Slate Liberals - Why you should love a police state that will be used against you

https://www.linkedin.com/in/danabazelon/

Policy Director at the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office - why did they bury this pretty important conflict of interest information. Slate letting fucking cops write Copaganda disguising it as pro left reporting / opinions.

Famous progressive sympathetic organization: The Police

the way that china uses cameras, for example, if you run a stop sign, and a cop sees you do it, chances are, he's not gonna pull you over, because it was caught on camera and your plate shows where you live and they know who you are, so you can just get a ticket in the mail- i have no problem with this

i have no faith that amerikkka would be using cameras or similar technology this way. it would 100% be weaponized against our daily lives.

I was wondering how this thread got 80+ comments and it's all just literally one liberal larping as an anarchist

It wont be used against them because they will support SPD Hindenburg Fuhrer to the bitter end

The progressive case for The Camps

Think of all the Ford f-350s and speed boats on huge trailers that will be sold in your area!

The transfer of wealth to local impoverished luxury car and boat dealers will be great for the local mega-mansion construction industry!

Its Win Win Lose!

It's interesting how she uses the voices of people of color to try to justify this. I tried looking into her background, and it seems like she's just white? This might be more blackwashing (idk if this is a real term) than representing what the "black community" wants. Add to that how the "black community" is not a monolith, and it really doesn't seem very genuine.

Also, she was charged with child endangerment. Just a fun fact I found while looking her up.

It is painfully clear that almost no one read the article. What did Mao say about investigating matters before speaking on them?

If the idea of more police cameras makes you queasy, I understand: I spent the first decade of my career as a criminal defense and civil rights lawyer and during that time, I would have treated a plan for more police-controlled cameras with suspicion and skepticism. But acting as the policy director for progressive prosecutor and Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner for six years changed my perspective.

The author is no leftist, but she worked in opposition to the police first, then went to a DA's office where the guy at the top is at minimum doing actual harm reduction (e.g., a significant reduction in sentences and requests for pretrial incarceration, prosecuting cops, exonerating and freeing people who were railroaded by prior DAs). This is someone whose ideas have been informed by practice and we're dunking without even reading it.

What finally broke the [nonfatal shooting] case open was the discovery of surveillance footage from a private camera outside the Get It Mini Market... Before the discovery of the Mini Market footage, the shooting on Marston Street seemed destined to contribute to one of the grimmest statistics in the American criminal justice system: less than 20 percent of nonfatal shootings in most large American cities are ever solved. The clearance rates have been as low as 11 percent in Chicago, 10 percent in Durham, 15 percent in San Francisco, and 18 percent in Philadelphia.

Shootings are the type of crime that is still prosecuted in an AES state. 80-90% of nonfatal shootings resulting in no case is a real problem. It's one thing to say "I've investigated the issue and this is not a worthwhile tradeoff," but you'd have to actually investigate, and you'd have to acknowledge that there's a real issue (gun violence) you're choosing to pull back on.

Opposing ideas without investigating and ignoring real-world problems that get in the way of sweeping solutions are hallmarks of ultraleftism.