No need for the military to engage in civilian law enforcement Lane, you're just trying to defend the indefensible, as usual.

Violent crime is trending down:

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press...he-nation-statistics

Indefensible!?


This young man went to DC to learn how to serve his country. What did he get? Gunned down in the street by a group of thugs.

Give me the NG any day! The DC populace is loving it.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/dc-...der-offer-50k-reward

Now you’re on the side of crime Steve.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Indefensible!?


Give me the NG any day! The DC populace is loving it.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/dc-...der-offer-50k-reward

So, Fox is justifying the military in populace security,

I suppose that's consistent with the Rightist's supposed stand about law and order. But, It's becoming clear that the Right isn't talking about the "Order" the Rule of Law is envisioned to achieve by the Founders. It's something else entirely.

Then there is the question of "freedom". Is there any need for me to define "freedom" from a Rightist's POV? Let's just say it's the freedom (govt sanctioned) to fuck over those deemed "them" in the Rightist's "us vs them".

And, of course the intentional breakdown of democratic institutions and rule of law, while spewing propaganda offering an alternate remedy is SOP for fascists.

https://www.google.com/search?...dl9zPq8-FPDM&csuir=1

Question:
Is a fascist nation safer for the population than a capitalist nation?

Answer:
Neither a fascist nor a capitalist nation is inherently safer, as both systems have historical and potential vulnerabilities regarding population safety and well-being. Fascism enforces order through state violence and repression, while safety in capitalist nations is subject to market regulations and the strength of democratic institutions.

Safety under fascism
Fascist regimes prioritize the security of the nation-state above all else and enforce it through totalitarian control. However, this "safety" is not a universal good for the population and comes at a severe cost.

Suppression and violence:
Fascism relies on state-sponsored violence and the suppression of civil liberties to impose its will. This was seen in Mussolini's Italy and Nazi Germany, where secret police and organized militias terrorized the population to maintain control.

Persecution of minorities:
A core fascist tenet is the creation of an "us versus them" mentality, which designates certain groups as threats to national unity. Historically, this has led to the persecution, expulsion, and extermination of marginalized populations, resulting in profound insecurity.

Limited freedom:
Under fascism, individual freedom is sacrificed for the perceived collective good of the state. The state dictates nearly all aspects of economic and social life, removing the populace's ability to make independent choices.

Safety under capitalism
Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership, not a political ideology like fascism. The safety of a capitalist nation's population depends on the government's regulations and democratic practices.

Economic inequality:
Unregulated capitalism can lead to extreme economic inequality, leaving vulnerable populations without access to adequate housing, healthcare, and education. This creates instability and can contribute to social unrest.

Democratic institutions as a safeguard:
In democratic capitalist countries, civil liberties and human rights protections serve as checks on state power. A strong rule of law, independent judiciary, and free press are crucial for upholding the safety and rights of the population. However, the strength of these institutions can vary.

Social safety nets:
Many capitalist countries have incorporated social democratic policies, such as public healthcare, unemployment insurance, and robust welfare states, to mitigate the risks of market forces. These systems provide a layer of security that pure, unregulated capitalism lacks.

Comparing the two
The concept of "safety" is fundamentally different under each system.

Feature: Fascist Nation vs Capitalist Nation

Source of "safety":
Fascist Nation---State control and suppression of dissent.
Capitalist Nation ---Regulation, rule of law, and social safety nets.

Freedom:
Fascist Nation---Minimal individual freedom; prioritization of the state.
Capitalist Nation---High degree of individual economic freedom, with civil liberties varying by country.

Vulnerable groups:
Fascist Nation---Explicitly targeted and persecuted.
Capitalist Nation---Vulnerable to economic inequality and systemic failures, but protected by law in democratic systems.

Political stability:
Fascist Nation---Enforced by force and the elimination of opposition.
Capitalist Nation---Maintained through democratic processes, but can be threatened by economic crises.

