Posted on 04/19/2021 7:09:02 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Broadcast news outlets often show horrific footage of a lone victim being bludgeoned because of some actual or perceived political difference, and for extra effect, give the story more attention when the pummelers and the pummeled are of different races.
An underreported component of those stories, though, is that the number of bystanders dwarfs that of the attackers, yet hardly anyone ever lifts a finger to get involved. A prime example is a video of one man viciously beating another to near unconsciousness on a subway train while about 35 onlookers sit idly by.
But do you know who does get involved and breaks up such fights, saving not only broken bones but also lives? The police do.
Much like how soldiers defend our country, police officers defend our streets. After blaming the former through most of the 1960s and 1970s for their direct involvement in the much-maligned Vietnam War, Americans of all political stripes — doves and hawks alike — sounded the clarion to “support our troops!”
Regrettably, such gratitude is rarely afforded to our men and women in blue who risk their lives every second they wear the uniform — not only when they answer a call, but even when they stop for a cup of coffee.
In fact, subsets of the modern American left continuously try to one-up the other by intensifying the absurdity of their proposals. Apparently, “defund the police!” wasn’t enough; now the prompt in some circles is to abolish law enforcement altogether.
Paradoxically, all of that takes place as headlines abound with tragic stories about random mass shootings in schools, movie theaters, supermarkets, you name it.
The obvious solution is not only to retain existing officers but to hire a lot of new ones.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournal.com ...
Most “gun” violence is actually gang violence.
Or close the border. Or stop releasing dangerous criminals.
The left considers the lawful use of firearms ‘gun violence’.
They wish to disarm America, period.
There is no logical argument, facts, or ‘solution’ that will sway them.
I still think it would be cheaper and more effective to go temporary big brother on high crime areas like Chicago.
Put cameras on every street corner and drones in the sky. When a violent crime is committed, track the perp down and prosecute them. That would get all the violent criminals off the streets in short order.
Once the crime rate falls remove the cameras and let life return to new normal.
Yuck, I used new normal. I both hate that and am proud of working it in.
1. Execute murderers.
2. No early releases for violent criminals.
3. No plea bargaining deals to drop relevant/significant charges when it comes to the violence of the criminal. So yeah, drop jaywalking, but not anything related to the violent crimes themselves.
Want to really cut down on CRIME at ALL levels?
Let everyone not currently incarcerated or under commitment order to carry whatever they want, however they want, whenever they want.
It’s called the RIGHT thing to do and it’s 100% Constitutional. Doesn’t cost one single taxpayer dime either.
-Quit tying the hands of Law Enforcement
-Tell prosecutors and judges to do their job
-Quit relaxing sentencing for felonies
Consequences are both a deterrent and a safeguard from those not deterred.
Did you learn NOTHING from Homeland Security? “Temporary” is not a word Government understands.
Any unjust power given will be kept and used in way not originally approved of.
The police and the left have always been natural allies.
When the left is in power. Like now.
Well that’s my solution.
If you can’t elect legislators that do the right thing, then you deserve robocop telling criminals to have a nice day.
The fact is that probably many communities are moving that way anyway. This could actually be an opportunity to limit local, state and federal surveillance unless justified by hitting the crime threshold.
Or make me emperor and I'll fix all these problems.
Cops, well they'll holler "taser taser" and then shoot your dogs, your autistic child, your psychotic grandpa and your stoned uncle and occasionally a violent criminal who may or may not have his hands up.
You do make a good point. It’s just none of the alternatives are good. And you always need good controls and checks and balances on government power.
Fewer police by attrition, and more people armed.
there is not such thing as “gun violence” .. guns are simple inert pieces of metal, they do not exhibit behaviors of any kind
we sure could reduce (not altogether eliminate) “gun violence” by having more folks carrying
Arm and train more citizens.
Follow the Swiss model!
Go to the root of the problem. Non stop violence on the screens that kids see. Movies, Videos, etc.
When kids are fed violence through the media day after day after day, they get used to it and become so that they think nothing of it any longer.
Heads getting blown off, chopped off, bellies being slit open so the intestines spill out. Blood being splattered all over the place.
WTH does anyone think would kids do once they have seen that for most of their younger years growing up?
Hollywood has a lot to answer to for this, as do the video game makers.
I am not sure i agree.. this isnt your grandpas pd. There are teams with attack helicopters and fully automatic weapons. Heck NOAA and other orgs have fully automatic weaponsthe patriot act pd is a posse comitatus end around.
Not my local sherrif.. no they fear him, but urban pds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.