• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Philly Mayor: ‘You Have Some Police Officers Who Are Increasingly Afraid...."

it needs to be mandated federally and paid for with taxes. has to be done. my guess is that it's inevitable now.

No, the feds don't have the grant of power to do so. They can try to convince all the states to require them of their cops, but that's about it. And NO, just hell no, we don't want to federalize the police.
 
that will matter a lot less if everything is documented.

I doubt it. Look at Ferguson and what's his face in NY. It doesn't matter what the facts of the case are, the people still think both those situations was racially motivated. Facts and evidence don't matter to these people. They think the cops are racist and they won't listen otherwise.
 
No, the feds don't have the grant of power to do so. They can try to convince all the states to require them of their cops, but that's about it. And NO, just hell no, we don't want to federalize the police.

I don't see a whole lot of states saying no to the plan. I think ultimately it matters more where to implement it. I don't think every policeman in the country needs a body camera, but those in the major cities, especially where police are likely to have violent encounters with blacks, they should have it. And really, the police want to do it, because it cuts down on a lot of false complaints as test cases have shown.
 
No, the feds don't have the grant of power to do so. They can try to convince all the states to require them of their cops, but that's about it. And NO, just hell no, we don't want to federalize the police.

i'm not arguing to federalize the police. i'm arguing that this should be a nationwide (funded) regulation.
 
I doubt it. Look at Ferguson and what's his face in NY. It doesn't matter what the facts of the case are, the people still think both those situations was racially motivated. Facts and evidence don't matter to these people. They think the cops are racist and they won't listen otherwise.

they can believe whatever they want. the evidence needs to be documented to protect both sides. it will solve a lot of problems.
 
I don't see a whole lot of states saying no to the plan. I think ultimately it matters more where to implement it. I don't think every policeman in the country needs a body camera, but those in the major cities, especially where police are likely to have violent encounters with blacks, they should have it. And really, the police want to do it, because it cuts down on a lot of false complaints as test cases have shown.

I think there will be, as well as a lot of counties who won't/can't sign on due to budgetary concerns. Even when the feds double dog promise to pay for something, we all know they leave the states and the counties holding the bag.
 
i'm not arguing to federalize the police. i'm arguing that this should be a nationwide (funded) regulation.

The only way to do that is to nationalize the police.
 
i'm not arguing to federalize the police. i'm arguing that this should be a nationwide (funded) regulation.

I do agree with you it would help with a myriad of things, I'm just saying it won't fix the supposed larger issue of race. Strangely enough, police brutality is only a small side issue to that, despite the fact that played a much bigger role with the Garner case, and the fact that a black officer was in charge on the scene. I am curious though, you're not talking about doing this for every police force around the country are you?

I think there will be, as well as a lot of counties who won't/can't sign on due to budgetary concerns. Even when the feds double dog promise to pay for something, we all know they leave the states and the counties holding the bag.

Obama's already asked congress for the 300 million or so for the plan, so they'll get the money. I think he's serious about this one.
 
I do agree with you it would help with a myriad of things, I'm just saying it won't fix the supposed larger issue of race. Strangely enough, police brutality is only a small side issue to that, despite the fact that played a much bigger role with the Garner case, and the fact that a black officer was in charge on the scene. I am curious though, you're not talking about doing this for every police force around the country are you?

yeah, i think the cameras should be on all police officers. enough of this ****. it protects both sides, and is just a common sense solution. i don't see any reason not to do it.
 
ok, explain why congress can't pass a federal regulation.

Because congress doesn't pay for it and the US Constitution. This isn't anywhere a matter of interstate commerce no matter how you stretch it
 
Because congress doesn't pay for it and the US Constitution. This isn't anywhere a matter of interstate commerce no matter how you stretch it

but there are all kinds of federal regulations regarding the workplace. are those all invalid, too?
 
I do agree with you it would help with a myriad of things, I'm just saying it won't fix the supposed larger issue of race. Strangely enough, police brutality is only a small side issue to that, despite the fact that played a much bigger role with the Garner case, and the fact that a black officer was in charge on the scene. I am curious though, you're not talking about doing this for every police force around the country are you?



Obama's already asked congress for the 300 million or so for the plan, so they'll get the money. I think he's serious about this one.

The 300 million, if it comes at all, will be in the form of grants and will not fund the programs continuing on. My home county fell for that a couple times. Took federal grants to hire new officers. A year later, the federal funding was gone and the layoffs began.
 
but there are all kinds of federal regulations regarding the workplace. are those all invalid, too?

Interstate commerce. Really, do you not know how our systems of government work? Ever read the 10 Amendment?
 
Interstate commerce. Really, do you not know how our systems of government work? Ever read the 10 Amendment?

this would be a federal regulation regarding the workplace for law enforcement officers. not exactly unprecedented.

either way, it needs to happen. enough is enough with this he said she said crap when it comes to police actions.
 
I've always been an advocate of getting the community more involved with some sort of neighborhood watch program that was designed to work in conjunction with the local citizens in giving them the equipment and training to defend their homes. Especially in Chicago where to get this under control, you have to have the community work with you. I'd actually be curious to hear what Chicago Blacks think of the police force there.



From what I've heard, probably not so good. My understanding is that cooperation with investigations is extremely low in most of the worst areas.

People either don't trust the police not to bust THEM for something, or they don't trust the police to PROTECT them if they testify... and given how things are these days, both of those are not unreasonable concerns.
 
Parts of our major cities are already like that.
The question is, why does anyone stay in a place that is unsafe, where the cops can't be trusted, where the whole area is under the control of violent gangs?

I would only stay in such a place if I we a quadraplegic, and could not crawl out of there.

I would also stay if I were a delusional leftist, or had a narcotics addiction, or was a gang member selling narcotics.
 
We don't need more cops; we need better cops; and people being better citizens.
 
I would only stay in such a place if I we a quadraplegic, and could not crawl out of there.

I would also stay if I were a delusional leftist, or had a narcotics addiction, or was a gang member selling narcotics.

Exactly.

And I seriously doubt that there are a lot of "delusional leftists" living there.
 
Parts of our major cities are already like that.
The question is, why does anyone stay in a place that is unsafe, where the cops can't be trusted, where the whole area is under the control of violent gangs?



Poverty, familiarity, fear of the unknown, ignorance that life is different elsewhere, family ties.
 
but there are all kinds of federal regulations regarding the workplace. are those all invalid, too?

Yes. The commerce clause was to keep trade regular, not to allow the federal government to regulate the workplace.
 
Do you understand the concept of deterrence? It is a big word, but not that complex...

So I guess you would have to explain crime ridden areas where police presence is clearly NOT a deterrent.
 
Back
Top Bottom