Conclusion: While a fascist regime may project an image of order and stability by silencing dissent, this is a form of control, not safety, and it is achieved through extreme violence and the persecution of minorities. The safety of a population in a capitalist nation is determined by the strength of its democratic institutions and the social protections that regulate its market. A capitalist system with strong democratic safeguards and social policies provides more reliable and equitable safety for the general population than a fascist system.

No, I'm on the side of civil liberties Lane. I stand against authoritarian leaders and those who would trample our constitution.
I don't believe there is crime emergency or a trade deficit emergency. Trump wants to behave as a dictator and that should be challenged at every single turn.

Violent crime has been decreasing since Bush I.....the statistics tell the story.

https://www.statista.com/stati...-the-usa-since-1990/

The statistics also tell the story on inflation and the job market, the story is.....Trump is incompetent and his policies suck.

Actually, the best thing for this sort of crime is IMMEDIATE EXECUTION!

ON THE SPOT!

Anyone killing some at random on public transport does NOT deserve to be treated as a human being!

Lane, you know that the military occupation of D.C. has nothing to do about law and order.

The National Guard is not trained or equipped to conduct police work.

The real purpose is to distract from Trump’s Epstein problem and to normalize the military occupation of our country.

Well, Schro, I was thinking the same thing and you beat me to it.

The fact is that Trump lied about the stats and justification and purpose, and declared farce emergency to beat the law. So, why should we believe anything he or Heritage Foundation or his sickophants say about this and/or their overall narratives?

What is Trump's real purpose in sending troops to Washington DC?

AI summary:
Donald Trump's purpose in sending troops to Washington, D.C. in August 2025 was stated to be an effort to combat crime, which he declared to be an "emergency". However, this action drew significant controversy and legal challenges, with critics alleging that the real purpose was political and an abuse of power.

More detail:

https://www.google.com/search?...sclient=gws-wiz-serp

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
No, I'm on the side of civil liberties Lane. I stand against authoritarian leaders and those who would trample our constitution.
I don't believe there is crime emergency or a trade deficit emergency. Trump wants to behave as a dictator and that should be challenged at every single turn.

Violent crime has been decreasing since Bush I.....the statistics tell the story.

https://www.statista.com/stati...-the-usa-since-1990/

The statistics also tell the story on inflation and the job market, the story is.....Trump is incompetent and his policies suck.

i am in the middle -- no, i don't want the military on every corner - but i DO want criminals to be afraid of cops AND legal outcomes - i don't speed because an interaction with johnny costs me time and money

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

i am in the middle -- no, i don't want the military on every corner - but i DO want criminals to be afraid of cops AND legal outcomes - i don't speed because an interaction with johnny costs me time and money

Yet you support a regime that intentionally and clearly guts institutions that function as the network supporting the Rule of Law, and fail to recognize/acknowledge the purpose of doing that.

All the Rightist pseudo-indignation about "defund the police" compared to their support for an authoritarian move like taking control of DC law enforcement with military, and threat of doing much the same with blue cities - hypocrisy doesn't get much clearer than that.

What is the limit to what you will support?

The civil and social unrest he is intentionally festering is scheduled to peak just before the mid-terms. Are you going to support his declaration of national emergency and martial law?

One can't help but think, the use of the National Guard to establish law and order, is more about testing the possibility of using the Guard to maintain ORDER; never mind the law. There were situations in the last four years when the deployment of the National guard could have been justified. I don't think this is it. Bill.

I think it is a test too. Try to create a sense of normalcy and apathy around such actions so that when the elections in 2026 and 2028 roll around and troops are deployed to major blue-voting cities to “ensure election integrity” folks will be less likely to revolt.

If you wish to be known as a slayer of dragons, what is the first thing you need?

A dragon, of course. If there aren't any, you might get by with making one up from papier mache.

And that variety is a lot easier to kill than a real one...

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
If you wish to be known as a slayer of dragons, what is the first thing you need?

A dragon, of course. If there aren't any, you might get by with making one up from papier mache.

And that variety is a lot easier to kill than a real one...

In what culture the slayer of dragons has to be a draft dodging coward?

