Are Womens' Cycling Competitions Wrecked?

[Handlebars]

I don't even know that "0 incidents of violence" is achievable. Certainly it is something to strive for.

One observation I'd make is that many other rich countries resolve murders at very high rates -- 95A%+ for Finland and Switzerland, and most other European countries are at rates over 70%.

The United States is under 50% for resolution of murders, and under 35% for resolution of sexual assaults.

A note: when I say "resolution" I mean the perpetrator was identified and either charged or it was determined that they were beyond the law, e.g. the perpetrator was deceased or had fled to another country where we could not extradite.

Hearing those numbers, I have a hard time understanding, when we spend at a very high per capita rate on law enforcement, why we can't bring more than 50% of murderers to justice. Bringing more such individuals to justice would certainly have a substantial deterrent effect. So a reorganization and rethinking of our law enforcement priorities and procedures seems warranted. A good starting point would be studying how countries like Finland or Switzerland operate their criminal justice systems and trying to learn from them. The United States in general has a horrible "not invented here" syndrome and we could do a lot to improve our society if we were more willing to learn from others and not so damned arrogant. That doesn't mean everything or even most things would apply but a willingness to learn, a willingness to improve, and even a willingness to admit that we could learn and improve would do a lot to help our country.

I'd turn your question around: what do you think is an acceptable number of "incidents of violence" in the United States?

For one thing America has strong protections for the innocent and for rights. Think about how you'd like to reduce that.
Then talk about Sweden where the rape stats show ... well, that there are political reasons regarding migrants and some religion or other so let's not talk about it.

wiki:"In 2014, there were 6,697 rapes reported to the Swedish police, or 69 cases per 100,000 population, according to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (BRÅ), which is an 11% increase from the previous year.[6] In 2015, the number of reported rapes declined 12%, to 5918 (On the other hand, Swedish Crime Survey in 2015 showed that 1.7% of the total population or 129,000 people between 16–79 years old have exposed to some extension of sexual offenses include rape previously in their lives, increased from 1% in 2014.[7]) In 2016, the number of reported rapes increased again to 6,715.[8] The number of convictions has remained relatively unchanged since 2005, with approximately 190 convictions on average each year.[9][10] The total number of convictions for rape and aggravated rape in Sweden 2015 was 176'

The United States is under 50% for resolution of murders, and under 35% for resolution of sexual assaults.

Sweden: 176 convictions out of 5918 attacks ... can you do the math? Hmmm?

They don't give a rat's behind for their own population in Sweden. America is the greatest nation in the history of the world. So many don't appreciate what they were so lucky to be born into. They want to throw it all away to whomever from wherever, claims it. Be a Sweden. Forsake your children.

 

[FlatSix911]

I don't even know that "0 incidents of violence" is achievable. Certainly it is something to strive for.

One observation I'd make is that many other rich countries resolve murders at very high rates -- 95A%+ for Finland and Switzerland, and most other European countries are at rates over 70%.

The United States is under 50% for resolution of murders, and under 35% for resolution of sexual assaults.

Hearing those numbers, I have a hard time understanding, when we spend at a very high per capita rate on law enforcement, why we can't bring more than 50% of murderers to justice.

Why the answer is simple really... some communities refuse to cooperate with the police.
Try asking for a witness to a shooting in broad daylight on a crowded street in Chicago.

 

[ChezCheese:)]

How about instead of ranting on about how you presume other people live their lives and make their choices, why don't you do something good for the planet and donate to my non-profit organization to save trees and fund forests: ourforestfund.org
The world will be a better place for it.

 

[Handlebars]

How about instead of ranting on about how you presume other people live their lives and make their choices, why don't you do something good for the planet and donate to my non-profit organization to save trees and fund forests: ourforestfund.org
The world will be a better place for it.

Why don't you advertise in the proper place for it, instead?

 

[ChezCheese:)]

My point is do something to make the world a better place instead of ranting about things you don't like and can't change.

 

[FlatSix911]

When you have run out of valid arguments... then deflect and change the subject.

BTW, having said that I think that the Forest Fund is a worthy project. http://ourforestfund.org/our-first-project/

 

[Mr. Coffee]

Why the answer is simple really... some communities refuse to cooperate with the police.
Try asking for a witness to a shooting in broad daylight on a crowded street in Chicago.

That might partially explain it. On the other hand many rural jurisdictions have very low clearance rates as well, where your explanation doesn't likely hold as well.

In the end, even if your position is correct, we still need to do better. Saying we can't (or won't) fix something because somebody else is making the fix difficult is pretty damned lame, in my opinion. Sometimes you just have to roll up your sleeves and do actual work.

 

[mogulskier]

When you have run out of valid arguments... then deflect and change the subject.

BTW, having said that I think that the Forest Fund is a worthy project. http://ourforestfund.org/our-first-project/

Agree on both counts.

 

[mogulskier]

That might partially explain it. On the other hand many rural jurisdictions have very low clearance rates as well, where your explanation doesn't likely hold as well.

In the end, even if your position is correct, we still need to do better. Saying we can't (or won't) fix something because somebody else is making the fix difficult is pretty damned lame, in my opinion. Sometimes you just have to roll up your sleeves and do actual work.

Beware the law of unintended consequences. There is no doubt Government and Law Enforcement can fix the problem. For me, the question is why isn't it being done? Even Minneapolis City Council, who, after George Floyd, could not bring themselves to disband the Police Department as promised. The city manager had to deny their request because they had no plan on how to replace it.

If we are going to fix this, why not start in Chicago or NYC and have them show us how easy it is and create the template for other cities to follow.

Far easier to "talk" about it where you can just go to bed at night and keep the status quo then it is to actually "do" something about it.

Perhaps it really is the fear of unintended consequences.

 

[ChezCheese:)]

When you have run out of valid arguments... then deflect and change the subject.

BTW, having said that I think that the Forest Fund is a worthy project. http://ourforestfund.org/our-first-project/

I'm not arguing -- I'm trying to point out the that there are more productive ways of improving the world we live in than dissing countries the arguers have probably never lived in.

And thank you!

 

[Handlebars]

My point is do something to make the world a better place instead of ranting about things you don't like and can't change.

But it's only your baseless claim that we can't change what we disapprove of. And maybe your "non profit" is not a good thing at all. Your slur terms used to describe our dissent here doesn't convince me that you are an honest broker.

I'm trying to point out the that there are more productive ways

There might be more productive ways than to denigrate those here with words like "ranting" and saying "things you can't change" - that is a garbage attempt to cause despair in those you disdain.
Even Mr. Coffee said

Saying we can't (or won't) fix something because somebody else is making the fix difficult is pretty damned lame, in my opinion.

So possibly both sides can recognize what you are trying to do here; demoralize. And it's despicable.

I'm trying to point out the that there are more productive ways of improving the world we live in than dissing countries

So you diss the people posting here in order to show the way. Not hypocritical at all
The hypocrisy is a sign that perhaps even your "nonprofit " is not what it seems.

Someone makes money or position from non profits. And maybe you are against controlled burns and thus are part of the problem. Either way, this isn't the place to discuss it, so post your adverts in the proper places, please.

 

[Mr. Coffee]

Beware the law of unintended consequences. There is no doubt Government and Law Enforcement can fix the problem. For me, the question is why isn't it being done? Even Minneapolis City Council, who, after George Floyd, could not bring themselves to disband the Police Department as promised. The city manager had to deny their request because they had no plan on how to replace it.

If we are going to fix this, why not start in Chicago or NYC and have them show us how easy it is and create the template for other cities to follow.

Far easier to "talk" about it where you can just go to bed at night and keep the status quo then it is to actually "do" something about it.

Perhaps it really is the fear of unintended consequences.

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding and appreciating your point of view. You asked me a specific question and I gave what I thought was a reasonable and thoughtful answer, and asked you a question in return which you ignored. That isn't a debate or a constructive discussion. If you don't wish to participate in good faith that's fine with me but don't expect me to give you any more of my time or attention.

I found this very interesting and recent article about measuring the effectiveness of law enforcement. There was what I think is a pretty serious and thought-provoking quote on the bottom of page 9:

The observations in this Article about police effectiveness may be unsettling. One may not sleep soundly knowing that 97% of burglars, 88% of rapists, and over
50% of murderers get away with their crimes. Indeed, we live in a world where much more often than not, crimes go unsolved and unaccounted for.

I don't know about you, but those numbers aren't even remotely acceptable, and I suspect that most people would agree with me.

So from my point of view the question becomes, "if law enforcement doesn't solve crimes, then why in blazes are we paying them so much?"

It seems to me that if some communities do not trust law enforcement and that inhibits the solving of crimes, law enforcement agencies should earn the trust of those communities to permit them to do their jobs. It doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

 

[Handlebars]

It seems to me that if some communities do not trust law enforcement and that inhibits the solving of crimes, law enforcement agencies should earn the trust of those communities to permit them to do their jobs. It doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

When corrupt politicians such as those in the hellholes, when they bail out those burning down their cities, and they praise as a hero someone who repeatedly sexually assaults a women and flees with her children, and attacks the cops, it isn't the cops' fault, it's YOUR fault if you support these people in Chicago Detroit and NY and the VP office. When it's OK to knowingly purposefully infect others with HIV, but it's a horrendous assault on grandma to go without a mask in public or keep your business open...

...things are not OK, and it's your fault if you support them.

 

[mogulskier]

I don't even know that "0 incidents of violence" is achievable. Certainly it is something to strive for.

One observation I'd make is that many other rich countries resolve murders at very high rates -- 95A%+ for Finland and Switzerland, and most other European countries are at rates over 70%.

The United States is under 50% for resolution of murders, and under 35% for resolution of sexual assaults.

A note: when I say "resolution" I mean the perpetrator was identified and either charged or it was determined that they were beyond the law, e.g. the perpetrator was deceased or had fled to another country where we could not extradite.

Hearing those numbers, I have a hard time understanding, when we spend at a very high per capita rate on law enforcement, why we can't bring more than 50% of murderers to justice. Bringing more such individuals to justice would certainly have a substantial deterrent effect. So a reorganization and rethinking of our law enforcement priorities and procedures seems warranted. A good starting point would be studying how countries like Finland or Switzerland operate their criminal justice systems and trying to learn from them. The United States in general has a horrible "not invented here" syndrome and we could do a lot to improve our society if we were more willing to learn from others and not so damned arrogant. That doesn't mean everything or even most things would apply but a willingness to learn, a willingness to improve, and even a willingness to admit that we could learn and improve would do a lot to help our country.

I'd turn your question around: what do you think is an acceptable number of "incidents of violence" in the United States?

I do not agree on the premise that we should study Finland/Switzerland and apply those lessons learned to the US. It would be a futile effort. In order to make that happen, you need buy in from the citizens from whom their law enforcement agencies would be modeled after (i.e. Finland/Switzerland). The US is a melting pot and getting people to unilaterally support the copy of those countries law enforcement strategies to their own is next to impossible, if you could even get someone to help promote it and drive it to completion.

What I don't hear you mentioning is the "defund the police" movement. Before we start copying other countries law enforcement, we had better clear this barrier. You clearly have segmentation on this issue. Many want law enforcement completely eliminated, others want more law enforcement, and many more want a hybrid. Again, who is the person, or the agency that is going to be point person and drive this so we can achieve better resolution in line with other countries? You accomplish nothing if you cannot get commitment from the community to try something new.

There is no acceptable number of incidents of violence in the US. It is an impossible metric to measure that everyone can agree on. We simply adapt to ever changing conditions. If it gets bad enough, there will be sufficient momentum to effect change.

 

[BarryS]

How about instead of ranting on about how you presume other people live their lives and make their choices, why don't you do something good for the planet and donate to my non-profit organization to save trees and fund forests: ourforestfund.org
The world will be a better place for it.

The planet doesn't need saving . It's going to be burned up anyway . Mankind is who needs savings . Donating is 80% of these so called Non Profits are just covers to wash money .

I do not agree on the premise that we should study Finland/Switzerland and apply those lessons learned to the US. It would be a futile effort. In order to make that happen, you need buy in from the citizens from whom their law enforcement agencies would be modeled after (i.e. Finland/Switzerland). The US is a melting pot and getting people to unilaterally support the copy of those countries law enforcement strategies to their own is next to impossible, if you could even get someone to help promote it and drive it to completion.

What I don't hear you mentioning is the "defund the police" movement. Before we start copying other countries law enforcement, we had better clear this barrier. You clearly have segmentation on this issue. Many want law enforcement completely eliminated, others want more law enforcement, and many more want a hybrid. Again, who is the person, or the agency that is going to be point person and drive this so we can achieve better resolution in line with other countries? You accomplish nothing if you cannot get commitment from the community to try something new.

There is no acceptable number of incidents of violence in the US. It is an impossible metric to measure that everyone can agree on. We simply adapt to ever changing conditions. If it gets bad enough, there will be sufficient momentum to effect change.

