Should the FBI be abolished?

[Juxtapose]

Yes

No

Updates

1 y

I would have the US Marshals and local law enforcement fill the gap, the FBI is unneeded and actively detrimental.

[BCA6010]

I wouldn't say "abolished," but the entire federal law enforcement apparatus needs an overhaul, which would include among other changes, a lot fewer individual agencies and changing how leadership is selected and trained at some of them. The way the FBI does it is idiotic, and easily exploited to groom political yesmen early in their careers rather than elevating experts in their field- you could probably get rid of 10-15% of the FBI or any other agency and it would be a radical improvement in terms of both effectiveness and legitimacy. The other major change is that aside from the currency related mission of the Secret Service, the bulk of FLEO attention should be directed at smuggling, trafficking, and other outside threats.

You could feasibly streamline the entire federal law enforcement system into three agencies by merging ICE, Customs, and the Border Patrol, merging the USMS, FBI, ATF, USSS, and IRS, and merging the US Forest service, bureau of land management's investigation unit, and DEA. The problem you still run into of course is the human factor, and if you could find a way to permanently ban or at least suppress the political corruption of law enforcement bodies, then much of this would be pretty moot. There's already an IG unit for all of these agencies, but it's a well known fact to most people who have served in government or military organizations that IG is usually toothless when concerning senior leadership even though they could end the career of a junior in a snap of their fingers.

[monorprise]

How exactly are you going to convince Federal politicians always elected on the basis of numerous other issues of far greater consequence to everyone not to abuse their comparable freedom to quietly appoint yes men to do their political dirty work, and target the agencies resources toward their individual enemies?

Its not like very many of us would hear about most any of theses abuses of individual political rivals even if most American would care about their individual abuses more than pressing national issues of the day like War & peace, trade, monetary policy etc.. for which the same politicians must be elected every 2 to 6 years.

Nor will we notice the drop in performance of their legitimate jobs or overall political stagnation the state (for want of fair elections) at the Federal level for want of other similar states to compare it with and migrate to.
It should be noted we only know and care about recent abuses because they became so bold after 90 years to go after the President himself, threatening all other issues.

Outside of incidents like this and a few others ever get out over the years, and never anything that has been significant in an election. Hence why they can be so abusive. The fact that the same people giving them their orders also appointed their ONLY judges doesn't help them fear even a well written law if Congress were ever inclined to write and maintain one.

I don't see how you can plan to reform theses agencies.
The subject of abuse for theses domestic Law enforcement agencies, individuals is and has always been consistently too small to be political relevant and thus accountable for a continental sized country.

[monorprise]

Of course it should be abolished.

The Federal Constitution created "a Government of few and defined" powers of a forign nature and has no provision for a domestic law enforcement organization like the FBI.

The design of that constitution and the nature of the Government so created is incompatible with such a force being well managed and accountable to the people.

The reason our system of Federal Constitutional orders delegates to the States the practical ability to effect the people is so that we the people might defend our rights from the abuse of said power both by appeal to a higher court not appointed by the very executive that abused them and most importantly with our feet.

When you invest in 1 centralized authority the ability to directly effect the people it becomes exclusively accountable to 1 group of men leaving the people no recourse.

In the interest of Freedom and Constitutional law the FBI and all other Federal law enforcement agencies must be totally abolished.

[zagor]

Then interstate crime would have to be dealt with by co-operation between states. Good luck with that.

[monorprise]

@zagor Such cooperation is required by the Federal Constitution in the form of extradition.
As long as you have an offended State to make the claim such clause can be used by congress to rally others to demand and enforce (with said militia) cooperation.

So yes they would and do cooperate.

[LztutuIsCute]

It should depend on what cases. FBI should still exist. Who's gonna search for all the crimes?

[Juxtapose]

The USA Marshals could take over that and local law enforcement can help.

[LztutuIsCute]

If they can handle the crimes, alright, FBI should be abolished.

[Sixgunsound]

They absolutely can handle the crimes, there was a podcast somewhere that I forget now about exactly how it could be part it out and cease to exist as a political heat seeking missile.

[LztutuIsCute]

@Sixgunsound Ok. Gotchu.

[exitseven]

They turned over every rock except the one that Hunter's laptop was under. If they investigated the 2020 presidential election with half the effort they put into investigating every single person that was in DC on Jan 6th , the Jan 6th riot never would have happened. Every mass shooter had been red flagged by the fBI but nobody would actually do anything. We need the FBI like we need more inflation.

[exitseven]

The US Marshalls still have some credibility and integrity.

[Sixgunsound]

@exitseven well stated.

[monorprise]

The same people who do nearly all the work today State & local law enforcement who run 90%+ of all law enforcement and use to do all of it period.

the FBI were created in the 1930s, they did not exist before then.

[dustybiker]

@Juxtapose USM offices could make similar choices next week. You going to disband them then? Are judges to be replaced next just because people disagree with their rulings? “I didn’t win you’re fired.” The FBI’s reasonings and evidence are classified for a reason.

[Sixgunsound]

@dustybiker Democrats regularly threaten to pack the US SCOTUS. So yes, at least some people DO seem to hold to the sentiment that you ruled against me you’re irrelevant.

[dustybiker]

@Sixgunsound Of course all sides are guilty of the same. My point. Dissolving something such as the FBI isn’t helpful.

[exitseven]

@dustybiker The FBI is totally country has no confidence in it.

[dustybiker]

@exitseven Others would say the same about the supreme court. Nothing will make everyone happy.

[monorprise]

@dustybiker The Marshals lack key aspects of the enforcement power.

[Snsl153]

I never thought I'd agree with someone on the far left, but yes, let's get rid of it.

[OddBeMe]

Why?

[Snsl153]

@OddBeMe Why get rid of the FBI, or why this is the very first time I've actually agreed with someone on the far Left of the political spectrum?
Well, if it's the former, the reason is simple enough; as I understand it, it has become extremely politicised. It's almost like America's version of the KGB. The same thing has happened in my country, in my state. The state police in Victoria clearly demonstrated their political bias when they allowed BLM protests to take place unmolested, but when people concerned about their very future had had enough of all the restrictive and destructive mandates and came out to protest, it was like the Czarist police crushing the revolution of 1905 in Russia. The 'Black Lives Matter' movement has absolutely nothing to do with Australia, it's purely an American phenomenon, and yet we had people demonstrating their support for that Marxist organisation during a supposed pandemic (most of them weren't wearing masks, by the way, and they didn't get into trouble for that either).
As for this being the first time I'm agreeing with someone on the radical Left, well, to put it bluntly, those people are literally insane. They believe in more than two genders, that gender is "fluid" (it's not), that segregating toilet facilities according to gender is a bad idea, that the concept of a woman can't be defined anymore, that men who "identify" as women should compete in women's sports, and that censorship is a good idea if the idea being censored "triggers" them. They live in a batshit crazy alternative reality that I want nothing to do with.

[OddBeMe]

The FBI is like the KGB? You guys seemed to like them when they cleared Kavanaugh…

[Snsl153]

@OddBeMe "You guys"? Kavanaugh? The name seems familiar, but I don't remember what that was about (assuming I ever knew in the first place).

[OddBeMe]

The drunk supreme court guy.

[OddBeMe]

Just seems like you right wingers are a bit flaky about who’s traitorous from time to time.

[Snsl153]

@OddBeMe Let me get this straight. You think I'm a "right-winger" because I don't know who someone named Kavanaugh is. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense (not). You can't expect people to know everything you know.

[OddBeMe]

No because you're “surprised to agree with a lefty”.

[Avicenna]

@OddBeMe : Don’t play dumb. Even the FBI had to admit Blasey Ford was lying. That’s how bad her acting job was.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna actually no…Wah Wah
www.vanityfair.com/.../brett-kavanaugh-fbi-investigation

[Avicenna]

Keep dreaming. Do you actually think was telling the truth?

[Wade12345]

Whats with you people and wanting to abolish law enforcement. What next, do you also want a purge day?

The FBI caught Western Union operating a scam, not the union customers, the company was involved in a scam. I never knew it happened, but the FBI figured out western Union owed me about $600 one time and forced them to pay me back along with all the other people they robbed.

The FBI solves most murders and rapes that cross state lines.

Do I agree with everything theyv'e ever done? Obviously not. It should be illegal to "bait" someone into committing a crime. One year two agents did that with a suspected terrorist, and he actually went through with it and attempted to bomb New York City and I don't know whether the agents were ever punished for their method fo trying to catch him ahead of time.. by actually teaching him how to make a homemade firebomb. That should have been two agents arrested too. That method of law enforcement actually produces more crime and distrust, so should never be employed.

[Juxtapose]

Your entire argument is dismantled by the fact that the USA Marshals and local law enforcement could easily fill the role of the FBI.

[Wade12345]

The woman in the video just wants to abolish law enforcement because she's black and blacks hate law and order and especially hate whites.

[Juxtapose]

Racist!

[Wade12345]

NO facts.

90% of the violent crime committed in the united States is done by black people.

If you enforce the law and put them in prisons, they accuse you of "enslaving" them.

IF you don't enforce the law you turn into New Orleans where the murder and theft and rape rates are worse than at any time in history.

[monorprise]

@Wade12345 As a Federal domestic "law enforcement" organization the FBI is effectively unaccountable. The subject of its abuse individuals have always been too small and obscure to ever be politically significant to the government politicians who controls them.

Allowing the same in addition to its own difficult to fire agents to selectively abuse this the most dangerous power of government for their own end almost always with impunity.

As @Juxtapose pointed out Local law enforcement combined with (where necessary) the non-law enforcement of the Marshal service have prior to the 1930s been perfectly acquitted to theses tasks and even today still do much if not most of the work.

[hahahmm]

Let's say it was abolished. 5 minutes later congress would create a new version of the FBI that has 90% the exact same management and agents. There's fundamental problems with how the U. S. works but it's all rooted in politics that isn't going to change.

[Juxtapose]

Well if we killed all of them and replaced them with average citizens maybe that would work?

I think about once in every generation giant organizations like the government should be purged.

[hahahmm]

No. My view - and I have been saying this for years -- society has a terminal disease. We're like people on the Titanic talking about how if we re-arrange the deck chairs we can save the ship. Nah, I don't think so. Nobody in my circle of friends listened to me 5 years ago. All of a sudden they seem to get it tho.

[Juxtapose]

All organizations are doomed to fall to corruption sooner or later. It is up to us to hold them accountable.

[Juxtapose]

[hahahmm]

What if the cancer in society has infected almost every single individual. Some have a bad case, some have mild cases & don't even realize how much they have contributed to the decline. For example, when I hear parents whining about how transgenders are in girls' locker rooms and playing sports, I don't think, "woke people forced this on the majority". I think, soft dads, too busy watching porn/netflix/banging hookers didn't have time to nip that sh't in the bud 20+ years ago and now have no balls and expect the government to do everything for them. Can you imagine people 50 years ago needing to beg others to help them deal with that stuff? Nah... Yes, there some strong/traditional dudes around but I bet most of them are just biding their time for the 'apocalypse' stuff to cull the herd.

[goaded]

" All organizations are doomed to fall to corruption sooner or later. It is up to us to hold them accountable. "
Does that include serving a legal warrant issued by a Trump-appointed judge? You think you should be allowed to "hold them accountable" for that, like the moron in Ohio thought?

[KrakenAttackin]

@hahahmm. The FBI was once a quality and impartial organization.

[Roseboy]

i have no opinion cause i dont know enough

but i did hear about them going behind apple's back so they can search people's apple devices as they please and that was not cool

and also when they raided a home to arrest a man and killed his innocent wife and children just because they tried to defend themselves

and i dont think I've heard many positive stories

there probably are some

but i think a lot of these systems in the US need to be adapted and so if not abolish the FBI, tweak the FBI

[monorprise]

The FBI were created in the 1930s along with many other corrupt institutions, and are not a part of the original American system.

Under the original Federal constitution States were suppose to provide all domestic law enforcement and thus provide a check upon the abuse of the few domestic powers of the Federal Government by refusing to enforce such edicts on the people. While the Federal Government helped check the States by providing independent appeal and the vote of the people's feet.

This worked because the Federal government was designed to be "A Government of few and defined powers" of a forign nature, and thus had no real need to act against the people directly.

Via this system of Federal accountability individual liberty was securable while security was provided.

Creating a Federal law enforcement organization like the FBI in the 1930s broke this system by allowing the Federal Government to bypass any check upon their power by the States and directly threaten the people.

In the interest of freedom and constitutional law the FBI and all other Federal law enforcement must be abolished.

[Exterminatore]

I don’t think so but it should be depoliticized. Frankly If there is not sold evidence against Trump this time, all of us need to demand accountability. I have never see anyone go after any politician the way they have with Trump. Enough is enough.


They’re not getting another Rhino. Us conservatives won’t stand for it. I know that’s why they hate him. They want someone who will mostly just bend the knee and only talk the talk. They can forget it. People are largely unhappy with the woke folk and the pinkos.

[goaded]

"If there is not sold evidence against Trump this time" Apart from TS/SCI documents removed from government secure locations, you mean?

[Exterminatore]

Let’s see if it’s true.

[monorprise]

How do you depoliticized a effectively unaccountable organization?

The FBI along with all other Federal "law enforcement" organizations need to be totally abolished, and all domestic law enforcement needs to be returned to the States.

The existences of Federal law enforcement like the FBI allows the Federal Government to bypass the constitutional check by the States upon the abuse of their few legitimate domestic power provided by the Federal Constitution.

The original Federal constitution didn't provide for any kind of Federal law enforcement beyond that of borrowing the State's militia, nor did it provide almost anything in the way of Federal Domestic laws outside of the territories and A1S8C17 districts.

[goaded]

@monorprise "How do you depoliticized a effectively unaccountable organization?" They have to follow the law, same as everyone else. What is it with you people who want to go back to the 18th century? You'd have had a shitty life, back then.

[monorprise]

@goaded If the FBI "has to follow the law" then why don't they? Why do they have such a long history of being used to spy upon and blackmail political enemies?

Even the "laws" made by their theoretical masters are themselfs in printable effectively beyond accountability on the account of being lost among the forest of other issues their same politicians must be "accountable" for every 2-6.

That an agency who's subject of abuse (individuals) is soo dissimilar to the majority of said policy questions of the same formerly FEDERAL government is accountable for in each of those elections. In addition to being so obscurely distant from the eyes of 300+ million people most of whom are 1000+ miles away from any chance of knowing of such abuse only makes them even less accountable in practice.

This is why legitimate law enforcement under the system of Federal & State constitutions is local, and as such the local abuses may be locally known and delta with by elected officials more specifically accountable for that propose.

Hence why the FBI like all other federal "Domenic law enforcement" is not authorized by the Constitution and MUST be totally abolished.

[goaded]

@monorprise Of course the country would be much better off without anyone to

Protect the United States from terrorist attacks
Protect the United States against foreign intelligence operations, espionage, and cyber operations
Combat significant cyber criminal activity
Combat public corruption at all levels
Protect civil rights
Combat transnational criminal enterprises
Combat major white-collar crime
Combat significant violent crime

Going back to the 18th century is not a sane approach to the 21st century.

[monorprise]

@goaded We have such a thing as State police who are more than capable of dealing with all the domestic aspects of such issues, and Military intelligence to deal with the non-domestic aspects of such things.

You don't have to have domestic law enforcement power to follow people around in this country, you can still call upon State authorities as the FBI Do indeed do in almost all cases to supplement their tiny force in actually enforce said laws.

This gives the separately elected and specifically accountable States the chance to verify they are not in fact abusing their authority with such requests.

[goaded]

@monorprise No, they're not capable.

[monorprise]

@goaded You expect me to believe state police are not capable of doing the job they are already doing?

Maybe your police department but my city and state have been doing this work for 200 years.

[Exterminatore]

@mono

You make a real good point. Maybe abolishment is the only way.

[goaded]

@monorprise No, I expect you to understand that they're not capable of doing what the FBI does because they're limited to their individual states, which is why the FBI was founded in the first place.

[monorprise]

@goaded Only in the sense that the FBI is limited to the USA which is to say not very much.

In practice State police are in fact far less limited than the FBI in this respect for they have better and more organized relations with other states. As for following forign suspect around and financing private investigations that can be done via military intelligent as it was before.

Or as done currently already, simply sending the investigators after a suspects and using forign local authority to actually arrest and deport. Today State investigation divisions still do this, and even go overseas to on occasions to help deal with crimes relating to their citizens. Remember the Georgia Bureau of Investigation in Aruba some time ago to help investigate a crime involving one of their citizens? The Texas Rangers are famous going even further than that.

[Aerissa_Jade]

Only reason I say is no, is due to Native American tribal lands and federal crimes. The FBI is the only law enforcement agency that has any ability to go there and handle felonies. Due to various court rulings and since those are somewhat their own nations, they can't just pass a law saying, lets have the Federal Marshalls do it, they can't legally do it. That law would be considered illegal.

I'd be fine with the FBI being restricted to Native lands though and no where else, that is something they can do.

[monorprise]

Although the FBI were never in the Federal constitutions, congress can under Article 1 section 8 Clause 15 borrow the State's militia for such proposes when cooperation is not given. This is politically enforceable so long as there is an aggrieved party.

As for Federal Domestic law, you might noticed the 11 page Federal Constitution Provides almost no power to many such kind of law outside of territories and Article 1 Section 8 clause 17 Districts like D. C. and military instillation. In those cases their general power would enable them to employ a marshal.

Believe it or not we didn't have an FBI before the 1930s and yet we did have such issues.

[RolandCuthbert]

Trumpturds have loved the FBI for decades even as;

1. The FBI investigated civil right groups for the murders that were committed against them.

2. The FBI investigated MLK JR. for his civil rights work.

3. The FBI lied and framed the men convicted for murdering Malcolm X.

4. The FBI investigated Fred Hampton. Then lied and sowed disinformation about his movement. Then they drugged, shot and killed him in his own home.

I could go on, but what is the point? A trumpturd yelps when the FBI actually holds him and his accountable to the law.

[monorprise]

Conservatives like law enforcement in general, that sometimes gets confused for the Federal Government's lawless attempts at control in the form of the FBI. Conservatives also like limited and local government which is a reason NOT to like the FBI.

As you illustrated thou the FBI has a long history of abuse.

[Kiss_Me]

Each Federal Law enforcement agency has its own Stick. The FBI actively investigates crimes that span multiple states or violate Federal law. True, they have lost a lot of credibility due to the "banana republic" they have created, but we still need them.

The US Marshals serve Federal Warrants for arrest, Protect Federal Courts, transport prisoners, operate witness protection, and track down escaped fugitives.

Abolishing the FBI and transferring their responsibilities to the US Marshals will likely fix nothing. The potential and ability for politically motivated application of the law will still exist.

[Telekinetic-Potato]

I think the judge who let them into trumps house should be scrutinized, I think merrick garland should be scrutinized as well.

The real problem with our country is that it's corrupt to the point where there's no clear way to audit these agencies anymore. Which the FBI should be audited out the ass at this point.

Who's gonna do it? A politician? Do you trust the CIA to do it? Maybe they should hire nardwar

[JDavid25]

Yeah, the FBI is nothing but a tool at this point.. Useless also.. A popular conservative YouTuber did what the FBI couldn't.. Or didn't bother to do.. Not to mention they were probably involved in a lot of those school shootings.. The FBI is corrupt as hell..

[OddBeMe]

No. But like “defunding the police”…i beleive in the idea behind (held by most, I assume) where massive restructuring, retraining could make policing better.

I recently watched the miniseries “Waco” about the Davidians standoff. And it reflected about the FBI either de-escalating situations with negotiators (or Mindhunters by the way) or make it a pseudo military hostage rescue team. Spoiler: Waco didn't end well for…well anyone.

[Avicenna]

You might want to read about the work of the Church Committee (Frank Church was a Democrat, by the way) before you blithely continue to accept FBI abuses.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna oh i have. Big fan. But my comment still stands.

[Avicenna]

We've already seen the effects of "defunding" the police. It doesn't make policing better, it makes it worse. And so it is with ignoring the use of the FBI as a Democratic Party Revolutionary Guard.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna well at least you were open to it. :(

[KrakenAttackin]

@OddBeMe. I know a lady who was an ATF agent at the Waco siege. She was so disgusted with the whole event she resigned soon after. Waco was a colossal cluster fuck and abuse by the government.

[OddBeMe]

@KrakenAttackin no doubt. And their use of force (like cops today) was overkill. But the Davidians were apocalytic cult members and Koresh was fcking pre-teens. As well as the massive arsenal they had.

[KrakenAttackin]

@OddBeMe. Karesh could and should have been arrested off site when he was running an errand or otherwise alone. Without him the search warrant could likely have been served without violence. Also, the ATF thought they could flash federal tin and everyone wound bend over for them. Arrogance kills.

[OddBeMe]

Absolutely agreed.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna is there a process of "defunding"? Its not like quantitative easing. There's stupid stories of seattle police being disbanded for an hour or so. But like I keep telling you fcks... thats not what defunding means. It means reorganzing.

[Avicenna]

Some advocates of defunding the police make it quite clear that they want to disband police departments. Others want to cut budgets significantly (which has happened in a lot of crime-ridden leftist hellholes). Defund clearly means reducing money allocated to police departments. Seattle was one of the leftist hellholes that reduced the money allocated to its police department.

"Reorganizing" is a vague term. It's no secret that many leftists want to replace local and state police departments with a federal police focused on targeting what leftists consider crimes- being conservative, saying something leftists don't like, resisting leftist extremism, censorship and persecution.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna well poll all leftists and they’ll say keep police, maybe re-educate them in de-escalation.

[Avicenna]

That doesn't fit any definition of "reorganization", nor does it fit any definition of "defunding". And no way a group of all leftists will say exactly that.

Maybe it would also be a good idea to teach people how to interact with police should they be stopped? But there's no money in that...

[Avicenna]

But ongoing training is definitely a good idea

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna Sure. But your side keeps posting Vendetta memes of “People shouldn't be afraid of their govts”. People shouldn't be afraid of a traffic stop. Reorganization of funding into less military equipment and more de-escalation training.

[Avicenna]

I don't know what you're seeing, but you have no business trying to make me responsible for it- I doubt you'd take responsibility for the abuses perpetrated by your fellow Democrats. What you may be seeing is concern over the types of abuses the Church Committee identified as well as illegal surveillance and weaponization of the FBI, which are legitimate concerns. The FBI wields a whole lot more power (and certainly federal prosecutors do) than the local cop on patrol making a traffic stop.

I guess you're talking about police departments using surplus military equipment, which has nothing to do with traffic stops and is a separate issue (feel free to address it in detail without inaccurately conflating it with traffic stops).

There's going to be a certain amount of nervousness at a traffic stop on both sides (cops have been shot when doing traffic stops), so it's a two-way street. "De-escalation" can't mean preventing the cop from doing their job and it can't mean not cooperating with legal instructions by cops.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna oooh hit a chord. Should we be afraid of the police? You fcks talk big about congress or Biden. I’m talking about a simple traffic stop. you're saying WE should behave better when the government pulls us over for expired plates?

[Avicenna]

Use some common sense. We shouldn’t blindly trust the police, but at a basic traffic stop you aren’t going to have a problem if you cooperate. Ever been pulled over on a traffic stop or Ben a passenger when someone Else was? ? How did you behave?

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna so we should be afraid of cops? Fck that.

[Avicenna]

How about answering my question about being in a traffic stop?

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna polite and respectful to someone doing their job. But if I were to jump out and run off for some stupid reason thats not a good enough reason to get shot in the back.

[Avicenna]

So if you're polite and respectful, you don't have a problem. That's interesting- I've noticed that too.

But what if you try to run away and you're firing a gun? W

[Avicenna]

What if you try to drive away smelling of alcohol and your speech was slurred?

What if you there were warrants out for your arrest for carjacking and rape?

The point is that different circumstances might call for different results. And whose fault is that you ran away from the cop? Not the cop's.

Sure, there should be other things done besides shooting a potential suspect in the back, but the point is sometimes you don't have a choice as a cop if you reasonably believe the fleeing suspect is dangerous.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna cops dont have licenses to kill. Stun guns, pit maneuverers, backup…sorry very few excuses for killing. And if they can't handle the pressure get get the fck out.

[Avicenna]

No one says they have "a license to kill". But they deal with a lot of different situations that call for varying uses of force, and we can't cover every possibility here. Sometimes they have to use deadly force, although it's only appropriate in certain instances. Also don't forget these are fast-moving situations they may be dealing with.

[OddBeMe]

@Avicenna sure but we’re allowing them to use deadly force more leniently, especially with certain minorities. Or is it a coincident its black men shot in the back?

[Avicenna]

Since neither you nor I are law enforcement or lawyers working in criminal law, I doubt we can have a very knowledgeable discussion about whether guidelines for police to use deadly force are lenient or not. However, after having had a number of discussions with you, I've found your perspective to be very ideological rather than practical and very racist against whites, so it would be naive to accept your vague, unsupported claims at face value. That you added race baiting into your comments makes them even less likely to be accurate.

Whether or not nonwhites are more likely to have unjustified deadly force used against them, I don't know, but I do know that your claim that "black men get shot in the back" not only lacks context but falsely implies something we know doesn't actually happen that much is some sort of epidemic or genocide. That damages your credibility even more.

[KrakenAttackin]

@OddBeMe. Brother, you haven't been there. I was in a shooting where I was in a large house that was (illegally) chopped into small room/apartments. I was doing a follow up for a theft incident and knocked on a door, when a another door opened and a random guy shot at us! Turns out he had a warrant for attempted murder from Chicago. He fired one shot than jumped out of a window and broke his leg and immediately surrendered. Shit happens FAST. We had no idea he was there or why he was shooting at us.

[KrakenAttackin]

@OddBeMe. Absolutely agree. Just running is not a valid reason to shoot someone.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Avicenna You still can't shoot in the situation you describe. You can pursue and justify high speeds, but you cannot shoot at this point. Someone has to be actively threatening life or serious physical harm to a person before you can use deadly force.

[KrakenAttackin]

@OddBeMe. Believe it or not police do a lot of training in de escalation. Having said that I knew plenty of cops that would arrive on scene after I had everyone agreeing to go inside and go to bed, and these guys would get people riled up again. Before you knew it we were arresting a bunch of people. Pain in the ass. Most cops are not like this, but it only takes one.

[Avicenna]

@KrakenAttackin: Shooting at the Officer while running away was the situation I would think would allow for deadly force. I mentioned a couple of others to show that use of force is a spectrum, not that deadly force is always justified because obviously it isn’t, as I said.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Avicenna Fair enough, you can return fire fired upon.

[genericname85]

i'm not a leftist but the fbi has proven over an over to be just an unconstitutional rogue institution with too much power that they casually abuse every day just like the cia.

[Juxtapose]

Well given how they are treating Trump I don't think you have to be a leftist at this point to hate three lettered institutions.

[genericname85]

yeah. i'm a centrist libertarian, so i'm usually accused of being a leftist by right wingers and accused of being a conservative nut by leftists xD sucks. i don't know where all this trump hate comes from considering biden is so much worse. i mean the political party doesn't even matter. even if you're a hardcore leftist, you should see that biden is in no way fit to be a president on a purely physical/health level... don't even have to look at all the massive and obvious corruption and crime that he and hunter are involved in, that for some reason nobody seems to go after even though the evidence is right there out in the open.

[genericname85]

the thing about cia and fbi is that they just act against the law and do what they want. as Snowden was proven right about his whistleblowing and the courts actually found that the cia acted in violation of the law, they just adjusted the law to make what the CIA did right in hindsight. and nobody fucking cares about these outlaws. snowden is still in exile and assange massively misstreated. this is as bad or worse than the shit usa regularly accuses poor third world countries of before invading. so i would say this bullshit is systemic to the American political system. corruption and lawlessness. if you got the money, you got the power and litterally nobody can do anything against that. if you have as much money as bill gates, you can just casually take your child fucking trip to Epsteins child rape amousement park island and nobody bats an eye.

[genericname85]

And remember how the FBI just stood there nodding when Bush just blatantly lied to the people about weapons of mass destruction? they knew exactly there were none. they just didn't have the backbone to call Bush out on his bullshit.

[Moose304]

Love him or hate him, but one thing ole J Edgar did was keep the FBI as independent as possible. Yes, he kept files on politicians, but I think that was more to keep them out of his business. I think after Watergate the FBI started being used as a political weapon more and more. Going back to the 1930s forward to the 60s the FBI did a great job of taking down groups like the Mafia and the KKK. Sadly today they are more like the old KGB and need to be disbanded.

[FunkyMonkee]

At LEAST replaced with good, honest people!! They've had quite a few over the years! No reason they can't find more and flush the turds they have, now!! The cops could do with a good enema, too!!

[monorprise]

Do you honestly think Federal politicians would be inclined to replace such law enforcement leaders with "Good honest people" rather than simply people willing to do their dirty work?

The problem with the FBI like every other "Federal" domestic law enforcement agency is the fact that the subject of their abuse is an individual, which in a large continental sized country who's government leaders always has countless other very different issues to run on makes them effectively unaccountable.

For in nearly all cases of abuses against an individual too few of the electorate would be close enough to know of said abuse to be politically relevant To the politicians in charge in any election.

Elections which would almost always be held on completely different issues that actually do matter to most of the population.
This is why "Federal" Domestic law enforcement is inherently unaccountable, there is no reliable way to keep them in check. That they are today soo bold as to go after Presidents is only the result of 90 years of being unaccountable for going after everyone else.

[FunkyMonkee]

@monorprise No, I don't. But, I can dream, can't I?
Obviously, the Feds had something to hide because they didn't want any of the security cameras turned on during the raid!

[Avicenna]

Yes, it has violated too many peoples rights over the years. It’s functions could be transferred to the US Marshals and new employees hired. .

[StevieNix]

I agree 100%.
Did you hear that the new Biden's 87,000 IRS agents will be required to wear a gun, and be willing to shoot to kill?

[Avicenna]

@StevieNix: I sure have. There is no reason for them to be armed or even have physical contact with taxpayers since audits are primarily done by correspondence or have them dealing with tax accountants/lawyers where it's also done electronically.

The Democrats are sick totalitarians to pass such legislation, and it's so ridiculous that they don't get the benefit of the doubt- whatever excuse there is for arming IRS agents to kill is total BS.

[StevieNix]

The left are morons,

[exitseven]

Yes, the FBI has not been a serious law enforcement agency for 20 years. A whole new agency has to be created with a non partisan leadership with no ties any politicians.

[monorprise]

Were they a serous force in the 1930s thou 50s under J Edgar hoover?

Under the original constitution States were suppose to provide a check upon the abuse of the few domestic powers of the Federal Government by refusing to enforce there edict. While the Federal Government helped check the States by providing independent appeal and the vote of the people's feet.

This was how our system was suppose to defend the rights of the people and it broken when Washington cease to go thou the States as required by the original Federal Constitution.

The FBI and all other Federal Domestic law enforcement must be totally abolished if we are to be a free people long term.

[Dargil]

a. The top management should be purged and a new investigative body be created with better regulation and oversite. The FBI has been corrupt since J Edgar.

[Dargil]

The Marshal service idea is a good one. It is "Justified".

[888theGreat]

It should be combined with CIA and ATF and have funds cut , and reduced in size but no abolished

[Juxtapose]

The CIA is pretty shitty too. Perhaps it should be left up to the marshalls?

[goaded]

You want the CIA working inside the US, now? What could possibly go wrong?

[Juxtapose]

@goaded get rid of them too!

[goaded]

No. You need law enforcement.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded man do you know what kinds of experiments the CIA have been running? And that's just the declassified shit..

[Juxtapose]

They probably killed JFK too.

[goaded]

Was that why he didn't make an appearence when QAnon said he would last year?

[ElementoP]

The people who voted are still dumb enough to think the FBI is a bunch of cool dudes in suits and ties fighting for justice

Not just another branch of the Democratic party

[ElementoP]

Voted no*

[AviatorTom]

If the FBI were abolished, there would be no enforcement of federal crimes, which would mean all the legislation and laws that identify crimes at the federal level would disappear. Chaos would result.

[monorprise]

We have States who already make and enforce 90%+ of all domestic laws including many of the few legitimate federal domestic acts.
Under the original constitution States were suppose to provide a check upon the abuse of the few domestic powers of the Federal Government. While the Federal Government helped check the States by providing independent appeal and the vote of the people's feet.

Having a federal Domestic law enforcement force breaks down this system of accountability in allowing the Federal force to become abusive and unaccountable.

The FBI must be abolished along with all other Federal Law Domestic enforcement force. They are NOT authorized by the Federal Constitution for a reason.

[KrakenAttackin]

@AviatorTom. I would prefer chaos to mass political corruption.

[DCooper]

Yup, along with all the rest of the executive branch alphabet agencies.