|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On June 06 2015 12:22 JonnyBNoHo wrote:In the 2008 election people at ACORN were caught engaging in voter registration fraud, so it's not like this stuff is entirely in the past. You're kidding, right? From the California Attorney General's investigation into ACORN:
"The California Secretary of State discovered four instances of possible voter registration fraud in San Diego in connection with the 2008 election. These cases have been examined by the Secretary of State’s Office and referred to the local district attorney. The district attorney’s office investigated and has filed no criminal charges. We found no allegations or evidence of actual fraudulent votes being cast" (emphasis added)
So, first, get your facts straight, please.
From the detailed section titled "ALLEGATIONS OF ACORN VOTER REGISTRATION FRAUD":
Allegations of voter registration fraud against were raised in 2008 in San Diego County. The San Diego County Registrar submitted to the SOS 62 registration cards turned in by ACORN and Young Political Majors (YPM). The Registrar believed these cards were suspicious or possibly fraudulent in some way. YPM is not affiliated with ACORN and was hired by the California Republican Party to solicit voter registration and Republican Party membership. At the time the ACORN recordings were made public, the SOS had opened cases on some of the cards submitted by San Diego County, but for a multitude of reasons, had not focused its limited resources to fully resolving the cases. Of the 62 suspicious cards submitted, 31 related to multiple re-registrations not found to be fraudulent, and 24 were juvenile registrants that were too young to vote. Of the remaining cards, three were submitted by YPM, leaving four fraudulent cards collected by four different canvassers hired by ACORN"
There were all of FOUR registrations (NOT VOTES) that possibly shouldn't have passed muster. Even if all of those resulted in four fraudulent votes, that throws off the outcome of an election far, far less than disenfranchising hundreds or thousands of voters via restrictive voter ID laws and other such measures.
Read the entire document (if you care to) here:
http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/press/pdfs/n1888_acorn_report.pdf
|
Jonny -> the issue for id laws isn't voter fraud in general. It's in-person voter fraud. in-person fraud just doesn't happen, because it's a terrible method.
Other kinds of fraud are a real issue for which there's plenty of methods to discuss.
It gets confusing when people start mixing the two too much in conversation, and fail to specify which one they mean.
|
On June 06 2015 13:03 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2015 12:22 JonnyBNoHo wrote:In the 2008 election people at ACORN were caught engaging in voter registration fraud, so it's not like this stuff is entirely in the past. + Show Spoiler +You're kidding, right? From the California Attorney General's investigation into ACORN:
"The California Secretary of State discovered four instances of possible voter registration fraud in San Diego in connection with the 2008 election. These cases have been examined by the Secretary of State’s Office and referred to the local district attorney. The district attorney’s office investigated and has filed no criminal charges. We found no allegations or evidence of actual fraudulent votes being cast" (emphasis added) So, first, get your facts straight, please. + Show Spoiler +From the detailed section titled "ALLEGATIONS OF ACORN VOTER REGISTRATION FRAUD": Allegations of voter registration fraud against were raised in 2008 in San Diego County. The San Diego County Registrar submitted to the SOS 62 registration cards turned in by ACORN and Young Political Majors (YPM). The Registrar believed these cards were suspicious or possibly fraudulent in some way. YPM is not affiliated with ACORN and was hired by the California Republican Party to solicit voter registration and Republican Party membership. At the time the ACORN recordings were made public, the SOS had opened cases on some of the cards submitted by San Diego County, but for a multitude of reasons, had not focused its limited resources to fully resolving the cases. Of the 62 suspicious cards submitted, 31 related to multiple re-registrations not found to be fraudulent, and 24 were juvenile registrants that were too young to vote. Of the remaining cards, three were submitted by YPM, leaving four fraudulent cards collected by four different canvassers hired by ACORN" There were all of FOUR registrations (NOT VOTES) that possibly shouldn't have passed muster. Even if all of those resulted in four fraudulent votes, that throws off the outcome of an election far, far less than disenfranchising hundreds or thousands of voters via restrictive voter ID laws and other such measures. Read the entire document (if you care to) here: http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/press/pdfs/n1888_acorn_report.pdf
What didn't I get correct? I wrote 'voter registration fraud'.
From factcheck.org Here’s what is true: In recent years, ACORN employees have been investigated multiple times for voter registration fraud. ACORN workers have been convicted of submitting false voter registration forms in Colorado Springs in 2005, Kansas City, Mo., in 2006 and King County, Wash., in 2007. ACORN’s Las Vegas office was raided by a state criminal investigator on Oct. 7, 2008. ACORN workers are also the subjects of ongoing investigations in Wisconsin, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana. The Indiana investigation started in early October and may involve thousands of fraudulent registration forms.
|
On June 06 2015 13:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2015 13:03 Kyadytim wrote:On June 06 2015 12:22 JonnyBNoHo wrote:In the 2008 election people at ACORN were caught engaging in voter registration fraud, so it's not like this stuff is entirely in the past. + Show Spoiler +You're kidding, right? From the California Attorney General's investigation into ACORN:
"The California Secretary of State discovered four instances of possible voter registration fraud in San Diego in connection with the 2008 election. These cases have been examined by the Secretary of State’s Office and referred to the local district attorney. The district attorney’s office investigated and has filed no criminal charges. We found no allegations or evidence of actual fraudulent votes being cast" (emphasis added) So, first, get your facts straight, please. + Show Spoiler +From the detailed section titled "ALLEGATIONS OF ACORN VOTER REGISTRATION FRAUD": Allegations of voter registration fraud against were raised in 2008 in San Diego County. The San Diego County Registrar submitted to the SOS 62 registration cards turned in by ACORN and Young Political Majors (YPM). The Registrar believed these cards were suspicious or possibly fraudulent in some way. YPM is not affiliated with ACORN and was hired by the California Republican Party to solicit voter registration and Republican Party membership. At the time the ACORN recordings were made public, the SOS had opened cases on some of the cards submitted by San Diego County, but for a multitude of reasons, had not focused its limited resources to fully resolving the cases. Of the 62 suspicious cards submitted, 31 related to multiple re-registrations not found to be fraudulent, and 24 were juvenile registrants that were too young to vote. Of the remaining cards, three were submitted by YPM, leaving four fraudulent cards collected by four different canvassers hired by ACORN" There were all of FOUR registrations (NOT VOTES) that possibly shouldn't have passed muster. Even if all of those resulted in four fraudulent votes, that throws off the outcome of an election far, far less than disenfranchising hundreds or thousands of voters via restrictive voter ID laws and other such measures. Read the entire document (if you care to) here: http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/press/pdfs/n1888_acorn_report.pdf What didn't I get correct? I wrote 'voter registration fraud'. From factcheck.org Show nested quote +Here’s what is true: In recent years, ACORN employees have been investigated multiple times for voter registration fraud. ACORN workers have been convicted of submitting false voter registration forms in Colorado Springs in 2005, Kansas City, Mo., in 2006 and King County, Wash., in 2007. ACORN’s Las Vegas office was raided by a state criminal investigator on Oct. 7, 2008. ACORN workers are also the subjects of ongoing investigations in Wisconsin, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana. The Indiana investigation started in early October and may involve thousands of fraudulent registration forms.
So you did. My apologies.
|
Washington lawmakers have credited a Guardian investigation to count killings by police with building momentum on long-stalled law-enforcement reform and renewed efforts to force the US government to establish a comprehensive database of officers’ lethal use of force.
As members of Congress sought to turn a patchwork of proposals into a progressive agenda for action, authors of Democratic proposals in both the Senate and House to demand an official US record of police-involved fatalities said the journalistic project had been valuable in filling a void of governmental accountability – and in advancing new legislation.
“Let me just say on the record: the job you are doing here to point out the discrepancy in the numbers that are being reported is the wind at our back,” Senator Barbara Boxer of California said in an interview.
“These statistics in the Guardian’s study will be most helpful in making the case,” said Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee.
Boxer’s Police Reporting of Information, Data and Evidence (Pride) Act, which she wrote with Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, was introduced earlier this week, one day after the launch of The Counted, the Guardian’s reported and crowd-sourced project to collect data on every killing by law enforcement in 2015.
