Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

CNN reports Trump commutes Roger Stone's sentence

I understand Stone immediately ate a tuna sandwich.

(07-10-2020, 12:23 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-09-2020, 09:25 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-09-2020, 02:39 PM)TnT Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-05-2020, 09:47 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-05-2020, 08:55 PM)TnT Wrote: [ -> ]Well, if the pictures of the beer-gut wanna-bes that showed up at Gettysburg this weekend, having been gulled by the very cesspool of information that they subscribe to, have any credibility, I guess I'm not too worried about any "civil war" that these guys foment.

You ever mess with a tough older dude with a beer gut. Hint....I'm pretty sure the dudes with the beer guts can handle themselves and know how fight and want the opportunity to get their hands on your punks. It's amazing how many punks there are walking around these days. I mean, it used to be open season on punks not so long ago. Hint...Moms way ain't working out so well but that's OK as far as the liberals go these days.

I get what you're saying.  It turns out that I look a lot like those dudes.  And I too own firearms.  I would think that since you and I are drawn to a history-based venue like this, that we would share a more realistic view of the military value of groups like this.

I know a number of these guys.  Out at the range, they look at my short hair and the age in my face and my white skin and assume that I agree with them about their fantasies.  I'm not even sure they know exactly who they would shoot if they got the chance.  My concern is that they would conjure up some conspiracy theory off the internet and then shoot innocent folks to no good.

A good military organization is NOT democratic.  It has a tightly organized chain of command.  These rabble groups, that so like to call themselves "militias" tend to be informal,  and relatively democratic.  They are loosely organized.  Egos abound.  Everyone wants to be an officer.  Politics gets going.  Splintering starts up with each little tinpot "captain" having a few sycophant followers.  I've been there and seen it in operation.

Another simple principle.  You and I should both know - when the shooting starts, all sorts of people just die.  There's little or no sense to it.  If it goes on long enough, it gets better organized and more people die.  Ultimately, one "side" prevails.  No one wins in any real sense of the word.  Revolutions have occurred over and over again over the ages.  They all seem to get into extremism of some sort eventually before something brings it to an end.  My goodness, but this very theory of history is an effort to describe it!

The so-called "militia" movement, it seems to me, might well result in hundreds of small groups running around out in the hills shooting at each other; kind of a replication of the disparate sects fighting amongst themselves in the mideast, over trivial conspiracy-theory differences.

Well, I've got a legal permit to carry a firearm in public and an old gun safety certificate that still has value too. I didn't see the dudes that you saw doing whatever at Gettysburg. So,  I can't really comment on what I thought about them as a group. I don't have a beer gut myself. I must say, I was pretty impressed by the AR-15. It's a cool gun.

Revolutions start over and over, the shotgun sings the song, the party on the left becomes the party on the right, the new boss is the same as the old, and the cycle starts again. That's why Woodstock was better, ha ha! It will be back for another go-round too, according to Strauss and Howe.

Knowing what Classic has said here for years, I sure don't think he should have that permit. No, the AR-15 is about the un-coolest thing going.

Dude, the American Revolution and American Civil War weren't peaceful events. I heard Woodstock occurred during a pandemic similar to the one we are dealing with today. Is that true or is my older sister a liar?

(07-10-2020, 10:15 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Dude, the American Revolution and American Civil War weren't peaceful events. I heard Woodstock occurred during a pandemic similar to the one we are dealing with today. Is that true or is my older sister a liar?

Different times, different Crises. 

The epidemic related to the Boom Awakening was drug overdoses. Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison...

I'll say this: contracting COVID-19 is about as dangerous as using street drugs, something that I do not endorse. One typically shoots up, ingests, or freebases certain drugs which you cannot get from aerosols that someone coughed into the environment.

(07-10-2020, 10:20 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-09-2020, 10:00 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Trump was a pure political outsider with no skin in the political game. Personally, I didn't think he had a chance after he bashed Bush II and then bashed McCain and then bashed and blew off Romney and then bashed pretty Megyn Kelly during a debate on Fox too. Unlike the liberals who talk about change and pin their hopes on change, the Republican base decided it wanted a change and made a change by electing Trump. Personally, I viewed Trump as the best candidate to face Hilary. As it turned out, I was right about that one. I've been pretty much right all along as well. To be fair, I was wrong about Obama because I didn't think he had a chance to beat Hilary back in 08'.

He didn't know what he was doing, he does not trust anyone with even a legitimate claim to greater knowledge on any topic, and he is all in all a horrible person, someone whose emotional maturity is at an elementary level. A pathological narcissist whose core character is meanness, he can only bring catastrophe.The surprise is that he got away with his awfulness as a leader as long as he did. 

He pleases a sector of the electorate that ordinarily gets ignored in part because satisfaction of that sector brings suffering to a vast majority of Americans. That is his political 'genius'... which is about like Al Capone being a 'genius' as a bootlegger. 

The game is already up. Our political system clicks its heels and follows a really good President; it basically ignores that President when he goes bad. As a basic reality the President has few real powers that he cannot get without support of Congress.

The game was up a long time ago. Trump's election was the result.

(07-10-2020, 10:23 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2020, 10:15 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Dude, the American Revolution and American Civil War weren't peaceful events. I heard Woodstock occurred during a pandemic similar to the one we are dealing with today. Is that true or is my older sister a liar?

Different times, different Crises. 

The epidemic related to the Boom Awakening was drug overdoses. Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison...

I'll say this: contracting COVID-19 is about as dangerous as using street drugs, something that I do not endorse. One typically shoots up, ingests, or freebases certain drugs which you cannot get from aerosols that someone coughed into the environment.

Different time, same issues and problems as those in the past.

(07-11-2020, 12:35 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2020, 10:23 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2020, 10:15 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Dude, the American Revolution and American Civil War weren't peaceful events. I heard Woodstock occurred during a pandemic similar to the one we are dealing with today. Is that true or is my older sister a liar?

Different times, different Crises. 

The epidemic related to the Boom Awakening was drug overdoses. Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison...

I'll say this: contracting COVID-19 is about as dangerous as using street drugs, something that I do not endorse. One typically shoots up, ingests, or freebases certain drugs which you cannot get from aerosols that someone coughed into the environment.

Different time, same issues and problems as those in the past.

Hmm…. I started out thinking on the distinction between the two. The war on drugs has to be fought with law enforcement. On the other hand, COVUS 19 has to be fought with…. law enforcement? Those that contaminate the environment have to be initially ticketed then more severely punished until they stop randomly killing people?

The biggest difference is that druggies take their own risks, though some encourage lawlessness by those who have to support their habit by committing criminal acts. With COVID 19, people randomly murder for their own convenience. How big a distinction?

The difference is that I had to take no special precautions against druggies except to avoid certain places where criminal activity is high. COVID 19 has me in isolation as those with no concern for other people’s lives are everywhere.

(07-10-2020, 12:39 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2020, 12:32 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-09-2020, 08:55 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]What can I say, I'm not a professional writer or a highfalutin liberal either. In a way, I wish that I was a more professional writer because walking all over you guys would be pretty easy.

You certainly resemble Trump in that way too, always claiming that you can do things that you never could.

Well, if he can manage not to distinguish between looters and protestors, he can imagine a universe where he is winning the debate.  If he could find a following with people as obsessed with violence and ideologically blind as he is, he could gather dozens of followers.

Perhaps he is better off playing fixit man.

The protesters were the ones walking around carrying all the signs and repeating slogans while the looters and rioters were out and about doing their thing. Personally, I wouldn't waste my time or money fixing other peoples junk. You're going to find out soon enough that America isn't interested in fixing liberal junk or fixing the issues directly related to the Democratic parties past and present either.

(07-11-2020, 01:20 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Hmm…. I started out thinking on the distinction between the two.  The war on drugs has to be fought with law enforcement.  On the other hand, COVUS 19 has to be fought with…. law enforcement?  Those that contaminate the environment have to be initially ticketed then more severely punished until they stop randomly killing people?

The biggest difference is that druggies take their own risks, though some encourage lawlessness by those who have to support their habit by committing criminal acts.  With COVID 19, people randomly murder for their own convenience.  How big a distinction?

The difference is that I had to take no special precautions against druggies except to avoid certain places where criminal activity is high.  COVID 19 has me in isolation as those with no concern for other people’s lives are everywhere.

