By on September 15, 2020

As you’re undoubtedly aware, there has been a lot of pressure to de-fund the police this year following the highly publicized death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The city became the epicenter of violent and peaceful protests demanding police departments be stripped of funding that has since spread across the rest of the United States. Some cities, including Minneapolis, have already agreed to cut their budgets or abolish departments entirely.

While most of the ramifications of these decisions would be off-topic for this particular forum, a study came out this week examining how on-road policing has been impacted. Unsurprisingly, the number of traffic stops in Minneapolis has declined immensely. Since May 25th, Bloomberg’s CityLab estimated the department had made 80 percent fewer stops each week.

Based on the data provided, traffic stops cratered in the city almost immediately after Floyd’s death  especially moving and equipment violations. However, actions taken in response to suspicious vehicles dropped by 24 percent while suspicious person stops (which don’t include automobiles) declined 39 percent. While the Minneapolis City Council has voted unanimously to approve a proposal to eliminate the city’s police department entirely, the plan to replace it with “a department of community safety and violence prevention, which will have responsibility for public safety services prioritizing a holistic, public health-oriented approach” (sounds a lot like cops, frankly) has not yet been enacted.

So then, why have traffic stops slowed to a crawl if the regular PD has yet to be abolished?

From Bloomberg:

One explanation for the change in behavior could be the phenomenon of a “pullback” — police reducing their proactive activity in the wake of public criticism of their performance. In Minneapolis, officers are putting in requests to leave the department at higher rates than normal. One lawyer representing officers said he’s processing hundreds of requests from officers who want to leave the department, some citing post-traumatic stress disorder. Though the department budgeted for 888 sworn officers this year, MPD spokesperson John Elder told CityLab in August that there were closer to 830 officers at last count. The slowdown in stops might also be attributed to other factors, such as a potential change in police priorities, and the effects of Covid-19, which led to less activity on the street.

Either way, the trend could push Minneapolis farther from what criminal justice advocates say is an over-reliance on police to manage problems that would be better suited for unarmed, non-law enforcement officials. Amid calls to defund, dismantle or reimagine the police, portions of police budget cuts in Philadelphia and New York City came from removing some crossing guard duties from officers; Berkeley, California, council members moved this summer to create a new Department of Transportation that would handle most traffic stops in the police’s stead.

Ironically, New York City is worried that traffic will surge immensely once lockdown restrictions end. Ridership for mass transit was declining long before the pandemic and is assumed to remain heavily suppressed until months after a vaccine has been made widely available. It could result in a serious problem, though we doubt motorists will be heartbroken to learn they’ll be less likely to receive a ticket for going 10 over the posted limit or failing to notice a bum taillight. Critics are more likely to overlook that anyway and focus on the city’s elevated rates of violent crime over the summer or the presumption that funds have been squandered on a Manhattan Transit Authority nobody will use.

Things are more nuanced than that, obviously. But you get the idea.

The Bloomberg study goes on to examine presumed racial injustices and how best to combat them via various equity movements, but we’re once again moving well beyond the confines of what this website and author are about. However it did reference Stanford University’s Open Policing Project, which estimated that around 50,000 drivers and pedestrians are stopped by police on the daily. Assuming the de-funding movement continues picking up steam through 2020, that number could plummet as more cities adjust their budgets.

That would perhaps be less of a contentious issue if present-day rules didn’t leave so much up to police discretion. In most states, law enforcement can pull you over for basically any reason they want. Even those that have condemned Black Lives Matter and other movements aimed at abolishing or replacing local law enforcement have been in broad support of ending scattershot or brute-force policing tactics. Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey Sheila Oliver has called the concept of police abolition idiotic and dangerous. But even she noted that police reform needed to be tackled seriously in the United States last week at the September 11th memorial in West Orange, NJ.

“I am on board with police reform,” Oliver said on the anniversary of the attacks. “But police are needed.”

[Image: Grindstone Media Group/Shutterstock]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

138 Comments on “Study: De-funding the Police Seems to Reduce Traffic Stops At Least...”


  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    Traffic deaths have increased.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    It’s easy to hate police, lawyers, and the medical system… until you need them. Then we want them Burger King style – our way.

    Reducing corruption is important. But not all traffic stops are bad, and sometimes the suspects are inconveniently an imperfect match for the local demographics.

    We’re heading straight into the Idiocracy.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “We’re heading straight into the Idiocracy.”

      That happened the day that President Trump was sworn in. All those looney lefties on their knees, hands raised to the heavens, howling “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!”

      • 0 avatar
        MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

        Wait I thought Rosie and Jane moved to Canada by now…

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Canada didn’t want them. Same with Barbra Streisand when she threatened to leave the US.

          A lot of countries still take them, as long as they bring their own money and not become a burden on the State.

          HEY! Where have we heard that before!?

          BUILD THAT WALL! BUILD THAT WALL!

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            “…Hey! Where have we heard that before?!…”

            Do you mean the time you hired/employed hundreds of illegal aliens for over 30 years?!

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Nope. President Trump said immigrants are welcome as long as they “not become a burden on the State.”

            It’s called merit-based immigration, rather than the leftwing socialist open border illegal entry of undesirable aliens, gang members, drug mules and criminals.

            You’d sing a different tune if illegal aliens affected your life.

            Well, there’s hope it will. Maybe the next time a ‘crat is elected president and the borders are opened.

            But it ain’t going to happen the next four years under President Trump. Hell, maybe for eight more years if Congress repeals the 22nd Amendment.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Congress alone can’t repeal an amendment. Read your Constitution.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Shorthand FreedMike, shorthand.

            But you got the gist of my comment.

            If Xi can do it, if Putin can do it, why not Trump?

            I will say that after eight more years in office Trump may be as dilapidated as Biden is today.

            So, eight more years is all I’m hoping for.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “if Xi can do it, if Putin can do it, why not Trump?”

            Oh, the irony of lumping those three in a sentence.

            The first 2 happen to be very intelligent, the later brags about passing a test that any “normal” person can pass.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            LOL, Lou_BC!

            I knew instinctively that would bring you out of your Canadian basement.

            You don’t know when you’re being played.

