George Floyd arrest body cam videos out

HawkeyeShawn

HR All-American
Gold Member
Nov 9, 2001
4,901
3,256
113
Sheriff and State Patrol aren't police. They should have a defined role as well. It will allow the monies being spent to have much better outcomes.
Do you think this will cost more or less than what is currently being spent?
 

HawkeyeShawn

HR All-American
Gold Member
Nov 9, 2001
4,901
3,256
113
I think it can be done by reallocating what is being spent now. So, neither.
What area do you think we need to reducing funding so the additional professionals can be hired and trained? In my opinion, what you are seeking is going to require a significant number of new employees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old_wrestling_fan

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
What area do you think we need to reducing funding so the additional professionals can be hired and trained? In my opinion, what you are seeking is going to require a significant number of new employees.
The police. Reduce significantly and reorganize police departments to be specialized. Some of those people will be reassigned to different public safety organizations. There are vast amounts of $$ being spent on police departments that can be used more wisely.
 

Old_wrestling_fan

HR Heisman
Mar 2, 2009
8,850
7,368
113
Iowa City
What area do you think we need to reducing funding so the additional professionals can be hired and trained? In my opinion, what you are seeking is going to require a significant number of new employees.
Not to mention additional resources such as vehicles, equipment, etc. Also, if you specialize like that you will have more personnel costs, perhaps significantly more. Not a well thought out alternative.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
Not to mention additional resources such as vehicles, equipment, etc. Also, if you specialize like that you will have more personnel costs, perhaps significantly more. Not a well thought out alternative.
Lol - no, not necessarily. Businesses break off and specialized all the time to save costs. This is naive.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
Let's see your details...budget, etc. I find it humorous that you would call anyone else naive.
This is often your response and it's childish. I don't have to know the intimate details of every communities plan to know, in general, it's a good idea to specialize. We know there are problems with policing in our country, that they are funded at very high levels, that unions have more influence than they should and that other areas of public safety and support are under funded. If you've got a better idea, propose it and see if it catches on. Otherwise, STFU.
 

Saint Louis Attorney

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Apr 26, 2016
5,713
8,472
113
What area do you think we need to reducing funding so the additional professionals can be hired and trained? In my opinion, what you are seeking is going to require a significant number of new employees.
One area of savings could come from no longer funding the pensions of cops that are fired for committing crimes. In today's system, those committing acts so egregious that they get the axe and be decertified by police academies still get to live off of the taxpayer teet for decades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk

HawkeyeShawn

HR All-American
Gold Member
Nov 9, 2001
4,901
3,256
113
One area of savings could come from no longer funding the pensions of cops that are fired for committing crimes. In today's system, those committing acts so egregious that they get the axe and be decertified by police academies still get to live off of the taxpayer teet for decades.
That’s is certainly one area for savings, but I think that is a minimal dollar amount. What @RileyHawk is asking for is going to require a significant increase in personnel. The major cities in the US need more police, not less. But I’m assuming @RileyHawk disagrees since his response to where to get the funding is from the current police budget.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
That’s is certainly one area for savings, but I think that is a minimal dollar amount. What @RileyHawk is asking for is going to require a significant increase in personnel. The major cities in the US need more police, not less. But I’m assuming @RileyHawk disagrees since his response to where to get the funding is from the current police budget.
I completely disagree. What cities need is different policing, more effective policing. There are massive budgets for police departments that need to be reallocated. The biggest challenge is people are resistant to change. That's why we get stuck in the status quo so often rather than continuous improvement.
 

HawkeyeShawn

HR All-American
Gold Member
Nov 9, 2001
4,901
3,256
113
I completely disagree. What cities need is different policing, more effective policing. There are massive budgets for police departments that need to be reallocated. The biggest challenge is people are resistant to change. That's why we get stuck in the status quo so often rather than continuous improvement.
Just curious, where do you live?
 

Old_wrestling_fan

HR Heisman
Mar 2, 2009
8,850
7,368
113
Iowa City
This is often your response and it's childish. I don't have to know the intimate details of every communities plan to know, in general, it's a good idea to specialize. We know there are problems with policing in our country, that they are funded at very high levels, that unions have more influence than they should and that other areas of public safety and support are under funded. If you've got a better idea, propose it and see if it catches on. Otherwise, STFU.
I do respond to you in that way, yes... because so often your posts are complete "pie in the sky" babble. It is no different in this thread.
 

HawkeyeShawn

HR All-American
Gold Member
Nov 9, 2001
4,901
3,256
113
Ever lived in Baltimore, NYC, LA, Chicago, or any other major city where there is more crime than the police can manage? I’m all for reform, but these cities have real crime problems. Those of us in a Iowa can’t even come close to relating to what goes on there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: farmandfleet

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
I do respond to you in that way, yes... because so often your posts are complete "pie in the sky" babble. It is no different in this thread.
In your simple world I'm sure it is. But these types of things have been done many, many times before. Antiquated thinking, such as yours, is one of the biggest hurdles to overcome toward progress.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
Ever lived in Baltimore, NYC, LA, Chicago, or any other major city where there is more crime than the police can manage? I’m all for reform, but these cities have real crime problems. Those of us in a Iowa can’t even come close to relating to what goes on there.
The thinking that the only solution to those issues is more police is very shortsighted, imo. They are driven by systemic issues that have to be addressed long, long before a crime takes place. It will take time and mostly, commitment to address the foundational issues. And the police are not equipped to do this.
 

LetsGoHawks83

HR Heisman
Mar 20, 2015
9,682
6,636
113
The thinking that the only solution to those issues is more police is very shortsighted, imo. They are driven by systemic issues that have to be addressed long, long before a crime takes place. It will take time and mostly, commitment to address the foundational issues. And the police are not equipped to do this.
So.... We aren't talking about police reform at all then. We are talking about programs in place to reduce people's "need" to commit crime. I completely agree with doing this.

But you are ALWAYS going to have people that can't be reached. I WANT police around for that line of defense against people that are still commiting crimes.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
So.... We aren't talking about police reform at all then. We are talking about programs in place to reduce people's "need" to commit crime. I completely agree with doing this.

But you are ALWAYS going to have people that can't be reached. I WANT police around for that line of defense against people that are still commiting crimes.
No one is suggesting that there won't be a place for traditional policing. Rather that it has it's place and should focus their training and efforts on specific areas of law enforcement. So they can be more effective at performing those duties. Other areas of public safety are handled by different specialists. Of course there will be overlap. It's simply a restructuring to put resources where they are needed to provide more effective public security.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
Nah, they aren’t “police”. :rolleyes:

@RileyHawk is an inner city crime expert.
They aren't. You're confusing the act of "policing" with the police department. The Iowa State Patrol and Sheriff departments are current examples of specializing some policing activities rather than putting them all under the police department. This should be extended.
 

HawkeyeShawn

HR All-American
Gold Member
Nov 9, 2001
4,901
3,256
113
They aren't. You're confusing the act of "policing" with the police department. The Iowa State Patrol and Sheriff departments are current examples of specializing some policing activities rather than putting them all under the police department. This should be extended.
You have my attention. I’d love to hear more.
 

iahawks10

HR Heisman
Nov 3, 2001
8,781
9,589
113
Not to my knowledge. Iowa State Patrol and Sheriff's offices are separate from police departments. They have different functions.
Why are people even engaging you in conversation about this when you’re this clueless?

They may have different functions than a local city police department (they have many of the same functions too), that doesn’t make them any more or less police officers. Look up the definition of “police” and start there. They are all police. You’ve never heard the term state police?

A state trooper is a police officer. A sheriff’s deputy is a police officer. A Des Moines city cop is a police officer. While their job functions may not be doing the same thing every day, they are all very much police. It’s almost like you’re being intentionally this obtuse.
 
Last edited:

Jan Itor

HR Legend
Jan 31, 2009
21,601
6,523
113
I have not seen any original tapes nor these. I know this is all just because it's an election year and it's 2020 , of course i am routing for trump to win because these clowns over play the race card all the time.

He’s trying to give you the brush off, but you’re not getting it
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
Why are people even engaging you in conversation about this when you’re this clueless?

They may have different functions than a local city police department (they have many of the same functions too), that doesn’t make them any more or less police officers. Look up the definition of “police” and start there. They are all police. You’ve never heard the term state police?

A state trooper is a police officer. A sheriff’s deputy is a police officer. A Des Moines city cop is a police officer. While their job functions may not be doing the same thing every day, they are all very much police. It’s almost like you’re being intentionally this obtuse.
But they don't work for the Police Department. They have their own organizations that are not in as much question. Part of the restructuring is defining what "police" work entails as opposed to traffic enforcement or social work or a number of other specialty areas that have fallen to police departments, but shouldn't.

You're getting caught up in semantics. Look at the issues and what's being proposed for solutions.
 

iahawks10

HR Heisman
Nov 3, 2001
8,781
9,589
113
But they don't work for the Police Department. They have their own organizations that are not in as much question. Part of the restructuring is defining what "police" work entails as opposed to traffic enforcement or social work or a number of other specialty areas that have fallen to police departments, but shouldn't.

