Seems like DC people might "like" the idea of law enforcement again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm hoping that you're just as quick to condemn the many times when police use tear gas, pepper spray, and vehicular chases inappropriately.

Aren't these examples you are referring to already investigated.

OP is making the point that you can't neuter a police force and then call for those same skills. Yes you can hold accountable and apparently according to MPD, the Mayor and the City Council, there was already a process in place to hold accountable.

Instead we as a city opted to strip MPD of a capability we are now pleading for.

Exactly. Remember when Trump called in the National Guard for the protests and riots (yes there were riots/fires/violence) and people howled and screamed that he was trying to be a military dictator. The decision was made after that to not bring in the NG for the remainder of the summer because of the optics of a coup.
If Trump had called up several hundred NG to protect the Capitol on the 6th people would have lost their collective minds. There are no two ways around that.
I will also remind DCUM that everyone was laughing that the small dick incels wouldn't have enough of them show up to field a baseball team. Remember that?
Now the press cannot stop their hero worship with police interviews of how horrible it was to get hit with objects and tear gas (funny how they didn't get that same empathy during the summer) after calling the police murders all last year.

Um. No. That's not why.

Also, "if Trump had called in the National Guard to protect the Capitol against his own supporters" is a statement that is inherently absurd.

Obviously you don't understand how the National Guard works. It takes several days to gather them together. You don't just say "hey can I get a couple hundred NG over here now?"

Mayor Bowser requested help days ahead. It was denied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm hoping that you're just as quick to condemn the many times when police use tear gas, pepper spray, and vehicular chases inappropriately.

Aren't these examples you are referring to already investigated.

OP is making the point that you can't neuter a police force and then call for those same skills. Yes you can hold accountable and apparently according to MPD, the Mayor and the City Council, there was already a process in place to hold accountable.

Instead we as a city opted to strip MPD of a capability we are now pleading for.

Exactly. Remember when Trump called in the National Guard for the protests and riots (yes there were riots/fires/violence) and people howled and screamed that he was trying to be a military dictator. The decision was made after that to not bring in the NG for the remainder of the summer because of the optics of a coup.
If Trump had called up several hundred NG to protect the Capitol on the 6th people would have lost their collective minds. There are no two ways around that.
I will also remind DCUM that everyone was laughing that the small dick incels wouldn't have enough of them show up to field a baseball team. Remember that?
Now the press cannot stop their hero worship with police interviews of how horrible it was to get hit with objects and tear gas (funny how they didn't get that same empathy during the summer) after calling the police murders all last year.

Um. No. That's not why.

Also, "if Trump had called in the National Guard to protect the Capitol against his own supporters" is a statement that is inherently absurd.

Obviously you don't understand how the National Guard works. It takes several days to gather them together. You don't just say "hey can I get a couple hundred NG over here now?"

Mayor Bowser requested help days ahead. It was denied.

Of 1/6? She requested a limited number of unarmed NG to do traffic management. It was granted.

[Anonymous]

This is by far the stupidest, most bad-faith take possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is by far the stupidest, most bad-faith take possible.

+1

The whole "hypocrites!" schtick is old. We see right through it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Does neuter only refer to emasculating men or does that actually show us more about the way your brain works. You need to argue less and read more.

Yes. Yes, it does. Yes. Even veterinarians use "neuter" in that way. Find me an example where someone refers to "neutering" a female-coded workforce. "You can't neuter the nursing profession and then call for those same skills." "You can't neuter the housecleaning crew and then call for those same skills."

At work we regularly neuter capability of our satellites. But we are engineers and not lit majors. Though we have a male and female staff. I wonder if the women are pissed when neutering a deployed capability comes up.

If you're engineers with a 50-50 workforce, or maybe even a woman-dominated workforce, then you're very atypical engineers.

In any case, the issue is not anger. The majority of veterinarians are now women, and nobody gets angry (as far as I know) about the phrase spay-and-neuter. The issue is, what does the word choice say about the speaker's underlying assumptions? If you want to, you can think about the use of "male" and "female" to describe the ends of connectors/fasteners.

non-engineers really aren't going to be happy about master and slave cylinders in hydraulic systems. That language kinda rubs me the wrong way, and I'm a 40+ YO white guy, who isn't exactly the poster child for woke causes de jour....hey life is what it is. But I think the clock is ticking on those terms becoming "enslaved cylinder" and "privileged cylinder" or maybe, less sarcastically, "controlling cylinder" and "responding cylinder" ? later we can address master-slave JK Flip-flop with the electricals.