            I’m howling with laughter! Thank you for making my day!

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @highdesertcat – bullsh!t.

            You play the “I was joking” card but wish that “one shot wonder” would go full totalitarian on any group that you happen to disagree with.

            You are saying that you are just trolling…. Okay.

            You just admitted that anything you type is tripe!

            For once, thanks for the candor.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Thanks again for making my day, Lou_BC.

            Like FreedMike wrote elsewhere, the process to rescind the 22nd Amendment is a complicated process that requires ratification by all US states.

            IOW, it ain’t gonna happen.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “Like FreedMike wrote elsewhere, the process to rescind the 22nd Amendment is a complicated process that requires ratification by all US states.”

            All US states? Nope. Three-quarters, actually. Or 2/3 of them can call a constitutional convention.

            Like I said…read your Constitution.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        highdesertcat,

        idiocracy in america started when they appointed first secretary of education in 1976. Before that americans were free. After that, first their minds became unfree. And now….

        Trump is trying to say, let me save you from this disaster. And americans say – “no. we better get on the knee. we better be stupid”

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          slavuta, the US History I learned in grade school, Jr High and Sr High School in America is drastically different from the US history the kids are being taught these days.

          I’ve got twin grandkids, age 14, and I graze through their school books once in awhile.

          I can understand the new Math. I cannot understand the convoluted US history that is being taught today, with huge gaps of actual history missing.

        • 0 avatar
          jkross22

          “Trump is trying to say, let me save you from this disaster”

          To which disaster are you referring? Because I know it’s not COVID. He’s screwed the pooch on that.

          As to the article, most police stops don’t result in awful results. Know what would reduce that number even more? Don’t resist arrest.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      A civilized society requires police.

      However, most of the interactions I’ve had with police have been decidedly uncivilized, despite me never having been arrested.

      Police treat every interaction with a member of the public as a combat situation. The problem with this is thst my day was NOT a combat situation until the police showed up.

      Police also need to realize that every interaction with a member of the public is also a chance to destroy that person’s confidence in policing as an institution.

      I lost my confidence in policing during a series of traffic stops in which officers tried to pick fights with me, or otherwise bully me. Fortunately, I was able to calm the situations using my customer service experience, but I lost confidence in the police as an institution, likely for life.

      Fifteen years later, I’m a PTA dad debating whether SROs are a good idea — and my kid does not have the customer service skills I used to save myself from being in a cops-gone-wild video as a 20-something.

      Reducing traffic stops is a bandaid on this problem, but first aid is necessary to buy our society time to solve the underlying problem.

      This will buy is time to civilize our police. Somehow.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        As always, there’s way more to the story that you are not telling us.

        The police are civilized. It’s the animals that they have to deal with that need reform.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          I’ve encountered police officers that approach most situations combatively and I’ve encountered those with great people skills that diffuse situations.
          “defund” the police is in many respects isn’t a cry to eliminate them but to shift funding to more appropriate services.
          A paramilitary response isn’t necessary for many mental health or addictions problems and many other social problems.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “I’ve encountered police officers that approach most situations combatively and I’ve encountered those with great people skills that diffuse situations.”

            Lou_BC you’re not a bad boy. I bet you’ve never been in a situation where you resisted arrest, or got busted for crack, or had the cops called on you for spousal abuse.

            C’mon now. You’re not dazzling us with brilliance. Now you’re baffling us with bullschitt.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @highdesertcat – some pretty broad assertions by someone who does not know me.

            I’ve been in a position professionally where criminal activity would void any professional status that I hold or have held.
            I never had to resist arrest nor would I but I’ll tell you a story.
            In my youth I was at a party that got violent. I myself got into a few fights at that same party. One was with an azzhole that got in my face, the other was to keep a buddy from getting double-teamed.
            The party was raided by the police. I had pulled off a guy who had tried to take down my friend from behind. just as that happens a few officers broke through the door. They saw that and grabbed the guy. One officer made the mistake of turning his back on another combatant. In turn, someone tried to take him down. I intervened just as multiple other officers swarmed the house. They saw me protect the officer. I felt like Moses parting the Red Sea. I let go of the guy I had grabbed and they cleaned out everyone around me. I walked out and they all nodded their thanks.

            As a paramedic I’ve been in multiple violent confrontations. Most were with fully mentally competent azzholes. A few were due to medical conditions or mental health conditions. Those were rare cases. I’ve been in harms way. Most of the time, I’ve been able to diffuse situations.
            In my various roles I have encountered officers that are azzholes and ones that are great.
            I’ve been out drinking and have encountered officers that were azz’s and those that were good.
            Being a former front-line professional I know very well what goes on.

          • 0 avatar
            jkross22

            Lou,

            Props to you for responding to HDC keyboard diarrhea in a measured way.

            HDC, seriously man, your approach in talking with people is atrocious. You’re pushing people away from policies that you agree with by acting this way.

            You gotta chill.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @jkross22 – Thank you. It can be a struggle to refrain from lowering oneself to their level. Those same individuals make the most noise if you do go that low!

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    Create 3 separate branches of policing. Investigation, law enforcement/patrols and traffic enforcement. Keep each function separate. Have separate selection requirements.

    Stop law enforcement officers driving around densely populated urban areas in vehicles. How often is a crime stopped by a patrol car driving past? Put more law enforcement types on foot patrol.

    Decriminalize the possession of drugs. And the sex trade. Set up red light districts that are patrolled by officers on foot. And have on-site nurses.

    Stop asking the police to be social workers and public relations officers as well as their regular duties.

    Enact mandatory quarterly testing for PEDs/steroids for all police/law enforcement officers.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      But We already have two separate, yet equally important, groups: the police, who investigate crime; and the district attorneys, who prosecute the offenders.

      These are there Stories…

      BONG BONG

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      This is sensible.

      Also, having first responders specializing in homelessness and mental health issues is a good idea.

      Police seem to regularly make those situations worse, and so a specialist is likely to have a better chance of resolving the situation and improving the outcome. The experiments done by the cities which have tried this have gone well so far.

