• 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!

Police no-go zones?

Should we have police no go zones?

  • Need more info

    Votes: 3 8.8%

  • Yes, I want to live in an area where I'm free from police.

    Votes: 9 26.5%

  • No, I like a police presence.

    Votes: 22 64.7%
  • Total voters
    34
  • Poll closed .
Taylor said:
We could call it "Detroit"
Click to expand...

More of the Democratic controlled urban cities will increasingly have no go zones for police - but it will be due to police refusing to act.

Remember the Baltimore mayor cursing the police and telling them to allow crime to let people cool off? Baltimore just had 15 people shot - five fatally - over the weekend and overall Baltimore is now the deadliest city in the USA.
Baltimore sees 15 shot, 5 fatally, in warm winter weekend

It is becoming a no police zone because the police FINALLY realized they can not lose their job for doing nothing, only for doing something. Therefore, do nothing. I expect that to become increasingly common in major urban cities run by Democrats. You can call 911. Maybe eventually police might show up. They'll take notes, leave, write a report and turn it in. That's it.

Arrest someone? That is FAR too dangerous to police in those cities to do. Democratic politicians are watching for any police to prosecute to become a hero by doing so. So show up for your shift. Eventually get where you are told to go. Then write a report. Do this until the end of your shift. Go home. That is the only way they can be safe.

If you do arrest someone, the person must be an adult, not elderly and white plus offer no resistance. If you think the person might resist, don't do the arrest. Let them get away. Write a report. Don't even THINK about questions or arresting any black person. That can get you fired, arrested, put in solitary without bail and imprisoned. Not arresting any black people is 100% safe.
 
maquiscat said:
That's rather my point. They are not actually getting that kind of training. They are getting the gear, and then receive no type of training to go with it, including the training needed for maintaining accountability. That aside, have you ever actually served in the military. I have. 10 years Nuclear submarine force, Navy. Do you know what kind of combat training I got. "here's a pistol, here's a shotgun. Here's how to fire them without hurting yourself. Now go learn your actual job!" And I think that is what you are equating with militarization. Combat training. Now, while some people might want that in the police force, most of us are looking at the overall training that we get, including those combat soldiers and sailors get. Which includes responsibility and accountability, as well as making sure that we can work with anyone, military or civilian, regardless of our personal feelings towards them for race, orientation, or identity. That is what many of today's police are NOT getting. So yeah, let's militarize and let's apply the same consequences as a military member would get if they had pulled some of the same crap police have been pulling lately. If a military member pulled even half of what some of these cops have done, there would be no paid administrative leave. There would be time served, loss of pay and many other consequences. And sadly, yes, especially given some of the stuff the more professional criminals are pulling, they are enemy combatants, citizens or not.
Click to expand...

We had an employee who was in the Navy on a submarine prior to this. He said they claim military service trains you for later private employment, but there are no companies that hire people experienced in watching for Russian submarines. :lol:
 
swing_voter said:
Police are a threat to the community, some say. Should we have police no-go zones? Sections of the city or countryside where police aren't allowed to go?
Click to expand...


Yep ... gated communities for starters. After all, they're already "protected" by a fence and will never need the police ...
 
joko104 said:
We had an employee who was in the Navy on a submarine prior to this. He said they claim military service trains you for later private employment, but there are no companies that hire people experienced in watching for Russian submarines. :lol:
Click to expand...

They do hire that type of person though. At least I do. Those people know how to bubba test.
 
calamity said:
I'm white. Police have always treated me kind, even when I was being an ass.
Click to expand...

Well if someone didn’t treat you kind while you were an ass then you’d, pretty much, never be treated kindly.
 
ClaraD said:
Not without a warrant they cant
Click to expand...

Actually yes they can. Not just anytime mind you, but there are times they can enter a property without a warrant, such as if they feel a life is in danger, either from an external source, or due to a medical reason. There can be other reasons as well, and these are defined by local and state laws, as applicable.
 
ClaraD said:
So you want military police you say? May I invite you to think about what the consequences of becoming a police state are?
Let me leave this here for you...these men were murdered by military police in Honduras. There was no persuit, no resistance, they shot to kill

View attachment 67283000


Be very careful what you wish for....we can quickly become a state where you have no rights if you are really good with us becoming a police state.
Click to expand...

The use of the phrase "militarization of police" can have several different meanings and outcomes. As is, we are already seeing results similar to what you referenced in some of our police without the militarization of them. You seem to automatically associate combat training with "militarization", but really, anything, including non combative disciplines, can be militarized. Militarization does not automatically mean killing or combat.
 
