OAKTOWN so wild even cops are running scared

[blerk]

I would think that cutting the funding of mischievous individuals would have some effect.

I don't see why it would have a positive effect. If anything, I would assume it more likely that crime would increase. But I don't think the crime rates now are as such related/due to the presence of welfare money, rather I think that social factors are the main driver and that for many people, crime is somewhat "habitual" as "everyone does it".

[DocM]

I think a big part of the problem is that the way welfare etc. are implemented engenders feelings of entitlement; "the world owes me whatever I want."

This gets drilled into immature brains, whatever the age, and some act out to get their unprovided wants. Doesn't matter what, doesn't matter who they hurt.

Their kids often end up even worse. Michigan has premeditated murderers who did their crimes as young as 10-11. Gangs recruit these kids, and often their initiation is doing a drive-by shooting, stabbimg, rape or beating.

That is the dependency cycle that needs breaking.

[Wyn6]

Dont throw a blanket statement like that - tell us why cutting welfare is not the answer, tell us why this will exist, in your opinion, if there was no welfare.

 

You're right. It was late and, being lazy, I decided not to elaborate. But, I'll do so now.

 

Having grown up in an area similar to what you saw in that video and having, at one time, been one of "those people", I have a unique perspective on this. First some background.

 

I grew up in Dallas in an area called Pleasant Grove. It's a notoriously bad area, infested with drugs, murders, robberies, and urban blight, Pleasant Grove is the place you see when somebody on a TV show has to go to "The Hood". I hate that term, by the way. My mother was a single parent raising two kids. I was the troublesome one. Now, I actually went to a private school from K-5th grade and was considered one of the "smart kids". Straight A's, advanced classes, yada, yada, yada. I said that to say this... the term uneducated, as it pertains to primary and secondary learning, didn't apply to me.

 

My mother worked for the City of Dallas and was a middle-wage earner. So, she wasn't bringing home a lot of money, however we didn't quite fall under the poverty line either. She never took government assistance in her life and this is even when there were nights she could barely afford to feed us or went hungry herself to do so.

 

So, simultaneously I fit the inner-city youth clich?s and yet I didn't. I grew up alongside dope dealers, murderers, gangsters, stickup kids, corrupt cops, and all manner of unsavory folk. Yet, I also grew up alongside, straight A students, the kind-hearted, those that saved lives, good police officers, business owners, and all manner of savory folk. We all lived in the exact same environment under the similar circumstances, but somehow we all weren't degenerates. Me... I was half and half. I wasn't on welfare and was considered an intelligent kid, yet I did things similar to the idiots in the video. Why? Because, I was an idiot.

 

That's the crux of it. This has nothing to do with welfare or education. Just because you aren't making six figures doesn't mean you do donuts in the street while firing guns in the air. And, this has nothing to do with being a high school or college drop out. You don't throw bottles and harass police officers, because you don't have a framed diploma over your mantle or hanging on a wall in your corner office. This does, however, have everything to do with mob mentality and stupidity. These people know right from wrong, they just don't care. They won't to be "cool" or "down". They don't want to be alienated from the primitive mindset held by their peers. I believe the term is... peer pressure.

 

Peer pressure, be it positive or negative, exists independent of social setting, locale, education, or economic status. This is what you see. Now, I won't deny that going on to get an education and making more money may keep a few more of these idiots off the streets. However, they have to have wanted to be educated to begin with. Horse to water? Welfare certainly doesn't play a part, because government assistance doesn't require or compel an individual to endanger the lives of others and/or violently rebel against authority.

 

This is too long and I'm not even sure I've made a point. Hell, I'm not even going to proof this. I'm going to stop typing now.  

[Circaflex]

oakland is crazy man been there too many times was just up there a few months ago and its not called the wild wild west for no reason

[+Warwagon MVC]

[adrynalyne]

You're right, they wouldn't 'suddenly' have morals, this problem has been growing for decades and any fix for it would obviously not happen overnight. You are exhibiting a trait held by many in your argument that is arguably one of the most deplorable traits that ever came out of the 20th century - you must have instant gratification (one of society's other major issues). Just because the suggested solution doesn't fix a problem right away, you assume it must be the wrong answer, therefore, like many others (including congress) will sit on your laurels waiting for the day that a magic wand solution comes by. Meanwhile the problem is getting worse by the day making any proposed solution that much more difficult to implement. 

That doesn't even make sense.  You are trying to equate criminals with a welfare system.  Criminals don't abide by laws, so lets face it, they will get the money elsewhere.  That is a minor inconvenience at most.

 

Also, please refrain from using the word 'you", because I have given no such indication of having such an attitude of instant gratification.  YOU do not know me, or how I feel about things.  I just gave my opinion.