      This way, police can focus on violent crime. But we’ll need fewer police and more mental health and homeless specialists if we take this route.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        Police have no business dabbling in mental health. Police respond to acute situations. Mental health issues are not acute. Mental health professionals go to school for years and it still taken them a long time to get people sorted out. What training are the police going to receive that will make achieving their goals of saving life and property easier?

        Also, do you have any idea how many hours per year police have to have in mental health training? In Minnesota it’s 13 hours per year. When someone is losing their mind and being violent there is only one way to control them. Physically and then chemically. That’s not the time to pull up a couch and ask them about their day.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Sounds like a good reason to vastly increase funding for mental health treatment – that way, the cops don’t have to deal with it and can concentrate on enforcing the law.

          Would you be in favor of paying more in taxes for that?

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            Absolutely not. The last thing this government needs is even more money.

            The funds could easily be reallocated from stupid pet projects like bike lanes, light rail (both of which are very underutilized where I live), or pointless global warming crap and actually serve a purpose.

            The government needs to learn to live within it’s means. The left needs to realize that WORK is the solution to the problem…not simply raising taxes.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            @EBFlex: history has demonstrated that every single time your solution has been attempted it has only made things worse. Would you recommend opening up ‘work houses’. There will always be unemployable members of society. And voluntary charity has never been a long term solution.

            Yes it is much better to ensure that all employable people are employed, but capitalism depends upon competition among the workers. Thus free market capitalists are willing to employ ‘undocumented workers’ or advocate for open immigration.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I’ve been on the front lines and the “EB Flex” mentality just f^cks things up more badly .You need police but you also need other services offered at the street level. Communities that have done that require less police resources and also reduces pressure across the board on all public services.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Arthur and Lou are making way too much sense.

  • avatar
    Yankee

    I’m going resist the urge to comment on the state of our country because I know no one cares what my opinion is and I don’t want to get into a discussion about who is and is not “looney.” I would suggest we stick to what this website is about as the author suggested. As someone who works behind the scenes on the PA state vehicle safety and emissions inspection programs, I am alarmed at how little (if any) training law enforcement personnel are given in the state inspection program they are supposed to enforce. I have heard many stories of officers overlooking serious safety issues and focusing on things that they erroneously think are citable offenses. We have had several ex-officers in the program over the years and I and they are both amazed at what they don’t know. As with other issues surrounding this topic, a little training could go a long way. I agree with SCE to Aux however: we desperately need officers to enforce the law, regardless of who is on the receiving end. Given the higher speed limits, level of distraction on the road (I was passed on the right the other day by a woman looking at her folded down visor mirror to apply eye makeup, and then later on the left by a man staring at his phone, and I was doing 70 mph), and capabilities of today’s cars that are way beyond the capabilities of most drivers, we need more, not less law enforcement on the road.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      You really should comment. Keeping quiet only encourages the opposition, regardless of which side they are on.

      That’s what makes America great! We can cuss and discuss and ultimately the majority wins.

      And when someone needs a cop, and there isn’t one to be had at any price, then those people will complain, as in hit and run cases.

      Or in cases of accidents on the Interstates where bodies are strewn all over the pavement.

      We Americans always get exactly what we deserve. Because we vote for it!

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Yankee – I fully agree that training needs to be better. Even when looking at just traffic infractions or assessing if a vehicle meets motor-vehicle code regulations. I’ve had to tactfully point out to police that my motorcycle exhaust was stock and legal by explaining it’s design and even had to point out the “DOT” stamp on my tires.
      Recently I got in an argument with the local Suzuki dealership over “street-legal” gas tanks. The idiots in the shop claimed my larger plastic aftermarket tank was “illegal”. I went down to the shop to get my bike with a copy of the motor-vehicle act and pointed out the “legal” requirements.

      Police do need to enforce the law but they need to know the law. The public also needs to know what the law is and also need to realize that driving is a privilege not a right.

  • avatar
    MKizzy

    Best case scenario: There’s a huge reduction of the types of random and minor traffic stops which result in senselessly heightened tensions between local police and communities of color.

    Worst case scenario: Once the driving public, already used to ignoring speed limits and many traffic laws, notices waning traffic enforcement, asphalt anarchy may ensue.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      You have any idea how many “random” or “minor” traffic stops lead to taking drugs and guns off the street? Or better, getting someone with a warrant off the street?

      Traffic stops are like fishing. They most certainly serve a purpose and should absolutely continue.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Do you have any idea how many bullsh!t stops it takes to make a positive difference that benefits anyone other than cops themselves, their unions, courts, jails/prisons and on down the road?

        Then why don’t we allow cops to “randomly” stop pedestrians on the sidewalk for a frisk, ID and run them through the national data base?

        Yeah you boot lickers would love that! But because they’re in a car, you seem to think they wave all their rights?

        • 0 avatar
          EBFlex

          How do traffic stops benefit the police? How do traffic stops benefit unions? How do traffic stops benefit courts? How do traffic stops benefit prisons?

          Who wrote the laws that people are breaking that result in traffic stops? Was it the police? The police union? The courts? Was it the jails??

          And we should allow stop and frisk. That worked wonders in New York. Crime was extremely low.

          And once again, you don’t agree with civility or common sense so you start name-calling. Hysterical yet predictable.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            You may not like the term, but it’s not name calling. It’s simply slang for what you admit you are. A cop apologist.

            Corporate media are huge boot lickers too, except once a big story hits the streets, their hands are tied.

            But don’t fool yourself, the courts, jails, prisons, cops, etc, and their unions, they’re all businesses too.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    It doesn’t have to be all one way or the other, but there needs to be an agreed upon level of professionalism. It’s very hit-n-miss across departments and officers.

    It would require 100% transparency, a citizen’s oversight/watchdog committee for each department, station, etc, not just comprised of government/city workers and other boot licker. Perhaps a mix of ex felons and parents of victims killed by police also.

    As it sits, police simply investigate themselves. Yeah no conflict of interest there…

    Unless the media or the FBI get involved, complaints just evaporate over time. Instead of defunding the police, set aside what ever it takes to clean up police departments and sheriffs offices and make sure them or officers/deputies don’t go off the rails.