Last edited:
Integrityrespec said:
It seems to be the fad to jump to the conclusion that all police are bad, that they do nothing positive and that they don't protect citizens from crime. That's odd because I thought that was exactly what 99% of police did do. If someone has numbers that show something different please post them.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that the vast majority of those who become police do exactly what they are supposed to do. For all the attention that these bad cops are getting, they are a tiny fraction of a percent of all, but of course they are also the ones who make the news. That said, a better training regimen, as well as more severe immediate consequences, such as exist in the military, would greatly reduce what incidents we have, as well as reduce feelings of targeting by the organization against any particular group.
 
Aurora said:
Many want to dismantle police depts. Need a system for the people who hate cops or think they are just hunting non whites , those phone numbers will be blocked by the police dispatch.

Or Only black police for black neighborhoods. All the fancy reform projects in the world won't account for the cop that screws up, has a questonable shooting. It will happen again. We can afford to burn down the country again. Policing and race is so radioactive now.
Click to expand...

One of the pictures of police brutality I saw recently was a black cop with his hands in a chocking position on a black man's neck.
 
joko104 said:
We had an employee who was in the Navy on a submarine prior to this. He said they claim military service trains you for later private employment, but there are no companies that hire people experienced in watching for Russian submarines. :lol:
Click to expand...

It really depends on what you do. Being nuclear field, I probably could have gotten a job in the nuclear plants across the country. Even without the nuclear training, the electricians, mechanics and electronic techs, have many many options. Even if you are looking at the weapons specialists, sure their training has little use in the civilian world, save maybe with weapons development and construction, but simply being in the military is a big boost over other non-military applicants. Military tend to be more organized, get the job done better, train easier, have better discipline, and better attendance. There are more ratings onboard a submarine then the missile, torpedo, and sonar techs.
 
Barnacle said:
Yep ... gated communities for starters. After all, they're already "protected" by a fence and will never need the police ...
Click to expand...

ROMLMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

Please tell me that you are not actually that naive. Police get called to gated communities all the time. Well as much as any other non-gated community of the same socio-economic level. Furthermore, most gated communities are not actually walled around completely. Some are to be sure. Just not a majority.
 
swing_voter said:
Police are a threat to the community, some say. Should we have police no-go zones? Sections of the city or countryside where police aren't allowed to go?
Click to expand...

You missed the option that states I want no-go zones but not where I live. I have the opposite concern. With the recent chaos there are to few police in town to make me feel safe.

If minority communities want no police in their neighborhoods, we should have no problem starting the experiment there.
 
Living next to one of these no-go communities would be a nightmare.
 
maquiscat said:
ROMLMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

Please tell me that you are not actually that naive. Police get called to gated communities all the time. Well as much as any other non-gated community of the same socio-economic level. Furthermore, most gated communities are not actually walled around completely. Some are to be sure. Just not a majority.
Click to expand...


Please tell me you don't recognize sarcasm when you actually see it. :lamo
 
maquiscat said:
The use of the phrase "militarization of police" can have several different meanings and outcomes. As is, we are already seeing results similar to what you referenced in some of our police without the militarization of them. You seem to automatically associate combat training with "militarization", but really, anything, including non combative disciplines, can be militarized. Militarization does not automatically mean killing or combat.
Click to expand...

I am one of the few people on this forum that has actually lived in a police state. I don't need to be educated on what I am seeing occur before my eyes.
 
maquiscat said:
Actually yes they can. Not just anytime mind you, but there are times they can enter a property without a warrant, such as if they feel a life is in danger, either from an external source, or due to a medical reason. There can be other reasons as well, and these are defined by local and state laws, as applicable.
Click to expand...

actually, no they cannot

Is Privacy Violated When Police Peep Through Windows? - CSMonitor.com
The police officer violated the suspected drug dealers' right to privacy when he peered through the crack in the drawn blinds of the apartment window.

Today, the case, called Minnesota v. Carter, moves to the US Supreme Court. It is seen as an opportunity to spell out a clear nationwide standard regulating how far police can go in conducting warrantless investigations without violating the privacy rights of criminal suspects in houses, apartments, and motels.


They cannot just wander up to a random home and peep in the windows. They may be able to do it with probable cause...but that probable cause needs to be defined before doing so..not after.




and

In a win for privacy rights, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that police may not search the area around a private home without a warrant, even when they think they have seen stolen property on the premises.

In other words, police can't just look on property or peek in windows, see something they think is illegal and start searching without a warrant.
In Win For Privacy Rights, Court Says Police Need Warrant To Search Area Around Home : NPR.
 