Well, you're pretty much screwed because you're losing support of law enforcement like crazy.

(07-11-2020, 02:05 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]The protesters were the ones walking around carrying all the  signs and repeating slogans  while  the looters and rioters were out and about  doing their thing. Personally, I wouldn't  waste my time or money fixing other peoples  junk. You're  going to find out soon enough that America isn't interested in fixing liberal junk or fixing  the issues directly related to the Democratic parties past and present either.

Impressive.  You have finally learned to tell the difference between protestors and looters.  I didn't know if you had it in you to notice.

Crises, well, are what happens are when a whole bunch of Americans decide on 'fixing other peoples junk.'  You strive to get rid of kings, slave owners, isolationists, laissez faire businessmen, violent racist police, or people who murder randomly for their own convenience.  These are truly despicable people.  Deplorables, though I wouldn't call them that if you are running for office and depending on their votes.  Conservatives?  The major problems of the culture are confronted.  (Well, some of them.  If you select a too wishy washy crisis leader, some issues get pushed off until the next transformational turning.  Too soon to tell if this has happened.)

We had a saying back in the awakening.  "Lead, follow, or get out of the way."  If you have no inclination to help fix the problems, hopefully you will get out of the way.

(07-11-2020, 02:14 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Well, you're pretty much screwed because you're losing support of law enforcement like crazy.

Too many police are committed to the blue wall of silence.  They give a higher priority to protecting fellow officers than to the community they are supposed to protect.  I doubt that will totally go away, but some police are not at all worthy of that loyalty.  Some make it impossible to do their jobs.  Some view themselves as judge, jury and executioner, that they can inflict physical punishment up to and including death without bothering with any technicalities.

I recently caught a YouTube video showing a comedian giving advice on how to avoid being beat up by cops.  Some of the advice.  Don't drive with a friend without making sure that you won't get into trouble.  They show a driver frisking a friend and finding drugs, money, a gun, etc...  If you don't, you are apt to get beat up by cops.  They showed a segment of a bunch of cops beating on both men.  Second, be polite.  They showed a segment where the driver was polite, but the rider was blatantly and comically not polite, followed by, you guessed it, by both men being beat up by cops.  He also recommended not jumping turnstiles,  There was a video of a guy jumping a turnstile, to be met by a bunch of cops.  He recommended not driving around playing loud rap music, not carrying obvious weapons, not driving around with a girlfriend with a grudge who will say anything, all interspersed with the comedian being beat up by cops.

It was typical comedy, with a heavy dash of violence to get the audience laughing, but enough truth to make people think a bit.

Innocent until proven guilty.  Due process.  Technicalities.  Yes, some police are used to ignoring it.  It is part of a culture, and cultures don't change easy.  Perhaps it is a good thing, somehow, that we have judges, juries and executioners driving around in every patrol car.  Still, it might be toned back some.  It is worth reining in folks from time to time, to make them abide by the written ideals they supposedly live by.

Picture a police officer wearing a badge, the black robes of a judge, the civilian pants of a jury member, and the black hood of an executioner.  Could he really beat up pigment enhanced individuals in that get up?

(07-10-2020, 10:20 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]The game is already up. Our political system clicks its heels and follows a really good President; it basically ignores that President when he goes bad. As a basic reality the President has few real powers that he cannot get without support of Congress.

Not confident that the click heels and follow part is true anymore.  The Republicans went pretty much into full obstruction mode with Obama.  These days there is not nearly enough heel clicking going on.  Too much partisanship.

(07-11-2020, 02:39 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-11-2020, 02:05 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]The protesters were the ones walking around carrying all the  signs and repeating slogans  while  the looters and rioters were out and about  doing their thing. Personally, I wouldn't  waste my time or money fixing other peoples  junk. You're  going to find out soon enough that America isn't interested in fixing liberal junk or fixing  the issues directly related to the Democratic parties past and present either.

Impressive.  You have finally learned to tell the difference between protestors and looters.  I didn't know if you had it in you to notice.