    Yet some departments still refuse to wear body-cams. Every interaction with the public needs to video recorded and viewable by any interested parties, any time, every time. And from multiple sources/angles. Cameras are cheap enough now that pretending they’re too expensive is silly.

    It’s a situation that’s fixable, but clearly it’s not going to fix itself.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Moderated comment from HDC.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Are you serious?? You’ve seriously lost it man.

        I’m not sure you’re ever had it. But like rats infesting the kitchen, there’s always a cure. And it may get ugly before it gets better.

        The bad cops may seek other employment that’s a better fit, or not apply in the first place, but you must start by shining a light on the problem a go from there.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          You’re blaming everything on the cops, but they are just employees of the city government that employs them, and empowers them. Or, as we have seen in the case of Portland and Chicago, severely restricts them from doing their job.

          As long as the people in those troubled places keep electing the politicians that they do, it will never get fixed.

          I have Law Enforcement people in my family, and they moved up to Federal Law Enforcement and away from local city, county and state law enforcement because the Feds are consistent in their application of the law.

          The problem is with the people, and the politicians they elect. Not the cops. The cops only put into action how they are trained.

          You really need to do a little research before besmirching all cops.

          Cops only use the restraining tactics and tools approved by the politicians empowering them. Yeah, even the chokehold, etc.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            With all due respect and all seriousness, are you dumb? Having a medical condition?

            Who said “all cops”? Yes most cops are professional and good. We’re not taking about them. But there’s absolutely no!way the cops that killed George Floyd were following approved tactics. That’s stupid. Beyond.

            But the wall is nowhere near completion and it’s already obsolete by drones capable of carrying people/cargo and in populated areas where the wall is already up, been up. Any dummy knows that.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “The cops that killed George Floyd”

            Oh do tell what you know! Because all that’s been released so far is that his neck showed no signs of traumatic asphyxiation and that he had a very lethal dose of Fentanyl in his system.

          • 0 avatar
            C5 is Alive

            “Who said ‘all cops?\'”

            The rioting and looting street thugs, with whom you share your Leftist ideology, say “all cops.”

            The criminal POS that shot two police officers as they sat in their car last weekend, with whom you share your Leftist ideology, say “all cops.”

            The rabid societal vermin that attempted to then block the hospital doors, with whom you share your Leftist ideology, say “all cops.”

            How dare anyone judge you by the company you keep, DM. Or perhaps I’ve somehow missed your reasoned and impassioned cries for law and order and in defense of peace, calm and civility over your bleatings about the wall and “ORANGE MAN BAD!”

            Floyd chose the wrong day to attempt to pass a counterfeit $20 and build upon his already long-established record as a habitual miscreant. While it probably shouldn’t have happened, his death was neither any great loss to civilized society, nor worth even 1/1000th of the violence and chaos that has since ensued… by the hands of those with whom you share your Leftist ideology.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Regardless, please explain how it was not a case police brutality. When they mishandle a person with a weak system, for what ever the reason, a kill is still a kill.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Oh so you’re talking about criminal? Except I’m sure not even they think it’s all cops.

            But I must be a Leftist (or criminal) if I’m not a boot licker?

            Yes cops take on a dangerous job. Except I’m sure they know that going in. And how their actions, or more accurately, the actions of their fellow officers make it even more dangerous.

            But still most cops die accidentally. And not just the automotive related, struck by moving cars, pursuits, not wearing seatbelts, etc. Drownings for example.

            Regardless, the calculated, unprovoked, ambush type killing of officers is extremely rare according to FBI stats.

            However, you’re 9X more likely to be killed by police than terrorists. Some would say police are our main terrorists.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            DenverMike, I think you are beating a dead horse.

            The police will be part of our society because we cannot exist without laws and law enforcement.

            But people like you who advocate for abolishing law enforcement could very well be directly responsible for the increase in gun sales and applications for CCL.

            People will protect themselves. I do. And I’m not afraid of any ‘fvcking’ thing as long as I am packing.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “Regardless, please explain how it was not a case police brutality. When they mishandle a person with a weak system, for what ever the reason, a kill is still a kill.”

            Much like your argument against the police (essentially nobody should have sympathy because they chose that profession) I believe that criminals chose their outcome when they chose to be criminals. Imagine of George Floyd didn’t break federal law and pass counterfeit money? Imagine if George Floyd chose not to do drugs that made him act erratically and ultimately killed him? Imagine if George Floyd just complied with officers?

            Imagine if Jacob Blake chose not to rape that woman resulting in a warrant for his arrest?

            But it’s the fault of the police. Just wow. Your ignorance is truly astounding. And when you have no argument you call people who side with civility and common sense “boot lickers”. What a retort.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            highdesertcat, when did I anything even closely related to abolishing police?

            Jeeze why does everything have to be all or nothing? The sh!t can be fixed like anything else. It’s true it’s near impossible to fire and or prosecute bad cops, and that right there would be a small step but a great place to start.

            If it was like any other industry, and police departments are a business, it wouldn’t be a problem. But there’s too many conflicts of interest at play. Problem number two.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            EBFlex, again, I’m not against police or policing, just bad cops and bad policing.

            Frick, it’s as if your only defense of police is lumping all of them together in one pot, take it or leave it, but if you take it, leave it alone? Yikes.

            Yes if you can’t separate the good cops from the bad cops, good policing from the bad, you’re a classic boot licker. Deal with it.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “EBFlex, again, I’m not against police or policing, just bad cops and bad policing.”

            Outside of the fentanyl fueled George floyd who held a gun to a woman stomach while his buddies robbed her during a home invasion the incidents of “bad policing” are extremely rare. But sheep like you think it’s some national systemic problem because your media makes huge deals out of isolated incidents. And then terrorist organizations like BLM (who actually don’t give a damn about black lives) lump ALL police shootings of black guys as unjustified when, again, the vast majority of those shootings are fully justified and warranted (Jacob Blake)

            Somehow the police are the focus while the feral vermin in liberal cities like LA and Chicago are out there killing dozens every weekend including innocent children and nothing is said. Not one word. Talk about hypocrisy.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            If it could be fixed it would have been fixed 10, 20, 30, 40, even 50 years ago.