[T3X4S]

I am not sure what you are attempting to say other than certain people complain about increased police tactics. This may be true, but it has nothing to do with race.

People complain about the actions of the police and police commissioner irrespective of race. So you could have stated your view of those latest without including the race of the chief.

It seems you are attempting to use race to justify the actions of the police chief. As if to say the tactics can't be excessive because he is of the same race that may be the people who typically are at the front lines of police tactics.

I would hope not. If a white person attacked another white person it wouldn't be OK because the attacker is white. Likewise, it wouldn't be OK if a police chief authorized excessive force against white people because he is white as well. I am not saying the tactics used here are excessive, but my point is simple. Interjection of race here was useless at least and race baiting at worst.

Apex - stop being defensive and look @ this unbiasedly - It is 100% relevant to mention the Detroit Police Chief is black, yet catching hell from an overwhelming majority of black council members, organization leaders, etc.  The ones who scream that certain demographics are being incorrectly singled out by his raids and new tactics.

Whether you care to admit it or not, if the police chief were white, everyone would be up in arms about racial profiling in Detroit, and eventually the white police chief would be replaced.

The fact that the police chief is black removes the chance of someone thinking "oh they are upset because he is singling out black people" - Kinda hard to say that when the chief himself is black.  If you stop for a minute you do/will realize the overwhelming fact that black people are less likely to support white people, and if the chief is black - it removes that whole fear of alterior motives... Basically, it doesnt matter to some people whether or not he is doing good , some people only see the damage to the black man his raids, and tactics are doing.... You can deny it all you want, but it is a fact - then when you add, "and the chief is black" - someone will think "wow, hes black AND they're upset ?!?  thats ironic"   -0 sorry but its the truth.

Nobody is saying anything bad about you - just stating what everyone already knows to be the case, right or wrong it is an undeniable fact.

[T3X4S]

You're right. It was late and, being lazy, I decided not to elaborate. But, I'll do so now.

 

Having grown up in an area similar to what you saw in that video and having, at one time, been one of "those people", I have a unique perspective on this. First some background.

 

I grew up in Dallas in an ar....

This is too long and I'm not even sure I've made a point. Hell, I'm not even going to proof this. I'm going to stop typing now.  

I think you made a great point, and I appreciate the insight you showed.  I live in Flower Mound, I know Pleasant Grove area, you're right - its bad.  (Military Pkwy)

You might think because I live in Flower Mound & grew up in Highland Park that I have no idea about these things, but I was also an idiot when younger.  My problem was pretty wealthy parents who had lawyers take care of things when I got into trouble, so I'd get nothing more than a slap on the wrist.  My father thought he was just helping me so I could focus on my education.. he meant well. - I was just an idiot.  Eventually I just grew up.  (when your sister who is 4 years younger graduates college before you do - it makes you rethink things)

This isnt about me, I just wanted you to know that we shared something in common.

[seta-san]

Welfare has very little to do with these situations. If welfare went away, this issue would still exist. I can assure you of that.

no it wouldn't. the birthrate in these communities would PLUMMET... These single mothers running around with 6 or more kids would disappear or die of starvation.

 

 

also. it's stuff like this that is the reason for white flight. No rational person wants to live around this ######.

[riahc3]

Hello,

You know they aren't...

Then shoot till dead. You read right: Not shoot to kill. Keep shooting until they are dead.

Period. Just throwing bottles is enough to shoot someone because you are being assaulted.

Lets all pitch in for a armored vehicle for DocM; Himself and all his weaponary can problably reduce the criminal's population to about 0.03% :laugh:

[P!P]

I hope non-US visitors don't think this represents most of America. That would never happen here in the Upper Midwest. I can't imagine being in an area where laws, serious offenses at that, are being committed with the police viewing it or with the offenses being directed at the police themselves and then the police simply leaving the scene. A least, they should call in a copter to view the activity and call in a couple of SWAT teams.

 

In my opinion, this sort of activity needs to be stopped while it's still somewhat controllable. Either a local, state, or federal police force needs to be called in. If the things shown in the video happen again (I'm sure they happen daily) and I was in charge of a local police force, I would ask for state or federal assistance. Create an "Urban Violence Deterrence Team" of sorts. Have some members of that unit go undercover in these areas and record the criminal acts being committed. Then, once the situation gets really out of control or enough evidence has been collected to arrest many of those involved in these acts, bring a team that can use overwhelming force 

 

Bring in a couple of HUMVEEs with 50 cals mounted, and these punks with pistols will flee. If they don't, shot to kill. Every member of the team should wear GoPros so that none of these losers try to sue. That's why I think it's better to bring in the National Guard, it's harder to sue the National Guard than a local sheriffs office. Every National Guard in the country should have a couple units of urban teams to combat these situations. There are plenty of soldiers coming over from Iraq who are well trained in urban combat. Urban combat might sound harsh on American streets but in situations where the police are too scared to response, that's what it becomes. 

