• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,368
Points
1,110
Remius said:
Look at the CAF.  Because of a few a-holes we saw a massive change in the CAF that led disbanding a regiment and changing policies that affects to this day.  Canadians lost trust in the CAF and it took a war to win it back.

Don't disagree with much that you say. However, take issue with what I have left in your quote.

I lived the disbandment of the AB Regt. I was involved in the investigations, and was on the parade square when they stood down. There were a few a-holes, but most of those flaws had been fixed, internally, by the CAF. It was a complete reluctance on the part of the government of the time to accept any potential responsibility, questioning or inquiry...disbandment was the easy option.

And now, with a few a-holes...let's de-fund.
 
S

stellarpanther

Guest
How can they disband a police force?  We certainly need police for numerous things.  I am in favor of eliminating/restricting access to certain weapons they have.  I don't think a police department for example should have armored vehicles.  I think many of the weapons they have should be left to National Guard units if needed. Looking at some of these departments in the U.S. they look like they're better equipped than the CAF.

 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
2,819
Points
1,010
Too many misleading phrases are in use - "fuck the police", "disband the police", "public trust is broken".  On the whole, public trust is not broken and it's not hard to find the pockets where it is broken.

Minorities already feel unsafe.  Making more people feel unsafe is not an improvement.  It doesn't matter how outraged someone is; people who already feel safe are not obligated to weigh his outrage in deciding whether to feel unsafe and what steps to take to stop it.  They will abandon unsafe cities, self-segregate in safer communities among people who share their values, buy private security, and buy more guns.  The tax bases in the cities with problems will shrink.

The CAR disbandment is a poor example to refer to, because as noted its current leadership had started to reform it.  I've never seen the disbandment as anything except a political exigency.

For all the recent interest in Camden, the headlines may say "disband" (technically true) but the substantial point is that it was restructured and reformed.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
2,819
Points
1,010
>How can they disband a police force?

Only a small fringe - the true anarchists/minarchists - want police disbanded.  What most people want is restructure and reform (Camden NJ is the poster child).  Very roughly: Camden disbanded its municipal force and went with the existing county force.  The city took that route because the union was too much of an obstacle to internal reform.  The uniformed officers were not simply all let go; they were re-hired into the new force.  The new force has since unionized.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,406
Points
1,090
Brad Sallows said:
Too many misleading phrases are in use - "frig the police", "disband the police", "public trust is broken".  On the whole, public trust is not broken and it's not hard to find the pockets where it is broken.

Minorities already feel unsafe.  Making more people feel unsafe is not an improvement.  It doesn't matter how outraged someone is; people who already feel safe are not obligated to weigh his outrage in deciding whether to feel unsafe and what steps to take to stop it.  They will abandon unsafe cities, self-segregate in safer communities among people who share their values, buy private security, and buy more guns.  The tax bases in the cities with problems will shrink.

The CAR disbandment is a poor example to refer to, because as noted its current leadership had started to reform it.  I've never seen the disbandment as anything except a political exigency.

For all the recent interest in Camden, the headlines may say "disband" (technically true) but the substantial point is that it was restructured and reformed.

My example of the CAR disbandment was more to highlight that the trust and the image Canadians had in the CAF was broken by then and it took a long time and a lot of changes to rebuild that trust.  It didn’t matter what the CAF did, it was going to happen.  Was it political yes.  The same thing I think is happening to images and confidence in the police.
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,304
Points
1,060
Brad Sallows said:
>How can they disband a police force?

Only a small fringe - the true anarchists/minarchists - want police disbanded.  What most people want is restructure and reform (Camden NJ is the poster child).  Very roughly: Camden disbanded its municipal force and went with the existing county force.  The city took that route because the union was too much of an obstacle to internal reform.  The uniformed officers were not simply all let go; they were re-hired into the new force.  The new force has since unionized.

So we disbanded the airborne regiment. Then, we scattered all the members of that regiment to three battalions, gave them back their hats, and gave them the same job. What really changed other than the size and location of their unit(s)? Disbandment was a huge mistake, but it was all smoke and mirrors in the end. Sort of like “disbanding” a city police force by renaming it a county police force.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
607
Points
1,260
Brad Sallows said:
The uniformed officers were not simply all let go; they were re-hired into the new force. 

Sounds like what Metro did when they merged 13 police forces into one.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,406
Points
1,090
Target Up said:
So we disbanded the airborne regiment. Then, we scattered all the members of that regiment to three battalions, gave them back their hats, and gave them the same job. What really changed other than the size and location of their unit(s)? Disbandment was a huge mistake, but it was all smoke and mirrors in the end. Sort of like “disbanding” a city police force by renaming it a county police force.