            Look over the US history of the past 50 years re police brutality, rioting, anarchy, looting, etc. How ’bout 1968, eh? That was a great year. Rioting all year long.

            Oh, and how ’bout “Four Dead In O-H-I-O.” They made a song to celebrate it, or commemorate it, depending on which side of the political aisle you stand.

            But those riots ended abruptly after the four dead.

            Another great year for anarchy, 1968. This year 2020 is nothing compared to past riots, anarchy and looting.

            How about 1992 and the LA riots? They burned down most of Maxine Waters’ district.

            Don’t forget that America’s White Boys have not yet entered the fray to keep law and order where the cops are prevented from doing so.

            They stepped in, in Kenosha, I believe, and there were two dead anarchists. Stopped that cold.

            So that’s what we need: more anarchists, looters and rioters with guns. Then the White Boys can step in and stop the rioting. Rioters and looters – it doesn’t matter the color of their skin.

            That’s when Live TV will draw an audience, like 9/11 did.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @EBFlex –
            I could asphyxiate you with no obvious signs of trauma to the throat. One again, you have zero clue!

            Oh and what constitutes a lethal dose of fentanyl?

            How do they measure that?

            Please post your sources!

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        “negroes”?

        Really? Do we not have any moderators here anymore?

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          should we remove this word from book written 60-80 years ago? Classical literature? You seem like BLM to me

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Some dark-skinned people are greatly offended when they are lumped in as “black” when they are in actuality Caucasian.

            Many dark-skinned people are not members of the negroid race.

            Often they are Caucasian, or Pacific Islanders, Samoans, Aboriginies. None of them are “negroes” but they are “black.”

            And American society does not treat all black people the same, to wit the current BLM movement.

            When was the last time a Samoan or someone from India was high on crack, resisted arrest and was shot dead by police or had his windpipe crushed by the knee-on-the-neck?

            A more generic term invented was African-American, until naturalized White US citizens who came from Africa started calling themselves naturalized African-Americans. That was actually in the news some time ago.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “race” Is more of a social construct than that of a biological one. Skin colour or skull shape is biologically insignificant. Bigots and racists will use the term but not many else.

            Recent biological evidence from tracing mitochondrial DNA show that the vast majority of inhabitants of this earth regardless of artificial constructs like “Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid” originated from a same common ancestor.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            I don’t care what I seem like to you, slavuta.

          • 0 avatar
            Old_WRX

            slavuta,

            Don’t you know the important thing is to conform to the politically correct usage of the day as established by the people who make the most noise and trouble?

          • 0 avatar
            Old_WRX

            “should we remove this word from book written 60-80 years ago?”

            Of course, we must purify all written or spoken words and of course all thought. The truth about all this communist idiocy is that you must believe the “THE TRUTH”. Whether the “TRUTH” is true or not or even what it is is irrelevant. It’s all about the joy of being able to bully everyone.

            The vast majority of Americans think it can’t happen here despite the fact that it is happening right under their noses. Their denial is mind boggling. It’s like taking candy from a baby.

        • 0 avatar
          jkross22

          I was wondering the same, Mike.

          Figured this would be a spicy comment section, but this is counterproductive.

  • avatar
    Dan

    Stops traffic stops in the hood where the drugs and guns and people who vibrantly resist arrest are, but pulling over civilized people for 10 over on their way to work isn’t going anywhere.

  • avatar
    Gardiner Westbound

    Hate cops? Next time you’re in trouble call a crackhead.

  • avatar
    dwford

    There’s no way around the fact that minor traffic violations are used as a predicate to sniff out other crimes. Do we want people with outstanding warrants found and picked up? Do we want people driving around with drugs stopped? You tell me. It’s unfortunate that recent deaths have been happened, but they all had outstanding warrants and didn’t feel like going to jail that day. What’s a cop to do when a person resists, just back off? We’d never apprehend another criminal.

    I could see a scenario where we treat minor traffic violations as code violations – maybe just snap the license plate and mail them a fine, instead of doing a regular traffic stop.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Probably since we’re not nazi Germany. What if one day a cop decides you fit the profile of what ever he/she and K9 specialize in. To a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

      And your car is torn apart a meth molecule is found. Maybe it was the previous owner of your car. Or the time you loaned the car to your brother inlaw. Or cops do plant drugs.

      Then your whole life changes (not in a good way). All from not driving 100% centered in your lane or something goofy. It happens all day everyday.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        Oh the ignorance.

        Most, if not all states have laws that say you are in violation of state statute when you cross the line. You can be anywhere you want in the lane.

        In fact, nobody is getting pulled over because they are not centered in the lane. People are pulled over because of a moving violation, the registered owner has a warrant, etc.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          It’s a tactic cops use. I’ve seen them use it on Live PD along with license plate lights being too dim. And they’re on their best behavior on these stupid shows. They can do whatever they want, invent laws, and that’s the root of the problem.

          • 0 avatar
            brn

            Criminals have tendency to drive in ways that draw attention or fail to maintain their vehicles. It’s true. Their general disregard for the rules, makes them easy targets.
            Don’t want to get pulled over? Replace you freaking tailight when it burns out. If you don’t, the cops will pull you over. If you’re not doing anything else wrong, you get a warning. Have a warrant? Bingo.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            How would you know? They don’t exactly alert the media and brag about all the regular folks they pull over just because they feel like it, handcuff them, ransack their autos and send them on their way with just a warning.

            And they’re supposed to be grateful they didn’t go to jail, didn’t get cited and thank the officer too.

            Maybe they gave “consent to search”, or the police dog false-positive alerted.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “ How would you know? They don’t exactly alert the media and brag about all the regular folks they pull over just because they feel like it, handcuff them, ransack their autos and send them on their way with just a warning.

            And they’re supposed to be grateful they didn’t go to jail, didn’t get cited and thank the officer too.

            Maybe they gave “consent to search”, or the police dog false-positive alerted.”

            You clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Can you articulate where I don’t have a clue? Do you have anything informative to add? Or correct?

            Boot lick much? You have to go outside the corporate media to learn anything else or important.

          • 0 avatar
            brn

            How do they know? They’re not randomly pulling over people. They’re pulling over people who they actively see violate the law. Yes, you should be grateful if they don’t hold your responsible for your actions.