I think this thread has been sufficiently run off the rails, and so quickly!

As far as the original topic.....yeah, those who call for the cops to be disbanded are quick to call 911...for the cops. Same as those who say they are for "law and order" seem to also invade the Capitol, break stuff, and smear feces all over. Speaking of that very topic, the only movements these days not full of its own hypocrisy is my bowel movements.

[Anonymous]

Does OP realize like a dozen LE have been arrested for the crimes they committed at the Capitol?

[Anonymous]

It’s so funny that people are liking the idea of police more after an event when police utterly failed to protect what should be one of the most secure buildings in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Does neuter only refer to emasculating men or does that actually show us more about the way your brain works. You need to argue less and read more.

Yes. Yes, it does. Yes. Even veterinarians use "neuter" in that way. Find me an example where someone refers to "neutering" a female-coded workforce. "You can't neuter the nursing profession and then call for those same skills." "You can't neuter the housecleaning crew and then call for those same skills."

Neutering, from the Latin neuter, is the removal of an animal's reproductive organ, either all of it or a considerably large part. "Neutering" is often used incorrectly to refer only to male animals, but the term actually applies to both sexes. The male-specific term is castration, while spaying is usually reserved for female animals. Colloquially, both terms are often referred to as fixing. In male horses, castrating is referred to as gelding. Modern veterinary practice tends to use the term de-sexing.

Looks like the engineers on the board had it right. Probably that background in Latin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Does neuter only refer to emasculating men or does that actually show us more about the way your brain works. You need to argue less and read more.

Yes. Yes, it does. Yes. Even veterinarians use "neuter" in that way. Find me an example where someone refers to "neutering" a female-coded workforce. "You can't neuter the nursing profession and then call for those same skills." "You can't neuter the housecleaning crew and then call for those same skills."

Neutering, from the Latin neuter, is the removal of an animal's reproductive organ, either all of it or a considerably large part. "Neutering" is often used incorrectly to refer only to male animals, but the term actually applies to both sexes. The male-specific term is castration, while spaying is usually reserved for female animals. Colloquially, both terms are often referred to as fixing. In male horses, castrating is referred to as gelding. Modern veterinary practice tends to use the term de-sexing.

Looks like the engineers on the board had it right. Probably that background in Latin.

In lexicography, there's how people think people should use language, and there's how people actually use language. It's the prescriptivist vs. descriptivist dispute. Evidently you're a prescriptivist.

https://www.pbs.org/speak/speech/correct/prescriptivism/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is by far the stupidest, most bad-faith take possible.

+1

The whole "hypocrites!" schtick is old. We see right through it.

Remember- when they call us hypocrites it means that they are hypocrites.

I’m used to the name calling now.

[Anonymous]

Ah, you are failing to distinguish between the "MPD" and the "Capitol Police". The "MPD" were intrinsic to breaking up the riots. The "MPD" are who are City Council began the process of defunding this summer, as well as banning some riot-control methods and severely limiting others. When the thread is titled DC people might "like" the idea of law enforcement again, that obviously refers first and foremost to the MPD to whose riot-quelling actions on 1/6 DC people are responding positively. It also sounds like since people are complaining about the lack of Capitol Police response, that they "like" the idea of law enforcement overall. No one seems to be complaining about the use of tear gas on 1/6. Are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does OP realize like a dozen LE have been arrested for the crimes they committed at the Capitol?

Waiting for OP to realize this...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does OP realize like a dozen LE have been arrested for the crimes they committed at the Capitol?

I liked the good police just fine before, and I like the good police now. It's just that a percentage think they are the terminator, and those are the ones who need to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm hoping that you're just as quick to condemn the many times when police use tear gas, pepper spray, and vehicular chases inappropriately.

It should always been investigated if there is concern. But many people who have no knowledge of crowd control assume things are done inappropriately and base their opinions of police work on ignorance. This gets amplified through social media and now millions hate the police, for no legitimate reason. I'm not saying there aren't things to improve, or that there isn't systemic racism. There is. But policy improvements need to be based on fact. Not Monday morning quarterbacks.....

If you watched the lawful and peaceful protests from the summer and didn't see a mass use of inappropriate means to control crowds then you are neither trained in that area nor able to see past your own nose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is by far the stupidest, most bad-faith take possible.

+1

The whole "hypocrites!" schtick is old. We see right through it.

I actually think these people are that stupid though.