-
[QUOTE=Tami;5480988][URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/04/11/mexico-migrant-crisis-border-shelters/?itid=hp-top-table-main"]Mexico’s new migrant policy adds to Biden’s border woes[/URL][/QUOTE]
It's not so much "adding" to Biden's woes as it is correctly placing the burden on his shoulders where it should have been all along. All of these Central American migrants are ultimately hoping to settle in the US, the only reason Mexico doesn't just funnel them on through is because we have basically been using extortion tactics to force them to enforce OUR immigration policies, which was never going to be a sustainable policy. Biden cannot have it both ways here, either he comes up with a fair and humane immigration policy that addresses this issue, or he accepts all the bad optics that come with reimplementing most of Trump's border control. What he and other centrists seem to want is to a country that theoretically accepts and welcomes everyone, while practically making it near impossible for most potential migrants to come in because we have forced Mexico to do all of the dirty work of detaining and deporting them for us.
-
[QUOTE=Adam Allen;5481352]According to this story, police are saying they stopped him because the car had expired registration. And apparently, the cop meant to fire her taser.
How is that possible, though? Is a taser even shaped like a gun?
I mean, I don't even know if it makes it much better, if it legitimately was a mistake.
Edit: Well, meant to link a story, but apparently you can't link stories from AP?[/QUOTE]
They are both made different and most trainings enforce on the cop that the gun is here and the taster is here on your belt. Depending on the brand you have. Not all taser are shaped anything like a gun.
And if having something hanging from your window warrants a stop-what about Handicap signs that NOBODY takes off of their windows?
-
This reminds me of an idea I've been thinking about. My idea is redesigning a police officer's handgun in such a way that it uses a mini-magazine that has to be loaded into the handle of the weapon in order to actually shoot anyone or anything.
From an outsider's perspective, it would be hard to tell if the gun was loaded or not.
However, the police would be required to carry their weapons unloaded unless a conscious decision is made to actually shoot someone.
It would be designed to load quickly, but the mini-mag would be kept separately on the police officer from the weapon.
A police officer could still use the weapon as a deterrent since the person it's being pointed at wouldn't know if it was loaded or not.
But it would also require the police officer to think, am I ready to shoot this person? Is it really needed for me to shoot this person?
It might still be a snap judgment, but it might stop or reduce accidents and separate out those police officers who are trigger happy from other police officers who are just trying to save lives.
Of course, there still needs to be addressed the overuse of Pepper Spray and the use of other types of assault like what happened to George Floyd and others.
But still, if we can limit overuse of loaded weapons, maybe more lives can be spared.
-
[QUOTE=Tami;5481452]This reminds me of an idea I've been thinking about. My idea is redesigning a police officer's handgun in such a way that it uses a mini-magazine that has to be loaded into the handle of the weapon in order to actually shoot anyone or anything.
From an outsider's perspective, it would be hard to tell if the gun was loaded or not.
However, the police would be required to carry their weapons unloaded unless a conscious decision is made to actually shoot someone.
It would be designed to load quickly, but the mini-mag would be kept separately on the police officer from the weapon.
A police officer could still use the weapon as a deterrent since the person it's being pointed at wouldn't know if it was loaded or not.
But it would also require the police officer to think, am I ready to shoot this person? Is it really needed for me to shoot this person?
It might still be a snap judgment, but it might stop or reduce accidents and separate out those police officers who are trigger happy from other police officers who are just trying to save lives.
Of course, there still needs to be addressed the overuse of Pepper Spray and the use of other types of assault like what happened to George Floyd and others.
But still, if we can limit overuse of loaded weapons, maybe more lives can be spared.[/QUOTE]
Police that carry lethal force should only be called in for special occasions. And have different training. Worked in Japan very well ...
-
[URL="https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2021/0411/Republican-unity-Trump-offers-different-take-at-donor-meeting?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&cmpid=FB&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1NjqILhlJSqVMaasfVc2kpGBq0nHAEm4N_sYW-RwkQFCY0Su_6yjE_oHY#Echobox=1618181777"]Republican unity? Trump offers different take at donor meeting: At GOP donor meeting, Donald Trump veered from prepared remarks Saturday and slammed Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and other Republicans. [/URL]
[QUOTE]Ahead of the invitation-only speech at Trump’s new home inside his Mar-a-Lago resort, the former president’s advisers said he would emphasize his commitment to his party and Republican unity.
Trump veered sharply from prepared remarks Saturday night and instead slammed Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., as a “stone-cold loser” and mocked McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao, who was Trump’s transportation secretary.
Trump also said he was “disappointed” in his vice president, Mike Pence, and used a profanity in assessing McConnell, according to multiple people in attendance who were not authorized to publicly discuss what was said in a private session. He said McConnell had not thanked him properly for putting Chao, who was labor secretary under President George W. Bush, in his Cabinet.
McConnell's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment Sunday.
Trump's words left some attendees feeling uncomfortable.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich did not defend Trump as he left Palm Beach on Sunday.
[B]
“We are much better off if we keep focusing on the Democrats. Period,” Gingrich said.[/B][/QUOTE]
Well, the old, out-of-touch white guys are done with him now.
-
[QUOTE=BeastieRunner;5481491][URL="https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2021/0411/Republican-unity-Trump-offers-different-take-at-donor-meeting?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&cmpid=FB&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1NjqILhlJSqVMaasfVc2kpGBq0nHAEm4N_sYW-RwkQFCY0Su_6yjE_oHY#Echobox=1618181777"]Republican unity? Trump offers different take at donor meeting: At GOP donor meeting, Donald Trump veered from prepared remarks Saturday and slammed Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and other Republicans. [/URL]
Well, the old, out-of-touch white guys are done with him now.[/QUOTE]
How in hell is McConnell a "stone cold loser" when he won re-election while Trump lost the presidency? And why was Dastardly Don "disappointed" in Pence? Because he wouldn't cooperate with the insurrectionists who wanted to lynch him back on 1/6? PUH-LEEZE!
-
[QUOTE=WestPhillyPunisher;5481501]How in hell is McConnell a "stone cold loser" when he won re-election while Trump lost the presidency? And why was Dastardly Don "disappointed" in Pence? Because he wouldn't cooperate with the insurrectionists who wanted to lynch him back on 1/6? PUH-LEEZE![/QUOTE]
McConnell lost the Senate Majority.
-- He backed McSally in two losing elections for the AZ Senate.
-- He f--ked up during GA's runoffs with his dumb-as-rocks stalemate on the stimmy.
-
[QUOTE=BeastieRunner;5481486]Police that carry lethal force should only be called in for special occasions. And have different training. Worked in Japan very well ...[/QUOTE]
Problem is, I don't think that every person in Japan has a so-called constitutional right to carry a weapon like we do here in the US.
The best way to solve this problem is to get rid of the gun culture in the US, but, we all know how hard that's going to be.
Completely disarming all police officers would just lead to the mass shooting of police officers by crazy gun fanatics who decide that the police are going to take their guns away from them.
Unfortunately you can't disarm the police until you also disarm the general public.
-
[QUOTE=Revolutionary_Jack;5481524]McConnell lost the Senate Majority.
-- He backed McSally in two losing elections for the AZ Senate.
-- He f--ked up during GA's runoffs with his dumb-as-rocks stalemate on the stimmy.[/QUOTE]
Yeah. McConnell only won his election because his voters don't give a bleep. In almost any other state he would have been primaries and lost easily.
-
McConnell won re-election because, like all other senior members of the Senate in positions of power, he had funneled a lot of money to his home State that otherwise would have gone elsewhere. Newly elected members don't have nearly that much control over spending, aside from a few set-asides and earmarks that everyone gets. Once you become entrenched into a position of power in Congress, your constituents have good (albeit selfish) reason to keep you there. Incumbency becomes self re-enforcing, and you wind up with doddering geezers like Strom Thurmond in charge of things.
-
[QUOTE=Tami;5481525]Problem is, I don't think that every person in Japan has a so-called constitutional right to carry a weapon like we do here in the US.
The best way to solve this problem is to get rid of the gun culture in the US, but, we all know how hard that's going to be.
Completely disarming all police officers would just lead to the mass shooting of police officers by crazy gun fanatics who decide that the police are going to take their guns away from them.
Unfortunately you can't disarm the police until you also disarm the general public.[/QUOTE]
I disagree because it has nothing to do with "gun rights" or "disarming" the police. This would be more of tier system.
Having say, traffic officers with non-lethal or domestic service officers with deescalation training and non-lethals, and having another branch of officers like major crisis intervention or gang intervention officers that have deescalation training and carry lethal force is just improving the current system. When the blues can't handle the "threat" they call in SWAT. It is well past time we have more than detectives, beat officers, and SWAT. If the beat officer can't handle the situation, you call in the right back-up.
Reforming and restructuring the American police system would go along way in changing the violent gun culture in the USA.
Nobody has to be disarmed in this scenario. We just create some new services and jobs to help people.
-
[QUOTE=BeastieRunner;5481643]I disagree because it has nothing to do with "gun rights" or "disarming" the police. This would be more of tier system.
Having say, traffic officers with non-lethal or domestic service officers with deescalation training and non-lethals, and having another branch of officers like major crisis intervention or gang intervention officers that have deescalation training and carry lethal force is just improving the current system. When the blues can't handle the "threat" they call in SWAT. It is well past time we have more than detectives, beat officers, and SWAT. If the beat officer can't handle the situation, you call in the right back-up.
Reforming and restructuring the American police system would go along way in changing the violent gun culture in the USA.
Nobody has to be disarmed in this scenario. We just create some new services and jobs to help people.[/QUOTE]
What if that traffic stop becomes something that needed SWAT in the first place?
I would say we need to look at all these laws that allow traffic stops and so on.
I did not know that having something on your rear view window was not legal in that state. There are so many laws that vary from city to city to state to county that no one can keep track of them.
Get rid of the ones that are a FULL waste of a cop's time. Figure out a better way to deal with warrants.
-
[QUOTE=skyvolt2000;5481861]What if that traffic stop becomes something that needed SWAT in the first place?
I would say we need to look at all these laws that allow traffic stops and so on.
I did not know that having something on your rear view window was not legal in that state. There are so many laws that vary from city to city to state to county that no one can keep track of them.
Get rid of the ones that are a FULL waste of a cop's time. Figure out a better way to deal with warrants.[/QUOTE]
I think that is a good idea too.
-
[QUOTE=skyvolt2000;5481861]What if that traffic stop becomes something that needed SWAT in the first place?
I would say we need to look at all these laws that allow traffic stops and so on.
[b]I did not know that having something on your rear view window was not legal in that state.[/b] There are so many laws that vary from city to city to state to county that no one can keep track of them.
Get rid of the ones that are a FULL waste of a cop's time. Figure out a better way to deal with warrants.[/QUOTE]
I didn't know about that either. Dumbest law I ever heard, and, sadly, it resulted in a needless tragedy.
-
School shooting in Knoxville TN.