Loony Leftist Policy Destroying Minneapolis

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,732
Reaction score
1,485
Points
113
I was told carjacking was merely an inconvenience and the carjacker actually needed the car more than the owner. Carjacking was really just an equitable transfer of wealth.
No you weren’t. Your post is asinine. Be better or get buried in your own shit.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,214
Reaction score
1,844
Points
113
I doubt anyone has ever told you that.
The member of the city council in my area told 96 of us that very thing in a Zoom meeting. About 90 of them nodded in approval. He also said even the people rioting are more important than any building. He also accepted private security while saying that all Mpls police officers are bad for black people. I could go on.
 

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
736
Points
113
No you weren’t. Your post is asinine. Be better or get buried in your own shit.
He's not entirely wrong. There were absolutely stories on this site with quotes from individuals in MPLS neighborhoods lamenting the fact they called the cops post criminal activity because it would lead to the potential death of black individuals.
 

scools12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
5,518
Reaction score
1,301
Points
113
You aren’t very smart.
Obviously a lot smarter than you.

⬇⬇⬇⬇

The member of the city council in my area told 96 of us that very thing in a Zoom meeting. About 90 of them nodded in approval. He also said even the people rioting are more important than any building. He also accepted private security while saying that all Mpls police officers are bad for black people. I could go on.
He's not entirely wrong. There were absolutely stories on this site with quotes from individuals in MPLS neighborhoods lamenting the fact they called the cops post criminal activity because it would lead to the potential death of black individuals.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,732
Reaction score
1,485
Points
113
He's not entirely wrong. There were absolutely stories on this site with quotes from individuals in MPLS neighborhoods lamenting the fact they called the cops post criminal activity because it would lead to the potential death of black individuals.
Right. The post was disingenuous at best and an outright lie at worst. As has been stated dozens of times, one or two people on the internet saying something stupid doesn’t legitimately justify painting everyone who views the world differently with that brush. The excessive exaggerated nature of the post was a tell. Also, Tiki brings up something we actually *should* care about. But I saw the footage and I disagree that the message is as he stated. That said, the sentiment is at least in the hemisphere and most certainly alarming. Which is why I have been actively advocating full turnover of the Minneapolis City Council.
 

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
736
Points
113
So we’re against carjacking? I was told carjacking was merely an inconvenience and the carjacker actually needed the car more than the owner. Carjacking was really just an equitable transfer of wealth.

It’s hard to keep up with where we’re at with this stuff.
I'm with you on this. It is hard to keep track of the reaction we need to have towards law enforcement and criminal activity. Might I suggest you take your cues from Joe and Kamala?

If officer is killed defending Capital against Trump insurrectionists -- honorable and worthy of Biden's approval per his attendance at casket yesterday, as it should be

If two FBI agents are killed in crossfire when trying to take down child trafficking ring -- honorable and worthy of Biden's approval per his comments yesterday, as it should be

If an individual is killed when police officers come under fire and return fire during legal drug warrant -- system racism

If individuals commit any other number of property crimes or crimes against said officers -- start a bail fund and claim systemic racism
 

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
736
Points
113
Right. The post was disingenuous at best and an outright lie at worst. As has been stated dozens of times, one or two people on the internet saying something stupid doesn’t legitimately justify painting everyone who views the world differently with that brush. The excessive exaggerated nature of the post was a tell. Also, Tiki brings up something we actually *should* care about. But I saw the footage and I disagree that the message is as he stated. That said, the sentiment is at least in the hemisphere and most certainly alarming. Which is why I have been actively advocating full turnover of the Minneapolis City Council.
If only we all held the viewpoint above while posting on this site, it would be a much less toxic environment.

I'm guilty on this issue. See my immediate post above. The degradation of an entire industry this year has been beyond ridiculous.

I'm glad common sense is starting to prevail among people on both sides of this issue. I certainly give you credit on your own views on this issue.
 

scools12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
5,518
Reaction score
1,301
Points
113
I'm with you on this. It is hard to keep track of the reaction we need to have towards law enforcement and criminal activity. Might I suggest you take your cues from Joe and Kamala?

If individuals commit any other number of property crimes or crimes against said officers -- start a bail fund and claim systemic racism
You can suggest it but when one of the individuals you mention promotes and donates to said fund that is the last person I will be taking cues from on this issue.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,209
Reaction score
3,029
Points
113
If an individual is killed when police officers come under fire and return fire during legal drug warrant
You don't want to know what I think about that.

Let's just say if unjust violence is perpetrated against someone then expect violence in return. I believe the drug war is unjust violent oppression.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
The member of the city council in my area told 96 of us that very thing in a Zoom meeting.
A city council member in a public meeting said "Carjacking is really just an equitable transfer of wealth"?

I highly doubt it. I suspect you're misinterpreting their words.

If they had said that, it would've been in the news.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
18,697
Reaction score
3,626
Points
113
As has been stated dozens of times, one or two people on the internet saying something stupid doesn’t legitimately justify painting everyone who views the world differently with that brush.
There are maybe 6 posters on all of tOTB that don't do this.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,214
Reaction score
1,844
Points
113
A city council member in a public meeting said "Carjacking is really just an equitable transfer of wealth"?
I highly doubt it. I suspect you're misinterpreting their words.
If they had said that, it would've been in the news.
Exact quote: "Carjacking is more of an inconvenience."
Pretty close to exact quote: "The people out at night are more important than any building."
Exact quote: "It's pretty obvious that the police are a danger to black people."

All three quotes are beyond stupid and a few of us called him on it. He even brought an "expert" from Louisville to teach us how the increase in crime isn't that bad. He was a coward and left the meeting after he downplayed someone who was robbed in their driveway.

Why would any of the things said be on the news? Things just like that have been said a lot lately by many more people than my guy.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,732
Reaction score
1,485
Points
113
Exact quote: "Carjacking is more of an inconvenience."
Pretty close to exact quote: "The people out at night are more important than any building."
Exact quote: "It's pretty obvious that the police are a danger to black people."

All three quotes are beyond stupid and a few of us called him on it. He even brought an "expert" from Louisville to teach us how the increase in crime isn't that bad. He was a coward and left the meeting after he downplayed someone who was robbed in their driveway.

Why would any of the things said be on the news? Things just like that have been said a lot lately by many more people than my guy.
Thanks Ted. Is your guy Cunningham? And do you have the date of that meeting? I have seen a few of these and haven't seen those quotes. I definitely haven't watched every minute of those meetings as I can barely stand more than about 5 minutes at a time. But they are all online and I would be curious to check it out and gladly admit my error, if I could see it with my own eyes.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,214
Reaction score
1,844
Points
113
Thanks Ted. Is your guy Cunningham? And do you have the date of that meeting? I have seen a few of these and haven't seen those quotes. I definitely haven't watched every minute of those meetings as I can barely stand more than about 5 minutes at a time. But they are all online and I would be curious to check it out and gladly admit my error, if I could see it with my own eyes.
Yes and I did a search and couldn't find any of the meetings I have attended. I see lots of actual council meetings that are attended by the various council members, but the one I am talking about was just Cunningham (and his guest speaker) and 96 residents of my district. I don't think they can share those online. At least I don't remember ever being asked permission to do so.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,732
Reaction score
1,485
Points
113
Yes and I did a search and couldn't find any of the meetings I have attended. I see lots of actual council meetings that are attended by the various council members, but the one I am talking about was just Cunningham (and his guest speaker) and 96 residents of my district. I don't think they can share those online. At least I don't remember ever being asked permission to do so.
Appreciate the response. Yeah, your guy is a complete tool. He chairs the Public Health and Safety committee which is stocked with idealists that tiptoe around so lightly that they will never solve any actual problems. I believe tough love is an effective tool when used judiciously and they quite clearly reject that. I'm curious if you were allowed to respond or their comments elicited any resistance or condemnation in the meeting you cite? And I do wonder approximately what date this meeting occurred.