Crises, well, are what happens are when a whole bunch of Americans decide on 'fixing other peoples junk.'  You strive to get rid of kings, slave owners, isolationists, laissez faire businessmen, violent racist police, or people who murder randomly for their own convenience.  These are truly despicable people.  Deplorables, though I wouldn't call them that if you are running for office and depending on their votes.  Conservatives?  The major problems of the culture are confronted.  (Well, some of them.  If you select a too wishy washy crisis leader, some issues get pushed off until the next transformational turning.  Too soon to tell if this has happened.)

We had a saying back in the awakening.  "Lead, follow, or get out of the way."  If you have no inclination to help fix the problems, hopefully you will get out of the way.

With camcorders and cell-phone video everywhere,. and protesters having brought such devices along to document their participation in something wonderful, the same recording devices that can document police brutality can also record arson, vandalism, assaults and battery, and looting. Many protesters have no problem with the usual sort of police work that busts drunk drivers, spouse-abusers, drug-dealers, rapists, armed robbers, and child molesters. The Black Lives Matters protests are well organized and orderly. Rioters are easy to spot and identify this time. This isn't Detroit in 1967; the technology of recording video no longer needs the unwieldy, expensive television camera. We can all carry a cell phone. 

Here's a hint: the news media have usually worked hand-in-glove with police in supplying video of criminal behavior. News media rely heavily upon official sources for stories -- especially criminal trials -- and they return the favor. 

Protesters may see some destructive people torching a car for no apparent reason and think "That could be MY car -- and Fluffy (my beloved pet dog) is in my car". The protests against police brutality aren't about people busted for overt criminality. If the police do their job, then such offenders get hauled off to jail, basically intact. The protests are about police brutality which violates the expectation that the accused will be taken, unhurt, to the pokey. I would take video of violent or destructive acts and forward those to the police.  

I am for law and order, something necessary for the enjoyment of basic human rights. The alternative to law and order is lynch law which may be efficient in dispatching real or imagined offenders -- but infamously poor in making judgments. Police brutality in no way serves law and order. Of course we need to humanize police forces and reform them -- starting by more effective weeding out of bad cops who join police forces for all the wrong reasons. Want to do some real good for Humanity? Be a cop. You may end up busting drug traffickers, spouse-abusers, drunk drivers, armed robbers, rapists, and child-molesters... but you will be trained to do it. Your presence on the highway, real or imputed, is a good deterrent to driving at unsafe speeds. You may be pulling someone out of a wrecked car as it starts to burn or before it burns. Your presence may be what it takes to stop a family argument.

We all have our little list. Mine is rather conventional.

As a flaming liberal with a roomful of guns, I'm mostly puzzled by the concealed carry folks as well as the owners of the so-called "AR-15".

It's like saying "The orange is the perfect food!"  "I don't need protein or complex carbohydrates or vegetables; the orange is what I want!"

For example, let's say hypothetically that I have a S&W .357 revolver, a Remington 12 gauge Wingmaster shotgun, a Remington 700 .270 with a nice Nikon scope, a Winchester 30:30 saddle rifle, and the Remington bolt action .22 that I got when I was a kid.  And let's further assume that I'm familiar with all, can field strip and clean them and maintain them except for skilled tasks best left for real gunsmiths.  And that I've been coached and trained on the proper safety measures.

Question #1.  How do I differ from the typical "AR-15" owner?  Answer:  The AR-15 owner has probably never been around firearms until he got his rifle.  Chances are the only other firearm he has, if any, is a Glock .40 pistol.  Training?  Virtually none.  Safety?  None - no gun safe, no idea of how much he risks.  

Question #2.  What can the "AR-15" owner do better, or even as well as, I can do by selecting the proper tool for the circumstances?  Answer:  Nothing, other than, perhaps, shooting up a classroom full of third graders.

Question #3.  What, if anything, does the average "AR-15"/Glock owner actually DO with his firearms?  Answer:  It's like buying a treadmill - it gets used decreasingly over time until finally it ends up in the basement or garage collecting dust.  Sure.  They go to the range a couple times, shoot up a few boxes, and then it dwindles down to nothing.  But ask them about the safety or appropriateness of them having these items laying around their house and OMG!  All of a sudden we've got a Second Amendment constitutional lawyer on our hands.