The federal government does not currently keep a comprehensive record of people killed by police forces. Instead the FBI runs a voluntary program to submit numbers of “justifiable homicides”. The Guardian investigation found people were being killed by officers at twice the rate of the much-criticised FBI system.
The Boxer-Booker plan would require mandatory reporting on a series of data also being collected by the Guardian database, including the age, gender and race of anyone killed.
Precise locations of fatal incidents would also be collected. The Guardian on Monday began publishing the most comprehensive map of police killings ever produced, based on logged street addresses of incidents.
The Guardian’s analysis also found that at least 27% of people killed during encounters with police so far in 2015 were identified by family members, friends or police as having a mental health disorder.
In separate legislation introduced this week, Representative Gwen Moore, a Democrat from Wisconsin, introduced an amendment to mental illness legislation that would provide additional funding for state and local law enforcements to establish training programs for officers confronting mentally ill people.
The goal, Moore said in an interview, was for officers “to at least have some clues about how to approach people with mental illness, and that they be treated as mentally ill people rather than criminals”.
Source
|
So how about that "something for everyone" EPA fracking report?
|
|
|
That was some impressive "trying to stop the bleeding" from the officer...
I especially like how he hits the camera at the end to indicate not to say anything incriminating.
They need to just replace the motto "protect and serve" with "comply or die"
|
Never raise your shirt to the police. Never
|
United States43706 Posts
At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way.
Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?"
|
On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Show nested quote +Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?"
That is totally how they are trained though.
|
On June 08 2015 02:44 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?" That is totally how they are trained though.
And that's a big problem. The way the officer acted after he shot shows he had no intent to kill the guy, he shot him because he had been taught to shoot and did not know how else to handle the situation
Police Departments should look outside the US and get some help in how to train officers to not shoot the people they are sworn to protect unless as an absolute last resort.
|
On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Show nested quote +Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?"
Did you actually watch the video? He had a hole in his chest and a mouthful of blood, He wasn't saying anything.
Part of the feds deal with Cleveland PD was that they had to provide emergency medical help in situations like that. Which doesn't mean putting a 2"x2" piece of gauze on the bullet wound for a few seconds.
They will be required to take immediate steps to provide or secure first aid for suspects they injure, addressing an issue raised in many lawsuits that cost the city money.
Which is a result of many incidents finally being pushed over the edge when police watched a 12 year old boy (Tamir Rice) bleed out in front of them without doing anything.
Not sure why they told the responding units to slow down either?
|
On June 08 2015 03:24 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?" Did you actually watch the video? He had a hole in his chest and a mouthful of blood, He wasn't saying anything. Part of the feds deal with Cleveland PD was that they had to provide emergency medical help in situations like that. Which doesn't mean putting a 2"x2" piece of gauze on the bullet wound for a few seconds. Show nested quote +They will be required to take immediate steps to provide or secure first aid for suspects they injure, addressing an issue raised in many lawsuits that cost the city money. Which is a result of many incidents finally being pushed over the edge when police watched a 12 year old boy (Tamir Rice) bleed out in front of them without doing anything. Not sure why they told the responding units to slow down either?
What kind of medical help do you think he should have provided instead? Its not like he has an surgery room in his patrol car.
|
I haven't looked at any details of that case, but...
If the call to the police did say the suspects had a gun, and the victim really did draw his hands out suddenly, then I'd call unfortunate circumstances more than police being trigger happy.
I don't think police officers should wait until a suspect starts shooting at them before they ever take a shot, and while it would be absolutely ideal that they are required to actually see a gun before a shot is ever fired, it's also not realistic in every circumstance when it comes to public safety or officer safety.
That's just speaking in a general manner, though. No idea what happened in the before and after of this specific case.
|
On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Show nested quote +Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?"
But it's not. Their job is to enforce the laws of society, ensure the protection of property, and limit civil disorder. None of that involves placing the safety of others before their own.
|
On June 08 2015 02:51 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2015 02:44 Slaughter wrote:On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?" That is totally how they are trained though. And that's a big problem. The way the officer acted after he shot shows he had no intent to kill the guy, he shot him because he had been taught to shoot and did not know how else to handle the situation Police Departments should look outside the US and get some help in how to train officers to not shoot the people they are sworn to protect unless as an absolute last resort.
