I've got some bad news for you.

Whether this "lovely" AC is one of them or not, this mentality absolutely exists within a far too large segment of the population. Bitching about the younger generation is a right of passage those of us barreling through middle-age, but that nonsense is just a bitter old conservative yelling at clouds. Best to just ignore them.

What, exactly, is a "regular" power plant? Coal? Gas-to-steam? Gas-direct? IGCC? How big is this "regular" power plant? What's your basis for "more" or "less" polluting? Noise? Particulate? SOx/NOx? CO2? Overall efficiency?

So what if they have a permit? That doesn't negate the problems they are causing for the residents.

You're entitled to your opinion.

That's an opinion piece, they are entitled to thier opinion. I think it's bull too. It's counterproductive because it distracts from the police reform that's actually needed.

I literally drove past a scene this week. Random house in the suburbs with two cop cars parked in front of it. One of the cops standing out front leaning against his car looking bored. But yeah, whatever, every call is one cop, one car. Every time. No exceptions. No possible reason you'd ever want a second unit onsite, even for "boring" things like a medical emergency.

First, I've never said the phrase "defund the police" in any context other than discussions like this, explaining why it's a dumb statement. Second "don't reduce funding to the police at all, but add other services that the taxpayers have to pay for." is flat fucking contrary to what I just said. Here's the meat of my statement: "Minneapolis, for example, currently has a deficit of 200-250 officers. Plenty of room to try something different without firing anyone." They have a budget for 250 more officers. That's money my community has already allocated. All I'm saying is maybe hire and train some of that deficit of officers to respond to things like mental health crises in a more appropriate way. That's not a controversial statement, unless you completely ignore the explanation again and come back with "HUUUUUR. Stoopid librhuls just want to fire all the cops".

I'm not lying, you're just not listening to what I'm saying. Your read my words, completely disregarded what I said, and went back to your bullshit preconceptions. So piss off, you condescending cunt.

Fine. You don't like my "multiple officer responding" scenario. How about some real data. There were 265,579 service calls. How many of those would be better handled by someone whose training concentrated on handling social needs?

This is where the communication breaks down. Who said "social worker"? I sure didn't. My scenario is still police officers. Hence the "[whatever you want to call the other group] Officers" comment. Most major police forces have a contingent of officers who receive additional dedicated tools and training on Special Weapons And Tactics who are going to respond to calls where someone's door needs busted down. Why are you so opposed to having a contingent of officers who are available to respond when busting down someone's door is counterproductive for everyone involved?

Sigh. Thanks for that "helpful" reminder that nobody else could possibly have a different perspective or life experience than you do. Your life isn't "real life".

I would argue that the problem starts when when a collection of wildly varying opinions and statements get distilled into a stupid slogan. It is then exacerbated when those opposed take the stupid slogan, discount all of the array of opinions that lead to it's inception, and pretend the stupid slogan represents the entirety of what the monolithic "them" want. Then things devolve to a point where you have two sides that aren't even operating on the same level of understanding of what the other side even wants. You end up having stupid conversations about abortions taking place post-birth or, in this case, literally abolishing Law Enforcement in its entirety.

That's been my problem with the "Defund the police" bullshit from the beginning. It's a crap slogan that doesn't reflect what my progressive brethren want. I'm sure you can find some left-wing nutters that truly want all LEO gone, but that opinion isn't representative of the platform and should be ignored. (Just like there are plenty of people on the Right to ignore. I'm sure most people on the Conservative side don't think Cletus's opinion on being able to marry his 16-year-old 1st cousin are representative of the group either.)

On some issues, I'll 100% give you that one.

Instead of sending two squads with two officers each you send a squad with two Law Enforcement Officers and a squad with two [whatever you want to call the other group] Officers.

No. It means utilizing existing resources more effectively. We've already got a budget for a hundred hand tools. Instead of buying a hundred hammers, maybe buy a couple of screwdrivers and wrenches to throw into the mix. And no, I'm not implying cops are tools. And no, I'm not advocating firing LEOs to replace them with Feeling Enforcement Officers. Minneapolis, for example, currently has a deficit of 200-250 officers. Plenty of room to try something different without firing anyone.

Yes. Getting the appropriate people to do a job seems like a no-brainer to me. There's a good reason I don't call my GP Doctor when need my teeth need cleaned.

Hey, another Twin Cities Resident! This is the last theater I went to: https://www.amctheatres.com/mo... and it pretty much matches your assessment. I mean, it's a nice theater, clean, comfortable, ticketing is easy, etc. but the prices are insane. Nothing to drop $100 for night out for a mediocre movie. I'll stay on my couch. (Although, that Trylon seems intriguing, I'll have to check it out.)

I, admittedly, am not a huge fan of the "theater experience". I'd rather just watch a movie at home. That being said, the closest theater to me is actually remarkably good. The ticketing experience was great, assigned seats purchased in advance online. Heated reclining leather seats, some that will allow you to raise the middle armrest so you can get closer to your companion if that is your desire. Theaters were clean and well kept. The audio and video quality was stellar. It's still expensive as hell, and there's still the assholes that don't understand how to act in public, but at least they keep an eye on it and will still escort the distractors out. It's been a few years since I've been there, but at that time I would have called it a successful implementation of "a premium viewing experience".

edit: The last time I was at that theater was probably late 80s early 90s. I know it was a Batman movie, but don't recall if it was I or II.

I'm 45, I recall the single-screen theater in my small-ass hometown had curtains. I don't remember there being ushers, but the owner would be happy to drag you out by your shirt collar if you got uppity. There was even a balcony. Super cool place, but it's been closed for decades. Replaced by a 5-screen econo-box multiplex that I couldn't even tell you is still open.

They won't be reporting any new information. They've been deactivated since 2019.

Which non-democrat-controlled major city would you suggest?

Check out some Sovereign Citizen content, they've got all sorts of ways to deal with those. None have worked so far, but it's worth the entertainment.