Police & Crime aka Man, Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva is so Great

[byco42]

I'm not trying to dump on Jesus, just his so-called "followers."

Read an article yesterday that looked at comments on these homelessness articles, and yikes, there are a lot of psychotic Americans out there...

Our Blessed Lord Himself said ?the poor will always be among us,? as a way to illustrate our failure to tend to them, and that ?poor? applies to the spiritual as well as the material. And that statement was in the context of a unique situation in scripture and as a reference to this scripture passage, that He was, in a not-so-subtle way, chiding the Pharisees present at the time.

Link

 

[tinselwolverine]

And, given these extremes, where would the likes of you or me more likely end up? As for Villanueva? No idea. He wanted the job, though.

He was elected. The LA County/State of California Democratic machine backed him.

Now they feel betrayed. Why? Because he is actually trying to fix shit.

The LA County Board of Supervisors has been trying to remove him from the start.

I left the Republican Party when the moron George W. Bush won the California Republican primary in 2000.

Remember how not so great shit was for the six years when the Republicans controlled both the White House and Capitol Hill? It?s my opinion the Republicans just kinda threw away their core principals once they finally came into power. One party rule has a tendency to do that.

Anyway, that?s what we got goin? on here in California - and in the words of our new/old president, the great J?Biden?ON STEROIDS.

 

[Michchamp]

He was elected. The LA County/State of California Democratic machine backed him.

Now they feel betrayed. Why? Because he is actually trying to fix shit.

The LA County Board of Supervisors has been trying to remove him from the start.

I left the Republican Party when the moron George W. Bush won the California Republican primary in 2000.

Remember how not so great shit was for the six years when the Republicans controlled both the White House and Capitol Hill? It?s my opinion the Republicans just kinda threw away their core principals once they finally came into power. One party rule has a tendency to do that.

Anyway, that?s what we got goin? on here in California - and in the words of our new/old president, the great J?Biden?ON STEROIDS.

I'm skeptical of anyone who garners positive media coverage from state media (AKA - CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, and to a lesser extent, Fox) these days.

You don't get on those channels because you're just doing your job well... you get on them because someone or some special interest group told the editors and news producers there they wanted more coverage about you, . and the either paid for it, or twisted arms to get it.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I'm skeptical of anyone who garners positive media coverage from state media (AKA - CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, and to a lesser extent, Fox) these days.

You don't get on those channels because you're just doing your job well... you get on them because someone or some special interest group told the editors and news producers there they wanted more coverage about you, . and the either paid for it, or twisted arms to get it.

You have a point.

Because nobody had ever heard of Los Angeles County, and nobody had been aware of our homeless situation, before our fucking Sheriff Alex Villanueva started himself into national/international newsroom departments and started talking about it.

Before that, the media was all like ?Hollywood? It?s part of some kind of county, or something?

Who knew?

 

[Michchamp]

You have a point.

Because nobody had ever heard of Los Angeles County, and nobody had been aware of our homeless situation, before our fucking Sheriff Alex Villanueva started himself into national/international newsroom departments and started talking about it.

Before that, the media was all like ?Hollywood? It?s part of some kind of county, or something?

Who knew?

now you're just being facetious... this forum is for serious business.

 

[tinselwolverine]

now you're just being facetious... this forum is for serious business.

Well, I started this thread; so, technically?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U8FP1A3jBAk

 

[Spartanmack]

Interesting framing. No deeper look at why homelessness is this growing problem. I guess people just decided they wanted to abandon their homes, live on the street and live lives of deprivation, violence, and squalor?

It's weird how people approach this issue/problem.

It's obvious (to me at least) that if you transfer massive amounts of wealth to the top 1%, and even more to the top 0.1%, the rest of everyone is going to have less. Less food, less healthcare (including mental health), less education, less consumer shit, and less housing. So... more homeless people.

The economy doesn't defy the laws of physics... conservation of matter here... there's only so much to go around.

Like the amounts of money dumped on business owners through PPP loans & that the Fed pumped into Wall Street (on top of an already long term, multi-decade trend in that direction) just meant they can buy more of what's available... leading to empty price inflation.

They seem to be really pushing this Villanueva guy. Giving him a lot of uncritical media coverage. Must be some big money interest behind him. Some LA real estate developer association or something?

you're the guy advocating policies that will restrict the supply resulting in less food, less healthcare (including mental health), less education, less consumer shit, and less housing. Where's your evidence that any of these are in short supply because of wealth inequality? Please be more specific than, 'America has lots of billionaires and lots of homeless people, therefore billionaires must be a root cause of homelessness.'