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

i am in the middle -- no, i don't want the military on every corner - but i DO want criminals to be afraid of cops AND legal outcomes - i don't speed because an interaction with johnny costs me time and money

Yet you support a regime that intentionally and clearly guts institutions that function as the network supporting the Rule of Law, and fail to recognize/acknowledge the purpose of doing that.

All the Rightist pseudo-indignation about "defund the police" compared to their support for an authoritarian move like taking control of DC law enforcement with military, and threat of doing much the same with blue cities - hypocrisy doesn't get much clearer than that.

What is the limit to what you will support?

The civil and social unrest he is intentionally festering is scheduled to peak just before the mid-terms. Are you going to support his declaration of national emergency and martial law?

You are illiterate and incapable of nuance. That was a compliant, chowderhead

quote:

That was a compliant

Oh, thanks for the distinction.

Complainant vs compliant.

Maybe it would help if you headed your posts so we can tell the difference.


Like - complaint: or compliant:

Of course your double-think could include both.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

You are illiterate and incapable of nuance. That was a compliant, chowderhead

Oh, thanks for the distinction.

Complainant vs compliant.

Maybe it would help if you headed your posts so we can tell the difference.


Like - complaint: or compliant:

Of course your double-think could include both.

i acknowledge my typo, and meant complaint - i have altered your "quote" to include all BOTH sentences of my post, honey --

and changes nothing i said -- as you live semi-off-grid, there's a village missing you

did you get a hormone treatment this week?

quote:

i acknowledge my typo, and meant complaint

Same here.

I see that you got your panties in a wad because I didn't quote your personal insults.

Here's a short video for you Jeffee.

Maybe it will un-wad your panties:

https://youtube.com/shorts/alG...?si=2pHzB3r_b3HCPdDD

Trump knows all about grass

And

https://youtube.com/shorts/TXF...?si=rsD5lfjwT9cZVHmx

Dear Leader is not dead

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

i acknowledge my typo, and meant complaint.... did you get a hormone treatment this week?

Same here.

I see that you got your panties in a wad because I didn't quote your personal insults.

you do understand it's unusual for a male to wear panties, regardless of how common it is in your singlewide

quote:

Originally posted by Schrodinger:
Lane, you know that the military occupation of D.C. has nothing to do about law and order.

The National Guard is not trained or equipped to conduct police work.

The real purpose is to distract from Trump’s Epstein problem and to normalize the military occupation of our country.

You logged on just to tell me that Doug?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
No need for the military to engage in civilian law enforcement Lane, you're just trying to defend the indefensible, as usual.

Violent crime is trending down:

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press...he-nation-statistics

I'm not defending Trump nor am I convinced his authoritarian crack down on crime warranted but I wonder.

I asked Mike M recently if he thought the streets are safer in these modern times for his kids or during his youth. My personal opinion is today they are not more safe.

I have read that illegal border activity is way down with Trumps efforts.

Jines rightly argues that urban city problems should be the responsibility of the urban cities, yet the problems always creep outside the urban cities to communities less capable of dealing with urban problems. Our last big drug bust here in DLG had origins in a California prison gang.

I'm not down there, I don't know if Trumps efforts are warranted or not, but when I read about the Sinaloa Cartel being active in Butte Montana I think to myself that maybe someone should try something different.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
No, I'm on the side of civil liberties Lane. I stand against authoritarian leaders and those who would trample our constitution.
I don't believe there is crime emergency or a trade deficit emergency. Trump wants to behave as a dictator and that should be challenged at every single turn.

Violent crime has been decreasing since Bush I.....the statistics tell the story.

https://www.statista.com/stati...-the-usa-since-1990/

The statistics also tell the story on inflation and the job market, the story is.....Trump is incompetent and his policies suck.

Yeah inflation is right where the Fed wants it and the job market is stable…yep got it…statistics tell the tale.

As to crime…even though we lead the world in murders in our cities…you are good since the trend has been on the slight decrease for a score long term.

Hey Doug,
BTW…how is inner city Portland these days? Did you get your watch shop back that had to close due to rioting?

Another question. What the hell does civil liberties have to do with the NG walking the streets?

