Oompa Loompa
Well-Known Member
- Jun 4, 2020
- 9,445
- 4,983
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Nope.America is.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Nope.America is.
Yes! Please send more troops to other Democrat run cities to fix their crime problems!yes, cities like Portland and Minneapolis but that is not the case with these cities who have a shortage of police officers and a problem with recruitment. These are predominately black urban cities, and quite different from the more white liberal ones who think they do not need much police. I am not sure if more funding will help. But you can't deploy the national guard forever. So Trump should step up and offer long term funding for officers. This has been done in the past. with Clinton. I wonder who killed the grants?
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Just a dozen days after money became
available, President Clinton today announced the first round of
police hiring grants under the new crime bill, an important step
toward his goal of putting 100,000 police on America's streets.
More than $200 million in grants were awarded to communities in
all 50 states and Puerto Rico, including 332 police departments,
46 sheriffs' departments, six Indian tribal groups, and several
other law enforcement agencies. The crime bill authorizes money
to increase the number of police in America by twenty percent.
At a White House ceremony today, President Clinton and
Attorney General Janet Reno welcomed mayors and chiefs of police
from many of the jurisdictions receiving grants."
From google AI in asking does _____ want more police?
"Yes, the Memphis Police Department (MPD) is actively seeking more police officers to fill hundreds of open positions and reach their staffing goal of 2,200 to 2,300 officers, as they currently have 1,942 officers on staff as of late 2024."
Yes, the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department (SLMPD) has sought more officers due to a documented shortage, with the police union and an internal memo indicating a deficit, even as the mayor has claimed a sufficient number per capita. While the police department is actively working on recruitment, challenges like officer departures and better pay in surrounding departments have contributed to the shortage.
![]()
Baltimore Police Launch New Recruitment Campaign to Attract Sworn & Professional Members
The Baltimore Police Department (BPD) has launched a new recruitment campaign aimed at attracting both sworn officers and professional members to join its ranks.www.baltimorepolice.org
Yes, the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) is actively seeking more police officers to address a significant shortage, having lost many officers recently and facing ongoing recruitment challenges despite efforts like pay raises and remote testing. The department needs to increase staffing to adequately respond to public safety concerns and reduce the workload on existing officers, who are struggling with low morale and feelings of being unsupported.
Why NOPD is seeking more police:
- Historical Low Staffing:
The NOPD is at an all-time low in officer numbers, with many officers leaving the department.
- High Crime Rates:
The city has experienced a surge in violent crimes like shootings and carjackings, leading residents to feel unsafe and demand more action from the city.
- Officer Morale:
Current officers are experiencing low morale due to negative public perception, a lack of support from the city, and concerns about policies that they feel hinder their work.
Troops are OK, but more police funding would be better. Let's send them to the red states too. Memphis, New Orleans, St Louis, Kansas City all have more violent crime than Chicago. But I think Trump is doing this out of spite rather than address the problem of crime in USA cities in a fair way. I think too that cities should be allowed to decline Federal troops or aid. Some Red states declined expanded medicare. I imagine more died from that than will ever die from declining troops. To me conservatism is more constant. You allow states rights when possible.Yes! Please send more troops to other Democrat run cities to fix their crime problems!
I will help Trump with his math. New Orleans population is 363,000 / 4 deaths = 1 death per 91,000 people![]()
54 shot over weekend in Chicago as governor rejects Trump's threat to send in National Guard
At least seven people have been killed and 47 others injured in shootings across Chicago over Labor Day weekend, according to police.abcnews.go.com
Meanwhile, 35 people are shot dead in Chicago, and Denocrats dont care because they hate Trump and dont want him to send the national guard to fix the problem. Democrat mayor proves yet again than they hate Trump more than they care about the citizens they represent.
Again, I agree. Send them to BLUE cities.Troops are OK, but more police funding would be better. Let's send them to the red states too. Memphis, New Orleans, St Louis, Kansas City all have more violent crime than Chicago. But I think Trump is doing this out of spite rather than address the problem of crime in USA cities in a fair way. I think too that cities should be allowed to decline Federal troops or aid. Some Red states declined expanded medicare. I imagine more died from that than will ever die from declining troops. To me conservatism is more constant. You allow states rights when possible.
With what are you agreeing? The gist of his post is that crime is more prevalent in major red cities, so the next sentence is puzzling:Again, I agree.
Don't you care about the crime victims in RED cities?Send them to BLUE cities.
By not wanting to refine gun laws, you’re not super concerned about lowering gun violence, which means it must not be that big a problem, which means the federal government doesn’t need to invade Chicago.What laws do you propose and why the states accused of being the source/cause of these gun crimes not experiencing similar gun crime issues? The short answer is that the problem is not the gun laws, but a culture that promotes gun violence.
They don’t care about gun control, no, but it certainly makes the criminals easier to identify and arrest.Criminals don't care about gun control. That's why, they are CRIMINALS.
If anything, we have a mental health problem.
Our nation needs to address that.
Saying that as a person who doesn't own guns, nor will ever use one.
(for personal reasons)
My opinion only.
What a compelling, facts-based, well-cited response.Nope.
Girl, you just told on yourself.Again, I agree. Send them to BLUE cities.
What? They can obtain guns illegally, that’s the issue.They don’t care about gun control, no, but it certainly makes the criminals easier to identify and arrest.
WRONG! Try again. Are they red cities, or are they blue cities located in red states?The gist of his post is that crime is more prevalent in major red cities,
Ok. If I have cocaine, it’s pretty obvious I’m breaking the law. If somebody has a gun that is illegal to own or with modifications that are illegal to have or are absent the control they need to have or in an area they’re clearly not allowed, when they are spotted, it’s obvious they’re breaking the law.What? They can obtain guns illegally, that’s the issue.
Crime ridden Oklahoma City looks pretty darn rosy to me.WRONG! Try again. Are they red cities, or are they blue cities located in red states?
I have a splendid idea. Why not have areas that legally prohibit gun possession all together? We can call these areas "gun free zones." We can implement these "gun free zones" in any and all areas that we deem that guns have no purpose. Like public and private schools. Surly the very same criminals who disregard every gun law will obey this one and never take advantage of the fact that all the law abiding citizens will be completely unarmed in these "gun free zones."Ok. If I have cocaine, it’s pretty obvious I’m breaking the law. If somebody has a gun that is illegal to own or with modifications that are illegal to have or are absent the control they need to have or in an area they’re clearly not allowed, when they are spotted, it’s obvious they’re breaking the law.
It is rosy because it is not "crime ridden."Crime ridden Oklahoma City looks pretty darn rosy to me.
Ok!Ok. If I have cocaine, it’s pretty obvious I’m breaking the law. If somebody has a gun that is illegal to own or with modifications that are illegal to have or are absent the control they need to have or in an area they’re clearly not allowed, when they are spotted, it’s obvious they’re breaking the law.
What stats?Stats say otherwise.
And the more gun types and features on them that are made illegal, the more "criminals" we make out of what were once law-abiding citizens. If you want to eliminate illegal guns and criminals who have them, we should legalize all types of guns. That would also take a heavy burden off the back of law enforcement, and would result in having to maintain so many people in jails/prisons.Ok. If I have cocaine, it’s pretty obvious I’m breaking the law. If somebody has a gun that is illegal to own or with modifications that are illegal to have or are absent the control they need to have or in an area they’re clearly not allowed, when they are spotted, it’s obvious they’re breaking the law.