Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

circadian · 02-01-2018 10:41AM

I agree with Manic Moran in regards to the equipment being dished out to police forces. It's not the real problem.

The main issues with handing out ex army equipment to police is;
A) they aren't trained properly in many aspects of the job, this is seen time and time again with unarmed civilians being shot by police. It doesn't matter what the weapon is, the cause is the same.

B)Increasingly lax laws on who can buy guns, what guns are available and what aftermarket add ons are available (bump stocks, ACOG sights etc)

The idea that someone can fairly easily buy, depending on state, an AR-15, extended mag, scopes and a bump stock for relatively little money is insane. This then leads to police forces getting increasingly wary and nervous around someone they're arresting.

Billy86 · 02-01-2018 11:48AM

Manic Moran wrote: »

The last time I saw a guy in uniform standing around with an assault rifle in San Francisco was when, exactly?

Never been to SF, but when I read Union Square in your initial post I thought you meant in NY and nearly balked, as whenever I've been through that place it has plenty of heavily armed police around it - Manhattan is probably the heaviest policed area I've ever seen, just about all of whom had a firearm of some form and plenty of whom were in full on riot type gear on a quiet, sunny afternoon.

You guys want to make it an issue of 'militarisation' and 'equipment'. Well, we can't get any more 'militarised' than the actual military doing civilian duties with actual military equipment. CIT used to be done with AMLs, for example. We are agreed that the equipment is useful to have at times. Fantastic. How about looking at the problem as being one of the police/citizenry relationship then, which is more of a human issue than an equipment one? If we want to make a difference, how about starting with the 'us and them' mentality many cops have, instead of arguing over who should pay for the grenade launcher or rifle, and how much they should pay?

You're really, honestly trying to claim that because you saw a security pick up in Dublin that means our police are as heavily militarised as in the US?

The thing is, you can't claim that this is nothing to do with equipment when you've literally got heads of police departments saying the likes of this are: "It's a lot more intimidating than a Dodge. The United States of America has become a war zone. There's violence in the workplace, there's violence in schools and there's violence in the streets. You are seeing police departments going to a semi-military format because of the threats we have to counteract. If driving a military vehicle is going to protect officers, then that's what I'm going to do."
3american-police-militarization-war.si.jpg

3american-police-militarization-war.si.jpg

And that's hardly isolated either, with even quiet, low crime, rural counties having the likes of these:

Once you've got as ingrained a problem and bad a reputation as the US police do over violent and prejudiced tendencies, that kind of stuff is not going to go over well with the population regardless. Especially when you're as eager to ramp it up as the US police have been. The issue is people feeling intimidated or threatened by the police, and the reason police officers are giving for having these vehicles is a) protection, and b) intimidation and to pose a threat.

02-01-2018 12:38PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Never been to SF, but when I read Union Square in your initial post I thought you meant in NY and nearly balked, as whenever I've been through that place it has plenty of heavily armed police around it - Manhattan is probably the heaviest policed area I've ever seen, just about all of whom had a firearm of some form and plenty of whom were in full on riot type gear on a quiet, sunny afternoon.

You're really, honestly trying to claim that because you saw a security pick up in Dublin that means our police are as heavily militarised as in the US?

The thing is, you can't claim that this is nothing to do with equipment when you've literally got heads of police departments saying the likes of this are: "It's a lot more intimidating than a Dodge. The United States of America has become a war zone. There's violence in the workplace, there's violence in schools and there's violence in the streets. You are seeing police departments going to a semi-military format because of the threats we have to counteract. If driving a military vehicle is going to protect officers, then that's what I'm going to do."

And that's hardly isolated either, with even quiet, low crime, rural counties having the likes of these:

Once you've got as ingrained a problem and bad a reputation as the US police do over violent and prejudiced tendencies, that kind of stuff is not going to go over well with the population regardless. Especially when you're as eager to ramp it up as the US police have been. The issue is people feeling intimidated or threatened by the police, and the reason police officers are giving for having these vehicles is a) protection, and b) intimidation and to pose a threat.