My experience is that if you are a law abiding citizen…they are the friendliest folks to visit with on the street. And, they are volunteer regular citizens…the least likely to violate anyone’s civil liberties.

Did we all forget the wonderful Democrat idea of defunding the police?

It is also a test of criminals versus law enforcement of how much they ( the criminals ) can get away with within big cities and especially hoods
Amazing isn’t it?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I think it is a test too. Try to create a sense of normalcy and apathy around such actions so that when the elections in 2026 and 2028 roll around and troops are deployed to major blue-voting cities to “ensure election integrity” folks will be less likely to revolt.

I thought you were too intelligent to make that assertion guess I was wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

i acknowledge my typo, and meant complaint.... did you get a hormone treatment this week?

Same here.

I see that you got your panties in a wad because I didn't quote your personal insults.

you do understand it's unusual for a male to wear panties, regardless of how common it is in your singlewide

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
No need for the military to engage in civilian law enforcement Lane, you're just trying to defend the indefensible, as usual.

Violent crime is trending down:

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press...he-nation-statistics

I'm not defending Trump nor am I convinced his authoritarian crack down on crime warranted but I wonder.

I asked Mike M recently if he thought the streets are safer in these modern times for his kids or during his youth. My personal opinion is today they are not more safe.

I have read that illegal border activity is way down with Trumps efforts.

I can testify to that^^^and demonstrate it on my own property in south Texas.

Jines rightly argues that urban city problems should be the responsibility of the urban cities, yet the problems always creep outside the urban cities to communities less capable of dealing with urban problems. Our last big drug bust here in DLG had origins in a California prison gang.

I'm not down there, I don't know if Trumps efforts are warranted or not, but when I read about the Sinaloa Cartel being active in Butte Montana I think to myself that maybe someone should try something different.

A very reasonable post.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
No need for the military to engage in civilian law enforcement Lane, you're just trying to defend the indefensible, as usual.

Violent crime is trending down:

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press...he-nation-statistics

I'm not defending Trump nor am I convinced his authoritarian crack down on crime warranted but I wonder.

I asked Mike M recently if he thought the streets are safer in these modern times for his kids or during his youth. My personal opinion is today they are not more safe.

I have read that illegal border activity is way down with Trumps efforts.

Jines rightly argues that urban city problems should be the responsibility of the urban cities, yet the problems always creep outside the urban cities to communities less capable of dealing with urban problems. Our last big drug bust here in DLG had origins in a California prison gang.

I'm not down there, I don't know if Trumps efforts are warranted or not, but when I read about the Sinaloa Cartel being active in Butte Montana I think to myself that maybe someone should try something different.

I grew up during the crack wars of the 80's, the Reagan/Bush years....yes, I think it is safer today than it was when I was a kid.

The FBI thinks it is safer today too.

Fox News? Not so much.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Another question. What the hell does civil liberties have to do with the NG walking the streets?

My experience is that if you are a law abiding citizen…they are the friendliest folks to visit with on the street. And, they are volunteer regular citizens…the least likely to violate anyone’s civil liberties.

You know, things like innocent until proven guilty, due process, the right to not be searched without sufficient reason.

The things that make us different than say, Russia.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
No need for the military to engage in civilian law enforcement Lane, you're just trying to defend the indefensible, as usual.

Violent crime is trending down:

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press...he-nation-statistics

I'm not defending Trump nor am I convinced his authoritarian crack down on crime warranted but I wonder.

I asked Mike M recently if he thought the streets are safer in these modern times for his kids or during his youth. My personal opinion is today they are not more safe.

I have read that illegal border activity is way down with Trumps efforts.

Jines rightly argues that urban city problems should be the responsibility of the urban cities, yet the problems always creep outside the urban cities to communities less capable of dealing with urban problems. Our last big drug bust here in DLG had origins in a California prison gang.

I'm not down there, I don't know if Trumps efforts are warranted or not, but when I read about the Sinaloa Cartel being active in Butte Montana I think to myself that maybe someone should try something different.

