Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire What defunding cops would look like

To a large extent, LEO is for investigating crimes that have happened, not preventing them. So I get your underlying point, but it's not realistic.

If someone broke into your house and you shot them dead, you would call LEO, and they would be involved.

If someone stole your vehicle, you would report it to LEO, and they would be involved.

If someone assaulted your wife, you'd call LEO, and they'd be involved. Vandalized property, same.

Hell, I am in the Public Safety/911 business!! But like you, if there is a "bump" in the night the last thing I am doing is calling 911 - I'm grabbing my 870 and my wife is grabbing her .38.

But to suggest there is NO scenario where you'd engage LEO?

Com'on...................

I said there is no scenario where I would call for assistance. What you are suggesting is reporting not asking for help

Cutting $150 million from police depts to pay antifa and BLM members to riot, pillage and promote anarchy is what the good mayor means.

Who is talking about protecting the folks? Not the D mayors or governors. Trump.

Based on a set of preconceived false suppositions? The article makes little sense.

It be no different than that scene in Back to the Future when Biff Tanner runs the town!

Anyone guess. I am guessing there wouldn't be any law. Maybe a feeble attempt at first but it wouldn't last long. Jungle rules.

Who protects “bad” cops, more? The police drpt, itself, or the police unions??? Which political party do the unions donate most of their money to???

Things would revert a situation somewhat like the year 1850 in California except many times worse because of population density. There will be rampant murder and pillage. Which will be solved by the public demanding a dictator. The country would fall into the waiting hands of the global bankers and the new world order. 1984 will come true except much worse.

People vote for their mayors and city councils. If they're stupid enough to want this, let them live with it for a year or two. It will be total anarchy. The city will soon be run by the mob and money needed for city services will soon be funneled into private pockets. It will be pure hell.

You're reading my mind.

I'd call my Cuban bud neighbor first.

You will pay for protection, or we'll break your Cuban buddy's legs and yours We'll just make you an offer you can't refuse.

I suspect his .300 Win Mag will not be an astute listener (amongst others). Lol.


HIs wife's truck gun is a mac-10.

Better yet' we'll just take his wife until he pays. see how this works?

But the only rights you have are those you can protect.

And with no police, we will have to enforce them ourselves, via the 2nd.

One advantage, When you shoot a burglar in your kitchen, no one to call, no paperwork. Just SSS. Then clean get out the bleach and the rags.

If there are no law enforcement officers, then we all become Sheriffs. Does anyone think there will be no bad Sheriffs?

I’m fine with it. They should test it in phases to judge the effectiveness as is only sensible. Baltimore, Chicago, and San Fran seem a decent starting place.

There would be a lot of bad sheriffs. And few of them would end up dead.

But in reality, it would soon come to resemble 1930 to 1950 Chicago, on steroids and nationwide. A huge number of mob bosses and their gangs all competing for territory. All running their own rackets from protection to whores to dope. And each of them killing anyone who does not knuckle under, or would dare to compete.

Without police security, say goodbye to fire and ambulance services in high crime areas too.

When there are traffic accidents on the freeway, nobody will respond, just see to your self the best you can.

That should work, give or take.

Less cops simply means less opposition, which means more riots, which means more mob rule. They obviously know that and that's why they want it.