You're getting caught up in semantics. Look at the issues and what's being proposed for solutions.
They don’t work for a police dept? I know. One works for the sheriff’s department and the other works for Iowa DPS. That wasn’t what you claimed though. You said that the sheriff and state troopers are not police, when they clearly are. It has nothing to with semantics, but more about correcting your ignorance.

Let’s look at what’s being proposed. Please educate me how defunding the police prevents George Floyd from dying.


You want to restructure what defines police work to include traffic enforcement, but don’t want to include the state patrol when their job is upwards of 90% traffic enforcement? This is like bizarro world logic, but it is 2020 where what we say doesn’t actually mean the definition of what we say. Like defund the police doesn’t actually mean defund and evidently only applies to city police.

If there is a cause that you’d like to me to get behind it would be opening up more mental health facilities, both long term and short term care. Clearing our local jails out of people who really don’t belong there, but are there because we have no better place to bring them is a far bigger issue around the county. Unfortunately that doesn’t that relate to George Floyd, not does it save his life either.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
They don’t work for a police dept? I know. One works for the sheriff’s department and the other works for Iowa DPS. That wasn’t what you claimed though. You said that the sheriff and state troopers are not police, when they clearly are. It has nothing to with semantics, but more about correcting your ignorance.

Let’s look at what’s being proposed. Please educate me how defunding the police prevents George Floyd from dying.


You want to restructure what defines police work to include traffic enforcement, but don’t want to include the state patrol when their job is upwards of 90% traffic enforcement? This is like bizarro world logic, but it is 2020 where what we say doesn’t actually mean the definition of what we say. Like defund the police doesn’t actually mean defund and evidently only applies to city police.

If there is a cause that you’d like to me to get behind it would be opening up more mental health facilities, both long term and short term care. Clearing our local jails out of people who really don’t belong there, but are there because we have no better place to bring them is a far bigger issue around the county. Unfortunately that doesn’t that relate to George Floyd, not does it save his life either.
FFS - it is semantics. Completely.

And your lack of understanding continues to be magnified. Restructuring of the Police Departments would take away traffic enforcement and let police officers work on bigger crime issues. Perhaps all traffic enforcement would fall to the State Patrol. Specialization creates efficiencies that are sorely needed.

I think the term "defund" is misleading as well when it really should be "re-fund" all public safety. But again, that's simply semantics and many, like you, prefer to focus on that rather than the real issues.
 

iahawks10

HR Heisman
Nov 3, 2001
8,781
9,589
113
FFS - it is semantics. Completely.

And your lack of understanding continues to be magnified. Restructuring of the Police Departments would take away traffic enforcement and let police officers work on bigger crime issues. Perhaps all traffic enforcement would fall to the State Patrol. Specialization creates efficiencies that are sorely needed.

I think the term "defund" is misleading as well when it really should be "re-fund" all public safety. But again, that's simply semantics and many, like you, prefer to focus on that rather than the real issues.
Lol at my lack of understanding. You don’t even know who is or isn’t a police officer. You believe only city cops are police. After getting corrected, you call it semantics.

Then you go on to completely agree with me in your last paragraph about making up your own definition of what words mean. You can’t make this shit up.

You don’t think a city of any significant size has their police department structured how you described? The majority of police depts have a traffic division, patrol division, detective/CID branch and so on. It’s not like traffic cops are investigating robberies or detectives are running radar and looking for seatbelt violations. It’s not how it works. Traffic cops are not even dispatched to calls for service unless it’s an absolute emergency and they’re in the area.

Your solution is to allocate all traffic enforcement to the Iowa State Patrol? There are roughly 270 troopers statewide right now and you want them to be responsible for the entire state? Wow. You’re probably most likely for demilitarizing police, yet want to give more work and responsibility to most militaristic police force in the state in the Iowa State Patrol. Again, must be bizarro 2020 logic here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old_wrestling_fan

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
Lol at my lack of understanding. You don’t even know who is or isn’t a police officer. You believe only city cops are police. After getting corrected, you call it semantics.

Then you go on to completely agree with me in your last paragraph about making up your own definition of what words mean. You can’t make this shit up.

You don’t think a city of any significant size has their police department structured how you described? The majority of police depts have a traffic division, patrol division, detective/CID branch and so on. It’s not like traffic cops are investigating robberies or detectives are running radar and looking for seatbelt violations. It’s not how it works. Traffic cops are not even dispatched to calls for service unless it’s an absolute emergency and they’re in the area.