Barnacle said:
Please tell me you don't recognize sarcasm when you actually see it. :lamo
Click to expand...

You have to admit that when working with a text only based medium, devoid of facial and verbal cues, AND given that there are actually people out there who believe such things, sarcasm is not always the easiest to pick up. The worse is that I have actually heard people, in person, seriously tell me exactly what you sarcastically said.
 
ClaraD said:
I am one of the few people on this forum that has actually lived in a police state. I don't need to be educated on what I am seeing occur before my eyes.
Click to expand...

I am not trying to deny your experiences, not claim that such is not what happens in other countries. What I am saying is that how that place defined "militarization" and implemented it, is not automatically what others mean and intend. You are looking at only one aspect of militarization. It also seems to me that you are conflating the powers of the police with they type of training they receive. These are two very different things. The powers of the police and military are different in each location that you go t, especially between different countries. Are you assuming that the US military has some kind of extensive powers, that the various US LEO's do not have?
 
ClaraD said:
actually, no they cannot

Is Privacy Violated When Police Peep Through Windows? - CSMonitor.com
The police officer violated the suspected drug dealers' right to privacy when he peered through the crack in the drawn blinds of the apartment window.

Today, the case, called Minnesota v. Carter, moves to the US Supreme Court. It is seen as an opportunity to spell out a clear nationwide standard regulating how far police can go in conducting warrantless investigations without violating the privacy rights of criminal suspects in houses, apartments, and motels.


They cannot just wander up to a random home and peep in the windows. They may be able to do it with probable cause...but that probable cause needs to be defined before doing so..not after.




and

In a win for privacy rights, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that police may not search the area around a private home without a warrant, even when they think they have seen stolen property on the premises.

In other words, police can't just look on property or peek in windows, see something they think is illegal and start searching without a warrant.
In Win For Privacy Rights, Court Says Police Need Warrant To Search Area Around Home : NPR.
Click to expand...

You seem to be assuming more than I say. As I noted, the police cannot just enter onto or into private property anytime they want. But there are certain conditions by which they can. For example, if they heard a scream that reasonably sounds like someone in danger, or a gunshot, they can indeed enter into the premise without a warrant. There are conditions, as per law, in which the police do not require a warrant to enter.
 
maquiscat said:
I am not trying to deny your experiences, not claim that such is not what happens in other countries. What I am saying is that how that place defined "militarization" and implemented it, is not automatically what others mean and intend. You are looking at only one aspect of militarization. It also seems to me that you are conflating the powers of the police with they type of training they receive. These are two very different things. The powers of the police and military are different in each location that you go t, especially between different countries. Are you assuming that the US military has some kind of extensive powers, that the various US LEO's do not have?
Click to expand...

this is what I am responding to

Police enter private property all the time. They can come peek in your window for example, if the neighbors complain about you.

No, police cannot peak in your window or go in simply because a neighbor complains about you.
 
swing_voter said:
Police are a threat to the community, some say. Should we have police no-go zones? Sections of the city or countryside where police aren't allowed to go?
Click to expand...

Those who voted yes for police no go zones are ****en retards and have no business voting seeing how they are not mature enough to realize we actually need the police.
 
ClaraD said:
this is what I am responding to

Police enter private property all the time. They can come peek in your window for example, if the neighbors complain about you.

No, police cannot peak in your window or go in simply because a neighbor complains about you.
Click to expand...

First, if you are addressing a very specific situation, that is a little different than the impression I got. I was under the impression that you thought that they could not enter a property uninvited without a warrant for any reason.

As to looking in the window, I do believe that such is limited to what local laws say, and if no one has challenged the local law, then it applies. So in some places, they may well be allowed to look in a window without a warrant, usually dependent upon the conditions and reasons.
 
maquiscat said:
First, if you are addressing a very specific situation, that is a little different than the impression I got. I was under the impression that you thought that they could not enter a property uninvited without a warrant for any reason.

As to looking in the window, I do believe that such is limited to what local laws say, and if no one has challenged the local law, then it applies. So in some places, they may well be allowed to look in a window without a warrant, usually dependent upon the conditions and reasons.
Click to expand...

it has been challenged. I cited the decision. It held that you cannot without probable cause look in a window if you are the police.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Or you know

A better option is to clean up the Police and from a practical standpoint have the police live in the city they are policing
Click to expand...
The problem with that is that some places are ****holes and people don't want to live there. The end result would then be a "police no go zone."

Also, the prospect of being fired because you moved across the street into another precinct is plainly retarded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom