https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/

Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds. I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator with the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop. In some cases, they won't even accept hard evidence since they have now been propagandized to believe that police or police labs with misrepresent anything and everything. This is why California is turning back into the wild west where gunfights in malls are now becoming common enough that people would rather shop Amazon than go to a mall.

On 4/18/2022 10:32 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
>
> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds. I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator with the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop. In some cases, they won't even accept hard evidence since they have now been propagandized to believe that police or police labs with misrepresent anything and everything. This is why California is turning back into the wild west where gunfights in malls are now becoming common enough that people would rather shop Amazon than go to a mall.
Tom sees everything through blood red-colored right wing spectacles.
Regarding the incident Andrew linked: Hit-and-runs by motorists have
been an issue since long, long before any lefty radicals said "defund
the police."
One man interviewed in that clip mentioned that removing centerline
barriers led to much faster traffic speeds in that area. That's much
more likely to have been significant. Society can't possibly afford
enough police to be watching every intersection or every street. That
sort of Police State would send taxes through the roof.
(Of course, something like that could be done much more inexpensively
with automated cameras - but the "Law and Order" party hates traffic
cameras. Go figure.)
I'm in favor of slowing traffic speed, especially in areas where there
are lots of pedestrians and cyclists. But it's unlikely to happen using
cops alone. I'm much more in favor of certain Traffic Calming measures,
like the raised intersections briefly mentioned in that article. Those
tend to make motorists slow down, but don't inconvenience cyclists.
--
- Frank Krygowski

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
>
> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.

I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.

As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.

> I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area

Is this your momma's basement house or some other place you used to live?

> that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator with the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop.

As for not believing what a cop says, that is probably due to the fact in some instances there are videos of the police stop. And what the cop says and is written in the police report is 100% opposite of what the video shows.. Do you believe what your eyes see, or what you hear from someone trying to convince you of something else.

> In some cases, they won't even accept hard evidence since they have now been propagandized to believe that police or police labs with misrepresent anything and everything.

>This is why California is turning back into the wild west where gunfights in malls are now becoming common enough that people would rather shop Amazon than go to a mall.

You mean like in SOUTH CAROLINA?
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/17/us/hampton-county-south-carolina-shooting/index.html
https://abcnews.go.com/US/injured-shooting-south-carolina-restaurant-police/story?id=84135698
"Nine people were shot and five others were injured while fleeing the scene Saturday afternoon, police said. The injured ranged in age from 15 to 73 years old."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/suspect-south-carolina-mall-shooting-released-house-arrest-judge-sets-rcna24751
"The man, identified as 22-year-old Jewayne Price, has been released under house arrest and ordered to wear an ankle monitor after a judge set a $25,000 surety bond."

Good thing they know how to treat criminals in South Carolina. Imagine, making a person who shoots 9 people spend time in jail. Criminal.

https://www.wltx.com/article/news/crime/south-carolina-club-shooting-injures-9/101-927d68b1-602a-48ac-9a57-f1958d1f328a
https://nypost.com/2022/04/17/nine-injured-at-south-carolina-restaurant-shooting/
I did not know South Carolina had TWO mass shootings over the weekend. Imagine that. I guess down in South Carolina they like to shoot people. Lots of people at once, more efficient that way I guess.

Now I will give Tommy boy a little credit. Sacramento did have a mass shooting two weeks ago. 6 dead in downtown Sacramento late at night after the bars closed down. Gang related killings.
https://fox40.com/news/sacramento-mass-shooting/da-3-of-6-dead-in-sacramento-shootout-were-in-gang-dispute/

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 12:13:50 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/18/2022 10:32 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>> https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
>>
>> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds. I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they
>won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator with the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop. In some cases, they won't even accept hard evidence since they have now been propagandized to believe that police or police labs with misrepresent anything and everything. This is why California is turning back into the wild west where gunfights in malls are now becoming common enough that people would rather shop Amazon than go to a mall.
>
>Tom sees everything through blood red-colored right wing spectacles.
>
>Regarding the incident Andrew linked: Hit-and-runs by motorists have
>been an issue since long, long before any lefty radicals said "defund
>the police."
>
>One man interviewed in that clip mentioned that removing centerline
>barriers led to much faster traffic speeds in that area. That's much
>more likely to have been significant. Society can't possibly afford
>enough police to be watching every intersection or every street. That
>sort of Police State would send taxes through the roof.
>
>(Of course, something like that could be done much more inexpensively
>with automated cameras - but the "Law and Order" party hates traffic
>cameras. Go figure.)
>
>I'm in favor of slowing traffic speed, especially in areas where there
>are lots of pedestrians and cyclists. But it's unlikely to happen using
>cops alone. I'm much more in favor of certain Traffic Calming measures,
>like the raised intersections briefly mentioned in that article. Those
>tend to make motorists slow down, but don't inconvenience cyclists.

I keep telling y'all. You have the laws to control speeding. Just
enforce them. Of course you'll have to convince the judges to award
the proper penalties but the laws will work.

And, as I have mentioned, the law does work as in several southern
states that use to apparently lay in wait for "foreign" cars from the
north and pounced on them for speeding. And "awarded" the maximum
allowable fines when they caught the speeders.

As for speed cameras, etc., they do work. Here we even have "No Turn"
cameras. My wife got caught by one a couple of months ago. No hearing,
no court, just a notice in the mail to come and pay your fine
enclosing a photo of you "doing wrong". I notice that she is now
somewhat more careful in not making illegal turns since she had to pay
a fine for doing so (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 4/18/2022 4:00 PM, John B. wrote:

<snip>

> I keep telling y'all. You have the laws to control speeding. Just
> enforce them. Of course you'll have to convince the judges to award
> the proper penalties but the laws will work.

"The judges" have nothing to do with the penalties and fines except in
the unlikely event that the violator contests the citation and goes to
court, which is usually a counter-productive thing to do because then
you can't go to traffic school to keep the ticket off your record.

The problem with enforcement is that the cost of police is much higher
than the revenue from fines that can be generated. But speed
enforcement, stop sign enforcement, and crosswalk enforcement is still
pretty common in my area. Speed cameras are not legal in California. Red
light cameras are legal but are not widely used.

Very few U.S. cities have actually cut funding for police and for the
few that did, there's been no correlation between funding and crime rates.

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> > https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
>>
>> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.
>
>I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.
>
>As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
>

Your arguments are illogical, at best. Sure "police brutality" exists.
but frequently it exists primarily in the mind of the oppressed. "But
he hit me with a stick!" "And what were you doing when he hit you?"
"Err... well I had my hand in his pocket. See... his wallet was stuck
somehow and I couldn't get it out".

>
>
>
>
>> I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area
>
>Is this your momma's basement house or some other place you used to live?
>
>
>
>
>> that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator
with
>the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop.
>
>As for not believing what a cop says, that is probably due to the fact in some instances there are videos of the police stop. And what the cop says and is written in the police report is 100% opposite of what the video shows. Do you believe what your eyes see, or what you hear from someone trying to convince you of something else.

Well, obviously, as the police are worthless lying bastards the
solution is to get rid of them. and, of course this will reduce taxes
a bit so everyone will be happy. Right?

But, perhaps more to the point, I came across a study of some 93
million stops and it showed that Black drivers were 20% more likely to
be stopped then White drivers. And while it loudly acclaimed the fact
that Black's were being stopped it quite coyly avoided the reasons for
the stops. Was it a matter of "Hey Jake, there's a Jig-a-Boo in that
car better stop him"? Or Hey, that car's going 50 mph over the speed
limit, better stop him"?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:32:08 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 4/18/2022 4:00 PM, John B. wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> I keep telling y'all. You have the laws to control speeding. Just
>> enforce them. Of course you'll have to convince the judges to award
>> the proper penalties but the laws will work.
>
>"The judges" have nothing to do with the penalties and fines except in
>the unlikely event that the violator contests the citation and goes to
>court, which is usually a counter-productive thing to do because then
>you can't go to traffic school to keep the ticket off your record.
>
>The problem with enforcement is that the cost of police is much higher
>than the revenue from fines that can be generated. But speed
>enforcement, stop sign enforcement, and crosswalk enforcement is still
>pretty common in my area. Speed cameras are not legal in California. Red
>light cameras are legal but are not widely used.
>
>Very few U.S. cities have actually cut funding for police and for the
>few that did, there's been no correlation between funding and crime rates.

Well, I suppose I was using Judge" as a cover all for "Legal system"
so I was at fault. But how does going to traffic school negate an
actual malfeasance? Sort of like, "well, yes I did steal that $100,000
but if I go to finance school I don't have to go to jail"?

After all, I read that California kills some 3,606 (2019) on the
roads. And "50% of all drivers killed in motor vehicle crashes, who
were tested, tested positive for legal and/ or illegal drugs."
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.

I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
offenders have actually broken a traffic law.

As I see it, a certain amount of money is required to maintain
civilization. It has to come from somebody. Why should law breakers not
be asked to pay a bit extra? They are perfectly legitimate targets.

If they don't like it, their choice should be obvious. Just obey the laws.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 21:13:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
>
>I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
>offenders have actually broken a traffic law.
>
>As I see it, a certain amount of money is required to maintain
>civilization. It has to come from somebody. Why should law breakers not
>be asked to pay a bit extra? They are perfectly legitimate targets.
>
>If they don't like it, their choice should be obvious. Just obey the laws.

Somewhere, maybe Georgia, I was told that police officers were paid,
awarded?, a portion of any fines paid by those who they arrested. And
why not, it would certainly influence police to be more interested in
their job.

But to be honest, the average citizen doesn't have a clue what the
Police are doing. they get their knowledge, usually, from lurid news
articles. After all the fact that the Police stopped and fined some 75
people speeding in school zones and as a result now no one speeds past
the grade school, doesn't make exciting reading while a police
shooting? Wow!
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:07:10 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
> >>
> >> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.
> >
> >I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.
> >
> >As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
> >
> Your arguments are illogical, at best. Sure "police brutality" exists.
> but frequently it exists primarily in the mind of the oppressed. "But
> he hit me with a stick!" "And what were you doing when he hit you?"
> "Err... well I had my hand in his pocket. See... his wallet was stuck
> somehow and I couldn't get it out".

Apparently John you have not been keeping up with what is happening in the USA. A few stories I recall. Police woman goes home to her apartment, or so she thought, and shoots the man in the apartment. Because he actually lived in the apartment. Police serving a warrant in Kentucky(?) break into a house and shoot a woman in her bedroom. Wrong house they served the warrant on. Oops. 3-4-5 cops on top of the black guy up in Minnesota, and choke him to death and he dies of suffocation. If you have that many cops sitting on top of the guy's back, do you really need to suffocate, choke him? Some big city, Chicago(?), where the suspect is running away from the cops and they shoot him 15 times in the back. And this suspect was not someone they had witnessed murder someone in front of their eyes. He was just someone they were chasing for some reason. Not saying he was not guilty. But unless someone is a murderer, are the police justified in shooting someone 15 times in the back.

> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area
> >
> >Is this your momma's basement house or some other place you used to live?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator
> with
> >the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop.
> >
> >As for not believing what a cop says, that is probably due to the fact in some instances there are videos of the police stop. And what the cop says and is written in the police report is 100% opposite of what the video shows. Do you believe what your eyes see, or what you hear from someone trying to convince you of something else.
> Well, obviously, as the police are worthless lying bastards the
> solution is to get rid of them. and, of course this will reduce taxes
> a bit so everyone will be happy. Right?

No. As I somewhat clearly explained above. You need police to enforce the laws. Properly. Not improperly. And if you try to resolve the problem of police acting illegally by removing the funding for the police, then you kind of end up in the damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. No funding, no police, no police abuse, but also more crime by the criminals.. Lot of police funding, more police abuse, and maybe less crime from criminals. Its kind of a choice whether you want the crimes committed by the police or by the criminals.

>
> But, perhaps more to the point, I came across a study of some 93
> million stops and it showed that Black drivers were 20% more likely to
> be stopped then White drivers. And while it loudly acclaimed the fact
> that Black's were being stopped it quite coyly avoided the reasons for
> the stops. Was it a matter of "Hey Jake, there's a Jig-a-Boo in that
> car better stop him"? Or Hey, that car's going 50 mph over the speed
> limit, better stop him"?

I suppose it also depends on your bias or views too. If you believe some people, certain races of people, are more prone to be criminals, then you can justify stopping 20% more blacks. Like the old saying, you rob banks because that is where the money is. So you stop, arrest, blacks because they are more likely to be criminals and guilty.

200 people. 100 black, 100 white. And because I am not a racist or have any preconceived notions, Ha Ha, I think criminality is universal. Equal criminals everywhere and amongst everyone. So 5 out of 100 blacks are criminal. And 5 out of 100 whites are criminal. But in the USA we have about double or triple the number of blacks in jail as whites. Given jailbirds per 100 population and racial census and such. In the USA there are far more blacks locked up than whites compared to how many there should be for the population of the races. In the USA we have 4 blacks locked up and 2 white locked up. Out of the 100 and 5 I mentioned above.

Why? The number of criminals and criminal tendency is equal for the races. Is it because the police pick on the blacks more and stop their cars and arrest them more? So they get 4 out of the 5 criminals. But with the whites, heck, if we only get 2 out of the 5 criminals, that is plenty good enough. But is it? Shouldn't the police get 5 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 2 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 1 out of 5 criminals from both races? Parity? Equality in enforcing the laws?

> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 8:13:20 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
> I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
> offenders have actually broken a traffic law.

What I am talking about is the often reported instances of a police pulling over someone for expired tags on their plates. Something minor. Even if the driver is obeying the traffic laws. Now I agree a law is being broken because the tags are expired. Kids jaywalking in the middle of the block and not at the crosswalks is illegal too. Cops should ticket every kid in town. And when the cops stop the driver, they arrest, confiscate the contents of the car and sell it at auction and keep the money. And take the wallet from the driver and keep the money. And the above scenario is also reported to happen far more to black drivers than white drivers.

I am all for enforcing the laws. Traffic and otherwise. But it can and does get out of hand and go beyond simply keeping people safe. I am not for that.

>
> As I see it, a certain amount of money is required to maintain
> civilization. It has to come from somebody. Why should law breakers not
> be asked to pay a bit extra? They are perfectly legitimate targets.
>
> If they don't like it, their choice should be obvious. Just obey the laws..
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 20:41:12 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 8:13:20 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >
>> > As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
>> I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
>> offenders have actually broken a traffic law.
>
>What I am talking about is the often reported instances of a police pulling over someone for expired tags on their plates. Something minor. Even if the driver is obeying the traffic laws. Now I agree a law is being broken because the tags are expired. Kids jaywalking in the middle of the block and not at the crosswalks is illegal too. Cops should ticket every kid in town. And when the cops stop the driver, they arrest, confiscate the contents of the car and sell it at auction and keep the money. And take the wallet from the driver and keep the money. And the above scenario is also reported to happen far more to black drivers than white drivers.
>
>I am all for enforcing the laws. Traffic and otherwise. But it can and does get out of hand and go beyond simply keeping people safe. I am not for that.

Your argument is still illogical at best. Vehicle registration is, to
some extent, a means of paying the government to organize things. Like
taxes.As well as a method of identifying the vehicle.

So if having up to date tags on your car is like paying taxes and
never mind if you don't pay for up to date car registration try not
paying you income tax. Or go to the cops and tell them your car was
stolen and when they ask for the registration tell 'em you don't have
any.

You are like a lot of other people. "Speeding ? Don't worry about
they, I always speed. The speed limits are foolish!" Then someone who
is driving too fast runs over your kid at the school crosswalk and it
is a whole different story.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 20:32:41 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:07:10 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
>> >>
>> >> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.
>> >
>> >I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.
>> >
>> >As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
>> >
>> Your arguments are illogical, at best. Sure "police brutality" exists.
>> but frequently it exists primarily in the mind of the oppressed. "But
>> he hit me with a stick!" "And what were you doing when he hit you?"
>> "Err... well I had my hand in his pocket. See... his wallet was stuck
>> somehow and I couldn't get it out".
>
>Apparently John you have not been keeping up with what is happening in the USA. A few stories I recall. Police woman goes home to her apartment, or so she thought, and shoots the man in the apartment. Because he actually lived in the apartment. Police serving a warrant in Kentucky(?) break into a house and shoot a woman in her bedroom. Wrong house they served the warrant on. Oops. 3-4-5 cops on top of the black guy up in Minnesota, and choke him to death and he dies of suffocation. If you have that many cops sitting on top of the guy's back, do you really need to suffocate, choke him? Some big city, Chicago(?), where the suspect is running away from the cops and they shoot him 15 times in the back. And this suspect was not someone they had witnessed murder someone in front of their eyes. He was just someone they were chasing for some reason. Not saying he was not guilty. But unless someone is a murderer, are the police justified in shooting someone 15 times in the back.
>

Yup, A few stories you recall.

But there are, in the U.S. some 693,644 police in the U.S. (2020)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/191694/number-of-law-enforcement-officers-in-the-us/
and you post four or five examples of malfeasant.
What were the other 693,600 cops doing?

As I said before, your argument seems to be based on the lurid stories
that you read in the News, and lets be honest here, "Cops Shoot Bloke
Running Away" gets on the front page while, Cops drive Sick Woman to
Hospital" doesn't even make it into the back pages.

Then too it might be pointed out that in 2020 police made some
7,632,473 arrests
https://www.statista.com/statistics/191261/number-of-arrests-for-all-offenses-in-the-us-since-1990/
So, say 7-1/2 million cases and the cops screw up, what did you say? 6
or 7 times? Call it 10 times, that is (Wow!) 0.00000131019... 0.0001%
of the time?

In comparison, I read that in 2020 traffic fatalities in the U.S. were
11.67/100,000 population or 1.167%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
Makes the cops look pretty good when compared to Mr. Average American
doesn't it
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:12:08 AM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 20:32:41 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:07:10 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> >> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >> >> > https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
> >> >>
> >> >> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.
> >> >
> >> >I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.
> >> >
> >> >As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
> >> >
> >> Your arguments are illogical, at best. Sure "police brutality" exists.
> >> but frequently it exists primarily in the mind of the oppressed. "But
> >> he hit me with a stick!" "And what were you doing when he hit you?"
> >> "Err... well I had my hand in his pocket. See... his wallet was stuck
> >> somehow and I couldn't get it out".
> >
> >Apparently John you have not been keeping up with what is happening in the USA. A few stories I recall. Police woman goes home to her apartment, or so she thought, and shoots the man in the apartment. Because he actually lived in the apartment. Police serving a warrant in Kentucky(?) break into a house and shoot a woman in her bedroom. Wrong house they served the warrant on. Oops. 3-4-5 cops on top of the black guy up in Minnesota, and choke him to death and he dies of suffocation. If you have that many cops sitting on top of the guy's back, do you really need to suffocate, choke him? Some big city, Chicago(?), where the suspect is running away from the cops and they shoot him 15 times in the back. And this suspect was not someone they had witnessed murder someone in front of their eyes. He was just someone they were chasing for some reason. Not saying he was not guilty. But unless someone is a murderer, are the police justified in shooting someone 15 times in the back.
> >
> Yup, A few stories you recall.
>
> But there are, in the U.S. some 693,644 police in the U.S. (2020)
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/191694/number-of-law-enforcement-officers-in-the-us/
> and you post four or five examples of malfeasant.
> What were the other 693,600 cops doing?
>
> As I said before, your argument seems to be based on the lurid stories
> that you read in the News, and lets be honest here, "Cops Shoot Bloke
> Running Away" gets on the front page while, Cops drive Sick Woman to
> Hospital" doesn't even make it into the back pages.
>
> Then too it might be pointed out that in 2020 police made some
> 7,632,473 arrests
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/191261/number-of-arrests-for-all-offenses-in-the-us-since-1990/
> So, say 7-1/2 million cases and the cops screw up, what did you say? 6
> or 7 times? Call it 10 times, that is (Wow!) 0.00000131019... 0.0001%
> of the time?
>
> In comparison, I read that in 2020 traffic fatalities in the U.S. were
> 11.67/100,000 population or 1.167%
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
> Makes the cops look pretty good when compared to Mr. Average American
> doesn't it
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

So the 1.167% traffic fatalities is a big deal according to you. Much more important than the number of people the cops kill. You estimated it at 10 people based on my remembrance of news articles. OK. 126.430 rapes in the USA in 2020. US Census population of 331,449,281 on April 1, 2020. 50.8% female. I am assuming all rapes are women. So 168,376,235 females in USA. That works out to 0.275% women/girls raped in the USA in 2020. Why the F-CK are we concerned at all about rape in the USA? It is only one fourth as much as the far more important traffic deaths. Using your police numbers, we had about 5.5 cops per female raped in the USA in 2020. Lets call that the cops/rape ratio.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/191137/reported-forcible-rape-cases-in-the-usa-since-1990/
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 11:22:47 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 20:41:12 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 8:13:20 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> >
> >> > As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
> >> I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
> >> offenders have actually broken a traffic law.
> >
> >What I am talking about is the often reported instances of a police pulling over someone for expired tags on their plates. Something minor. Even if the driver is obeying the traffic laws. Now I agree a law is being broken because the tags are expired. Kids jaywalking in the middle of the block and not at the crosswalks is illegal too. Cops should ticket every kid in town. And when the cops stop the driver, they arrest, confiscate the contents of the car and sell it at auction and keep the money. And take the wallet from the driver and keep the money. And the above scenario is also reported to happen far more to black drivers than white drivers.
> >
> >I am all for enforcing the laws. Traffic and otherwise. But it can and does get out of hand and go beyond simply keeping people safe. I am not for that.
> Your argument is still illogical at best. Vehicle registration is, to
> some extent, a means of paying the government to organize things. Like
> taxes.As well as a method of identifying the vehicle.
>
> So if having up to date tags on your car is like paying taxes and
> never mind if you don't pay for up to date car registration try not
> paying you income tax. Or go to the cops and tell them your car was
> stolen and when they ask for the registration tell 'em you don't have
> any.
>
> You are like a lot of other people. "Speeding ? Don't worry about
> they, I always speed. The speed limits are foolish!" Then someone who
> is driving too fast runs over your kid at the school crosswalk and it
> is a whole different story.
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

For some reason you missed the point I was making. Here in the USA we have this notion that you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Cops require a reason to arrest someone. Cops require a search warrant to search homes. Not sure how vehicles work for searches. I think its called probable cause. The idea of cops needing a reason to arrest or search someone. They cannot just stop anyone and interrogate them. I suspect things work differently in Russia. Cops pulling over someone for expired tags or for jaywalking. Law breakers. And then using that to arrest, interrogate, search, confiscate, etc. That is the part where the cops get out of hand and carry it too far portion. Long ago, decades ago, when the speed limit was only 55 mph. You could more or less drive 60 without any worries of being pulled over for speeding. Even though technically you were speeding at 56 and above. But minor speeding was overlooked by the cops or highway patrol.

On 4/18/2022 8:42 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 21:13:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>
>>> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
>>
>> I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
>> offenders have actually broken a traffic law.
>>
>> As I see it, a certain amount of money is required to maintain
>> civilization. It has to come from somebody. Why should law breakers not
>> be asked to pay a bit extra? They are perfectly legitimate targets.
>>
>> If they don't like it, their choice should be obvious. Just obey the laws.
>
> Somewhere, maybe Georgia, I was told that police officers were paid,
> awarded?, a portion of any fines paid by those who they arrested. And
> why not, it would certainly influence police to be more interested in
> their job.
>
> But to be honest, the average citizen doesn't have a clue what the
> Police are doing. they get their knowledge, usually, from lurid news
> articles. After all the fact that the Police stopped and fined some 75
> people speeding in school zones and as a result now no one speeds past
> the grade school, doesn't make exciting reading while a police
> shooting? Wow!
>

Yes, there are excesses:
https://themillenniumreport.com/2019/02/legalized-theft-civil-asset-forfeiture-out-of-control-in-america/

But police wrongful homicides of black citizens are a
minuscule outlier (still wrong, just note they are extremely
rare) being something around twenty per year out of some 90
million police stops.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/18/2022 10:32 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:07:10 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
>>>>
>>>> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.
>>>
>>> I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.
>>>
>>> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
>>>
>> Your arguments are illogical, at best. Sure "police brutality" exists.
>> but frequently it exists primarily in the mind of the oppressed. "But
>> he hit me with a stick!" "And what were you doing when he hit you?"
>> "Err... well I had my hand in his pocket. See... his wallet was stuck
>> somehow and I couldn't get it out".
>
> Apparently John you have not been keeping up with what is happening in the USA. A few stories I recall. Police woman goes home to her apartment, or so she thought, and shoots the man in the apartment. Because he actually lived in the apartment. Police serving a warrant in Kentucky(?) break into a house and shoot a woman in her bedroom. Wrong house they served the warrant on. Oops. 3-4-5 cops on top of the black guy up in Minnesota, and choke him to death and he dies of suffocation. If you have that many cops sitting on top of the guy's back, do you really need to suffocate, choke him? Some big city, Chicago(?), where the suspect is running away from the cops and they shoot him 15 times in the back. And this suspect was not someone they had witnessed murder someone in front of their eyes. He was just someone they were chasing for some reason. Not saying he was not guilty. But unless someone is a murderer, are the police justified in shooting someone 15 times in the bac
k.
>
>
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area
>>>
>>> Is this your momma's basement house or some other place you used to live?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator
>> with
>>> the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop.
>>>
>>> As for not believing what a cop says, that is probably due to the fact in some instances there are videos of the police stop. And what the cop says and is written in the police report is 100% opposite of what the video shows. Do you believe what your eyes see, or what you hear from someone trying to convince you of something else.
>> Well, obviously, as the police are worthless lying bastards the
>> solution is to get rid of them. and, of course this will reduce taxes
>> a bit so everyone will be happy. Right?
>
> No. As I somewhat clearly explained above. You need police to enforce the laws. Properly. Not improperly. And if you try to resolve the problem of police acting illegally by removing the funding for the police, then you kind of end up in the damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. No funding, no police, no police abuse, but also more crime by the criminals. Lot of police funding, more police abuse, and maybe less crime from criminals. Its kind of a choice whether you want the crimes committed by the police or by the criminals.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> But, perhaps more to the point, I came across a study of some 93
>> million stops and it showed that Black drivers were 20% more likely to
>> be stopped then White drivers. And while it loudly acclaimed the fact
>> that Black's were being stopped it quite coyly avoided the reasons for
>> the stops. Was it a matter of "Hey Jake, there's a Jig-a-Boo in that
>> car better stop him"? Or Hey, that car's going 50 mph over the speed
>> limit, better stop him"?
>
> I suppose it also depends on your bias or views too. If you believe some people, certain races of people, are more prone to be criminals, then you can justify stopping 20% more blacks. Like the old saying, you rob banks because that is where the money is. So you stop, arrest, blacks because they are more likely to be criminals and guilty.
>
> 200 people. 100 black, 100 white. And because I am not a racist or have any preconceived notions, Ha Ha, I think criminality is universal. Equal criminals everywhere and amongst everyone. So 5 out of 100 blacks are criminal. And 5 out of 100 whites are criminal. But in the USA we have about double or triple the number of blacks in jail as whites. Given jailbirds per 100 population and racial census and such. In the USA there are far more blacks locked up than whites compared to how many there should be for the population of the races. In the USA we have 4 blacks locked up and 2 white locked up. Out of the 100 and 5 I mentioned above.
>
> Why? The number of criminals and criminal tendency is equal for the races. Is it because the police pick on the blacks more and stop their cars and arrest them more? So they get 4 out of the 5 criminals. But with the whites, heck, if we only get 2 out of the 5 criminals, that is plenty good enough. But is it? Shouldn't the police get 5 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 2 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 1 out of 5 criminals from both races? Parity? Equality in enforcing the laws?
>

You skipped over a lot of mitigating detail there.

The Houston officer Guyger had mistakenly gone to the wrong
apartment in her building after a night shift and admitted
it was an horrible tragic mistake. She was convicted and is
in prison.

Ms Taylor was shot after her dope dealer boyfriend fired
through a door at police who were looking for her
ex-boyfriend, another dope dealer. Officer Hankison is on
trial for recklessly and inexcusably firing the fatal round
through the back wall of her apartment.

George Floyd ate a bag of fentanyl when police inquired
about his having passed counterfeit currency. His companions
all quietly waited as instructed and did not resist police
inquiry. They are alive today. As he overdosed, he begins
the 'I can't breathe' routine at initial conversation before
any physical contact. Floyd violently resisted arrest, even
smashing his way out of a police car twice after being
handcuffed. Post mortem, he still had several lethal doses
worth of undigested dope in his stomach. Take forty minutes
to view the entire set of body cam footage. His death and
the officer's conviction are not at all so clear as some
believe.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/18/2022 10:41 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 8:13:20 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>
>>> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
>> I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
>> offenders have actually broken a traffic law.
>
> What I am talking about is the often reported instances of a police pulling over someone for expired tags on their plates. Something minor. Even if the driver is obeying the traffic laws. Now I agree a law is being broken because the tags are expired. Kids jaywalking in the middle of the block and not at the crosswalks is illegal too. Cops should ticket every kid in town. And when the cops stop the driver, they arrest, confiscate the contents of the car and sell it at auction and keep the money. And take the wallet from the driver and keep the money. And the above scenario is also reported to happen far more to black drivers than white drivers.
>
> I am all for enforcing the laws. Traffic and otherwise. But it can and does get out of hand and go beyond simply keeping people safe. I am not for that.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> As I see it, a certain amount of money is required to maintain
>> civilization. It has to come from somebody. Why should law breakers not
>> be asked to pay a bit extra? They are perfectly legitimate targets.
>>
>> If they don't like it, their choice should be obvious. Just obey the laws.
>>
>> --
>> - Frank Krygowski

Much agreed. Civil forfeiture has become a national shame
and a real problem (whatever the legislators' initial intent
may have been).

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 7:21:50 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/18/2022 10:32 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:07:10 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> >> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>> https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
> >>>>
> >>>> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.
> >>>
> >>> I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.
> >>>
> >>> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
> >>>
> >> Your arguments are illogical, at best. Sure "police brutality" exists.
> >> but frequently it exists primarily in the mind of the oppressed. "But
> >> he hit me with a stick!" "And what were you doing when he hit you?"
> >> "Err... well I had my hand in his pocket. See... his wallet was stuck
> >> somehow and I couldn't get it out".
> >
> > Apparently John you have not been keeping up with what is happening in the USA. A few stories I recall. Police woman goes home to her apartment, or so she thought, and shoots the man in the apartment. Because he actually lived in the apartment. Police serving a warrant in Kentucky(?) break into a house and shoot a woman in her bedroom. Wrong house they served the warrant on. Oops. 3-4-5 cops on top of the black guy up in Minnesota, and choke him to death and he dies of suffocation. If you have that many cops sitting on top of the guy's back, do you really need to suffocate, choke him? Some big city, Chicago(?), where the suspect is running away from the cops and they shoot him 15 times in the back. And this suspect was not someone they had witnessed murder someone in front of their eyes. He was just someone they were chasing for some reason. Not saying he was not guilty. But unless someone is a murderer, are the police justified in shooting someone 15 times in the bac
> k.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area
> >>>
> >>> Is this your momma's basement house or some other place you used to live?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator
> >> with
> >>> the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop.
> >>>
> >>> As for not believing what a cop says, that is probably due to the fact in some instances there are videos of the police stop. And what the cop says and is written in the police report is 100% opposite of what the video shows. Do you believe what your eyes see, or what you hear from someone trying to convince you of something else.
> >> Well, obviously, as the police are worthless lying bastards the
> >> solution is to get rid of them. and, of course this will reduce taxes
> >> a bit so everyone will be happy. Right?
> >
> > No. As I somewhat clearly explained above. You need police to enforce the laws. Properly. Not improperly. And if you try to resolve the problem of police acting illegally by removing the funding for the police, then you kind of end up in the damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. No funding, no police, no police abuse, but also more crime by the criminals. Lot of police funding, more police abuse, and maybe less crime from criminals. Its kind of a choice whether you want the crimes committed by the police or by the criminals.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> But, perhaps more to the point, I came across a study of some 93
> >> million stops and it showed that Black drivers were 20% more likely to
> >> be stopped then White drivers. And while it loudly acclaimed the fact
> >> that Black's were being stopped it quite coyly avoided the reasons for
> >> the stops. Was it a matter of "Hey Jake, there's a Jig-a-Boo in that
> >> car better stop him"? Or Hey, that car's going 50 mph over the speed
> >> limit, better stop him"?
> >
> > I suppose it also depends on your bias or views too. If you believe some people, certain races of people, are more prone to be criminals, then you can justify stopping 20% more blacks. Like the old saying, you rob banks because that is where the money is. So you stop, arrest, blacks because they are more likely to be criminals and guilty.
> >
> > 200 people. 100 black, 100 white. And because I am not a racist or have any preconceived notions, Ha Ha, I think criminality is universal. Equal criminals everywhere and amongst everyone. So 5 out of 100 blacks are criminal. And 5 out of 100 whites are criminal. But in the USA we have about double or triple the number of blacks in jail as whites. Given jailbirds per 100 population and racial census and such. In the USA there are far more blacks locked up than whites compared to how many there should be for the population of the races. In the USA we have 4 blacks locked up and 2 white locked up. Out of the 100 and 5 I mentioned above.
> >
> > Why? The number of criminals and criminal tendency is equal for the races. Is it because the police pick on the blacks more and stop their cars and arrest them more? So they get 4 out of the 5 criminals. But with the whites, heck, if we only get 2 out of the 5 criminals, that is plenty good enough. But is it? Shouldn't the police get 5 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 2 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 1 out of 5 criminals from both races? Parity? Equality in enforcing the laws?
> >
> You skipped over a lot of mitigating detail there.
>
> The Houston officer Guyger had mistakenly gone to the wrong
> apartment in her building after a night shift and admitted
> it was an horrible tragic mistake. She was convicted and is
> in prison.
>
> Ms Taylor was shot after her dope dealer boyfriend fired
> through a door at police who were looking for her
> ex-boyfriend, another dope dealer. Officer Hankison is on
> trial for recklessly and inexcusably firing the fatal round
> through the back wall of her apartment.
>
> George Floyd ate a bag of fentanyl when police inquired
> about his having passed counterfeit currency. His companions
> all quietly waited as instructed and did not resist police
> inquiry. They are alive today. As he overdosed, he begins
> the 'I can't breathe' routine at initial conversation before
> any physical contact. Floyd violently resisted arrest, even
> smashing his way out of a police car twice after being
> handcuffed. Post mortem, he still had several lethal doses
> worth of undigested dope in his stomach. Take forty minutes
> to view the entire set of body cam footage. His death and
> the officer's conviction are not at all so clear as some
> believe.

Am 19.04.2022 um 16:01 schrieb AMuzi:
>
> Yes, there are excesses:
> https://themillenniumreport.com/2019/02/legalized-theft-civil-asset-forfeiture-out-of-control-in-america/
>
> But police wrongful homicides of black citizens are a minuscule outlier
> (still wrong, just note they are extremely rare) being something around
> twenty per year out of some 90 million police stops.

I think the better base of comparison would be "police wrongful
homicides of black citizens out of police homicides of black citizens".

How does this compare to "police wrongful homicides of citizens out of
police homicides of citizens"?

Rolf

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 7:23:32 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/18/2022 10:41 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 8:13:20 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 4/18/2022 5:15 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
> >> I'm in favor of enforcing traffic laws to get money, assuming the
> >> offenders have actually broken a traffic law.
> >
> > What I am talking about is the often reported instances of a police pulling over someone for expired tags on their plates. Something minor. Even if the driver is obeying the traffic laws. Now I agree a law is being broken because the tags are expired. Kids jaywalking in the middle of the block and not at the crosswalks is illegal too. Cops should ticket every kid in town. And when the cops stop the driver, they arrest, confiscate the contents of the car and sell it at auction and keep the money. And take the wallet from the driver and keep the money. And the above scenario is also reported to happen far more to black drivers than white drivers.
> >
> > I am all for enforcing the laws. Traffic and otherwise. But it can and does get out of hand and go beyond simply keeping people safe. I am not for that.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> As I see it, a certain amount of money is required to maintain
> >> civilization. It has to come from somebody. Why should law breakers not
> >> be asked to pay a bit extra? They are perfectly legitimate targets.
> >>
> >> If they don't like it, their choice should be obvious. Just obey the laws.
> >>
> >> --
> >> - Frank Krygowski
> Much agreed. Civil forfeiture has become a national shame
> and a real problem (whatever the legislators' initial intent
> may have been).

I am sure that the occasion unfair civil forfeiture occurs but in the overwhelming majority of cases these are actions taken again criminals who haven't had sufficient hard evidence against them to convict them even though they have been prosecuted. If you charge a drug dealer with dealing drugs and catch him with $50,000 who the hell in their right mind is going to bankroll him to continue business? That this is the case is shown because lawyers to defend against civil forfeiture are big business and they have a poor record of success.

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 7:58:22 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 19.04.2022 um 16:01 schrieb AMuzi:
> >
> > Yes, there are excesses:
> > https://themillenniumreport.com/2019/02/legalized-theft-civil-asset-forfeiture-out-of-control-in-america/
> >
> > But police wrongful homicides of black citizens are a minuscule outlier
> > (still wrong, just note they are extremely rare) being something around
> > twenty per year out of some 90 million police stops.
> I think the better base of comparison would be "police wrongful
> homicides of black citizens out of police homicides of black citizens".
>
> How does this compare to "police wrongful homicides of citizens out of
> police homicides of citizens"?

This is probably offset in the wrong direction because of the extreme violence of the black gangs and their habits of carrying completely illegal fully automatic weapons. Police therefore, tend take no chances and are overly strongarm in the taking of citizens mistakenly identified as criminals.

So you prevent that by handcuffing the police? Or does that actually make it worse?

On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 7:21:50 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/18/2022 10:32 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:07:10 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> >> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 6:42:12 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>> https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/surveillance-video-shows-bicyclist-struck-by-driver-in-west-loop/
> >>>>
> >>>> Defunding the police has led to the preposterous end of enforcing traffic violations which could make up for the lost funds.
> >>>
> >>> I doubt any sane and rational person is against the police enforcing the laws properly. What some people are against is the police using made up nonsense to stop all black drivers. And then arresting or shooting them dead. And sense there is no policing of the police, the only way to prevent police abuse is to defund the police. No one monitors the police. They have free will to do anything they please. No one can hold them accountable because they have immunity from everything. So to prevent police abuse, you eliminate the police. Not exactly the best way to achieve the result of police abuse. Because you end up with less law enforcement. But you take the good with the bad. Less police lawbreakers, good, and more overall lawbreakers, bad.
> >>>
> >>> As for writing traffic tickets to get money, many many many police forces do this a lot. Its a big complaint against police. I am for enforcing the traffic laws. But if/when the police go the extra mile and use it as a means of enhancing their revenue and taking people's cars and property just because they can, then I am against this.
> >>>
> >> Your arguments are illogical, at best. Sure "police brutality" exists.
> >> but frequently it exists primarily in the mind of the oppressed. "But
> >> he hit me with a stick!" "And what were you doing when he hit you?"
> >> "Err... well I had my hand in his pocket. See... his wallet was stuck
> >> somehow and I couldn't get it out".
> >
> > Apparently John you have not been keeping up with what is happening in the USA. A few stories I recall. Police woman goes home to her apartment, or so she thought, and shoots the man in the apartment. Because he actually lived in the apartment. Police serving a warrant in Kentucky(?) break into a house and shoot a woman in her bedroom. Wrong house they served the warrant on. Oops. 3-4-5 cops on top of the black guy up in Minnesota, and choke him to death and he dies of suffocation. If you have that many cops sitting on top of the guy's back, do you really need to suffocate, choke him? Some big city, Chicago(?), where the suspect is running away from the cops and they shoot him 15 times in the back. And this suspect was not someone they had witnessed murder someone in front of their eyes. He was just someone they were chasing for some reason. Not saying he was not guilty. But unless someone is a murderer, are the police justified in shooting someone 15 times in the bac
> k.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I lived on what used to be a quiet road in a housing area
> >>>
> >>> Is this your momma's basement house or some other place you used to live?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> that is now commonly used by heavy trucks as a short cut to another road when a road built heavily enough to take the loads is only one block away and there is a sign on the corner leading into this area that says "No Trucks". Also it is used as a race track by non-residents who speed through the series of stop signs. They had been taking the route through another road on block up from mine but they have now turned that road (which had been completely repaved 4 years ago) into nothing more than gravel. I went to a Valentine's Day brunch yesterday and was shocked, SHOCKED, to see that the CHP had pulled over a Lotus sports car. These guys typically drive 90-100 mph on the freeways with a 65 limit without a qualm or fear of a ticket. Local police are now forbidden to chase serious law breakers so they won't even chase escaping murderers hoping I suppose to get enough crime scene evidence to rate their living quarters afterwards rather than catch the actual inarguable perpetrator
> >> with
> >>> the weapon in his possession. Plus California juries are prone now to not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of a cop.
> >>>
> >>> As for not believing what a cop says, that is probably due to the fact in some instances there are videos of the police stop. And what the cop says and is written in the police report is 100% opposite of what the video shows. Do you believe what your eyes see, or what you hear from someone trying to convince you of something else.
> >> Well, obviously, as the police are worthless lying bastards the
> >> solution is to get rid of them. and, of course this will reduce taxes
> >> a bit so everyone will be happy. Right?
> >
> > No. As I somewhat clearly explained above. You need police to enforce the laws. Properly. Not improperly. And if you try to resolve the problem of police acting illegally by removing the funding for the police, then you kind of end up in the damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. No funding, no police, no police abuse, but also more crime by the criminals. Lot of police funding, more police abuse, and maybe less crime from criminals. Its kind of a choice whether you want the crimes committed by the police or by the criminals.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> But, perhaps more to the point, I came across a study of some 93
> >> million stops and it showed that Black drivers were 20% more likely to
> >> be stopped then White drivers. And while it loudly acclaimed the fact
> >> that Black's were being stopped it quite coyly avoided the reasons for
> >> the stops. Was it a matter of "Hey Jake, there's a Jig-a-Boo in that
> >> car better stop him"? Or Hey, that car's going 50 mph over the speed
> >> limit, better stop him"?
> >
> > I suppose it also depends on your bias or views too. If you believe some people, certain races of people, are more prone to be criminals, then you can justify stopping 20% more blacks. Like the old saying, you rob banks because that is where the money is. So you stop, arrest, blacks because they are more likely to be criminals and guilty.
> >
> > 200 people. 100 black, 100 white. And because I am not a racist or have any preconceived notions, Ha Ha, I think criminality is universal. Equal criminals everywhere and amongst everyone. So 5 out of 100 blacks are criminal. And 5 out of 100 whites are criminal. But in the USA we have about double or triple the number of blacks in jail as whites. Given jailbirds per 100 population and racial census and such. In the USA there are far more blacks locked up than whites compared to how many there should be for the population of the races. In the USA we have 4 blacks locked up and 2 white locked up. Out of the 100 and 5 I mentioned above.
> >
> > Why? The number of criminals and criminal tendency is equal for the races. Is it because the police pick on the blacks more and stop their cars and arrest them more? So they get 4 out of the 5 criminals. But with the whites, heck, if we only get 2 out of the 5 criminals, that is plenty good enough. But is it? Shouldn't the police get 5 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 2 out of 5 criminals from both races? Or 1 out of 5 criminals from both races? Parity? Equality in enforcing the laws?
> >
> You skipped over a lot of mitigating detail there.
>
> The Houston officer Guyger had mistakenly gone to the wrong
> apartment in her building after a night shift and admitted
> it was an horrible tragic mistake. She was convicted and is
> in prison.
>
> Ms Taylor was shot after her dope dealer boyfriend fired
> through a door at police who were looking for her
> ex-boyfriend, another dope dealer. Officer Hankison is on
> trial for recklessly and inexcusably firing the fatal round
> through the back wall of her apartment.
>
> George Floyd ate a bag of fentanyl when police inquired
> about his having passed counterfeit currency. His companions
> all quietly waited as instructed and did not resist police
> inquiry. They are alive today. As he overdosed, he begins
> the 'I can't breathe' routine at initial conversation before
> any physical contact. Floyd violently resisted arrest, even
> smashing his way out of a police car twice after being
> handcuffed. Post mortem, he still had several lethal doses
> worth of undigested dope in his stomach. Take forty minutes
> to view the entire set of body cam footage. His death and
> the officer's conviction are not at all so clear as some
> believe.

On 4/19/2022 9:58 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 19.04.2022 um 16:01 schrieb AMuzi:
>>
>> Yes, there are excesses:
>> https://themillenniumreport.com/2019/02/legalized-theft-civil-asset-forfeiture-out-of-control-in-america/
>>
>> But police wrongful homicides of black citizens are a
>> minuscule outlier (still wrong, just note they are
>> extremely rare) being something around twenty per year out
>> of some 90 million police stops.
>
> I think the better base of comparison would be "police
> wrongful homicides of black citizens out of police homicides
> of black citizens".
>
> How does this compare to "police wrongful homicides of
> citizens out of police homicides of citizens"?
>
> Rolf

Without engaging skin color, can we agree that shooting at
police and then taking a fatal second place at the two-way
range is a different thing altogether?

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971