MAGAtards pull out of contractual obligations with DNC

[Tsing Tao]

This line of "thinking" makes no sense...and kinda explains, in part, how the US got here.

Employees don't get to pick and choose what work they'll perform.

The secret service doesn't get to pick and choose which POTUS they'll protect.

Just like everyone else, do your job, or quit. No one gets to refuse to do their job, and keep it.

Let them defund themselves and lose the contract, call in the national guard to work security.

I think it makes perfect sense. There are two aspects of this decision. The first is an emotional one, and you have the right to not like it just as others have a right to like it if they choose - its completely subjective. That part is the "You want to defund me? Then I won't protect you." Totally understand your point on that, even if I quietly laugh at the irony of the decision.

The other part is the more logical and hard to argue against point. If you remove the tools someone needs to perform a job, you can't rightly expect them to do their job - especially if it endangers them in doing so.

If we tell firefighters they aren't allowed to use water, but still have to put out fires, they're going to look at us like we are complete morons and refuse to do their job.

 

[Tsing Tao]

The National Guard is/are not Federal Officers.
The National Guard is at the pleasure of the Governor, Federal officers aren't.
Etc.
Etc.

The National Guard can also be mobilized by the President of the United States.

 

[Cuddles]

The beauty of all this, is it shows the public how LEO has become a bunch of thugs that will use their clout to bend politicians so they can crack the heads of citizens exercising their freedom to assemble thus strengthening the case for their defunding.

 

[Tsing Tao]

The beauty of all this, is it shows the public how LEO has become a bunch of thugs that will use their clout to bend politicians so they can crack the heads of citizens exercising their freedom to assemble thus strengthening the case for their defunding.

Only a few folks like yourself think like that. Sorry, bro.

From FiveThirtyEight.

 

[exGOPer]

Do you hear that? It’s the world laughing at you.

As a Trump supporter, you better not care for popular opinion.

 

[Tsing Tao]

I'm not a Trump supporter.

 

[userque]

I think it makes perfect sense. There are two aspects of this decision. The first is an emotional one, and you have the right to not like it just as others have a right to like it if they choose - its completely subjective. That part is the "You want to defund me? Then I won't protect you." Totally understand your point on that, even if I quietly laugh at the irony of the decision.

The other part is the more logical and hard to argue against point. If you remove the tools someone needs to perform a job, you can't rightly expect them to do their job - especially if it endangers them in doing so.

If we tell firefighters they aren't allowed to use water, but still have to put out fires, they're going to look at us like we are complete morons and refuse to do their job.

No one has taken the tools away from police, that they would need to do their jobs. Your argument and example doesn't apply. No one said, give up your gun, now go do police work.

Again, your argument makes no sense.

 

[Tsing Tao]

No one has taken the tools away from police, that they would need to do their jobs. Your argument and example doesn't apply. No one said, give up your gun, now go do police work.

Again, your argument makes no sense.

I'm sorry if it does not make sense to you, but it makes perfect sense to me. The gun isn't the tool needed for dealing with a protest that could easily turn violent. You don't want the cops using their guns, do you?

They have to use riot, non-lethal force. Pepper spray, bean bag bullets, etc. if you tell them they are not allowed to use any of those, how are they to do their job? Harsh language? Kung Fu?

They see that as increasing the risk to them needlessly and as such, they have free will to exercise their refusal to do the work. This isn't slavery.

 

[userque]

I'm sorry if it does not make sense to you, but it makes perfect sense to me. The gun isn't the tool needed for dealing with a protest that could easily turn violent. You don't want the cops using their guns, do you?

They have to use riot, non-lethal force. Pepper spray, bean bag bullets, etc. if you tell them they are not allowed to use any of those, how are they to do their job? Harsh language? Kung Fu?

They see that as increasing the risk to them needlessly and as such, they have free will to exercise their refusal to do the work. This isn't slavery.

The discussion is about the DNC, not the riots.

 

[Tsing Tao]

The discussion is about the DNC, not the riots.

The discussion is about the LE organizations pulling out of their agreements to provide security for the DNC. And why they are doing that.

Or did you want to simply discuss the DNC by itself? Perhaps who will be at the convention, and what clothes they will be wearing?

The rest of us were discussing the security arrangements. In fact, you were responding to my post and questioning my thinking, which was about the handling of riots by police who don't want to work there.