Sure, I agree with that over the long-term. In the short term though, you still have these social ills that are causing problems and chaos, and policing is the way to deal with them. It's distasteful, and I see that side, but you can't stop these things by standing there and saying "hey, I'm on your side and advocating for housing, rehabilitation and treatment programs, so can you just stop this rampage?!"
As btimbit said, just hyperbolic joke responses. That’s what everyone’s proposing, standing there.
I mean, the basis for the argument is that police aren’t the best way to handle some aspects that are currently their responsibility.
Well you see defund the police is actually a long game conspiracy. Once police presence is removed there will be a chaos in the form of violence and petty crime. People will demand police be reinstated, but this time it will be put in place by the WEF. It will be a global police and they will scrutinize your everymove. It will actually be a part of the global social credit system. The system is going to limit your access to social activities based on your social credit points. If you post the wrong meme they will stop you from going to bars and not allow you to meet women as a means to stop you from reproducing!
The Provincial police of alberta are our last defence against this global EVIL!
Maybe a bit of social credit would go a long way here at home. Leave your dog poop on the sidewalk? -15 credit. Shovel your neighbors' walk? +25 credit.
Calgary would be a better place.
The Following User Says Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
Sure, I agree with that over the long-term. In the short term though, you still have these social ills that are causing problems and chaos, and policing is the way to deal with them. It's distasteful, and I see that side, but you can't stop these things by standing there and saying "hey, I'm on your side and advocating for housing, rehabilitation and treatment programs, so can you just stop this rampage?!"
I'm about to go to bed so don't have time to really dive into the subject too much, but tldr is it still wouldn't be some kind of kid glove approach like that. These teams would still have peace officers and/or police backup with them if things go sideways. But say there was someone having a mental health crisis. Right now, for the most part, the police response would be isolate/contain the threat, then stop the threat. This takes a lot of manpower, and results in way too many injuries to police, public, and suspects alike. Non-lethal weapons are just too unreliable, then the suspect attacks the police and ends up shot.
Whereas a community assistance team actually trained in how to approach things like that would be able to read and react to the situation better. That type of de-escalation, talking to and negotiating with someone that may or may not even be on the same metaphorical planet as you, is a very different and specialized skillset. One could (and should) argue that that's just something that all police officers should be good at anyway, but it's simply too tall of an order. It's already hard enough recruiting and maintaining a smart police service that's large enough to be effective without just being full of morons, juice monkeys and adrenaline junkies (Yeah yeah, save the acab jokes people, I know someone is already thinking "lol dats wut they r anyway, amirite?'). If being a trained psychologist was an actual pre-requisite on top of everything else they have to be good at, we'd have like, 50 cops in town (number out of my ass, don't take that one to heart). Yet right now all the cops we do have are expected to do it anyway, despite no real training or expertise in it. Just look at the Latjor Tuel shooting in Calgary, I believe the police were absolutely justified in the shooting, and overall did a good job in that situation. But it's still an absolute shame it even got to that point and there wasn't anyone trained in how to better deal with that situation
It's not like we're talking about a drastic reduction in cops here either, simply using some of their budget to fund such a thing, with the argument being that it balances out because it would also reduce their workload.
It's a large and complicated subject, and can kinda be boiled down to how, especially in North America, we take a very jack-of-all-trades view to emergency services (Like how firefighters spend maybe 5% of the day fighting fires, yet are always busy). In general I like it, but there are just certain things that should be specialized, mental health I'd say is definitely one of them
This is only loosely relevant to this thread anyway, so I apologize. Not like such a thing is super relevant to someone stealing, definitely didn't mean to de-rail things too hard, was just responding to another defund the police comment from someone that doesn't understand what it actually means
The Following User Says Thank You to btimbit For This Useful Post:
Maybe a bit of social credit would go a long way here at home. Leave your dog poop on the sidewalk? -15 credit. Shovel your neighbors' walk? +25 credit.
Calgary would be a better place.
Isn't that what a lot of religious people believe? They get Heaven points for doing good deeds and Hell points for doing bad and then when they die God (aka The Great Accountant in the Sky*) tallies the total and assigns them their place in eternity.
*not to be confused with the Great Accountant in the Rye (Locke)
__________________
The of and to a in is I that it for you was with on as have but be they
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Red Slinger For This Useful Post:
Isn't that what a lot of religious people believe? They get Heaven points for doing good deeds and Hell points for doing bad and then when they die God (aka The Great Accountant in the Sky*) tallies the total and assigns them their place in eternity.