Question #4.  Where do the "bad guys with guns" get their guns?  Answer:  By burglarizing the cars and houses of the "good guys with guns."  Can you even imagine it?!  Keeping a Glock somewhere in your vehicle all the time?  Our cops keep telling the general public here in my city to not leave firearms in their cars.  Dear god.

Question #5.  What is worse than bringing a knife to a gunfight? (To quote the old adage.)  Answer:  Bringing a gun to a gunfight.  Explanation:  Gunfights, by definition, come in infinite varieties.  Every circumstance is different.  There is no way to predict how one might be challenged such that having a firearm might be of any value.  One thing is guaranteed - if a gunfight breaks out, and if I have a gun, I'm IN the gunfight whether I like it or not.  Whether the cops or the "bad guy" shoots me is up for grabs, because I'm not wearing a cop's uniform.  And god help me if I'm black, and a "good guy with a gun."

Question #6.  What is better than my S&W .357 for defending my home?  Answer:  A baseball bat and a yappy little dog.  Why?  Because I get to know the invader is coming.  My pistol won't wake me up barking.  I have to concede that my Wingmaster plus the yappy dog is about as good as it gets.

My bottom line opinion is that the vast majority of new gun owners, over the last couple decades, have no business owning their firearms.  This crap has turned our country into a tinderbox, peopled with limp-dicked wannabes who think that slinging an "AR-15" in front of them, like a real marine, turns them into saviors of our civilization.

Superficiality abounds.

Back in the old days on the forum, didn't we have a "Spiral of Violence" thread? I'm surprised it's not active.

(07-11-2020, 11:54 AM)TnT Wrote: [ -> ]Back in the old days on the forum, didn't we have a "Spiral of Violence" thread?  I'm surprised it's not active.

Most of the violence and violent rhetoric seems to come from the Hard Right.  The Hard Right may have lost most of its credibility.

(07-11-2020, 11:43 AM)TnT Wrote: [ -> ]As a flaming liberal with a roomful of guns, I'm mostly puzzled by the concealed carry folks as well as the owners of the so-called "AR-15".

It's like saying "The orange is the perfect food!"  "I don't need protein or complex carbohydrates or vegetables; the orange is what I want!"

For example, let's say hypothetically that I have a S&W .357 revolver, a Remington 12 gauge Wingmaster shotgun, a Remington 700 .270 with a nice Nikon scope, a Winchester 30:30 saddle rifle, and the Remington bolt action .22 that I got when I was a kid.  And let's further assume that I'm familiar with all, can field strip and clean them and maintain them except for skilled tasks best left for real gunsmiths.  And that I've been coached and trained on the proper safety measures.

Question #1.  How do I differ from the typical "AR-15" owner?  Answer:  The AR-15 owner has probably never been around firearms until he got his rifle.  Chances are the only other firearm he has, if any, is a Glock .40 pistol.  Training?  Virtually none.  Safety?  None - no gun safe, no idea of how much he risks.  

Question #2.  What can the "AR-15" owner do better, or even as well as, I can do by selecting the proper tool for the circumstances?  Answer:  Nothing, other than, perhaps, shooting up a classroom full of third graders.

Question #3.  What, if anything, does the average "AR-15"/Glock owner actually DO with his firearms?  Answer:  It's like buying a treadmill - it gets used decreasingly over time until finally it ends up in the basement or garage collecting dust.  Sure.  They go to the range a couple times, shoot up a few boxes, and then it dwindles down to nothing.  But ask them about the safety or appropriateness of them having these items laying around their house and OMG!  All of a sudden we've got a Second Amendment constitutional lawyer on our hands.

Question #4.  Where do the "bad guys with guns" get their guns?  Answer:  By burglarizing the cars and houses of the "good guys with guns."  Can you even imagine it?!  Keeping a Glock somewhere in your vehicle all the time?  Our cops keep telling the general public here in my city to not leave firearms in their cars.  Dear god.

Question #5.  What is worse than bringing a knife to a gunfight? (To quote the old adage.)  Answer:  Bringing a gun to a gunfight.  Explanation:  Gunfights, by definition, come in infinite varieties.  Every circumstance is different.  There is no way to predict how one might be challenged such that having a firearm might be of any value.  One thing is guaranteed - if a gunfight breaks out, and if I have a gun, I'm IN the gunfight whether I like it or not.  Whether the cops or the "bad guy" shoots me is up for grabs, because I'm not wearing a cop's uniform.  And god help me if I'm black, and a "good guy with a gun."