Again, you are missing the point I was making.

I used the CAR as an example of how a few individuals can tarnish the good name of any organisation.

So when Weenie asked if the actions of a few a holes can negate the good work of good cops the answer is yes.  In the eyes of the public it does.

I’m not debating the merits of the CAR being disbanded or not. Or what results that really had.

I was recruiting or trying to recruit after those events and let me tell you, Canadians by and large were painting us all with the same brush.  It took years and war to reestablish that relationship.

 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,403
Points
1,040
f5d1ad2081ad01380499005056a9545d


https://dilbert.com/

:cheers:
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,406
Points
1,090
Brad Sallows said:
>How can they disband a police force?

Only a small fringe - the true anarchists/minarchists - want police disbanded.  What most people want is restructure and reform (Camden NJ is the poster child).  Very roughly: Camden disbanded its municipal force and went with the existing county force.  The city took that route because the union was too much of an obstacle to internal reform.  The uniformed officers were not simply all let go; they were re-hired into the new force.  The new force has since unionized.

This is the problem.  People only hear what they want to hear.  Reform, restructuring and change does not mean “get rid of”
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,304
Points
1,060
Remius said:
Again, you are missing the point I was making.

I used the CAR as an example of how a few individuals can tarnish the good name of any organisation.

So when Weenie asked if the actions of a few a holes can negate the good work of good cops the answer is yes.  In the eyes of the public it does.

I’m not debating the merits of the CAR being disbanded or not. Or what results that really had.

I was recruiting or trying to recruit after those events and let me tell you, Canadians by and large were painting us all with the same brush.  It took years and war to reestablish that relationship.

Allow me to also restate my point. Disbanding, as in the case of NJ, did what, other than change the name of the PD? Some heads may have rolled, but the same cops were on the same streets, doing the same job, in the same cars, with a snazzy respray, and a different badge.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
607
Points
1,260
This caught my eye, "In five years, 10 ( US ) cities with the largest police departments paid out $1.02 billion in settlements and court judgements."

stellarpanther said:
I am in favor of eliminating/restricting access to certain weapons they have.  I don't think a police department for example should have armored vehicles.  I think many of the weapons they have should be left to National Guard units if needed. Looking at some of these departments in the U.S. they look like they're better equipped than the CAF.

For reference,

Militarization of the police?
https://army.ca/forums/threads/116026.0.html
7 pages.
LOCKED.

A report from a 1996 Los Angeles Times article - in the wake of the Rodney King riots - I found of interest,

( Mayor ) Riordan Orders Report on Plunge in LAPD Arrests
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-03-15-me-47313-story.html

“Today we have the largest force of sworn officers . . . in the history of the department.”
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,406
Points
1,090
Target Up said:
Seeing as I repetitively miss your point, it seems, allow me to restate my point. Disbanding, as in the case of NJ, did what, other than change the name of the PD? Some heads may have rolled, but the same cops were on the same streets, doing the same job, in the same cars, with a snazzy respray, and a different badge.


Point taken about points.

Did you look at the results about Camden?

Crime is still a problem.  But...by adopting more community policing it looks like the crime rate dropped significantly.  More importantly they have community buy in.


This article from 2013

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323968704578650171849946106

This from this year

https://snjtoday.com/2020/01/07/camden-city-experiences-historic-drop-in-crime-rate-new-study-says/

And this one with some graphics showing crime rates and crime clearance rates.

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/04/better-police-less-crime-in-camden-nj.html

In that last one from 2019, the writer makes the case for “More police officers but better policing”.

The reforms in Camden actually put more cops on the street.

 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
2,819
Points
1,010
The communication problem is not that people are hearing what they want to; it's that the speakers want to stroke themselves.  People who take a motte-and-bailey approach to their rhetoric (issue an inflammatory statement, and then make excuses that it didn't really mean what the plain language stated) are too tiresome to be paid any heed.

"Fuck the police".

So someone explains, "Oh, they don't mean all police.  They just mean the bad ones."  Well, why not just say "fuck bad police"?  Everyone just went a round on "believe women" in which in was necessary to massage the slogan's interpretation to fit preferred outcomes of the Reade/Biden dispute, and here the sloganeers are doing the same thing over again.  The "[imperative] [article] [object]" or "[imperative] [object]" constructs lends itself more easily to an inferred "all" rather than an unspecified "some".  Use a qualifier.  One word will do.

"Disband the police".  Ditto.