Speaking Generically in General: Not to you as accusing . The problem is our corrupt Media only draws attention where it wants to promote a narrative. There aren't massive numbers of LGBT being attacked . In fact they attack anyone who openly disagrees with them. We hear on The News about Cops Shooting Blacks . Yet the real stats show far more whites are shot and killed then blacks are. The Most persecuted groups in America are Jews . Followed by WHITE CHRISTIANS . Look at the racism as it really is . TAKE an Application for whatever you want . From a Job , a survey, Gun Ownership , Health questions etc. The all say under race . Are you Chinese/America African American Muslim/American as though that's a race . But when it comes to Caucasian Americans . It says WHITE If that same Application said Black or yellow or red etc. They'd be screaming RACIEST.
Look at Religion You dare not say anything Negative about anyone's Muslim Hindu Mormon etc religious faith . But anything is fine about Christians . Plus the accusers suddenly all have PHD's ?? LOL

I mention these only to point how that this Topic employs the same double standard Absurdity /


When it comes to THis Tranny Men in Sports . ANyone who speaks out with common sense is not only shot down . But what they say automatically goes into the stats as So called persecution. So in essence we are saying We have to accept your mental illness and let you do whatever you want . Because that is what LGBTQ is a Sexual Perverted Mental illness .
It's present in less the 3% of teh World's Population . With 100 % of the Sexually active spreading HIV. And we are just supposed to lay down and pretend their invasion of the female arena is not only fair but something to be applauded ??

I'd love to know why without being called a name AFter all You want My common sense comments in the closet . So give me a common sense reason why .

 

[Mr. Coffee]

I do not agree on the premise that we should study Finland/Switzerland and apply those lessons learned to the US. It would be a futile effort. In order to make that happen, you need buy in from the citizens from whom their law enforcement agencies would be modeled after (i.e. Finland/Switzerland). The US is a melting pot and getting people to unilaterally support the copy of those countries law enforcement strategies to their own is next to impossible, if you could even get someone to help promote it and drive it to completion.

What I don't hear you mentioning is the "defund the police" movement. Before we start copying other countries law enforcement, we had better clear this barrier. You clearly have segmentation on this issue. Many want law enforcement completely eliminated, others want more law enforcement, and many more want a hybrid. Again, who is the person, or the agency that is going to be point person and drive this so we can achieve better resolution in line with other countries? You accomplish nothing if you cannot get commitment from the community to try something new.

There is no acceptable number of incidents of violence in the US. It is an impossible metric to measure that everyone can agree on. We simply adapt to ever changing conditions. If it gets bad enough, there will be sufficient momentum to effect change.

As for your last point, I am glad we can come to some kind of agreement.

On your second point, I am of two minds. Over thirty years ago I had a series of extremely bad run-ins with a local police department. I never committed any crime more serious than jay-walking, yet I found myself many times being unlawfully detained and physically abused ("roughed up") by these officers. When I dared to file a complaint the mistreatment became even more aggressive and abusive, up to and including threats of physical harm if I did not "let my complaint slide". At the same time I observed that this same department wouldn't even take a statement from someone who had been a victim of a robbery or assault. This wasn't a case of "a few bad apples" -- the whole damned barrel was rotten.

Given that background, I can also say I doubt it is realistic to have a functioning society without law enforcement. But as for that particular police department, as far as I am concerned the world would be a better place if they were disbanded and the lot of them were put to hard labor in a salt mine.

And I will not name them. Ever.

I fail to understand why you think it is a bad idea or impossible to learn from others. Like I said, I think a huge weakness and blind spot Americans have is that we have the worst case of "not invented here" imaginable. From my standpoint we are paying a lot of money for not very effective policing, or even police that is better at harming or abusing law-abiding citizens than it is at actually solving crimes. So why not figure out ways to learn how to make it better? Why not? The performance gap is so mind-bogglingly large (50-odd percent to 95 percent) that I find it distinctly likely that there are some small and inexpensive procedural and organizational changes that can move that 50 percent to 70 or 80 percent. So why not try and find out?

 

[Handlebars]

As for your last point, I am glad we can come to some kind of agreement.

On your second point, I am of two minds. Over thirty years ago I had a series of extremely bad run-ins with a local police department. I never committed any crime more serious than jay-walking, yet I found myself many times being unlawfully detained and physically abused ("roughed up") by these officers. When I dared to file a complaint the mistreatment became even more aggressive and abusive, up to and including threats of physical harm if I did not "let my complaint slide". At the same time I observed that this same department wouldn't even take a statement from someone who had been a victim of a robbery or assault. '

What possible motivation would there be, for an aggressive force to not take complaints of robbery or assault?

 

[FlatSix911]

I'm not arguing -- I'm trying to point out the that there are more productive ways of improving the world we live in than dissing countries the arguers have probably never lived in.

And thank you!

No worries... I meant presenting an argument in a positive sense from a legal point of view.
Discussion is key in understanding all points of view... including those you or I may not agree with.

 

[BarryS]

As for your last point, I am glad we can come to some kind of agreement.

On your second point, I am of two minds. Over thirty years ago I had a series of extremely bad run-ins with a local police department. I never committed any crime more serious than jay-walking, yet I found myself many times being unlawfully detained and physically abused ("roughed up") by these officers. When I dared to file a complaint the mistreatment became even more aggressive and abusive, up to and including threats of physical harm if I did not "let my complaint slide". At the same time I observed that this same department wouldn't even take a statement from someone who had been a victim of a robbery or assault. This wasn't a case of "a few bad apples" -- the whole damned barrel was rotten.

Given that background, I can also say I doubt it is realistic to have a functioning society without law enforcement. But as for that particular police department, as far as I am concerned the world would be a better place if they were disbanded and the lot of them were put to hard labor in a salt mine.

And I will not name them. Ever.

I fail to understand why you think it is a bad idea or impossible to learn from others. Like I said, I think a huge weakness and blind spot Americans have is that we have the worst case of "not invented here" imaginable. From my standpoint we are paying a lot of money for not very effective policing, or even police that is better at harming or abusing law-abiding citizens than it is at actually solving crimes. So why not figure out ways to learn how to make it better? Why not? The performance gap is so mind-bogglingly large (50-odd percent to 95 percent) that I find it distinctly likely that there are some small and inexpensive procedural and organizational changes that can move that 50 percent to 70 or 80 percent. So why not try and find out

In Biblical times if they caught you screwing your neighbors wife they killed you and her with stones . They caught you stealing they did the same or you lost a limb . You disrespected your parents enough times they stoned you to death . In fact almost all crimes up until the 19th century they either beat the crap out of you or they killed you . Consquently people left their doors unlocked , their wives could walk the streets at night . Store owners actually sold more then was stolen . If you were caught having sex even in teh home with someone of teh same sex . They killed you or beat teh hell out of you then castrated you ETC ETC .
Then the do good liberals came along and said . NO NO NO We need to baby these people because they have social and mental issues . So that's what we did . We paid massive hospitol and jail bills .

So now that's evolved that the dregs of society have more rights then decent people do . You're called a bigots and raciest if you complain about what the dregs get away with . Police Officers are undermined constantly. All to the benefit of society??

We seem to have teh crazy people in Washington. Definitely the dumbest ones . And we have the patients cheering then on LOL Blaming the side who wants peace and security and fairness
While these things sound harsh they were actually pretty practical. We've reach a point in society that to own a Ebike in the city . You have to spend an enormous amount of money to prevent it's theft . And if by some chance the thief is caught . 9 out of 10 times he gets off because the cops got a little to rough ?? Yet the problem is the law ?

So lets see when we eliminated the trouble makers and the crazy people . Or we locked them away . We knew our women were safe away from the house and we didn't have to lock everything up.

Now you're saying The people who enforce what little laws we still have left . You want them to be even more gentle about it ?? Think about it . If you knew breaking the law or taking something that wasn't yours . Or raping a guys woman or even worse his little kids . If you knew getting caught ended your ability to breath . We actually would need less law officers

 

[Handlebars]

When I was a kid everyone left the money for the week's milk delivery outside under the doormat or in the milkbox the night before, for early morning pickup. Imagine al that money on every street just sitting there and never got stolen. It was Toronto the Good. Now you can't leave a plastic lawnchair out without expectation that it will gone sometime.
Different population now.
A record number of shootings in one weekend and the Chief says it was only street gangs, so...
But open your restaurant and you get a hundred police and 6 mounted police units.
Corrupt mayors are the worst. And we have just that. Now he's been caught again, this time in his Florida hideaway as he cracks down on us.