            As far as how they know there’s more; Driver may have an invalid license, driver may have a warrant, vehicle may smell of illegal substances, weapons may be visible.

            The net result is all positive from these actions.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        I get what you’re going for, but there is a flip side to that too. If there’s an Amber Alert with a Red Kia Stinger involved and I drive by a cop should they just let me roll along? If my brother-in-law used my car to distribute hard drugs should that property be completely uninvolved in any investigation?

        As far as cop planting drugs goes, I’m pretty sure that’s already a crime. I’m not sure what more you can do about other than make sure things are are monitored and prosecuted and remove any incentive to do such things.

        • 0 avatar
          Old_WRX

          Speaking of cops doing crimes. I remember a video about a cop car that rear ended another car. The two cops in the car started discussing how they were going to pin the accident on the guy whose car they hit. It might have worked except for the interior camera in the cop car recording their scheming.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          The whole thing is a conflict of interest. The bad cops, the prosecutors put there by cop unions, the incentives to arrest, job security for jailers, private prisons, etc, etc.

  • avatar
    Old_WRX

    This year has been one big circle jerk. And, defunding the police is, without a doubt, incredible stupid.

    But, hey, why not cave to the terroristic mob? Wouldn’t not caving be just another microaggression? We wouldn’t want them to have to deal with the reality that not everything in life is going to be the way you want it and that some people will have the effrontery to not see things your way.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      It’s easier to cave to domestic terrorists especially in an election year. Gotta get those votes for the Harris-Biden ticket.

      People that wind up in poor situations with the police do so because they have something to hide and they have no personal responsibility. But let’s continue to blame the police and not the people that put THEMSELVES in that situation.

      • 0 avatar
        Old_WRX

        “People that wind up in poor situations with the police”

        Yup mostly that is the case. There are bad cops, of course. But, defunding is not the way to fix that. The first thing that goes when money is short is just the sort of training that would help fix some of the problems that do exist with the police.

        From what I’ve read it looks like all the bad behavior on the part of the SJW’s is actually driving voters to the right. If they keep it up Trump will get a second term for sure.

        Of course the rioters don’t have the faintest idea why their shadowy backers have pushed this “defund the police” agenda on them. I’ll give ’em a hint: it doesn’t have anything to do with protecting people of color from police. But, if they can’t figure that out, what can they figure out? Not much, obviously.

        It’s easy to see that all the trouble is connected with the Dems. All you gotta do folks is check the political affiliation of the people who run cities like Portland, Chicago, NYC — you know, like, where they stopped law enforcement from stopping the rioters.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    Everyone keep this in mind down the road when you go to renew your insurance.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Hilarious. A story about traffic stops and you talk about Minneapolis PD.

    Do you think big-city departments do traffic stops? They don’t. And great traffic stops are down…but rioting and lawlessness are way up. This is the America the libs want. One where the police are shot in the face and the martyrs are sexual predators or a guy who does lethal doses of fentanyl and holds a gun to a woman’s stomach while his buddies rob her during a home invasion.

    • 0 avatar
      Arthur Dailey

      Traffic stops do occur, regularly. And not because somebody has broken the law. People/cars are pulled over because they might ‘fit a description’ or are seen late at night in a neighbourhood where they ‘do not look like they belong’, or possibly because there are a number of young males in a vehicle out late at night. Or even if the officer believes that your vehicle might be unsafe.

      These might all be legitimate but there are issues.
      1) People of colour are much more likely statistically to be pulled over in these traffic stops. Regardless of their age.
      2) In the USA unfortunately the officer(s) making the stop must assume that there is a firearm in any vehicle that they are pulling over. Thus increasing their anxiety and adrenaline levels.

  • avatar

    You do not need police. All you need is love, love Love is all you need. Have sex and all problems will be solved.

  • avatar
    jack4x

    It’s continually amazing to me how many people who support a political party that’s nominally for personal responsibility and limited government wholeheartedly endorse police tactics that sound like they come from Communist China.

    Yes I support fewer nuisance traffic stops.

    Yes I support fewer officers on the payroll.

    Yes I support taking military hardware away from police.

    Yes I believe armed officers are too often deployed in situations where armed force is not necessary, and that they are not properly trained for.

    I don’t much care if such positions count as “defunding the police” or not. But if I truly believe in smaller government, (and I do), then why wouldn’t I support making it smaller in one of the places most likely to affect my daily life?

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      I get 1 and 3. 4 can be worked on although that’s a broader situation than just the police.
      Not sure I’m with you on #2 though. I mean what’s the optimal number of police officers? I don’t agree with just a general “less is better” proposal.

      • 0 avatar
        jack4x

        2 follows from 1 and 4. With less responsibilities, fewer officers are needed. With less stress on budgets and more competition for the spots, recruiting standards and training can be improved.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          I’d definitely have to see other reforms successfully in action before I’d vote for personnel reductions. It’s not something I’d want to implement all at once or start off with.

          I think it is easier said than done though. A big driver of nuisance traffic stops are municipal budget shortfalls and calling the cops like they’re your parents or customer support is pretty ingrained in dipsh*t Millennial culture.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      Here’s an idea that the defunders would agree with if they weren’t too busy hating police.

      Calling the police is an option of last resort. You make that call when nothing else has worked. Rather than defunding and then hoping you can perform some magic to reduce crime, do the reverse. Figure out how to reduce crime (focus on the kids), THEN you won’t need the cops anywhere near as much. Once you’re at that point, reducing the size of the police force makes sense.

    • 0 avatar
      Daniel J

      And in what situations are they too often “armed” when not necessary?

      I’ve saw a meter maid hit down in Jacksonville, FL. I saw one here get into an altercation while writing a ticket for someone without a handicap sticker when that individual didn’t like the fact he was getting a parking ticket. Someone had enough sense to call the police and they were there quickly, but it could have been a situation where a meter maid could have been shot and killed over a ticket simply because they aren’t armed nor do they typically wear a protective vest.

      The problem is any situation can become violent where a police officer needs to be armed. I’ll get behind “better trained” any day.