 

We need to crack down on this BS. I like the all-in approach of the Detroit police commissioner. Every major city in the US needs to have a plan and a team ready to proactively shut these guys down. I 

[DocM]

It's been bad for a long time.

Back in the mid 1960's we had 2 major riots in Detroit, one starting because of a police raid on a "blind pig" - an illegal/unlicensed bar serving liquor.

All hell broke loose with the area hoods starting fires, throwing Molotov Cocktails at police, looting, killing....the whole shebang. Soon the call went out for the governor to call out the National Guard (state militia) under his command.

Soon President Johnson was forced to nationalize the Guard into the US Army and declare martial law, which is when tanks and other armor was called out and rioters/looyers were allowed to be shot on sight.

Things calmed down when the troops started shooting and a tank blew a sniper off the top of a building with an artillery shell.

[riahc3]

Hello,

It's been bad for a long time.

Back in the mid 1960's we had 2 major riots in Detroit, one starting because of a police raid on a "blind pig" - an illegal/unlicensed bar serving liquor.

All hell broke loose with the area hoods starting fires, throwing Molotov Cocktails at police, looting, killing....the whole shebang. Soon the call went out for the governor to call out the National Guard (state militia) under his command.

Soon President Johnson was forced to nationalize the Guard into the US Army and declare martial law, which is when tanks and other armor was called out and rioters/looyers were allowed to be shot on sight.

Things calmed down when the troops started shooting and a tank blew a sniper off the top of a building with an artillery shell.

Yup, this should be done. Set up a center with National Guards. Give a few days for people (obviously qualified people) to enter for security. After that: Complete and martial law: If you are caught on the street and you are breaking any law (even taking a ###### on the street) blown away on site. The military spends billions on weaponry. A strike like this would cost 2-3 million, at most.

Sometimes these sort of these have to be done :( Its a "shame" but...

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

Hello,

Yup, this should be done. Set up a center with National Guards. Give a few days for people (obviously qualified people) to enter for security. After that: Complete and martial law: If you are caught on the street and you are breaking any law (even taking a ###### on the street) blown away on site. The military spends billions on weaponry. A strike like this would cost 2-3 million, at most.

Sometimes these sort of these have to be done :( Its a "shame" but...

 

Martial law..lol. It won't happen, your gov. would be overthrow before the detroid thing would blow over. Take Ukraine for example. Regular people, regular "coctails" and some guns, while in the US almost all of them have guns. Oh but yeah, send your mercenaries to do the work and see what happens.

 

You people think martial law is some miracle cure for everything, get a grip on reality, people will defend themselves from it with whatever it takes.

[riahc3]

Hello,

You people think martial law is some miracle cure for everything, get a grip on reality, people will defend themselves from it with whatever it takes.

Please explain how people exactly will defend themselves with whatever it takes from armored tanks, drones, XM25s, M4s, etc. Before they even get close, they will be blasted to pieces.

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

Hello,

Please explain how people exactly will defend themselves with whatever it takes from armored tanks, drones, XM25s, M4s, etc. Before they even get close, they will be blasted to pieces.

 

Are you for real? So...just because it's the US it will all go differently than in the Ukraine right..."we will blow them to pieces" - seriously, get a f**** grip. You really think blowing people to pieces has no consequenses later? How old are you? 10? Play less video games.

[riahc3]

Hello,

Are you for real? So...just because it's the US it will all go differently than in the Ukraine right..."we will blow them to pieces" - seriously, get a f**** grip. You really think blowing people to pieces has no consequenses later? How old are you? 10? Play less video games.

What? I wouldn't care if this happened in the US, France, Russia, South Africa, etc. Use whatever military power you have to stop this. Warn of course, and if people do not wish to comply, kill them. Its simple.

If a police officer tells me to stop, I will stop doing whatever I am doing. I can ask questions and I will receive replies as long as I stop what I am doing and ask in a civilized matter.

Police are just you and me doing their job :) Nothing else. Would you want to be setting at your desk and get bottles thrown at your computer?

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

I'm not trying to say that it's normal what they are doing there, of course not and they should be punished but not by "blowing thme to pieces" - bigger police forces, swat and throw them into lock up for a long time, where the rest of them are. I don't know the whole Oakland thing but I doubt it something some swat teams couldn't handle, at least from the video it's just some punks shooting in the air with hand guns. I'm sure there are some gangs there but I doubt even they are that stupid to pull that kind of attention to themselves so it's just down to some arrogant imbeciles.

