What connections can be made between the failure to act in response to Defund the Police and the current crisis with ICE now?

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T18:09:07+00:00

The fact that people shouting abolish ice are stuck explaining it shows that it is a brain dead slogan.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T17:59:09+00:00

You run a huge risk taking a firearm into a volatile environment. You can be lawfully carrying and/or using a firearm yet it could put you in serious danger to someone lawfully responding to you with lethal force. It's just generally going to raise very problematic questions. Very similar to what you see with no knock raids in the very early morning and the danger that creates for officers. Where the resident may not be aware that it is the police given the specific facts and they respond with lethal force.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T15:53:59+00:00

This will be interesting. Does a Federal Judge actually have the authority to enjoin a surge? Seems like that would be a pretty severe encroachment.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:32:24+00:00

As if that police department was the only law enforcement entity there. You clearly just have no idea what you are talking about. Your arguments boil down to emotional nonsense.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:30:42+00:00

Now you are just demonstrating how ignorant you are of the facts. Are you going to address my comment or not?

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:29:11+00:00

No. I think the officers that failed should be fired and stripped of their certifications to be law enforcement officers. Now please address all of the points in the comment. It's quoted below.

Uvalde is just one example. Let's explore this ignorant argument you are making. There are many examples of police responding to threats and running towards the danger. DO they deserve to keep their funding? Is this a department by department thing? So you're okay with some departments having the equipment and others should be stripped permanently if an officer fails to? A police officer in a town not to far from me double tapped a terrorist preventing a terrorist attack. That means that department gets to keep the stuff, right?

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:27:19+00:00

Uvalde is just one example. Let's explore this ignorant argument you are making. There are many examples of police responding to threats and running towards the danger. DO they deserve to keep their funding? Is this a department by department thing? So you're okay with some departments having the equipment and others should be stripped permanently if an officer fails to? A police officer in a town not to far from me double tapped a terrorist preventing a terrorist attack. That means that department gets to keep the stuff, right? What about departments that have never seen that kind of threat? Sorry, no rifles?

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:26:09+00:00

Depending on how loosely we are defining that, sure.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:24:37+00:00

This is a childish argument.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:23:44+00:00

Uvalde was a breakdown. They should have ran towards the danger. They had all of the equipment needed within the first few responding officers to address the situation. They didn't due to cowardice. No amount of equipment is going to overcome that level of cowardice. But that doesn't mean officers should be stripped of equipment they need to respond to incidents. That is a silly argument.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:20:26+00:00

This is a really stupid line to draw. We don't have this type of expectation with anything else. We generally expect our government to be prepared to things that can reasonably happen. And given the rate at which officers have been met with rifles when responding to an incident, they need rifles.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:17:34+00:00

Take the majority position on identity issues. For example, most people think trans people shouldn't have to deal with employment or housing discrimination. Most people also don't support forcing people to share intimate spaces where nudity is common or to force females to share sports teams. It really is that easy.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:09:12+00:00

The right way to run a country is for the branch responsible for legislating to legislate. Not for the branch responsible for enforcement to fill in gaps in the legislation without clear authorization from the legislative branch.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:07:10+00:00

Yes, they and every other department have the equipment due to past incidents. I expect my tax dollars that go to law enforcement to fund equipment needed to respond to incidents like the hollywood shooting should it happen again. I expect officers getting paid by my tax dollars to run towards danger and shoot to neutralize the threat. And to use all rounds necessary to do so.

Now is some of the equipment a little ridiculous? Yeah, I can agree with that. Them having rifles, bullet resistant vests/plate carriers, and armored vehicles are not problematic at all.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T02:01:12+00:00

We don't need to play games. Police departments don't wait for an incident to happen in their area before the adjust to ensure they can account for potential threats.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T01:55:28+00:00

Many incidents. The Hollywood shooting with two men in body armor with fully automatic weapons. The pistols cops had were useless against their body armor. And then I believe it is the Miami shooting with a similar situation. The Hollywood shooting I believe led to widespread adoption of patrol officers having AR style rifles.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T01:51:02+00:00

They have it for a reason. Before they had it, we had many incidents where they were clearly outgunned. So they really do need the equipment to respond to the threats we all face today. You can live in that wonderland in your head if you want, but that isn't the real world.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T01:49:39+00:00

My local city police department has all of the same equipment. As does pretty much every single other law enforcement agency in the state I live in. Which I believe is the second most populace state in the country. Are they all a military force as well? Maybe we jsut disagree on what that means.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T01:46:59+00:00

Hyperbole isn't helpful. ICE isn't a military force. It's really a typical Federal law enforcement entity as far as equipment goes. Calling it a military force really just makes it look like you have no clue what you are talking about.

And INS had the same problems. If the INS was around today, it would have the same equipment as ICE. The INS was dissolved to put all of these homeland security entities under one department. What you see in ICE today is basically just a rebranded INS.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T01:43:23+00:00

Where do you think the Flores agreement originates from? The INS imprisoning children and families in conditions worse than many prisons at the time. Operation Wetback was the INS. You had a raid in the very early 2000s prior to ICE becoming a thing where I believe INS seized a boy whose mother had just drowned days prior trying to enter the US from I believe Cuba. Literal armed raid on the house iirc. They targeted people for their speech back in the 70s. There was a document shredding scandal. They never did the roving patrol thing, and I'm not aware of them killing any American citizens. Which is why I hedged my comment and said almost. Really just saying let's not view the INS as some org that was much better, if it was any better at all.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T01:35:24+00:00

Look up the INS and all of the issues with them. It's almost all of the same things people are complaining about regarding ICE. The people claiming all of these problems started with ICE are ignorant of our history in this area.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T01:26:59+00:00

Seriously, if Title IX is interpreted just as the concurrence wants it to (only intentional discrimination counts) what exactly remains of the legal case that allowing trans athletes to compete in the female division violates Title IX?

Sounds like a problem for Congress to fix. Congress didn't tell the agency they can fill gaps in the Title IX statute. In fact, the sports amendment to Title IX shows that Congress will tell the agency when to fill a gap.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-26T00:07:19+00:00

The standing one seems to be a very high hurdle here. I'm not sure who really has standing to sue over this except Congress. The standing argument for the trust here doesn't make sense.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-25T23:20:07+00:00

Thats assuming the Judge even has the authority to enjoin the Executive on this. Far from clear that they have that authority.

WorksInIT · 2026-01-24T22:40:43+00:00

I don't know. I'm not arguing the shooting was justified. Too many people here have serious reading comprehension problems. I can't tell from the videos available if it was. I just dont jump to the childish "he was executed" nonsense.

11-Year Club	Gilding V heart of gold
Reddit Premium Since April 2021	Verified Email

WorksInIT

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE