No hidden message there, @treco…maybe used the wrong towns?
I was just trying to point out the difference between more “Law and Order” type places (like Texas) and Berkeley.
Grew up in Tyler, wasn’t ragging you.
Whoa!
Tickets for what? We already have meter-maids or whatever they are called now.
Moving violations.
Whether or not it’s disliked, traffic stops are an important tool in the prevention of crime. I would estimate 30-50% of all arrests I ever made were from contacting wanted persons on traffic stops. Criminals don’t seem to care about traffic laws. When wanted criminals are arrested and jailed, they are unable to commit more crimes.
Wanted persons often desperately do not want to go back to jail or prison and are willing to do violence to prevent that. Unarmed traffic “agents” will likely be killed or injured until the criminals catch on that there’s no reason to ever comply with a traffic stop.
They will catch on immediately and because of that these unarmed traffic agents will be at no more risk than a late night 7-11 clerk (a job i would still not want). Th traffic agents are JUST there to write traffic tickets… thats it. they arent there to apprhend criminals or conduct investigations i dont believe… actually, maybe that could be a function that they do- be the folks collecting evidence and processing it so cops can get back out on the streets.
I would assume the traffic agents would work closely with actual cops though and report any illegal activity that would neccessitate a REAL cop. they would act as eyes and ears and only intervene in “safe” situations. All assumptions on my part as there is no policy in place or any details available. Seems fairly easy to make the traffic agents job “safe enough” to do it unarmed.
16 year olds do that working in the mall. You don’t need a whole new department for that.
It would be a step up from meter maid, and we dont have 16yr olds doing that now…
But yeah, the point is that the person doing those duties doesnt need to have a weapon.
Maybe Libs move because they no longer like the costs or lifestyles of the people they encouraged, enabled, supported, etc. Not now that taxation, regulation, and 3rd world conditions are in their neighhborhood.
I believe people are more conservative than education, pop culture, and media tries to gaslight.
I think they move because of cost, but also because its stressful living in cities, schools arent great there, and people want the stuff suburbia provides when they start families.
My questions is why is the narrative always about liberals invading conservative areas, but never conservatives invading liberal areas? Are conservatives a dying breed (i think thats a yes haha, so i guess i mean republican voters)? Maybe this is the opportunity for redstaters to invade the big liberal cities and try out GOP policies there?
My guess is that conservatives are not interested in moving to a dramatically different ‘culture’ and then changing it. They are satisfied where they are - slower pace, quieter lives, simpler entertainment. Income is less, so is housing.
It’s not like I don’t have cell phones, 500 channels, and hundreds of restaurants within a short drive. And any big city attraction like professional entertainment, culture or varied shopping is 90 minutes away. So why move there?
1 Like
I wonder if conservatives move less? maybe prefer to stick closer to hometowns and family? It seems like this country will become more and more blue as liberals spread out from the big citys but conservatives dont replace them to even it out.
Maybe if prices drop enough in those big metros, conservatives will start moving in.
I don’t have concrete data to back me up on this, but I believe a lot more people have moved to cities than away in the last few decades. This was contrary to what a lot of people thought would happen when the internet boom happened. The type of movement that DID happen, was from regional moves from different cities/states.
It might be that liberals are moving to conservative states, but the big cities they are moving to are liberal.
I’m a stodgy conservative because of all the big cities I have lived in. Dublin, London, Luxembourg (lol).
I hate them, yet my skill set requires I work in them. I yearn for my little town precisely because I’ve seen what some of the most developed cities on earth have to offer.
London is Mordor, Luxembourg is a private equity hub with a city attached, and Dublin has lost every scrap of Gaelic soul it ever had.
Ironically, I’d be moving back to what would be a deep blue district in the US.
1 Like
This, pretty much. The people are moving to blue districts with better tax incentives, they’re not invading deep red rural areas.
Ha! I dont blame you. I lived for a few years in San Francisco- dont want to ever live in a big city again. Just too much hassle with that many people outweighed all the cool stuff.
What is the blue area you like over here?
1 Like
I say ‘blue’ but it would be Sinn Fein green. ‘Progressives’ with a terrorist element. But it’s currently quiet and has plenty of trees. So I’ll take what I can get.
Edit: Anyone who ever finds themselves unfortunate enough to have to live in Luxembourg for an extended period should @ me for the better restaurants and the dodgiest pubs.
When out of town money and incoming liberals nearly vote Ted Cruz out of office for Beto,
deep red rural dwellers are susceptible.
Ah but let’s unpack that one for a moment. The governor won by 10, but Ted squeaked in on 2%.
Ted was hamstrung by his presidential bid more than Texas, I think. It’ll be interesting to see how red Texas is come this election though.
I don’t buy the current tie or +2 polls at all, especially not when Cornyn is leagues ahead.
You think they won’t get a “hit” when running a license? You think they won’t be asked to call for Officers if someone is wanted, drunk, etc.?