[T3X4S]

riahc3 - Im going to assume you are not that old.  Your idealistic dream of how things should take place doesnt work, and only someone who is unwilling or unable to see that would disagree.

As for the US - why do you think its possible that the most powerful military on the planet regularly gets its ass handed to them ?  How is it that when we go into areas that are vastly inferior in every way that we somehow fail to achieve our goals ?  Its simple - ethics.  The US military plays by a rule book nobody else does.  We cant go in guns blazing because people in the US would raise hell.  That means constituents who will not vote for people in charge on the next election.  People who demand leaders to be brought up on charges, things like that.

Dont think for 1 moment these things wouldnt be amplified 1000x when an incursion takes place on American soil.  Regardless of what is right, and the greater good.  Its all about who's voice is loudest & the people against martial law will be much louder than those who agree with it.  The goal wont matter.  It will not matter to certain people if the military's intentions are wholly justified, and it is truly for the greater good - people will complain about the methods.  Its the methods that prevent the military from doing what they are capable of.

 

I know you are not in US, so maybe you dont know about all of this, but I can tell you that people are "up in arms" about drones over american soil, the possibility of them carrying out orders on American civilians - and you think the military will ignore this & roll in with tanks ?

I agree with you on what should be done, but I know it wont happen.  And if it does, its only because things have deteriorated so badly that something like this wont be a big deal - and that means we have other things to worry about & people behaving badly wont be news.

[riahc3]

Hello,

I'm not trying to say that it's normal what they are doing there, of course not and they should be punished but not by "blowing thme to pieces" - bigger police forces, swat and throw them into lock up for a long time, where the rest of them are.

The problem is that we see at least one death in the video (guy who got run over). They assault police officers with bottles. Sorry, but for me that is personally shoot to kill for defense. Im not a fan of killing but if it has to be done...

I don't know the whole Oakland thing but I doubt it something some swat teams couldn't handle, at least from the video it's just some punks shooting in the air with hand guns. I'm sure there are some gangs there but I doubt even they are that stupid to pull that kind of attention to themselves so it's just down to some arrogant imbeciles.

Maybe I wasn't clear; I commented that a SWAT team should be deployed. They should be able to control the situation. If they don't, then they should take more drastic action. Sometimes violence can only be solved with defensive violence. I prefer, like you, that it doesn't and its solved in a legal and civil matter but...

[riahc3]

Hello,

riahc3 - Im going to assume you are not that old.  Your idealistic dream of how things should take place doesnt work, and only someone who is unwilling or unable to see that would disagree.

As for the US - why do you think its possible that the most powerful military on the planet regularly gets its ass handed to them ?  How is it that when we go into areas that are vastly inferior in every way that we somehow fail to achieve our goals ?  Its simple - ethics.  The US military plays by a rule book nobody else does.  We cant go in guns blazing because people in the US would raise hell.  That means constituents who will not vote for people in charge on the next election.  People who demand leaders to be brought up on charges, things like that.

Dont think for 1 moment these things wouldnt be amplified 1000x when an incursion takes place on American soil.  Regardless of what is right, and the greater good.  Its all about who's voice is loudest & the people against martial law will be much louder than those who agree with it.  The goal wont matter.  It will not matter to certain people if the military's intentions are wholly justified, and it is truly for the greater good - people will complain about the methods.  Its the methods that prevent the military from doing what they are capable of.

 

I know you are not in US, so maybe you dont know about all of this, but I can tell you that people are "up in arms" about drones over american soil, the possibility of them carrying out orders on American civilians - and you think the military will ignore this & roll in with tanks ?

I agree with you on what should be done, but I know it wont happen.  And if it does, its only because things have deteriorated so badly that something like this wont be a big deal - and that means we have other things to worry about & people behaving badly wont be news.

All Im saying is what should be done; Im not saying its gonna happen because it wont.

[seta-san]

avoid

 

Detroit

Chicago

Oakland

Baltimore

Atlanta

[Bi4me]

Hello,

Then shoot till dead. You read right: Not shoot to kill. Keep shooting until they are dead.

Period. Just throwing bottles is enough to shoot someone because you are being assaulted.

Lets all pitch in for a armored vehicle for DocM; Himself and all his weaponary can problably reduce the criminal's population to about 0.03% :laugh:

Well I have to agree. These people aren't doing anything but causing mayhem and disturbing their neighbors. If they won't listen to warnings, then send them six feet under as this scum manifests inability to live a civilized life among other humans.

[FloatingFatMan]

avoid

 

Detroit

Chicago

Oakland

Baltimore

Atlanta

 

The United States of America.

[123456789A]

The United States of America.

 

Earth.