The duty to communicate effectively lies with the speaker.  It's not the listener's fault for not interpreting an ambiguous or hopelessly general statement; it's the speaker's fault for being chickenshit.  We don't all have time to be Inigo Montoya.

Are they serious about the problems they claim to be serious about?  Then they should communicate meaningfully.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,267
Points
1,060
[quote author=stellarpanther] I am in favor of eliminating/restricting access to certain weapons they have. 
[/quote]

According to the Prime Minister of Canada and Minister of safety Bill Blair, Canadian police officers are carrying guns who's sole purpose is to kill as many people as quickly as possible. Scary.
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,304
Points
1,060
Remius said:
Point taken about points.

Did you look at the results about Camden?

Crime is still a problem.  But...by adopting more community policing it looks like the crime rate dropped significantly.  More importantly they have community buy in.


This article from 2013

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323968704578650171849946106

This from this year

https://snjtoday.com/2020/01/07/camden-city-experiences-historic-drop-in-crime-rate-new-study-says/

And this one with some graphics showing crime rates and crime clearance rates.

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/04/better-police-less-crime-in-camden-nj.html

In that last one from 2019, the writer makes the case for “More police officers but better policing”.

The reforms in Camden actually put more cops on the street.

Points conceded.  :salute:
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,406
Points
1,090
Brad Sallows said:
The communication problem is not that people are hearing what they want to; it's that the speakers want to stroke themselves.  People who take a motte-and-bailey approach to their rhetoric (issue an inflammatory statement, and then make excuses that it didn't really mean what the plain language stated) are too tiresome to be paid any heed.

"frig the police".

So someone explains, "Oh, they don't mean all police.  They just mean the bad ones."  Well, why not just say "frig bad police"?  Everyone just went a round on "believe women" in which in was necessary to massage the slogan's interpretation to fit preferred outcomes of the Reade/Biden dispute, and here the sloganeers are doing the same thing over again.  The "[imperative] [article] [object]" or "[imperative] [object]" constructs lends itself more easily to an inferred "all" rather than an unspecified "some".  Use a qualifier.  One word will do.

"Disband the police".  Ditto.

The duty to communicate effectively lies with the speaker.  It's not the listener's fault for not interpreting an ambiguous or hopelessly general statement; it's the speaker's fault for being chickenshit.  We don't all have time to be Inigo Montoya.

Are they serious about the problems they claim to be serious about?  Then they should communicate meaningfully.

Fair enough.  And you are right.  Frig the police does nothing to further the conversation. It works both ways.
 

Ironman118

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
stellarpanther said:
I am in favor of eliminating/restricting access to certain weapons they have.  I don't think a police department for example should have armored vehicles.

We carry C8's, remington 870's and just got our own ARV. You need to do a course to be able to use either, and even then there are only limited amounts per shift on the road, like 1-2 depending on the city. I can tell you they are definitely needed. Not being able to properly respond to a barricaded armed person because you have to wait for another region's police service to send their ARV is embarrassing. If the RCMP officers in NB had C8's instead of just their service handguns on June 4th 2014, they would probably still be alive today.

It's interesting hearing others viewpoints on taking weapons away from Police - because it obviously isn't founded in knowledge of any sort in armed person response or standard operating procedures regarding them. Look up the North Hollywood Shootout. Imagine if they had an ARV and high caliber weaponry?
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
607
Points
1,260
How are things going in chicago? Not well.
https://google.com/amp/s/chicago.suntimes.com/platform/amp/crime/2020/6/8/21281998/chicago-violence-murder-history-homicide-police-crime
From 7 p.m. Friday, May 29, through 11 p.m. Sunday, May 31, 25 people were killed in the city, with another 85 wounded by gunfire.

“We’ve never seen anything like it, at all,” said Max Kapustin, the senior research director at the University of Chicago Crime Lab.

Throw in 63 structure fires in 10 hours on 1 side of the city.
 

Ironman118

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
mariomike said:
How are things going in chicago? Not well.
https://google.com/amp/s/chicago.suntimes.com/platform/amp/crime/2020/6/8/21281998/chicago-violence-murder-history-homicide-police-crime
From 7 p.m. Friday, May 29, through 11 p.m. Sunday, May 31, 25 people were killed in the city, with another 85 wounded by gunfire.

“We’ve never seen anything like it, at all,” said Max Kapustin, the senior research director at the University of Chicago Crime Lab.

Throw in 63 structure fires in 10 hours on 1 side of the city.

Thank god they aren't trying to defund the fire department.
 
Top