I grew up during the crack wars of the 80's, the Reagan/Bush years....yes, I think it is safer today than it was when I was a kid.

The FBI thinks it is safer today too.

Fox News? Not so much.

I also grew up in the 80s, SF Bay Area. Crips and Bloods and Crack were very real in Oakland CA, about 10 miles and maybe 20 minutes from my front door. Fortunately then, (my recollection, ) is that the jungle had hard borders and the wildlife rarely escaped.

I used to walk I'm guessing less than two miles to high-school. In the Bay Area weather was rarely an issue for pedestrians. I was also 6foot tall so not much to worry about. Not only would I never allow my girl to walk to and from school there, but I'd never let her attend school there. Oakland and SF have learned to commute and now bring their criminal terror as far and wide as their cars and commuter trains will carry them. If I were still condemned to live in the Bay Area I'd absolutely love to ride the commuter trains and walk the sidewalks with National Guardsmen.

My favorite example is the evolution of security systems. In our day we left car and home doors unlocked. You and I slept with windows open, we could drive our cars with the windows down, car door unlocked and we might even leave the keys in the ignition. Sure, a wallet left in the center console was certainly going to be stolen.

Today the car doors automatically lock and the car beeps at us if we try to get out with the keys in the ignition. Our homes, phones, cars, and laptops have sophisticated security systems. Home invasions and car jacking is not of our era."Flash mob" shopping mall robberies are not of our era.

I think there's more than a few somebody's that think we're less safe today.

I lock my car these days, damn Black Bears have done a real number on the interior of a few of my neighbors cars and I had two windows broken the those punks that I had carelessly left cracked...no more, I'm vigilant these days.

Those are my worries....Crime here is very low, I don't lose any sleep over it.

I'll believe the FBI....crime is on a downward trend, and has been since it peaked in the good old days.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Another question. What the hell does civil liberties have to do with the NG walking the streets?

My experience is that if you are a law abiding citizen…they are the friendliest folks to visit with on the street. And, they are volunteer regular citizens…the least likely to violate anyone’s civil liberties.

You know, things like innocent until proven guilty, due process, the right to not be searched without sufficient reason.

The things that make us different than say, Russia.

Any of that taking place??? No…I didn’t think so.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
I lock my car these days, damn Black Bears have done a real number on the interior of a few of my neighbors cars and I had two windows broken the those punks that I had carelessly left cracked...no more, I'm vigilant these days.

Those are my worries....Crime here is very low, I don't lose any sleep over it.

I'll believe the FBI....crime is on a downward trend, and has been since it peaked in the good old days.

Years ago a meathead here left a 50# bag of dog food in the back of his jeep Cherokee hatchback.
The bear opened the hatchback from left to right side to side instead of using the latch button on the bottom and the hinges up at the top of the door.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

i acknowledge my typo, and meant complaint.... did you get a hormone treatment this week?

Same here.

I see that you got your panties in a wad because I didn't quote your personal insults.

you do understand it's unusual for a male to wear panties, regardless of how common it is in your singlewide

Yea, I think it's funny too.

Obviously, I was speculating.

If you think Ukraine is safer, you can always go.

quote:

So, Fox is justifying the military in populace security,

If the Police are inept at doing their job then bring in the cavalry though remember that their "ineptness" is largely the result of the Liberal Wokes crying foul when they get heavy-handed with individuals who have little or no respect for the Law.

We have seen this time and time again.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Another question. What the hell does civil liberties have to do with the NG walking the streets?

My experience is that if you are a law abiding citizen…they are the friendliest folks to visit with on the street. And, they are volunteer regular citizens…the least likely to violate anyone’s civil liberties.

You know, things like innocent until proven guilty, due process, the right to not be searched without sufficient reason.

The things that make us different than say, Russia.

Any of that taking place??? No…I didn’t think so.

No, because the Trump admin has had its policies challenged in court and lost. There were multiple threads here on ARPF this spring discussing due process and Trump's immigration enforcement. It turns out that even the orange turd is bound by law.

Due process is being applied, but only because Trump lost in court.

Somebody is Look in the mirror Lane.