Question #6.  What is better than my S&W .357 for defending my home?  Answer:  A baseball bat and a yappy little dog.  Why?  Because I get to know the invader is coming.  My pistol won't wake me up barking.  I have to concede that my Wingmaster plus the yappy dog is about as good as it gets.

My bottom line opinion is that the vast majority of new gun owners, over the last couple decades, have no business owning their firearms.  This crap has turned our country into a tinderbox, peopled with limp-dicked wannabes who think that slinging an "AR-15" in front of them, like a real marine, turns them into saviors of our civilization.

Superficiality abounds.

You have a lot of weapons that use specific rounds. I don't think you differ from the typical AR-15 owner as much as you think these days. You are rare because you are one of the few legal gun owners still aligned with today's Left. So, is anyone telling the crooks to stop breaking into cars and stealing weapons or shooting them for doing it? So, who is controlling who in blue America these days? The criminals seem to have the upper hand in blue areas these days and the blue's cops seem powerless and unable to do much about all their petty thief's? Why is that? Why would a police force point their finger at their gun owners and blame them for the actions of a bunch of thieves in the community or a bunch of thieves located in another community located relatively close to them?

Me, I don't have a room full of guns. I have a rather small cabinet full of select guns including some like you own and one in particular that you don't own. I even have a .22 caliber Marlin bolt action rifle that was given to me by my dad for Christmas when I was twelve. I rarely use it, it's the most beat up, the most used and the least in value dollars and cents wise but it's the one that meant the most and has the most sentimental value to me of the group these days. It would take someone really special like a grandson or someone poorer but equal to a grandson to enter my life and pass it on to them as a momento for me to part with it. I also own a Remington 700, .270 caliber rifle with a Nikon scope that has a plain finish black walnut stock that gives it a lot of character.

(07-11-2020, 03:17 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-11-2020, 02:14 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Well, you're pretty much screwed because you're losing support of law enforcement like crazy.

Too many police are committed to the blue wall of silence.  They give a higher priority to protecting fellow officers than to the community they are supposed to protect.  I doubt that will totally go away, but some police are not at all worthy of that loyalty.  Some make it impossible to do their jobs.  Some view themselves as judge, jury and executioner, that they can inflict physical punishment up to and including death without bothering with any technicalities.

I recently caught a YouTube video showing a comedian giving advice on how to avoid being beat up by cops.  Some of the advice.  Don't drive with a friend without making sure that you won't get into trouble.  They show a driver frisking a friend and finding drugs, money, a gun, etc...  If you don't, you are apt to get beat up by cops.  They showed a segment of a bunch of cops beating on both men.  Second, be polite.  They showed a segment where the driver was polite, but the rider was blatantly and comically not polite, followed by, you guessed it, by both men being beat up by cops.  He also recommended not jumping turnstiles,  There was a video of a guy jumping a turnstile, to be met by a bunch of cops.  He recommended not driving around playing loud rap music, not carrying obvious weapons, not driving around with a girlfriend with a grudge who will say anything, all interspersed with the comedian being beat up by cops.

It was typical comedy, with a heavy dash of violence to get the audience laughing, but enough truth to make people think a bit.

Innocent until proven guilty.  Due process.  Technicalities.  Yes, some police are used to ignoring it.  It is part of a culture, and cultures don't change easy.  Perhaps it is a good thing, somehow, that we have judges, juries and executioners driving around in every patrol car.  Still, it might be toned back some.  It is worth reining in folks from time to time, to make them abide by the written ideals they supposedly live by.

Picture a police officer wearing a badge, the black robes of a judge, the civilian pants of a jury member, and the black hood of an executioner.  Could he really beat up pigment enhanced individuals in that get up?

Well, if the current liberal trend continues, the liberals won't have cops to use as political pawns for them to make examples of in front of their base or blame or pick on as they please like they still kind of have available to them right now. Yes. if only the lowly blacks and other lowly folks only had better parents, better teachers, better leaders, better role models, better communities and a better overall environment like most other Americans they'd have a better chance at succeeding. living a better life and a better chance at survival. So, what are you going to do about them as their numbers continue to grow and your barriers begin to disappear and the bulk of us who can read the writing on wall are gone and living with us.

(07-11-2020, 10:16 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Well, if the current liberal trend continues, the liberals won't have cops to use as political pawns for them to make examples of in front of their base or blame or pick on as they please like they still kind of have available to them right now. Yes. if only the lowly blacks and other lowly folks only had better parents, better teachers, better leaders, better role models, better communities and a better overall environment like most other Americans they'd have a better chance at succeeding. living a better life and a better chance at survival. So, what are you going to do about them as their numbers continue to grow and your barriers begin to disappear and the bulk of us who can read the writing on wall are gone and living with us.

There's no constituency for violent crime. The model being introduced is community policing in which the police get to know a smaller area and know it better. It was introduced in Dallas around 1980 in areas with recent immigrants from southeast Asia accustomed to distrusting the police (Vietnamese police were corrupt and brutal). The cops set themselves up as the people who could be trusted. The police started talking with such community leaders as clergy and businessmen, and through them got the message out: if you have a problem with crime, then go to the cops. The people know who the bad guys are and get to choose between exposing those bad guys or being under their thumb. Crime rates plummeted. 

Suppression of crime is not only compatible with civil liberties; it is necessary for civil liberties including property rights. You tell me the last time you heard anyone say that he stands for the spouse-beater, the drug trafficker, the child molester, the rapist, the armed robber, and the arsonist. We have courts of laws and prisons to serve as the means of separating ourselves from people whose presence poses an obvious danger. 

Yes -- I called the cops on a drunk driver.

Classic Xer wrote, "The criminals seem to have the upper hand in blue areas these days and the blue's cops seem powerless and unable to do much about all their petty thief's? Why is that?"

I thought the answer was pretty clear. Because there are so many guns in the land that the criminals can steal as many as they want.

(07-11-2020, 10:16 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Well, if the current liberal trend continues, the liberals won't have cops to use as political pawns for them to make examples of in front of their base or blame or pick on as they please like they still kind of have available to them right now. Yes. if only the lowly blacks and other lowly folks only had better parents, better teachers, better leaders, better role models, better communities and a better overall environment like most other Americans they'd have a better chance at succeeding. living a better life and a better chance at survival. So, what are you going to do about them as their numbers continue to grow and your barriers begin to disappear and the bulk of us who can read the writing on wall are gone and living with us.

My sister taught first grade in a fairly affluent Boston suburb.  Included among her students were blacks with a success oriented culture that fit in with the white students well enough, but would still have to endure the prejudices of many.  Still, they presented no great challenges or difference from the other local students.

But she also had occasional students bussed out from Boston urban areas.  She explained it this way.  The people who had the greatest status and success visible to these young were star athletes, star performers, drug pushers, and mothers.  Thus, many pursued preparation to pursue these careers.

Now becoming a big time entertainer or athlete is a long shot.  One is apt to not be able to compete, or at best play a minor supporting role or get involved in a minor local act.  The other roles are less than desirable, but are still the only ‘success’ that is visible to a minority person growing up.  By bussing a few kids out to the affluent suburbs, they are at least exposed to the idea of a good education and work ethic could lead to a more ordinary and helpful role in the culture.  They choose kids who are already half way there, kids with the ethic to work hard and the intelligence to succeed.

One problem with that is the presumption that all blacks have the ghetto mind set.  Some people are prejudiced, set in their ways, and making it difficult or impossible for minorities to succeed.  Many are small government fans, making it difficult to equalize the school or even home environments.  Too many, small government is a racist tool, a way to prevent white tax money from serving the black community.  As long as this mentality persists, that people “read the writing on the wall” they help to perpetuate the problem.

And it is not that a well to do kid from the suburb never works at becoming a star athlete or entertainer.  That temptation is there for all kids.  It is just that the parents and the culture better ready the kid for a soft landing should there be failure in the low possibility of success in the dream.

But a key element is the racist presumption that all minority kids are the same and that resources should be hoarded to the dominant culture. To some degree you can work for success in spite of the attempts to monopolize culture and deny access.  It is impossible to achieve success if there is a large subculture attempting to isolate and deny resources.