      • 0 avatar
        Arthur Dailey

        Law enforcement officers in the UK are generally not armed. The number of citizens killed during interactions with UK police is minimal.

        Part of the problem is the number of firearms in the USA. Law enforcement officers must proceed in every encounter under the assumption that the citizens they are interacting with are armed. That increases the likelihood that the officer will draw their weapon.

        It is probably too late to change American society. But the Heller decision made things worse for law enforcement officers.

      • 0 avatar
        jack4x

        “And in what situations are they too often “armed” when not necessary?”

        Gee, I don’t know. Probably 95% of responses to non-violent crimes in progress? When you train for the worst case scenario every time, you learn to expect it every time. That’s how we see so many unarmed citizens killed by police.

        The thing that strikes me in so many of the cop shooting videos is the tone of fear in the officer’s voice. It’s an understandable reaction, but it’s not one we can tolerate in state-sworn agents that are granted the power to take life and protected by qualified immunity afterwards. If that can be helped by more training I’m all for it. If it can’t, then maybe those officers shouldn’t be carrying lethal weapons.

  • avatar
    brn

    If Bloomberg had taken time to do just a little bit of research, they’d know that crime is up in Minneapolis, while the Police Department is down HUNDREDS of officers. Simple math tells you they’re too busy to perform optional activities such as traffic stops.

    This is one of the primary problems with reporting today. It’s just too easy to guess at what might be happening, rather than doing actual research and utilizing basic math. At least, it’s better than the “reporting” that happens on social media.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      From the Minneapolis Police Chief…I mean activist city council puppet himself:

      “If we just stay the status quo right now, we will end this year with numbers that are absolutely unconscionable… in terms of community violence,”

      But that’s what the Harris-Biden admin and their mouth breathing supporters want.

      • 0 avatar
        Old_WRX

        “But that’s what the Harris-Biden admin and their mouth breathing supporters want.”

        Yes, that is what they want. They want to destroy this country. This is not an exaggeration. The left backs the two organizations that are doing the violence. If you don’t think blm wants to destroy US civilization then go on their web site and read what they say their goals are. It’s right there.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Yeah, Biden wants to send crime rates sky-high and destroy the country. Best re-election strategy ever.

          Seriously?

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            Biden doesn’t know what he wants. He has to be told. He doesn’t know where he is, he never takes questions from the media, he is an empty suit.

            But yes I am serious. His handlers and the people controlling him want that exactly.

            I did hear Biden of the Harris-Biden ticket is a fan of Despacito though. He so cultured.

          • 0 avatar

            I am not sure Biden is aware that he want something or even runs for something. He just reads like robot from teleprompter.

        • 0 avatar
          Arthur Dailey

          Biden has been an elected politician for decades. He was the VP for 8 years. During his tenure in in Washington he was primarily a ‘middle of the road’ Democrat. No radicalism. In fact during his period as VP the USA was less violent and less divided than it is now. But Trump will have you believe that Biden is the problem? It truly is unfortunate that so many Americans do not read/understand history.

          • 0 avatar
            Old_WRX

            “Americans do not read/understand history.”

            Yeah, if they did they would recognize the pattern of what is going on in the US. Biden is nothing but a place holder — that’s a given. What is going on is the same as what has gone on in other countries before they were taken over by the “communists.” But, without some knowledge of history and getting beyond CNN, et al, you won’t see it.

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            “Biden has been an elected politician for decades. He was the VP for 8 years.”

            This is exactly the problem

            “so many Americans do not read/understand history”

            soon there will be nothing to read

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            @Old_WRX: Please name one case in history where any nation has been ‘taken over by communists’ following a pattern being seen in the USA.
            However there are numerous instances of a nation entering into a fascist dictatorship under the same pattern with an incumbent leader declaring that ‘only he can maintain law and order’ and that ‘his opponents are trying to destroy the country’. The continued lack of historical knowledge demonstrated on social media sites including this one is a searing indictment of the American educational system. When so many Americans cannot understand the difference between a liberal, a social democrat, a socialist and a communist, it clearly demonstrates why the voting/political situation is so divided/messed up.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @Arthur Dailey – people have zero clue in relation to critical thinking. Part of critical thinking to to assess the accuracy and/or veracity of what they read.
            Most will line up behind anything that fits their own personal world view. It is much easier to “tow the line” and hurl insults at the opposing view than take an honest look at one’s own ideology. it is even more difficult to admit one’s ideology is incorrect and move towards a more logical belief.
            I used to sit firmly on the conservative side of the spectrum but too many beliefs did not survive being filtered through a logic filter. I grew tired of the cognitive dissonance and instead of becoming a bitter burnt out professional I evolved.

          • 0 avatar
            -Nate

            @ LOUBC :

            Don’t give up and get bitter just yet .

            True Conservatives don’t lie and have very good critical thinking skills indeed .

            I have hope that things will e set right in due time .

            -Nate

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      Arthur Dailey

      Ok, whatever form of totalitarianism. Sometimes it is called fascism and sometimes communism. None of the “communist” countries have really been communist.

      And, one big question is: Are there really two parties struggling to control the government? Or, is the two party thing just a show? I certainly wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the dems role right now is to make people cry out for law and order. Then of course the Donald will say sure here’s martial law (probably won’t call it that, tho). That’s a known method. After all, after the 9/11 controlled demo of the wtc’s no one in this country seemed to bat an eye as they passed the egregious “PATRIOT” act and created the dept of “Homeland” security. One rule of thumb: when the people in power start using sentimental terms like “fatherland” or “homeland” — watch out.

      There is certainly an uncomfortable similarity between the potus’s “MAGA” and the rhetoric uncle Adolf was using to get the people all stirred up. So, like I say, it could be a bipartisan effort.

      As to what countries have followed the kind of path to communism I described above — there are people who comment here who could handle that question better than I can.

  • avatar
    whynotaztec

    I remember hearing early on in the covid crisis (first hand and second hand) that traffic stops had essentially ceased. Also lots of stories of people speeding on empty roads.