Looking at the last picture there, just wondering if the sheriff in Walton county expects to deal with many ied's that he needs that yoke to drive around in. Absolutely mad.

keane2097 · 02-01-2018 01:58PM

It probably shouldn't need to be pointed out but the stock market is pretty much always at record highs because it's an upward trending graph.

Look at the DOW chart over the last 40 years and you will see that you pretty much have to credit every president in that time with 'achieving' all time highs probably hundreds of times.

Basically, by remaining alive Trump - and every other president - is pretty much guaranteed to be regularly presiding over all time highs.

02-01-2018 02:04PM

No stock market rises constantly and we've been on quite a good run for the last few years. The real fun will begin if there is a recession.

How will he react to a big dip in markets and people start to lose their jobs?

circadian · 02-01-2018 02:10PM

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

No stock market rises constantly and we've been on quite a good run for the last few years. The real fun will begin if there is a recession.

How will he react to a big dip in markets and people start to lose their jobs?

Obama. It'll be something Obama done years prior.

Billy86 · 02-01-2018 02:53PM

keane2097 wrote: »

It probably shouldn't need to be pointed out but the stock market is pretty much always at record highs because it's an upward trending graph.

Look at the DOW chart over the last 40 years and you will see that you pretty much have to credit every president in that time with 'achieving' all time highs probably hundreds of times.

Basically, by remaining alive Trump - and every other president - is pretty much guaranteed to be regularly presiding over all time highs.

Just took a glance and it would appear that the only presidents in the last 60 years without record highs were Nixon and Carter in the 70s, and Bush Snr likely due to the 1987 crash/Raegan bubble bursting.

keane2097 · 02-01-2018 02:59PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Just took a glance and it would appear that the only presidents in the last 60 years without record highs were Nixon and Carter in the 70s, and Bush Snr likely due to the 1987 crash/Raegan bubble bursting.

I'm sure they were lionised for 'five year highs' etc regardless. Or they just picked a different section of the 'stock market' to claim all time highs for.

Billy86 · 02-01-2018 03:03PM

keane2097 wrote: »

I'm sure they were lionised for 'five year highs' etc regardless. Or they just picked a different section of the 'stock market' to claim all time highs for.

Potentially, though it's interesting that the only ones of them who had to turn a trend around were Raegan and Obama (also sorta-kind Eisenhower, but the long and sustained recovery really began under FDR and began to snowball under Truman, such was the depths of the 1929 crash). Though I went off the DOW index for all rather than subsections or manipulating etc - http://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historical-chart

Tell me how · 02-01-2018 03:24PM

News today Trump made 1950 false statements in 347 days.

On phone so not linking but all over Twitter.

Washington Post article so obviously it's Fake News.

Billy86 · 02-01-2018 03:38PM

I had read just over 5-a-day about a month or two back (not sure if recommended by the doctor), so hardly surprising the investigation has caused the average to go up a bit.

demfad · 02-01-2018 03:45PM

Some of the Trump allies attacks on the FBI/Mueller investigation have been of the type:

-Steel dossier started the investigation
-Steele dossier is unverified ('dodgy')
-Therefore raison d'etre for an investigation is flawed.

This article in the Guardian undermines this logic: The investigation started after intercepts were noticed by international intelligence organisations who passed them onto the Americans:

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.

Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.

The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.

Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
Another source suggested the Dutch and the French spy agency, the General Directorate for External Security or DGSE, were contributors.

It is understood that GCHQ was at no point carrying out a targeted operation against Trump or his team or proactively seeking information. The alleged conversations were picked up by chance as part of routine surveillance of Russian intelligence assets. Over several months, different agencies targeting the same people began to see a pattern of connections that were flagged to intelligence officials in the US.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/13/british-spies-first-to-spot-trump-team-links-russia?CMP=share_btn_tw

Billy86 · 02-01-2018 04:03PM

Interesting that it involved Estonia, they're supposed to quietly be one of if not the most 'online' countries in the world even down to voting online, and while they've surely always been guarded with them, ever since Russia crashed their entire internet structure a few years ago they've been extremely suspicious of them on this front. No idea what their intelligence services are like, but I would imagine they'd see this as a serious opportunity given the typically huge levels of size/power between them and their territory-expanding neighbours.

Manic Moran · 02-01-2018 04:30PM

What are those photos supposed to prove? That armed cops hanging onto the sides of a large armoured vehicle is particularly militaristic, despite any benefits the technique may have for carrying out law enforcement?

Here, have some French police hanging onto the side and top of one of their large armored vehicles.

Or better yet, a German (Saxony) police vehicle with a remote weapons station.
I-xktkqTURBXy80MzA3YzM3MThiOGFhNGI5ZGIxZmVlODE5NTZiYmY2NS5qcGVnkZMCzQMmAA

I-xktkqTURBXy80MzA3YzM3MThiOGFhNGI5ZGIxZmVlODE5NTZiYmY2NS5qcGVnkZMCzQMmAA

If you don't know what you're looking at, that on the right of the RWS is a feed chute for a cal. 50 heavy machinegun. This image shows the gun mounted on a demonstrator vehicle. https://defence.ru/assets/content/paragraph2/209795/45353/4935114-original-fotor.jpg?nocache=257931 . I am willing to be proven wrong, but I don't believe any US police use such heavy weapons on their vehicles.

So, choice A: European police forces have lost the plot as badly as the US for having such equipment.
Or, choice B: The equipment has a place in the police inventory.

There are no other options. You can rail all you want on how the police are over-using the equipment, or how they have the wrong attitude to policing. They are arguments worth entertaining and I would not object to such arguments. But arguing that the equipment should not be in police possession in the first place is countered by the fact that multiple forces around the world have decided that it should be.

Calina · 02-01-2018 04:42PM

Well I can't see the German one as I get an invalid tag error but I'm fairly sure the French one is a BRI vehicle which is basically elite of the elite special forces. I don't think that's the case for a lot of the US police forces, right?

As far as the French one is concerned, you are definitely not comparing like with like when you suggest it matches American use of heavily armed vehicles.

Leroy42 · 02-01-2018 04:42PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

There are no other options. You can rail all you want on how the police are over-using the equipment, or how they have the wrong attitude to policing. They are arguments worth entertaining and I would not object to such arguments. But arguing that the equipment should not be in police possession in the first place is countered by the fact that multiple forces around the world have decided that it should be.

Not really. All it demonstrates is that police forces across the globe feel that they can get away with this and that there are plenty of the public that believe that it makes them safer.

There certainly is a place for this type of stuff, but to parade it as some sort of positive from POTUS (or any other politician) misses the point.

A politician should be dealing with the issues that lead to the ever increasing use of violence which necessitates the police to utilise this type of equipment. The easy, and not particularly effective, option is to keep the arms race going.

So cops get more weapons, so crims get more weapons, so cops do etc etc.

It is particularly strange that in a country that believes that everyone should own and carry a gun on the basis that they need it to over-throw the government lest they get out of control, the very same people are happy to let the government have unfettered access to military grade weapons.

Billy86 · 02-01-2018 06:01PM

Calina wrote: »

Well I can't see the German one as I get an invalid tag error but I'm fairly sure the French one is a BRI vehicle which is basically elite of the elite special forces. I don't think that's the case for a lot of the US police forces, right?

As far as the French one is concerned, you are definitely not comparing like with like when you suggest it matches American use of heavily armed vehicles.

No, it's not - as I'm quite sure MM is aware, the photos I posted are local police departments, and as I pointed out to him they are using them for the express purpose of intimidating the public (their own words, not mine, quoted a few posts up). MM seems to think it's an issue with mentality, when in truth it's that same mentality that is responsible for all these John Rambo PD departments in the US - they're completely intertwined.

I also used quiet areas, all you need to do is look up heightened spots like Ferguson to see people enjoying this on their walk down the street:

---

Maybe Manic Moran would be more interested in comparing the per capita numbers of people killed by police each year in Europe, vs the US? Like here: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

Leroy42 · 02-01-2018 06:06PM

I see Trump tweeted today that the DoJ is part of the 'Deep State'.

So America has a conspiracy theorist as POTUS! The person, he recently said that he can get the DoJ to do whatever he likes, has just claimed that it is part of a government wide conspiracy. And by extension, everyone working in it is part of the conspiracy.

ThisRegard · 02-01-2018 06:17PM

He's also claimed responsibility for the lack of deaths on commercial airlines

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948195478428102657

demfad · 02-01-2018 06:18PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

He's also claimed responsibility for the lack of deaths on commercial airlines

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948195478428102657

No deaths in 2016 or 2015 either apparently.

ECO_Mental · 02-01-2018 06:45PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

He's also claimed responsibility for the lack of deaths on commercial airlines

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948195478428102657

Has the man no F**king shame:mad::mad::mad: is there nothing he won't claim credit for. He has to be mentally ill.....

circadian · 02-01-2018 07:00PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

He's also claimed responsibility for the lack of deaths on commercial airlines

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948195478428102657

I literally LOL'd and woke the newborn up. It's so absurd.

Apparently $43 million dollars was spent by the taxpayer for Trump to golf last year. I wonder how much went to his own resorts.

Billy86 · 02-01-2018 07:13PM

That's cool, it's just him unwittingly taking the blame for terrorist attacks like Charlottesville in the US this year.

StringerBell · 02-01-2018 11:44PM

Tune in tomorrow, if the sun rises I expect a standing ovation for the man we all know is responsible for it. He has been very tough on the solar system since taking office.

humberklog · 03-01-2018 02:10AM

He appears to be off the meds at the moment on Twitter, talks of a big button- a big button that works.

And his own Fr. Ted style awards for MOST DISHONEST AND CORRUPT MEDIA AWARDS OF THE YEAR.

He can't be in his full mental faculties.

Doltanian · 03-01-2018 02:17AM

I don't see Trump talking any responsibility for aviation safety, He used a full stop between sentences. I think he has had a wonderful year in so many different aspects and from speaking to American's and reading simple economic facts it is obvious the man is doing a great job, if he isn't growing the economy, then he is fighting Islamic terror or tearing up bureaucracy and cutting down waste and bloat in the govt spending.

Hazys · 03-01-2018 02:18AM

His latest two tweets are completely insane.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948359545767841792

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948355557022420992

Joking about dropping nuclear bombs that could wipe out millions if not billions of people, its sickening.

mcmoustache · 03-01-2018 02:41AM

Hazys wrote: »

His latest two tweets are completely insane.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948359545767841792

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948355557022420992

Joking about dropping nuclear bombs that could wipe out millions if not billions of people, its sickening.

The president, ladies and gentlemen.

StringerBell · 03-01-2018 03:17AM

It is actually just shambolic. The culmination of (at least) 70 years of corruption and backroom dealing politics. The "leader of the free world".

Not much to be proud of really is it if this is the beacon that guides the rest of the world in the ways of democracy, freedom, morality etc.

wes · 03-01-2018 03:40AM

Trump has threatened 2 different nuclear powers in as many days. Does he want to start a nuclear war? Because that is how you start a god damn nuclear war.

His most recent rants are more unhinged than ever. How any rational person can support this man is beyond me.

If this was done in a movie or TV show, people would be calling it over the top anti-Americanism. I can't believe things have got so bad. The Right in the US (and most rest of the world if I am being honest) is a complete and utter joke.

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Comments