards. I'm saying we're not giving them a chance to succeed. The system is broken. This is a view many cops have, but you don't get to hear about that because they're silenced by a MSM who doesn't see money in those stories or superiors who destroy their careers for speaking up.

I don't give a flying damn how many people are murdered in Chicago every weekend, as long as the number of citizens unjustifiably murdered by cops is zero.

The first part of that is why the DOJ report took place, which is why I keep referencing the murders in Chicago. To ignore them is to ignore how politically motivated that DOJ report was... The second part of your statement is so utterly ridiculous I can't believe you wrote it in anything but jest. Again, a great sentiment and something that should be the goal of law enforcement everywhere, but humans are still gonna human. That's not excusing them. That's not saying it's ok. Those people should be punished by the law.

It's like saying, "Let's bomb Germany to eliminate Hitler and the Nazis, but let's not kill any civilians." Ask Bill Clinton how such a belief worked for him. (Hint: It directly led to 9/11.)

Ok, maybe it's not exactly like that, but it's in the same zip code.

Even if we got to a point where diversity hiring was a secondary factor in favor of qualifications and mental stability. Even if we got back to two cops per car. Even if the public had trust in cops again. Someone could still potentially get shot accidentally. There's still going to be that kid who pulls out a pellet gun altered to look exactly like a real gun, and there's still going to be a cop who makes a mistake based on what he sees and what his emotions are telling him to do. I mean, how do you ever expect to get around the human element? Microchips in our brains telling us how to act? Something tells me you wouldn't be ok with that either...

Again, I agree with you on the standards and all that. I just disagree with you on where the problem lies. Until the cops on the street are responsible for budgets, hiring, setting policy, etc. I don't understand how you can say they're the root cause of the problems with law enforcement.

If you still disagree, that's fine. If you at least concede that there are other issues that must be fixed before we can properly fix the issues with cops on the streets, great. Either way I've said my piece and there's no point in continuing to debate this topic. We've already lost one forum regular over it and if I cared to discuss it endlessly, I'd be in that echo chamber thread about it, but I never go there for a reason.

Anyway, this isn't the "cops are Hitler" thread, this is the Trump thread, so let's get back to him.

Sanctuary City mayors are going to fight Trump on funding.

This is just awesome. All these cities are run so well, and have no outstanding issues that these mayors can focus on illegals rather than the needs of their citizens.

In other news, and because I think Chelsea Handler is a talentless cunt:

Leisher wrote:

When you give one citizen extraordinary power over the lives of other citizens, you have to hold them to a very high standard because otherwise you have institutionalized tyranny.

I agree with the sentiment (and it should be the goal and the standard), but again, it's Utopian thinking. Such a "perfect" system completely ignores human behavior, and as such, is unrealistic.

Heh... for a minute there I thought we were talking about the Presidency. I think if we can't get the 536 decision makers in Washington under control, it's kind of pointless and wishful thinking to believe we can do anything about the police.

Because it doesn't matter what language you speak, stupid is universal.

All these cities are run so well, and have no outstanding issues that these mayors can focus on illegals rather than the needs of their citizens.

Aside from the fact that Dipshit Drumpf's executive order to defund the cities is wildly unconstitutional, were I mayor of one of those towns, I'd do it just to piss him off.

the way you mock his immigrant name and the white hot hatred you have for him.

This isn't white hot hatred. This isn't even lukewarm, tepid hatred. As for his name, you mean the way I use it to identify him, as names generally do with people?

This part's just for TPR

I suppose that's Leish mocking TPR there, calling him by name.

So, at this point, I think it's fair to ask:

Is Trump a great president, or the greatest president?

Greatest, by far.

GORDON wrote:Greatest, by far.

I'm not quite ready to put him ahead of Washington, but I can see your point.

I think they need to start looking at adding him to Mt. Rushmore right now, I'm positive The Donald can make it happen.

GORDON wrote:I think they need to start looking at adding him to Mt. Rushmore right now, I'm positive The Donald can make it happen.

Add him? Why not just replace those other guys? Does anyone even remember them?

Y'all mofos aren't even trolls with that level of thinly veiled rabble-rousing. You don't even qualify as Orcs.

TheCatt wrote:

GORDON wrote:I think they need to start looking at adding him to Mt. Rushmore right now, I'm positive The Donald can make it happen.

Add him? Why not just replace those other guys? Does anyone even remember them?

I hadn't thought of a replacement, but yeah, get rid of Roosevelt.

Apparently it is becoming American policy to enforce the law.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2613124

Illegals and Malcolm hardest hit.

I really have no problem there.

TheCatt wrote:I really have no problem there.

I didn't quite realize that "people with visas literally in the air on the way to the US," would be impacted. I apparently mis-understood it as "we're going to halt new refugee applications" from these countries. Not fuck with people who are already X years into the process.

Good job, Trump.

Hopefully they win and Dipshit Drumpf's insanity is struck down.

The two men, Hameed Khalid Darweesh and Haider Sameer Abdulkaleq Alshawi, had been released by Saturday night. But lawyers for other detained travelers said in a court filing that "dozens and dozens" of individuals remained held at JFK.

The ACLU, one of the groups representing the detained travelers, were in federal court Saturday night arguing for a nationwide stay that would block the deportation of all people stranded in US airports under what the group called "President Trump's new Muslim ban."

According to court papers, both Darweesh and Alshawi were legally allowed to come into the US but were detained in accordance with Trump's order.

Darweesh, who worked as an interpreter for the US during the Iraq War, was released from detention early Saturday afternoon.

Nice way to show your gratitude to one of the dudes that helped your country. Thanks, Dipshit Donald Judas Drumpf.

Meanwhile, that particular executive order is really winning over Silicon Valley.

Also, Iranian director is effectively banned from the Oscars.

fter President Trump signed an executive order banning Syrian refugees and citizens from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences issued a statement denouncing the ban, which may prevent Oscar-nominated Iranian filmmaker Asghar Farhadi from attending the 89th Academy Awards, where his new drama “The Salesman” is nominated for best foreign language film.

Seems legit. Dude sounds like a terrorist threat to me.

Hilariously enough, I notice Saudi Arabia isn't on the ban list. I guess giving carte blanche to the sharia-fellating country that was home to 15 of the 19 9-11 hijackers is cool. I can only assume it has to do with the embarrassingly lopsided enabler relationship we have with them.

Saudi should have been first on the list, that they are not says a lot. But I'm not sure what it says.

Court blocks Trump's presidential executive order.

One assumes they had to check to see if they were allowed to do that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cou ... 65cbbc6a6f

Anyway, what's the ACLU doing in this mess? Are they also the Syrian Civil Liberties Union?

GORDON wrote:Court blocks Trump's presidential executive order.

One assumes they had to check to see if they were allowed to do that.

Unlike Drumpf.

Anyway, what's the ACLU doing in this mess? Are they also the Syrian Civil Liberties Union?

They generally show up whenever someone wants to take a shit on the Bill of Rights.

Does the Bill of Rights apply to Syrians?