Progressives (Liberals)

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/06/03/sanders-calls-democrats-embrace-8-point-plan-end-police-brutality-protect?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0asTLErhqlUa7UgDl3HKExKHeBlLI9hmyFkAwJCEvHaGcBVmSIez0qwHw

Sanders has a great plan to reform our police force.
Democrats should be happy to adopt it.
Will they?

Which one? There are over 18,000 local police organizations in the USA. They're not under federal control.

I suggest reading the article if you want details.
Don’t worry though, I’m sure the stooges in Congress will find a way to kill reform suggestions that might work.

I don't know the legal background how and why those thousands of police forces have been created.
Additionally to the number hightor mentioned, there are 65 U.S. federal agencies and 27 offices of inspector general that employ full time personnel authorised to make arrests and carry firearms.

To reform all these will take really some time. (In our state, with just one police force, the rather simple re-organisation is going on since years, starting more than 20 years ago that all new policeman have got a BA and start their job with the rank of a 2nd lieutenant.)

Does your country and local municipalities also have decision-makers who receive bribes from weapons manufacturers to keep downvoting reforms?

I have no idea. (Taking of bribes by and giving of bribes to elected officials is, of course, a crime.)
Weapons manufacturers might try to do such, but that's armed forces and not police related.

Did you hear Biden's speech on the issue, aired two days ago or so? He made a few interesting proposals. Sounded quite committed to it.

It is simple-minded to think that the president can reform police forces, of which there are thousands, and as Hightor points out, they are not under Federal jurisdiction. A major problem came when Bush's dirty little war in Iraq exposed how woefully ill-equipped the Army National Guard had become. Upgrading their equipment meant that the Federal government then had large inventories of equipment which, although no longer suitable for deployment in foreign conflicts, was far more sophisticated than special weapons and tactics departments in the states had previously been able to employ. As was inevitable, police forces expanded dramatically to take advantage of the new equipment available, with a concomitant degradation of personnel standards. There's nothing that St. Bernie could do about that. As with so much of his bullshit, he would not have the authority to do anything about that, without providing funds which it is highly unlikely that Congress would provide. Sanders is a typical politician, he is willing to promise the sun, moon and stars to achieve his ambition. It's too late; by the 2024 campaign, even his most ardent supporters (deluded by his "promise 'em anything" rhetoric) would have to acknowledge that he would be too old.

But let's not fool ourselves here, Lash doesn't give a rat's ass about the Democrats or about so-called progressives. She just wants to distract and introduce discord in the fervent hope that "her president," i.e., Plump, will be re-elected. Life and government aren't so simple that one can wave a magic wand and solve all problems.

Maybe in your country.

Not "may be" but it is (Section 108e of the German Criminal Code).

Since I responded to your "Does your country ...." I certainly only meant 'Germany'.
For the situation in other countries you can look at An International Guide to Anticorruption Legislation

Considering how fucked up the US is right now, if Biden wasn’t a completely unbelievable liar—or if I didn’t have knowledge of his outsized role in creating the racist dystopia that is burning down our country rn, I would vote for him—just for the relief from Trump’s personality.

The difference for me in trump and Biden is that the media keeps up an exhausting pressure on trump—and would immediately begin covering up every similar crime and **** up for Biden. The media is a DNC mouthpiece.

Trump and Biden both suck, they’re both criminals, and they’re both incompetent.

Biden’s racist Crime Bill and divisive rhetoric got us here; trump just benefited from it. (Edit—and I should say here, he’s exacerbated it with his own stupid rhetoric and using the goddamn military against our citizens)

I don’t think Biden writes what he says now after stepping on his dick during unscripted interviews. He nearly lost the black vote yelling at a popular black man who dared to ask him questions. “You’re not black...”.

I don’t trust anyone who trusts Biden—or Trump.

I’m glad for you. Our country is infected with corruption from head to toe.

I did — that's what my remark was aimed at. I didn't see information as to how the plan was going to be implemented nationwide. I don't think such reforms can simply be mandated from D.C. There are some good points — including raising officers' pay. I know, there are departments where cops are grossly overpaid, but I don't think Sanders is talking about those guys. The fact is, the non-white population has become wary of going into law enforcement because there have been so many racial incidents — yet it is precisely because of those events that we need more non-white police officers. Raising pay would be an attraction and might make low level graft and corruption less of a temptation as an income supplement.

Well, nothing's getting by McConnell.

He was my favorite because he vociferously championed the policies that I consider mandatory.

OurRevolution is about policy not personalities.

I’ll leave the hero-worship to Democrats and Republicans.

You seem to argue that reform is impossible, therefore Americans should just accept the status quo. Otherwise, what is your point?

The crime bill didn't "create" the racist dystopia, it attempted to address one aspect of it. The problem is not that it was made into law but that its destructive effects remained unnoticed for so long. No big piece of legislation is perfect and congress should have monitored the crime bill's implementation and addressed its deficiencies long ago.

He didn't say that. He didn't recommend shooting protesters in the legs either.

Here's what he said:

and


Frankly, I wish he hadn't made either statement. The first one assumes an informality which is inappropriate for that sort of interview and the second one is simply impractical in many of the situations where officers use weapons against attackers. But the point is, why not just provide the entire statement instead of deceptively misquoting the guy?

My point is that these reforms have little chance of making it past the Senate. Only by defeating Trump and the party of Trump can such efforts even have a chance of success. It doesn't mean "accepting the status quo", just being aware that things aren't likely to change and that if we want change we'll have to vote it in, not simply expect something to get done because Sanders thinks its a good idea.

When you left the Facebook Click ID in the link?

No.

OK; I admit, I am curious. What you do you mean? I disagree with you probably 99% of the time, but to my mind at least, when it comes to tech/internet things, you usually know something about it. So, in connection to the post you were responding to, what does that mean?