As far as the truth here, I'm going to go ahead and concede - without direct evidence - that Tiki is representing the quotes above faithfully and honestly. As such, I believe I at least partially owe Scools an apology. While I disagree with the way you stated what you said about "I'm told that....." as an unfair - and purposely inflammatory - characterization, I do agree that people that "matter" have approximated your claims. I apologize for my absolutist statements above about how this never happened. Criticizing your intelligence was uncalled for in light of this as well, so I further apologize for those comments.

This illustrates a couple things. First off, this City Council has to go. If you have a vote in Minneapolis, please get these people out of office. Invite your friends to get these people out of office. We know that the replacement, if this occurs, will be left of center. But we don't need to be so PC that we aren't outraged by violent crime. Secondly, I don't know who agrees with the positions that these City Councilpersons hold, but they are just as dangerous as the whack jobs on the right.

I am tired of both fringe groups. They all need to be beaten down. The middle needs to re-emerge and take back the power.
 
Last edited:

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,214
Reaction score
1,844
Points
113
Appreciate the response. Yeah, your guy is a complete tool. He chairs the Public Health and Safety committee which is stocked with idealists that tiptoe around so lightly that they will never solve any actual problems. I believe tough love is an effective tool when used judiciously and they quite clearly reject that. I'm curious if you were allowed to respond or their comments elicited any resistance or condemnation in the meeting you cite? And I do wonder approximately what date this meeting occurred.

As far as the truth here, I'm going to go ahead and concede - without direct evidence - that Tiki is representing the quotes above faithfully and honestly. As such, I believe I at least partially owe Scools an apology. While I disagree with the way you stated what you said about "I'm told that....." is an unfair characterization, I do agree that people that "matter" have approximated your claims. I apologize for my absolutist statements above about how this never happened. Criticizing your intelligence was uncalled for in light of this as well, so I further apologize for those comments.

This illustrates a couple things. First off, this City Council has to go. If you have a vote in Minneapolis, please get these people out of office. Invite your friends to get these people out of office. We know that the replacement, if this occurs, will be left of center. But we don't need to be so PC that we aren't outraged by violent crime. Secondly, I don't know who agrees with the positions that these City Councilpersons hold, but they are just as dangerous as the whack jobs on the right.

I am tired of both fringe groups. They all need to be beaten down. The middle needs to re-emerge and take back the power.
I don't remember the exact date of the meeting (sometime after the defund the police idea was being floated), but we were able to ask and answer questions. I was frustrated right away because he asked everyone to answer a question and I didn't get mine in on time before he closed it. The question was if we agreed that the police should be defunded (his definition was explained as NO POLICE needed by a certain year...not just move the money around). I would guess that 70ish total answered the question, the overwhelming majority with a resounding Yes! The few that disagreed were pretty much ignored the rest of the meeting. My question was ignored. The guy who was robbed at gun point in his driveway was pretty much ignored (that is when the, "car jacking is just an inconvenience," was said). It was a circle jerk between all of the SJW's in the area.

Now....things have changed a bit. Crime has skyrocketed and opinions have started to change. Cunningham has been very, very frustrated by this. He can't seem to understand why people have changed their minds. He seems to be the final holdout within the Mpls Council in this regard.

I 100% agree with the Middle comment you made.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
Exact quote: "Carjacking is more of an inconvenience."
Pretty close to exact quote: "The people out at night are more important than any building."
Exact quote: "It's pretty obvious that the police are a danger to black people."
I believe you that these were said in the meeting. And I don't agree with them, myself.

But these are still a world away from "Carjacking is really just an equitable transfer of wealth". Not even close.

Why would any of the things said be on the news?
Those wouldn't, in my opinion, because they aren't even close to the quote above about equitable wealth transfer. That is an extraordinary thing to claim, that I doubt anyone of significance in Mpls city government has stated publicly. If you can find the proof, then I'm happy to admit I was wrong.

Things just like that have been said a lot lately by many more people than my guy.
Evidence of "a lot" and "many"? Probably more like "some" and "some".
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
But we don't need to be so PC that we aren't outraged by violent crime.
Only the "inconvenience" quote can have any chance of being construed as what you say here, and I highly doubt that was the spirit of what was meant, at all.

Perhaps the person saying it didn't realize that the definition of carjacking implies that violence was used, and merely meant to say that a car being stolen, in of itself, is ... blah blah blah. I'm not going to spend a bunch of effort apologizing, when I haven't even seen the video of the meeting or know the context in which the quote was given.


Clearly though, I have a hard time believing that even the Mpls council thinks we shouldn't be outraged at violent crime.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,214
Reaction score
1,844
Points
113
I believe you that these were said in the meeting. And I don't agree with them, myself.

But these are still a world away from "Carjacking is really just an equitable transfer of wealth". Not even close.
Can't tell you about that since it wasn't my claim.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
Can't tell you about that since it wasn't my claim.
Then your post #334 when you said "told 96 of us that very thing" should have made it clear what you were referring to.

Maybe you only meant to be replying to the first part of scool's post #329. If that is the case, fair enough. But you did not specify, and were replying to my post which was specifically talking about his latter claim.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,214
Reaction score
1,844
Points
113
Then your post #334 when you said "told 96 of us that very thing" is incorrectly stated, then.

What you were replying to with that is precisely what I just said.
I replied to the "inconvenience" part. I assumed the last line was an interpretation by the poster.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
I replied to the "inconvenience" part. I assumed the last line was an interpretation by the poster.
Fair enough. If you had made it clear in #334 what you just said here, it could have been avoided.

Nonetheless, I'm glad you commented with your public meeting experiences.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,214
Reaction score
1,844
Points
113
Only the "inconvenience" quote can have any chance of being construed as what you say here, and I highly doubt that was the spirit of what was meant, at all.

Perhaps the person saying it didn't realize that the definition of carjacking implies that violence was used, and merely meant to say that a car being stolen, in of itself, is ... blah blah blah. I'm not going to spend a bunch of effort apologizing, when I haven't even seen the video of the meeting or know the context in which the quote was given.


Clearly though, I have a hard time believing that even the Mpls council thinks we shouldn't be outraged at violent crime.
The council guy, and his guest speaker, blew off the notion that the person who was indeed carjacked/robbed in his own driveway wasn't looking at the big picture. That big picture was about racism and not being heard, etc.. It was incredibly rude and condescending. The guest speaker tried to explain more about it but was failing miserably and then just vanished. It was obvious he touched a nerve and bailed. So...yes, I would say both of them were saying that people shouldn't be so outraged by that violent crime. They downplayed it big time. The meeting started going off the rails as people were focusing on that and not what Cunningham wanted them to focus on.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
The council guy, and his guest speaker, blew off the notion that the person who was indeed carjacked/robbed in his own driveway wasn't looking at the big picture. That big picture was about racism and not being heard, etc.. It was incredibly rude and condescending. The guest speaker tried to explain more about it but was failing miserably and then just vanished. It was obvious he touched a nerve and bailed. So...yes, I would say both of them were saying that people shouldn't be so outraged by that violent crime. They downplayed it big time. The meeting started going off the rails as people were focusing on that and not what Cunningham wanted them to focus on.
There's nothing wrong, at all, with acknowledging that socioeconomic, cultural, and gang influence can lead to a person choosing to do violence.

I am taking a wild guess that such ideas, in general, were what was being hinted at.

I didn't see/hear it, so I can't tell if you're going out of your way to take what was said as "dismissing violence", or if you taking it that way was warranted.


Regardless, again, I just highly doubt that any sane person can truely be dismissive of violence towards any innocent person. It doesn't make sense.
 

From the Parkinglot

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,284
Reaction score
599
Points
113

The only reason they do this is because they are misunderstood and oppressed. If only there was a social worker they could talk to about their feelings I’m sure they would stop stealing valuable merchandise just to feed their families. I mean who has not smear down to a nice dinner table to eat a Chanel handbag with a side of Chanel wallet.
 
Top Bottom