*not to be confused with the Great Accountant in the Rye (Locke)
Yes. But from what I understood, doesn't a good social credit number in China have perks like more favorable loan terms etc?
So there's some real life applicability to the social credit system. Did I just become a communist?
It might be silly but to some degree it’s likely true. Religion likely evolved to maintain social order through self enforcement.
You only need to look at effectivenes of pandemic measures to see the difference between individualist and collectivist societies. Religion was one of the few remaining collectivist pulls in North America so its decrease without replacement is likely to lead to more individualist actions.
This doesn’t mean religion is good or beneficial just that the means of enforcing the social contract will change as a society becomes less religious
Hmm... but then two random examples of collectivist countries in China and Japan are both majority non-religious (in the 60's% for Japan and the 70's% for China). I think I get what you're trying to say here, but just pointing out that enforcement of social contracts don't require societies to be religious at all.
It might be silly but to some degree it’s likely true. Religion likely evolved to maintain social order through self enforcement.
You only need to look at effectivenes of pandemic measures to see the difference between individualist and collectivist societies. Religion was one of the few remaining collectivist pulls in North America so its decrease without replacement is likely to lead to more individualist actions.
This doesn’t mean religion is good or beneficial just that the means of enforcing the social contract will change as a society becomes less religious
The people who were least helpful to the collective by skirting rules were the religious
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
Hmm... but then two random examples of collectivist countries in China and Japan are both majority non-religious (in the 60's% for Japan and the 70's% for China). I think I get what you're trying to say here, but just pointing out that enforcement of social contracts don't require societies to be religious at all.
I agree with you.
In North American society which was build on individualism the church was one of the few things that created a responsibility to the social contract. The west never had a honou and shame to your family type thing outside of the church. Or the communist ideals of China. I’m not saying religion is necessary, I’m saying the loss of religion in a relatively independent leaning society will reduce already low levels of collectivism and community if it isn’t replaced by something.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
There are no "rules of the God" because they're merely the interpretation of whomever people seem an expert. It's hard to say that's good for a collective when there's no rules concerning what is the collective and who's deciding that.
In North American society which was build on individualism the church was one of the few things that created a responsibility to the social contract. The west never had a honou and shame to your family type thing outside of the church. Or the communist ideals of China. I’m not saying religion is necessary, I’m saying the loss of religion in a relatively independent leaning society will reduce already low levels of collectivism and community if it isn’t replaced by something.
Yeah, I figured that was your point!
Also a small revision by me to your post - it's from the Confucian beliefs in China that drives what you see with respect to social order there.
The Following User Says Thank You to activeStick For This Useful Post:
I highly doubt shoplifters engage in any kind of moral calculus when they’re planning their thefts. It’s a straightforward matter of risk-reward.
That's completely false. There are all sorts of crimes routinely committed under a mechanism of self justification by the criminal. There's all sorts of scenarios where criminals deem their crimes "victimless" or deem the victims deserving, and thus justify their actions. Similar to how people are more likely to speed on a highway than in a playground zone or residential street, despite all being illegal.
update.
It's not as easy to steal at a self checkout as one would think.
They have sensors that note if an item goes into your bag that wasn't scanned, then the
check out freezes and flashes for an employee.
A video is then shown on the screen so they can determine the issue at hand.
That's completely false. There are all sorts of crimes routinely committed under a mechanism of self justification by the criminal. There's all sorts of scenarios where criminals deem their crimes "victimless" or deem the victims deserving, and thus justify their actions. Similar to how people are more likely to speed on a highway than in a playground zone or residential street, despite all being illegal.
And yet none of that stops poor people from stealing from other poor people. There’s a reason poor neighbourhoods have among the highest rates of property crimes - the predatory dirtbags in those communities have no problem stealing their neighbour’s bike or breaking into their cars, businesses, and homes.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The people who were least helpful to the collective by skirting rules were the religious
What proportion of the 68 per cent of Canadians who profess religious faith would you estimate defied Covid restrictions? And how do you think that proportion stacks up against the 32 per cent who are irreligious?
Defying Covid restrictions was more common among young Canadians than old, and religious faith correlates to being older. So I doubt your assumption is true.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Last edited by CliffFletcher; 09-05-2023 at 09:24 AM.
What proportion of the 68 per cent of Canadians who profess religious faith would you estimate defied Covid restrictions? And how do you think that proportion stacks up against the 32 per cent who are irreligious?
Defying Covid restrictions was more common among young Canadians than old, and religious faith correlates to being older. So I doubt your assumption is true.
The only ones I knew who openly defied it were young + religous (late 20s)