I think GH would agree with this; what you are really taking about is a police force 1/4 the size where officers are paid 2x as much and has a support staff of professionals, not a hierarchy of sergeants and colonels.
What you are talking about is turning it from a blue collar job to to a university.
|
On June 08 2015 03:35 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2015 03:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?" Did you actually watch the video? He had a hole in his chest and a mouthful of blood, He wasn't saying anything. Part of the feds deal with Cleveland PD was that they had to provide emergency medical help in situations like that. Which doesn't mean putting a 2"x2" piece of gauze on the bullet wound for a few seconds. They will be required to take immediate steps to provide or secure first aid for suspects they injure, addressing an issue raised in many lawsuits that cost the city money. Which is a result of many incidents finally being pushed over the edge when police watched a 12 year old boy (Tamir Rice) bleed out in front of them without doing anything. Not sure why they told the responding units to slow down either? What kind of medical help do you think he should have provided instead? Its not like he has an surgery room in his patrol car.
Applying pressure to the wound immediately and consistently? Probably also treating the one gushing not the one barely bleeding. Not pressing for 20-30 seconds tops and then repeatedly checking his pockets.
That said he was probably going to die regardless, just saying an average boy scout coulda provided better first aid than that.
EDIT: I do think it's a case of piss poor training more than a malicious cop out to kill. I also think prejudice played a role between the call (which claimed the group was flashing a gun that was never found) and the officers threat assessment, but basic training would be a huge step forward.
I should also mention the guy already had his hands in his pants (double Al Bundy style) The cop is screaming for him to remove his hands and as soon as he does, the officer shoots. He never had a chance, there was no way for the situation to deescalate, which was a failure by police.
|
On June 08 2015 03:52 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2015 02:51 Gorsameth wrote:On June 08 2015 02:44 Slaughter wrote:On June 08 2015 02:14 KwarK wrote:At least the police officer in question made a reasonable attempt to save the guys life after negating the threat. They don't always do that. I still think it's absolutely insane that the police would rather kill a citizen than accept any potential threat to themselves, their job is meant to be to protect the public by putting themselves in harms way, not the other way around. But lets take the small victories for America where we can take them, at least he didn't wound him in a non immediately fatal way, cuff him and then watch him die while throwing racial insults his way. Cruz rolls Taylor's body to his side and tells him, "Stay with me buddy. Stay with me." Cruz applies gauze to a wound, saying, "Talk to me, buddy. Talk to me. Medical's on the way, man. Medical's on the way, OK?" That is totally how they are trained though. And that's a big problem. The way the officer acted after he shot shows he had no intent to kill the guy, he shot him because he had been taught to shoot and did not know how else to handle the situation Police Departments should look outside the US and get some help in how to train officers to not shoot the people they are sworn to protect unless as an absolute last resort. I think GH would agree with this; what you are really taking about is a police force 1/4 the size where officers are paid 2x as much and has a support staff of professionals, not a hierarchy of sergeants and colonels. What you are talking about is turning it from a blue collar job to to a university.
Hate to break it to you but over here cops are payed terribly and are not educated at all. But somehow we manage to not shoot people all the time.
+ Show Spoiler +Ofcourse you will say it is because America is special, and your right. Its especially stupid.
|
WASHINGTON — The Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley wants to raise capital gains taxes. His rival Bernie Sanders seeks to tax stock trades and increase personal income tax rates.
Indeed, Mr. Sanders’s plan harks back to the Eisenhower-era top rate of over 90 percent — more than twice today’s level. Asked whether that rate is obviously too high, Mr. Sanders responded simply, “No.”
Their stances partly reflect attempts to outflank Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic race for the presidential nomination. Mrs. Clinton herself is considering a friendly think tank’s advice to raise taxes on inherited wealth and close loopholes to collect more from affluent Americans.
But they also reflect a broader shift in tax politics that is rippling through the Republican world, too. Pressure to raise taxes, at least on the wealthy, is rising.
Several developments are fueling that pressure. The Tea Party push to slash spending has lost steam and generated a backlash. Defense hawks want more money for the Pentagon, while other Republicans seek additional cash for highway projects. The largest potential targets for further cuts, Social Security and Medicare for the elderly, are hardly politically inviting.
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