Maybe this Villanueva guy is getting lost of uncritical media coverage (although I bet that's not close to true) because he's actually doing something about the homeless crisis that's leading to lawlessness with open drug dealing/use, assaults, robberies, etc in public spaces in LA.

 

[Spartanmack]

I understand you guys read a lot of Christian/Conservative media, where in the tradition of Christ, the homeless/poor are all criminals, defective humans, and the ultimate solution to them may just be cops & bullets... but there IS another viewpoint out there, that takes a deeper look at the problem, and non-violent solutions like public housing and make work jobs are most cost-effective, and produce better results than sending cops out with assault rifles to bully homeless people (or shoot them?)

I rate this post 5 straw men (there's one peaking out from behind the 2nd on the left) - excellent work.

 

[tinselwolverine]

it does corroborate but with a very different flavor - the headline doesn't mention the cuts and elimination of a previously existing similar task force and the piece doesn't mention it until about half way through. It also doesn't mention the bit about the impact on morale saying just that the new unit will have 4 members assigned, no mention of the fact they could only get 4 applicants for 14 spots. Strange, it's almost as if they don't want their readers to have the full story.

Took me a while to respond.

As you know, I like to listen Daily Wire?s Ben Shapiro. Reading the Daily Wire would be dangerous?because I only listen to Ben when I?m driving.

Ironically, Ben said something - that l had observed about him previously - yesterday; he prefers to source center or left sources to support his points when he can - which makes sense.

So I linked to the Portland ABC affiliate mostly humorously in that vein.

That said, a little more seriously, I would give the Portland affiliate a little slack on not mentioning the previous cuts so immediately - because their audience is Portland. Their audience knew about the cuts. Their audience lived the cuts.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I understand you guys read a lot of Christian/Conservative media, where in the tradition of Christ, the homeless/poor are all criminals, defective humans, and the ultimate solution to them may just be cops & bullets... but there IS another viewpoint out there, that takes a deeper look at the problem, and non-violent solutions like public housing and make work jobs are most cost-effective, and produce better results than sending cops out with assault rifles to bully homeless people (or shoot them?)

Okay.

I live here.

There is loads of housing.

Housing comes with rules.

Curfews.

No drugs or alcohol.

Homeless are fully aware of housing.

They don?t want a curfew.

They want drugs and alcohol.

Why subject yourself to a curfew, when you can pitch a tent under a freeway overpass - or Venice Beach - come and go as you please, and do all the drugs and drink all the alcohol you want?

The ?tough love? approach to the homeless situation is the opposite of uncompassionate.

Also - the overwhelming majority of the homeless are - like me - not from California.

But there?s lots of people here not from California who aren?t from homeless.

Trey Parker and Matt Stone aren?t originally from California.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6EHPt8eoSJI

 

[Michchamp]

Okay.

I live here.

There is loads of housing.

Housing comes with rules.

Curfews.

No drugs or alcohol.

Homeless are fully aware of housing.

They don?t want a curfew.

They want drugs and alcohol.

Why subject yourself to a curfew, when you can pitch a tent under a freeway overpass - or Venice Beach - come and go as you please, and do all the drugs and drink all the alcohol you want?

The ?tough love? approach to the homeless situation is the opposite of uncompassionate.

Also - the overwhelming majority of the homeless are - like me - not from California.

But there?s lots of people here not from California who aren?t from homeless.

Trey Parker and Matt Stone aren?t originally from California.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6EHPt8eoSJI

so since people - HOMELESS OR NOT - like to drink, do drugs, and sometimes stay out late, this says to me that they are okay not actually providing housing to homeless people.

Like the stupid "drug test welfare recipients" shit. Why limit that to unemployment related government handouts? Make all the employees of banks who receive fed loans take drug tests too. And farm subsidies... why don't farmers have to submit to piss tests to get handouts?

If drugs are bad, why do we let someone people on them accept government money, but not others?

Drugs are okay, as long as you have a job and can afford a private attorney if you get caught...

 

[Michchamp]

I rate this post 5 straw men (there's one peaking out from behind the 2nd on the left) - excellent work.

I'd hate it too if I went around claiming to be Christian, but opposed government money to provide housing to homeless people, and someone pointed out the hypocrisy of my position

 

[Spartanmack]

so since people - HOMELESS OR NOT - like to drink, do drugs, and sometimes stay out late, this says to me that they are okay not actually providing housing to homeless people.

Like the stupid "drug test welfare recipients" shit. Why limit that to unemployment related government handouts? Make all the employees of banks who receive fed loans take drug tests too. And farm subsidies... why don't farmers have to submit to piss tests to get handouts?

If drugs are bad, why do we let someone people on them accept government money, but not others?

Drugs are okay, as long as you have a job and can afford a private attorney if you get caught...

I've never worked for a bank that didn't require me to take a drug test as well as a fairly extensive background check as a condition of employment. Banks also required finger printing which I believe is a federal regulation and those prints are stored in a database with the federal government. I've seen plenty of people test positive for minor substances like weed and have their offers revoked or been terminated because of it. So maybe the federal government made the rare correct judgement call and decided not to waste money drug testing people who have already been drug tested.

 

[Spartanmack]

I'd hate it too if I went around claiming to be Christian, but opposed government money to provide housing to homeless people, and someone pointed out the hypocrisy of my position

that's not what you did, but since you bring it up, opposing government waste and mismanagement isn't unchristian. And for the record, I don't view that money as belonging to the government. It belongs to private citizen taxpayers like myself who have every right, really an obligation in my view to monitor, influence and even criticize how they spend it.

and no one here has made any of those arguments about housing or welfare, they're all just conjecture on your part to impugn the motives of people who support efforts to clear public spaces to make them safe for the community, including the many homeless people occupying them who are continuously victimized by the crime that goes along with these situations. Opposing government mismanagement isn't the same as being uncharitable. It's far more uncharitable when people like you abdicate their responsibility for charitable deeds to the government and demand that others do the same with their resources. you're a hack who relies almost exclusively on these straw man arguments.

 

[tinselwolverine]

so since people - HOMELESS OR NOT - like to drink, do drugs, and sometimes stay out late, this says to me that they are okay not actually providing housing to homeless people.

Like the stupid "drug test welfare recipients" shit. Why limit that to unemployment related government handouts? Make all the employees of banks who receive fed loans take drug tests too. And farm subsidies... why don't farmers have to submit to piss tests to get handouts?

If drugs are bad, why do we let someone people on them accept government money, but not others?

Drugs are okay, as long as you have a job and can afford a private attorney if you get caught...

So, you don?t see the difference between people who can have a pop, or a toke where it?s legal - or not - who can nevertheless take care of themselves, and people who can?t?

People who can?t need help.

Except you can lead a horse to water but you can?t make him drink.

So the people who need help have to be motivated to accept it.

And sometimes that motivation has to and can only start with a stiff boot up the ass from one Los Angeles Country Sheriff Alex Villanueva.

 

[Spartanmack]

So, you don?t see the difference between people who can have a pop, or a toke where it?s legal - or not - who can nevertheless take care of themselves, and people who can?t?

People who can?t need help.

Except you can lead a horse to water but you can?t make him drink.

So the people who need help have to be motivated to accept it.

And sometimes that motivation has to and can only start with a stiff boot up the ass from one Los Angeles Country Sheriff Alex Villanueva.

careful, if you're not advocating for no-strings-attached handouts of other peoples' money, you're likely to be labeled unchristian here.

 

[tinselwolverine]

What would the world be like of Robert F. Kennedy had been elected president in 1968? Better? Worse? Who knows.

The guy who made knowing the answer impossible is facing the California Parole Board zero opposition from LA County Prosecutor?s Office, the jurisdiction where his murder occurred.

Screw it, let the guy out, right? He only murdered a sitting US Senator and former US Attorney General.

Surely he?s learned his lesson.

 

[Michchamp]

What would the world be like of Robert F. Kennedy had been elected president in 1968? Better? Worse? Who knows.

...

I would wager (if there were some way to know) a lot of money that the world would be better, which is why he died when he did.

 

[byco42]

I would wager (if there were some way to know) a lot of money that the world would be better, which is why he died when he did.

Bobby very likely contributed in a direct and significant way in making Marilyn Monroe's world a lot worse before she abruptly left it.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Yeah, the point is the policy of the county prosecutor to no longer attend parole board hearings to represent the victims the imprisoned victimized.

That?s for all victims in Los Angeles County, not just a victim who happens to have been one of the more notable politicians/statesmen of the last century.