FLEA

It's a dumb idea but it won't be anarchy. The sheriff and staties will take jurisdiction of the city and will handle the most severe stuff. It won't be ideal but it will hardly be anarchy. Sovereign citizens might all move to Minneapolis though.

Good read. This is very close to where my views start to lie. I don't see any reason anymore you can't be conservative but still be on the side that we need to continue to work on racism. In his bulleted points in the middle I've often found myself contemplating on #4. Specifically, that although we are a desegegrgated society in law, we didn't uproot and move 20.9 million black Americans into suburban middle class neighborhoods overnight. There are still geographic and economic segregations in our society that will take a few generations to fix. I also like the commentator who pointed out the roll of Europe in promoting the slave trade. I personally believe we give far too much a pass on Great Britain's role in the institution of slavery and it's establishment in the US.

I absolutely wouldn't defund the police and can't understand how most democrats find that the logical answer. First off, no society in the world right now successfully exist with out some sort of law enforcement. Furthermore, it seems to me you would want to give departments more money so they can recruit better qualified candidates, increase training, increase walking patrols, increase presence. If you've read my other post on here, many of you know my wife is a prior cop. I was surprised she would patrol the worst parts of Tucson by herself. Nearest help was 15-25 minutes out sometimes. When you recognize situations with police escalate quickly because police are saying they are in fear for their life, we should acknowledge that increasing their sense of security by bringing back the partner system is a positive step not a negative one. So what I think we really need with the whole "defund the police" thing is just give them less discretionary spending. Additionally, a big one my wife and I have discussed, is an overhaul of their hiring practices. Some departments are militantly protective of their high levels of scrutiny. My wife getting hired as a police officer was harder than a TS/SCI with full scope poly. Its ridiculous that you can be trusted to work with our nations most dangerous secrets/weapons but you can't be a police officer. This needs a thorough review for 2 reasons. 1.) Its not working. We still get bad cops. So clearly these practices aren't the end all be all for vetting morality. 2.) It prevents a lot of reformed people who would honestly be GOOD cops from doing so. These people often had challenged upbringings and can connect with kids and youth in a way someone from a middle class suburban neighborhood couldn't. Remember before anything else, police are successful because they earn the community's trust. Or better yet, they are members of that community already and they are working to help turn it around. I also agree that there would need to be a consensus on how far to let the war on drugs go. We obviously aren't going to legalize everything but we can change the extent and manner that we enforce it. This topic ties in heavy with incarceration and private prisons though. The overall point being however that we need to treat incarceration more seriously in our country. Its not only a permanent loss of several civil rights but it permanently affects your ability to seek employment afterwards. Once a debt to society is paid and a person deemed reformed they should not be living under reduced conditions for the rest of their life. Regarding poverty, I don't think dumping money into peoples pockets is going to fix anything. But providing education grants for better schooling and incentivizing businesses to move into destitute neighborhoods is probably a good start.

1.) Hundred % agree this is an inappropriate use of the concept of privilege and exactly why i hate the term. I believe the phenomena is real, but language is everything. Calling the phenomena "privilege" invokes a sense that some people are ahead in life because they received an unfair advantage. Trying to get someone to join my cause and then telling them they were only successful because they cheated doesn't usually work. Here's the thing; if you grew up and your family provided for you, you went to school, scored grades, found mentors, and worked hard; and then you were met with success and money; you are exactly where you SHOULD be. That is how society is SUPPOSED to work. The real question is, and I believe what most genuine people are trying to attack when they discuss the concept of privilege, is why does this formula for success not translate evenly over some subsets of society. Why is it that they are not getting to where they SHOULD be. When you use the term privilege people believe some people have things they shouldnt. The reality is some people don't have things they should. Its not a zero sum game. Everyone can win. You can have a society where everyone benefits. Recognizing that this was the intent of discussing privilege, and getting around the wording on it, was I think what allowed me to see around my mostly conservative points of view to realize that I might be missing something in the race argument. 2.) I dont think most people are looking for race targeted policy changes. Ignore the talking heads who are loud about reparations and speak to people in the middle. Most people want to see targeted reforms that benefit everyone but will benefit minorities disproportionately because of income class divide. For example, poverty. Putting in structures to alleviate poverty helps all Americans regardless of color. The black and latino community as a whole will benefit more from it though because they make up disproportionately higher demographics of the lowest income quartile. In law enforcement, getting rid of qualified immunity, ending the war on drugs and crack downs on other victimless crimes, increasing foot patrols over vehicle patrols (requires a huge manpower investment), overhauling recruiting methodologies, etc... none of those specifically target any one race. Get on board with those, they help everyone.

It's been a long time since I wore a desert bag but am I mistaken in remembering the material is lighter than the green bag? Why do t we just make the green bags from that?

This dude is REALLY well spoken.

Sheesh man, I hear ya, just saying we've been cutting those pencil tabs off for 40 years, why are we still manufacturing them on there?

Trump's election followed by the Kavanugb debacle and then the silence over the Biden / Tara Reade debacle has confirmed for me what I always suspected. People don't really care if the president they vote for is in their perception moral. They care about policy. Trump had a platform, Hilary was "more of the same." The opposite ends of the spectrum are going to vote by the candidates policy whether or not they are perceived as moral. It's indifferent to them. Better an evil liberal in office than a good conservative or vice versa. As for the people in the middle, if given two options and only one actually has a platform, a lot are going to swing by default.

Not disagreeing with you but I just planted in a community that doesn't fall entirely under the USAF and they have their own guidance. I like to keep my anonymity so I won't say where but that specific aspect has been a mild dissapointment. Rest of the assignment is awesome.

Haha, I would but the assignment I'm at right now forbids it.

Haha. Yes I know I'm the minority on this one. I do think it's silly to try and motivate everyone to be uniformed. If we did go 2 piece I would like to see the same green color brought back sort of like what the Aussies have. Or maybe just redesign it a bit so it is the green bag but literally split into 2 pieces with better fabric. Thought of 2 more things that annoy me about actually wearing the bag. 1.) No pant pockets. I get tired of storing everything in my pants leg or looking like I have a wallet shaped uniboob. 2.) When I fart the smell comes up the collar 😂. I've only made it to purple fibers with a few suits but usually before I get there the bags get weak at the seems and I see a lot of splitting, especially in the lower pant leg around the zipper, after around 3 years. Also if we do go just go with single piece for eternity can the manufacturer just remove the stupid pencil flap out of the design spec? Does anyone actually use this?!?!?!

I think one of the reasons exciting these protest so much and why it's getting a bit more attention this time around is because of the whole COVID situation. Basically you had people already pint up with a bunch of energy and frustration and the isolation just helped as fuel. Honestly, I don't think the conversation is worth discourse online. You have to talk to people in person. You have to go vulnerable and open minded. My opinion is most Americans are more eye to eye than the media would leave you to believe. We for one, have a common understanding of human rights and human dignity. We sometimes tend to place our values in different orders which leads to different policy approaches. But the values are still all there.

Did Burt Rutan work on Spaceship 2? I loved the early work he did on canards and always thought the LongEZ looked so futuristic. Was not hard to see the step to space craft from there.

I've heard similar rumors. I've heard once the 2 piece finishes ejection seat testing and modification the bag is pretty much gone. Personally I say good riddance. Yes, I realise the look is iconic, but green bags are as uncomfortable as hell for me. They are hotter than balls in the summer, my sweat soaks through it and anything in the breast pockets gets soaked. The worst is when you get them brand new and they have that rigid feel and then when you sweat through them the coating reacts and creates the most god awful smell. I also hate the waist bands. If I keep them all the way out the suit looks like shit but tightening them is so awkward around the stomach, especially while sitting. I used to think it was just cause I got fat but I've since then, I've dropped all the weight and still hate them. That said, I would be all about keeping green bags around as a heritage uniform. Something worn on a Friday with morale patches at the bar. Love the look of the bag but not worth the Monday through Friday ass pain in my book. Would rather just be comfortable.

I haven't read his statement yet, still at work. One thing I wanted to point out though, the AF response to this is probably effected by the scathing review from Congress on failure to follow up a 2015 IG report on racial disparity. That was recent, I'll try to find the article when I get home.

Guardian, first off, I think you being on here open minded and asking questions says enough about your character and I appreciate that I believe you're trying to make an earnest attempt to understand what i'm very poorly trying to explain. To go back to our example, yes, I believe individuals are ultimately responsible for their choices to commit crime or not. However, what I have recognized and learned was there was a whole host of institutional forces that steered me away from a life a crime very early on. Mainly money. My parents didn't have much but they had enough to keep me in a middle class public school with decent state scores and an acceptable admissions rate into college. When you think about it, how much of your morality growing up was shaped by your mentors? Parents, teachers, school counselors, resource officers, coaches, etc... Not having those mentors in certain neighborhoods can certainly have detrimental effects for the outcomes of those neighborhoods. Ultimately, we all want less crime in society. So identifying the root causes and providing institutional fixes is likely to gain more ground than just telling people to stop choosing crime. There are probably reasons they continue to choose crime even after witnessing first hands the consequences of it. We owe it to be good neighbors and try and understand what those reasons are so we can alleviate them. Unfortunately its late and I've found myself back at the FTU (as a student) again. So a discussion for tomorrow. But I guess what I want to convey is I actually really empathize your frustration with all of this.

Ok. So you have a hypothesis. Now take it a step further. Why are they comitting more crime? Does something about your skin being black make you commit more crime? No. So they must be subject to conditions that predispose them to choose that path over people who don't grow up under the same conditions. Black people don't just choose to commit more crime because they came together and said "hey let's beat out whites on doing more crime." So why? What would drive you to crime?

Let me try this the other direction using the criminal justice example. Why do you think blacks disproportionately end up in the criminal justice system more than whites? If your answer is anything to do with anything outside the idea that the color of your skin simply makes you more likely to commit crime, we are probably in agreement on most everything. Hopefully your answer is the former, otherwise we probably don't really need you in the AF.

Dude I'm not really sure how you got any of that out of what I said? I want to respond but I don't even know how you arrived at your conclusions.

It's irrelevent. It's a moral/logical argument not a data driven one. Your point is blacks enter the criminal justice system more often then whites. My point is yes, that is evidence that society is segregating them. You have to look at it holistically. It doesn't necessarily mean there are people targeting blacks, but simply being born black does not make you more likely to commit crime. So there are outside institutional factors. For example, what socio-economic background are blacks being raised in? Are they accumulating wealth? Do they have access to the same attorneys? Do predominantly black neighborhoods have access to the same courts? Are they being tried by their peers or by middle class whites? Those are all hypothesis. But noone grows up saying "I want to rob convenience stores." Maybe casinos like in the movies but never 7/11s....like really? So your point is blacks commit more crime (which to be completely empiracle we need to say blacks are convicted of more crime because that's all we can really measure) and my point is, "ok, why? How is society influencing that?" Simply being black does not make you born a criminal, so what in the machine is influencing that? Those underlying root issues are what you want to identify and tackle. Things like affirmative action were well intentioned but poorly implemented at doing this. But it's complicated because there are a lot of problems. Access to education, access to wealth, access to family, etc... There's a lot more common ground on these issues than most people realise. Liberals normally hurt themselves with their choice of language though. That turns most conservatives away right off from even examining the complaints. By now you've probably seen Gen Slifes video on Facebook. I think he puts it brilliantly. You gave to trust there is a green triangle there, even if you can't see it. Edit: I also just wanted to say, like many, I was hugely skeptical of this once too. I took a course on diversity last fall through AETC that I was hugely skeptical of, however, it really opened up some thought trains I actually was on the same side of. As I said earlier, liberals have hurt themselves with the choice of words and labels they use for all of this. Only mentioning that because I know how frustrating it is to feel like people are talking last you.

One thing a lot of people don't recognize is systematic and institutional racism can exist without there actually being a racist. If you immagine society as a big gumball machine, and you pour all the gumballs in at the top, they should come out proportional. If your gumball machine starts segregating blue gumballs, there is a problem in the machine and a cog is broke. Society is supposed to be uniformed and not look at color. That cog may not have been put there intentionally. Or maybe it was left from people long ago who placed it with the wrong reasons. It may have been placed there to solve a differt problem and unintentionally created the problem we now have. All of this doesn't neccessarily mean the people entrusted to maintain the machine are racist. It does mean the machine is discriminatory and does need looked at, the cog identified, and machined to the point it no longer seperates blue gumballs when performing it's function.

I am a fan of the Starliner space suit though. The blue color looks futuristic and cool.

Oh dude I hear ya. The DFAC is probably the worst culprit. The point is though, the Air Force continues to approach health from the POV that it's exercise centered when it's mostly not. It's diet centered. Until the AF realizes and addresses that problem it will not stop a waist line epidemic in the force.

That makes more sense to me and I agree the parlor tricks were dangerous, especially if you already are in poor health. Hence why I think the AF needs a more holistic approach and they need to start looking at what airmen are eating versus emphasizing so much time at the gym. It's 95% diet. Stocking the base's food courts with Anthony's Pizza, Charley's Grilled Subs and Pizza Hut no doubt contributes to this. And out health education in youngsters is abysmal Nationwide. Ill get off my soap box now.