Making DC great again.

[JimmySpeaks]

21 minutes ago, fishbane said:

The link is nonsense that doesn't prove anything similar to you stating there is a non police officer union rep in some union you won't name.  Probably because if you did wed see that most of the reps in that union are police officers too.  If this were so common it would be easy to make a large well know police department where a bunch of non-police officer union reps.

If you take out "all" from your Google query it completely changes the AI answer.  It reads Yes, police union representatives are almost always current or recently retired police officers who are voted or appointed to their positions to represent their fellow officers.  Which sounds a lot like what I have been saying.  If police corruption is due to union corruption then police officers are responsible.

Almost always ISNT ALL like you claim. 

[fishbane]

10 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Almost always ISNT ALL like you claim. 

Feel free to quote where I said that.

[mspart]

mspart

[JimmySpeaks]

9 minutes ago, fishbane said:

Feel free to quote where I said that.

So you agree with me.  Not all union reps are current cops   Perfect. 

[JimmySpeaks]

3 hours ago, fishbane said:

Union reps are police officers in the department that were voted into position by officers in the department.  

@fishbane

[fishbane]

 Google AI has already established that is almost always the case.  

Yes, police union representatives are almost always current or recently retired police officers who are voted or appointed to their positions to represent their fellow officers.

You are being overly pedantic in a way that doesn't change anything. You also did this when you tried to distinguish between police officers being responsible for the negative public sentiment and the police unions. 

If its police misconduct itself to blame for the change in public sentiment then police officers are to blame.  It its underlying union corruption to blame then since they are run by police offices, police officers are to blame.  If you are trying to blame the relative small number of non-police officers that work as union representatives,  I think you are just wrong.  I don't these individuals exist in large enough numbers for that to be the case.  Evidenced by the fact that you have yet to find even a single verifiable real world example of it.  But even assuming you are right police still control the union and would ultimately be responsible for the actions of its representatives.  And even if you disagree with that I think we can both agree that it is unlikely that the police unions preferentially put democrats in the positions not filed by police officers, so you're initial assertion that the democrats are to blame is incorrect.

[JimmySpeaks]

22 minutes ago, fishbane said:

 Google AI has already established that is almost always the case.  

Yes, police union representatives are almost always current or recently retired police officers who are voted or appointed to their positions to represent their fellow officers.

You are being overly pedantic in a way that doesn't change anything. You also did this when you tried to distinguish between police officers being responsible for the negative public sentiment and the police unions. 

If its police misconduct itself to blame for the change in public sentiment then police officers are to blame.  It its underlying union corruption to blame then since they are run by police offices, police officers are to blame.  If you are trying to blame the relative small number of non-police officers that work as union representatives,  I think you are just wrong.  I don't these individuals exist in large enough numbers for that to be the case.  Evidenced by the fact that you have yet to find even a single verifiable real world example of it.  But even assuming you are right police still control the union and would ultimately be responsible for the actions of its representatives.  And even if you disagree with that I think we can both agree that it is unlikely that the police unions preferentially put democrats in the positions not filed by police officers, so you're initial assertion that the democrats are to blame is incorrect.

Almost always but not always. Just like I said.  Including the police union where I live. 

[red viking]

38 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Almost always but not always. Just like I said.  Including the police union where I live. 

Thank you for telling me about Harry Sisson. Lots of important news and solid insights!!! He's great!!!

Adam Mockler is still better but I'm still subscribing to his channel!!

Edited September 5, 2025 by red viking

[JimmySpeaks]

2 hours ago, red viking said:

Thank you for telling me about Harry Sisson. Lots of important news and solid insights!!! He's great!!!

Adam Mockler is still better but I'm still subscribing to his channel!!

Ya he’s great if you like dudes that lure young chicks on the internet.  Not surprised he’s your kinda person. 

[red viking]

Just now, JimmySpeaks said:

Ya he’s great if you like dudes that lure young chicks on the internet.  Not surprised he’s your kinda person. 

He's a pedo like Trump is? 

[JimmySpeaks]

1 minute ago, red viking said:

He's a pedo like Trump is? 

He’s one sick dude for sure 

[JimmySpeaks]

5 hours ago, fishbane said:

 Google AI has already established that is almost always the case.  

Yes, police union representatives are almost always current or recently retired police officers who are voted or appointed to their positions to represent their fellow officers.

You are being overly pedantic in a way that doesn't change anything. You also did this when you tried to distinguish between police officers being responsible for the negative public sentiment and the police unions. 

If its police misconduct itself to blame for the change in public sentiment then police officers are to blame.  It its underlying union corruption to blame then since they are run by police offices, police officers are to blame.  If you are trying to blame the relative small number of non-police officers that work as union representatives,  I think you are just wrong.  I don't these individuals exist in large enough numbers for that to be the case.  Evidenced by the fact that you have yet to find even a single verifiable real world example of it.  But even assuming you are right police still control the union and would ultimately be responsible for the actions of its representatives.  And even if you disagree with that I think we can both agree that it is unlikely that the police unions preferentially put democrats in the positions not filed by police officers, so you're initial assertion that the democrats are to blame is incorrect.

I posted your exact comment that disagreed with me.  Just like you asked 

[JimmySpeaks]

6 hours ago, fishbane said:

Feel free to quote where I said that.

Ok 

[Caveira]

 

[Caveira]

ShotSpotters was discontinued because it found that shots were fired mostly in black and brown neighborhoods….    

[Caveira]

The stats in crime ridden cities that don’t get reported and don’t occur in @1032004’s suburb 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8SebbAC/

[JimmySpeaks]

Walking in Memphis.  I hope this blue woke mayor is ready.  Time to do some more clean up of a liberal craphole 

[Caveira]

Trying 24 year olds as minors in dc and releasing them.  Which one of y’all did there doing their best job policing?

 

[Offthemat]

Insane 

[Caveira]

On 9/5/2025 at 4:36 PM, red viking said:

Thank you for telling me about Harry Sisson. Lots of important news and solid insights!!! He's great!!!

Adam Mockler is still better but I'm still subscribing to his channel!!

I don’t know who sisson is @1032004 but he seems pissed lol 

I thought the left had the sense of humor and the right wasn’t funny 

 

 

[Caveira]

On 8/19/2025 at 1:13 PM, red viking said:

I said 50 to 55. It was actually a lot higher for most of summer. An average of 3 hrs per day in addition to my primary full-time job. 

55+15 is 70.  Maybe not quite 80 

[Caveira]

On 8/19/2025 at 2:52 PM, red viking said:

Who the hell works 90 hours per week? I can tell you that I work harder than 90% of the general population and harder than 99.9% of wingers. 

You work pretty hard it seems.   

[Caveira]

On 8/21/2025 at 8:28 AM, red viking said:

Ot depends. My 2nd job is mostly outside and I'm burning calories. Complements main job really well. I can do this 20 hours in addition to main job no problem. Never burns me out, been doing that for years. Love it. 3rd job is a lot like my main job. Behind a computer, science, etc. That's a lot tougher for me. Even 10 hours in a week is a bit of a grind. I may end that one soon, but it's also interesting and 100% remote so who knows. 

55 + 20 + 10 is 85.  
 

Seems that 85 is more than 80 boss 

Edited October 29, 2025 by Caveira

[mspart]

I read this topic and thought DC comics, not WA DC.    Kind of funny. 

mspart

[Caveira]

5 hours ago, Caveira said:

55 + 20 + 10 is 85.  
 

Seems that 85 is more than 80 boss 

@red viking where is it that you didn’t say you had 3 jobs totaling more than 80 hours of work per week ?   And that you worked more than 90% if all Americans and 99.9% of wingers ?