Your solution is to allocate all traffic enforcement to the Iowa State Patrol? There are roughly 270 troopers statewide right now and you want them to be responsible for the entire state? Wow. You’re probably most likely for demilitarizing police, yet want to give more work and responsibility to most militaristic police force in the state in the Iowa State Patrol. Again, must be bizarro 2020 logic here.
I can't make these things more clear for you. You're an unreasonable idiot that's worthless to debate.

Enjoy your ignorance.
 

iahawks10

HR Heisman
Nov 3, 2001
8,781
9,589
113
I can't make these things more clear for you. You're an unreasonable idiot that's worthless to debate.

Enjoy your ignorance.
Hey, I’m just glad to educate you on who is a police officer. I thought that was basic knowledge most of us learned in high school, but I guess you were sick that day.

State Patrol responsible for ALL traffic enforcement in the state, unreal.
 

Nipigu

HR Heisman
Oct 31, 2005
7,898
4,371
113
Sheriff and State Patrol aren't police. They should have a defined role as well. It will allow the monies being spent to have much better outcomes.
What’s your distinction between law enforcement working an incorporated area (police), unincorporated area (sheriff), and highway patrol and which state are you using in your definition?
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
What’s your distinction between law enforcement working an incorporated area (police), unincorporated area (sheriff), and highway patrol and which state are you using in your definition?
I'm not offering any definitive solutions, just discussing the concept of separating the workloads and managing them more effectively. I believe public safety can be much more effective and efficient than it currently is by adopting a more specialized approach. What is being discussed applies primarily to police departments and could involve the roles of other law enforcement.
 

Nipigu

HR Heisman
Oct 31, 2005
7,898
4,371
113
I'm not offering any definitive solutions, just discussing the concept of separating the workloads and managing them more effectively. I believe public safety can be much more effective and efficient than it currently is by adopting a more specialized approach. What is being discussed applies primarily to police departments and could involve the roles of other law enforcement.
I’m still not following...and I don’t know which state you’re thinking of. Let’s take California for example. There’s is Peace Officer’s Standards and Training. It applies to all peace officers...and a peace officer consists of (but not limited to) incorporated areas (commonly referred to as police officers), unincorporated areas and county jails (commonly identified as sheriff), and state traffic officers (CHP). They all have peace officer powers as derived by the California Penal Code yet their primary emphasis might be slightly different.

I don’t think states differ much in that structure.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
I’m still not following...and I don’t know which state you’re thinking of. Let’s take California for example. There’s is Peace Officer’s Standards and Training. It applies to all peace officers...and a peace officer consists of (but not limited to) incorporated areas (commonly referred to as police officers), unincorporated areas and county jails (commonly identified as sheriff), and state traffic officers (CHP). They all have peace officer powers as derived by the California Penal Code yet their primary emphasis might be slightly different.
My guess is they each have different responsibilities and missions. What I'm talking about is basically expanding on this concept of specialization to allow "police officers" to focus more on the bigger crimes rather than having responsibilities for traffic, domestic issues, well person checks and the like. Some of the funding that now goes to "police departments" to handle these types of issues can be redistributed to groups who specialize in those areas.

Each state would have to structure their reorganization based on their unique needs and makeup.
 

Nipigu

HR Heisman
Oct 31, 2005
7,898
4,371
113
My guess is they each have different responsibilities and missions. What I'm talking about is basically expanding on this concept of specialization to allow "police officers" to focus more on the bigger crimes rather than having responsibilities for traffic, domestic issues, well person checks and the like. Some of the funding that now goes to "police departments" to handle these types of issues can be redistributed to groups who specialize in those areas.

Each state would have to structure their reorganization based on their unique needs and makeup.
I understand what you’re driving at, however keep in mind the following as you present your ideas.

Municipal police departments (officers) are funded by their city.
Sheriff Offices (deputies) are funded by their county.
State traffic officers are funded by the state.

Each agency is autonomous. The citizens of San Francisco decide what’s best for them and Oakland decides what’s in their best interest. Those interests need not intersect. The state decides the qualifications for a peace officer and their powers. The agency decides how they are deployed based on their constituents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jamesvanderwulf

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
23,077
8,839
113
I understand what you’re driving at, however keep in mind the following as you present your ideas.

Municipal police departments (officers) are funded by their city.
Sheriff Offices (deputies) are funded by their county.
State traffic officers are funded by the state.

Each agency is autonomous. The citizens of San Francisco decide what’s best for them and Oakland decides what’s in their best interest. Those interests need not intersect. The state decides the qualifications for a peace officer and their powers. The agency decides how they are deployed based on their constituents.
Those funding models can be reorganized as well. We don't have to adhere to the status quo just because we've been doing it that way.
 

Latest posts