You should ask why the press didn’t run those stories before the election.

Most of the press who should be reporting this was concerned with pushing the narrative that crime concerns were a fabrication. They clearly had their priorities.

If someone donated the funds to buy the CT machine that thousands are using every month, I wouldn't mind having that person skip the line if they needed a CT scan.

They knew this stuff, but it was small potatoes given the bigger drama in the midterms.

>The Zimmerman campaign was largely unsuccessful in getting the media to follow up on the discrepancies in Santos’s work history, such as his employment at Goldman Sachs and Citigroup.

https://newrepublic.com/article/169686/george-santos-record-democrats-media

Santos benefitted from those issues big time:

>“Anything outside of crime, inflation, and the cost of energy this cycle is a distraction from what’s really hurting Americans,” Santos told Spectrum News.

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/politics/2022/11/07/santos-beats-zimmerman-in-long-island-queens-congressional-district

What if MSG went the other way: instead of banning the lawyers, they started handing free ticket to the lawyers of the firm and their families?

"Oh hey, you work for that firm. Here, we will refund your ticket automatically!"

This really highlights the magnitude of the fuckups in the midterm elections in NY.

He only got elected because of the crime concerns that rose to the top of many voters minds due to the negligence and gaslighting of our Democratic politicians. Same reason that allowed Zeldin's campaign to resonate and attract more funding, and consequently narrow the margins.

If the crime concerns were deflated earlier by acknowledging it, rather than inflating it by gaslighting, this congressional seat wouldn't have flipped because all of this shit would've came to light and be noticed by the voters before the election.

That is an interesting thing to reflect upon.

I think almost anything can be found to be morally equivalent to anything else if one adopts a sufficiently reductive view.

On a wider perspective though, the arcs of the dominant opinions in the moral universe mostly flap around on the winds of the economic universe. Slavery and many other atrocities rose and fell over time because of the economics, and the moral universe (including religious morality and such) served most of the time as an after-the-fact rationalization.

I expect the same to happen with animal protein. The economics of raising animals in farms are inefficient and bad in many ways, but that's the best we have today. Once that can be genuinely replaced by superior economic processes (lab grown meat?), I bet will see the moral winds shift rather quickly.

It has to require extra funding.

Unless we can somehow make the training happen for free and in the officer's free time (without pay).

That has to come from somewhere.

Edit: so it seems that the argument boils down to a variant of "fuck the NYPD".

So each department should duplicate the work of developing the training curriculum and standards for de-escalation?

But regardless of that, why are you against federal funding that can help improve things in NYC and other cities? This is an issue that impacts every city in the nation.

And federal funding that would have also helped NYC... is not a good thing?

The same de-escalation training material and standards they develop at the federal level can help NYC and many other cities.

I don't see why each city needs to replicate the same work.

It’s a national problem, no?

Unless you’re trying to say it’s not.

Do you believe that lack of de-escalation training is a problem that only happens in a few US cities?

Why? Is violence de-escalation different across cities?

A deranged person in NYC will escalate violence much differently than a person in Seattle?

>[...] providing the training to law enforcement officers or mental health professionals.

​

>Oh you mean the bill that gives them more money.

To address one of the exact things anti-police folks criticize.

>What concrete measures are thrown out beyond "give them more money?"

Take this bill for example, see if you can guess which NYC Democract voted against it: https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2022525

>Anyway, how about the NYPD budget that is larger this year than it's ever been, and will be even bigger next year!

How about our own D politicians, who criticize the police plenty, but are still voting against the Law Enforcement De-Escalation Training Act? (House vote last week)
https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2022525

>People criticizing the NYPD for doing a bad job want them to do a better job, actually. Like investigating and arresting people who commit hate crimes. This whole "well don't criticize cops if you want them to do what they're being paid to do" strawman is so tired.

We have too many prominent people with excessive hypocrisy who will criticize the police and at the same time be against concrete measures to improve the police.

That, in my mind, puts a new perspective on strawmans.

>The NYPD said two people were arrested after somehow getting into Blottcher's building. Charges are pending.

Great.

I can't help but wonder if any anti-NYPD folks out there believe the police shouldn't be handling this. Send the social workers?

Even if she had somehow survived, being a victim of violence like this would’ve pushed her further into homelessness and make it so much harder to get her life back on track.

People who dismiss crime concerns as a fabrication from the media should be aware of the harm it actually causes.

Thank you for sharing.

For many people it’ll be obvious that the mention of slavery and child exploitation is just an exaggeration to try to make a point and they would be able to understand. However, for many others it may appear to be making those grave issues more trivial and that’s going to turn people away.

There will be the people who won’t think it’s an exaggeration and literally agree, but that’s just preaching to the choir.

I myself see a lot of issues with animal diets, for my own health, for the environment and for the treatment of the animals (in this exact order). But while they influence me into being more mindful about my diet, I admit I’m very far from the cusp of becoming vegan.

I don’t know, but I’ll let you decide.

Do you feel guilt or shame for the suffering of the animals? Maybe so much so that you desire other people to feel the same?

When talk about foie gras with such radicalism as if it's on the same level of child exploitation or slavery (as you did more explicitly in other comments), I don't think you'll get much positive response.

I'd be surprised if such rhetoric even helps your cause, to be honest.

PSA: Council member Richardson Jordan in Harlam will have several challengers next year.

Yusef Salaam (of the 'Exonerated 5') will be one of the candidates in that race.

https://patch.com/new-york/harlem/yusef-salaam-exonerated-5-joins-harlem-city-council-race

People should make their own choice on what they put in their bodies, rather than forcing their personal choice on others.

It's also particularly bad that banning this delicacy on such grounds seems to be targeting the cultural heritage of a minority.

>Do these places allow drugs?

That's a crucial question.

In SF, the permanent supportive housing program has an overdose death rate more than 16x compared to the general population (they house less than 1% of the pop, but has more than 16% of overdose deaths), but SF pols have been trying to sweep those concern aside for political reasons...

Maybe underneath all the fluff from the press conference, there is actually some tooth.

I guess what they might really be doing is:

"<prosecutor>: Hi, you were arrested for this alleged crime. How about you accept this mental health program, or else we will throw the book at you? We reserve the right to use a refusal as an evidence against you."

His first part about intervention ("neighborhood navigator") that are not linked to "criminal justice conduct" is just really problematic.

A prosecutor-led program going around the community and flagging people will contribute to criminal-stigmatization and just alienate people who need to be reached.

This is so short sighted.