    What I can say for sure now is that when I walk my dog at night, I can ALWAYS hear the sound of motorcycles screaming on the nearby highways. It goes on all night.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      That is definitely not the case in my area, at least with the state patrol. The nearest highway has typically be a place where they meet their quotas at the end of the month, but in the last few months every time I do use that road there are 2-4 cars out there working that section and usually at least one of them has a victim.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      You always hear that where I live. It’s been going on for years. I live on the edge of town. The road right near my house turns into a country road. Judging by the number of gears they go through and the revs they’re turning it’s not uncommon for them to hit 100+ mph. And, since the state I live in does nothing to stop loud vehicles, you can hear them miles away. Rude and annoying.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    If defunding the police coincides with a commensurate re-funding of the social services that we require cops to do now, then I’m all for it. These days, cops have to be social workers, psychologists, truant officers, and family therapists in addition to their day-in, day-out duties, and that stuff simply isn’t in their skill set. Social problems can’t be solved by simply “knocking heads” and incarcerating people.

    But simply de-funding police with no plan to fund everything else is a deeply foolish idea. I see why some people who have had nothing but negative interactions with the cops (i.e., a large percentage of minority folks) would love to see this, but I think they need to take a longer view.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    “we doubt motorists will be heartbroken to learn they’ll be less likely to receive a ticket for going 10 over the posted limit or failing to notice a bum taillight.”

    Don’t worry. They will find how to get you. They are already working on how to do it in automated mode.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      They do that when the judiciary is running low on funds or has overspent their annual budget.

      It’s called “mining the highway.”

      My #2 son was told often “to enforce the law” when the district ran low on funds. He thought it was just another way of “fvcking with the motorists.”

      After 12 years, he left and found a better, higher paying job with the Feds.

  • avatar
    -Nate

    First & foremost, de funding police departments is so foolish and bad idea it makes my head spin ~ you have to have a serious disconnect with reality to even suggest this .

    Better training and the culling of those problem officers that are in every department and everyone in the department knows about is critical as is out side management of problems .

    You’re almost all deathly afraid white folks who have no idea what it is to live in a “bad” area .

    The perceived need to be “heavily armed” proves this .

    Then you’re also mostly cowardly open racists and prove it thusly when your composure slips :

    “So as long as the majority killing is done by negroes killing negroes in Chicago, NYC et al, who cares?” .

    I notice that ‘negroes’ is supposed to be spelled “Negroes” bus really .

    Lying and trying to revise history shows cowardice and lack of self respect along with clear knowledge that you’re wrong in your stance, else why would you lie ? .

    Don’t be surprised if trump wins or simply takes this election .

    -Nate

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “Don’t be surprised if trump wins”

      Yah. The signs are all there. The endorsements are all there. The cheating on the part of the ‘crats will all be there, starting with ballot harvesting, altered ballots, undelivered ballots, discarded ballots, voting by non-US citizens and the like.

      It has happened before.

      No doubt it will again.

      I’ve gotta go to El Paso now and won’t be back until tomorrow. Carry on without me.

      • 0 avatar
        -Nate

        It’s interesting that you are unable to make any reply without lying, a sure sign of cowardice and fore knowledge that you’re wrong .

        Enjoy TEXAS, I always love my travels there .

        -Nate

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Please hurry back from El Paso… There’s not enough racists on here that speak with a fork tongue.

        You’re Old School alright, but the whole world has changed around you. I am old enough to remember all those racist TV shows when I was a kid. Why aren’t there any current ones? Yeah podcast, I know.

        Not all Trump supporters are racists, but all racists are Trump supporters. But to think police/policing can not be fixed, like an old broken down ’57 Chevy, is stupid.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      Nate,

      Unless I’m badly mistaken, people who live in bad areas as a rule would like to have more police not less. I think people who don’t live in bad areas tend not to understand that in those bad areas most of the people are just trying to get through the day — preferably without some kind of trouble from the gangs and other thugs. If the police were to go away, it would be ugly.

      And, I don’t care at all for his “…who cares?” thing.

      • 0 avatar
        -Nate

        Yes, this is so :

        Most are just work a day types and are not so scared they feel the need for forearms, in a civil society they’re not necessary, why they used to call it “The Wild West” when every tom, Dick and Harry carried a firearm and used it before thinking or trying anything else .

        I agree with better training and oversight, not less cops .

        The L.A.S.O. has a long and embarrassing history of being idiot cowboys .

        _I_ care as do all actual Conservatives ~ only a fool thinks they’re going it all alone .

        -Nate

        • 0 avatar
          Arthur Dailey

          Please allow me to ‘thread hijack’ here. Part of the problem with violence in American society is again a lack of historical knowledge. The American Wild West was no where near as dangerous as portrayed by Hollywood. Gunfights were few and far between (link at the end) and most often between law enforcement officers and ‘outlaws’. The weapons were often inaccurate, they sometimes used black powder and in some instances the gunmen were fueled by ‘liquid courage’. Often any gunplay was ended by placing restrictions on the carrying of firearms. Something that also seems to have been forgotten.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_West_gunfights

          https://www.neatorama.com/2012/06/07/the-truth-about-gunfights-in-the-old-west/

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            Do you think Hollywood and rap videos have no part in violent behavior? They’ve made it part of the culture, so, what do you expect? + incoming Latinos. These people come from most violent places on earth – Central and Latin Americas. What do you think they bring to America?

  • avatar
    markf

    Interesting that all the anti-Cop rhetoric comes from 100% Dem controlled cities. Police Chiefs are appointed by Democrat Mayors and enforce policies created by the Mayor and city council, all Democrats. But somehow the cops are to blame for enforcing laws and policies created by Democrats. Chicago, Seattle, Portland, LA, Baltimore, Louisville all 100% Democrat controlled for generations but Police abuse and riots are Trump’s fault.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • pwrwrench: It’s been talked around here but the unanswered, unasked, question is; Where does the electricity...
  • Lie2me: I had an F-150 STX. It was a nice sporty appearance package to dress up the otherwise dull base truck
  • Lie2me: I think I saw a commie in your back yard, better go check before they take all your stuff
  • Pig_Iron: Keep your forced collectivist crew cabs and keep the G D proletariat out of my truck.
  • EBFlex: What fiscal conservatives they are out there.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber