> LAPD and LASD are going to bankrupt Los Angeles.

LAPD and LASD aren't both part of any single entity called "Los Angeles" (the city and county of that name being separate entities).

> They're more concerned with being a paramilitary police force versus stopping or preventing neighborhood crime.

That's pretty much true (and foundationally so) of all American local general-jurisdictions police forces.

LASD and LAPD may have problems beyond those endemic to American police agencies, but that isn't one of them.

> They're more concerned with being a paramilitary police force versus stopping or preventing neighborhood crime.

Didn't they pull back on enforcement of quality of life crimes when the previous DA stopped prosecuting criminals? You can't expect the police to arrest criminals knowing full well the DA is immediately going to drop or reduce charges and let them loose.

> You can't expect the police to arrest criminals knowing full well the DA is immediately going to drop or reduce charges and let them loose.

You can't expect the police to do their jobs?

> You can't expect the police to do their jobs?

Imagine you're a programmer, or a chef, or a carpenter, really anything. Now imagine you go to work every day, put in 8-10 hours a day working hard, and at the end of each day someone in a more powerful position than yourself throws out, ignores, or otherwise destroys all of your work for that day.

And this happens every day, day after day. No matter your work ethic or how much you care about your job, sooner or later after enough of your work is sabotaged, you're going to give up.

So no, I do not expect the police to "do their job" as you put it, when a chief prosecutor publicly and vocally undermines that work each and every day. If you can't understand that very fundamental human reaction, then I don't know what to tell you.

Not to be flippant, that sounds like working at a lot of big tech companies nowadays. More conceptually, you have the constant churn of in house tooling meaning what you wrote last year needs to be rewritten to work with the new version of X (be it the ticketing system or the new process to store secrets or the new frontend framework that will fix everything). And even more concretely, there are teams that will fully get sunset when a new product or service deprecates them or beats them to market. Famously, that was how the iPhone was developed, with teams competing internally in Apple. https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/28/iphone-creation-click-wheel-t...

I know if I refused to do my work or even hinted I wouldn't do it...no matter if the boss destroyed it... Id be fired faster than those police lighting up a suspects vehicle with bullet holes.

Why are these comments saying that not doing a small part of a job that your boss doesn't want you to do is means for dismissal?

If something you are doing is being thrown away, you should change focus (like pulling back on quality of life arrests, and focus on real crimes).

If your boss is destroying all your work, you're going to get fired for not producing anything. I'd recommend you figure out what your boss cares about.

Whenever you feel like not doing your job, just tell your boss "I don't want to" and see how that goes for you.

I understand how motivation works. Sometimes doing a job sucks. That's part of why you get paid to do it.

It sounds to me like those police officers don't want to do their jobs. I'd encourage them to quit instead of wasting tax dollars. Of course the real issue is they want the money without the work, and the respect without having to earn it.

But that isn't what appears to be happening. Their "boss" (the DA) is the one saying "I don't want to". When your boss gives you clear incentives, like not prosecuting (throwing out) portions of your work, you are going to stop that work and focus on other things.

The DA is not their boss. Cops are supposed to enforce laws. The DA is supposed to prosecute them. The cops are just using the DA as an excuse to not do their jobs. And once you normalize the cops not arresting people, now the DA has an excuse for prosecuting fewer criminals - at that point how do you decide who's to blame? Now you have two dysfunctional organizations, each pointing the finger at the other, and you've already normalized at least one of them. Even if you think the cops shouldn't be arresting people because of the DA, at the very least this skews data on crime as police are making fewer arrests independent of crime levels.

This is like me saying I don't want to do my job because those other guys in the other department aren't going to do anything with it, so I'm just not going to bother. I think almost everyone can relate to lazy/incompetent coworkers - does that give you an excuse to stop doing your job?

Welcome to having a job/career. We've all put time and effort in to projects that never materialized. Do you expect every one of your ideas to be adopted and implemented by others? Surely not...

LAPD is a bastion of terrible police work. They have a rich history of killing, beating, racism, and organized crime. Maybe they're still doing bad police work, ever considered that? This budget is to protect them from civil rights lawsuits they're losing on the regular... which actually makes them the law breakers.

So I'm an employee at any grocery store or pre-prepared meal place (fast food, Starbucks, what have you) who does their job in compliance with a health code?

... that could, actually, explain a little bit of the work ethic (though I'm pretty sure it's "scraping along the bottom of minimum wage" that explains most of it).

LAPD has never been anything but a violent gang, and the DA didn't "stop prosecuting criminals"

> the DA didn't "stop prosecuting criminals"

The voters of California certainly think he did: https://calmatters.org/justice/2024/11/george-gascon-pamela-...

yeah because there were tens of millions of dollars spent on right wing reactionary ad campaigns to convince people of that

i would argue the people in these protests are likely the people committing street crime. just like the people that have been busted damaging tesla vehicles all so far have had priors except for one in new york that was some middle class guy. they claim they are fighting some nazi boogie man, but ended up being the type of person the average law abiding citizen fears to come in contact with.

You make a really good point! The average law abiding citizen is much more afraid of petty crime against Elon Musk, a man who does the Nazi salute, than they are about losing their constitutional rights. That is how we wound up with a militarized police force in the first place, with the average person being more afraid of terrorism than encroaching totalitarianism.

> i would argue the people in these protests are likely the people committing street crime.

evidenced by?

> evidenced by

i already stated this, the people busted on video had priors, they are damaging persons property(a crime, in case you forgot) in protest to musk.

it all reminds me of the rittenhouse situation where the three people shot were by chance(or highly likely depending on your lens)all were criminals: 1. sexual misconduct with minor(a child rapist) 2. history of domestic violence and disorderly conduct, 3. intoxicated use of a firearm and pointing a weapon at someone claiming outside of court on more liberal tv commentary he didn't, and in court that he did(so hes a liar and a coward).

seethe

No, I'm not mad, I just don't see the link between the Gaza protestors (who I don't particularly support) and the vandals torching Teslas. And now you are mentioning Kyle Rittenhouse, which seems like another canard.

I don't see any evidence between those things, I'm wondering if you have any or if you just think all protesters are criminals?

Do you hold the same contempt for the people that initially protested against the King of England?.. what a silly argument.

Remember that actual literal swastika-wearing nazis were average law abiding citizens. If nazis are scared to come in contact with you you're doing well.

ok clown