This is even more troubling:

You are getting what you want, less police activity. Now what do we do about the lives getting lost, which are going to be disproportionately black. If you don't come up with a message, Trump is going to pin it on the left. I already saw a Trump ad on WaPo hitting Biden for it.

Poverty is the mother of a lot of problems .
I guess the left ( which actually is the Center for the ROW) should favor a better redistribution of wealth to diminish crimes.

Is there a solution? I don't know and have my doubts.

Still, a necessary start is the realize that the problem is two-fold. There is the problem is crimes in the now, meaning crimes that are imminent or the result of issues you don't have the time to resolve. These must be handled by direct law enforcement. In this context it isn't all that relevant if factors such as systemic racism contributed to the problem, the crimes are still occurring and still leave victims.

Then there is the problem is crimes in the future. Factors that contribute causally to crime rates that you could potentially alleviate. In this context a factor such as systemic racism / poverty / socio-economics can be very relevant.

To use an analogy, if a car is coming towards you in your lane it isn't very relevant if society has a problem with alcoholism. Right now you just need to get out of the way and (if possible) get the car stopped as quickly as possible. But in the context of stopping such accidents on the macro level, and a general approach to reduce alcoholism could be very relevant.

"overall crime is down" - seems like a good thing. No action required.

Hahaha **** just read the whole post. Yes the government purse will no doubt be critically affected by the lack of speeding tickets. Reach for the fainting couches, it's all going to ****.

Guns, guns, guns, shootings, deaths, murders, did I mention guns

I wonder what a big part part of the the solution might be.

BUT, did you not hear, apparently gun control is a losing proposition with like 30% of the right wing voters so it can't possibly be actioned. The last thing you want is to make the fragile right wing paranoids any more scared than they already are.

It another example of something I just raised in another thread that we (progressives) have been too scared to make the case for getting rid of guns because it's hard. ('Hard' and 'scared' are about the politics)

You can't really charge all progressives with that. This is a uniquely yankee problem, they are petrified of making common sense decisions lest it offend the basement dwelling mentalists. We managed it here in the UK pretty easily. Dunblane happened, gun control implemented in short order. Simples. Same as New Zealand did recently after they discovered a right wing loony.

For the UK (England I should say perhaps) I used the examples of too scared to make the positive case for immigration and EU membership. Bad as the UK is, we can't compare to the usa - not even with the current shower in charge.

Getting rid of usa gun is orders of magnitude more of a problem then the extra gun control after Dunblane. It is going to be very hard

Yeah I mean to stay semi on topic, they are looking at reduced crime and fewer traffic stops and seriously asking, What on earth can we do about this!? As if it's a problem that these things are declining. Mentalists.

I don't want to be a dick but the immigration and EU issue is an English one, i'm not sure how you guys solve it as I don't know any english racists to form a base position to argue against. My underlying hope is that they just die out. As counter productive as things like cancel culture can be, they do seem to drag the younger generation further left which is a good thing in the long run.

You're not being dickish. It's why I added England in brackets. Clearer a much bigger problem down here.

We don't have to seek a coherent position to argue against, we just need to keep making the case (with policies where appropriate) for things we believe in.

Yep that's fair, but without an actual tangible enemy it's all just ideological chit chat. To win we have to have a visible enemy to actually defeat. For the yanks, I really think they should start putting ads out showing the actual gun advocates. Show how mental they are. Show that they are either old racist mentalists like that couple or basement Q anon shut in types. They seem afraid to push gun control because they have normalised some imagined "base" of gun supporters that doesn't' exist in a civilised society. More than half of these pricks are dead soon - this nonsense is the petulant death throes of a dying generation who no-one will miss. It's defo going to end soon, the only question seems to be exactly when it will happen.

Don't agree at all about enemy to defeat. The progressive goal is change not victory. the more we carry others rather than defeat them, the better.

Carry those who can change and defeat the rest... and the wisdom to know the difference.

Your understanding of American culture is very far off. The base of gun supporters is very real and not limited to old people about to die. Some of them are definitely unhinged though.

and the wisdom to not know what you don't know.

while you carry those who did change their views a bit to the defeat of those who didn't

and the wisdom to word the same thing in different ways, even if silly.

I thought I was conveying a different meaning. None of us will be the wisest man but a bit more wisdom wont hurt.

I am a bootlicker and I endorse this message. Trump will be going hard in the paint on 'lawless cities' once he gets his **** together.

Also, if someone could explain to me why funding police and funding social services is treated as an either or proposition that would be great. I, for one, would always vote for increasing taxes and doing both. tame_deuces made a great post ITT. Addressing the underlying social issues prevents future crime, it does nothing to address the crime and active criminals you already have.

When has the left ever had a solution that worked?

All they ever wish to do is throw money that somebody else earned at a problem.

How about we deund both and lower taxes so people can keep more of their own money, thereby providing greater wealth and prosperity for all people, thereby reducing crime and social issues?

wanted to throw money at education but the right balked. now we have "you".

The problem with that idea is obvious, some people don't have any money to keep more of.

Disarming the public leaves them defenseless against tyranny.

Black Guns Matter!