Which of course just makes it worse.
Typical political virtue signaling. The bill has no cosponsors , and has been thrust into committee hell - i.e. will not ever be passed. Already getting the right-wing scare tactics of “Demoncrats are trying to remove all laws!”
What’s a shame is that Slaughter was one of the cosponsors of the SAFE-T bill that removed cash bail in Illinois. This gives right-wing judges another excuse to ignore the SAFE-T bill as liberal overreach.
I’ve been pulled over plenty of times, and couldn’t count the number of times both my car and my person were searched. Guess how many times those stops resulted in a ticket/warning? That’s right, NONE of them.
(Up to and including; The time the cops were discussing the best way to remove the backseat of my car. Yeah, that sure sounds like what’s allowed in a ‘Terry Search’ don’t it?)
Would it surprise you to learn that I am White . . . and can pass as a ‘biker/hippie’?
Slaughter has reconsidered, intending to narrow the bill’s scope and reintroduce later.
Acknowledging the proposal’s broad language, Slaughter said he will seek input from stakeholders — including police officials and community members — to craft more narrow legislation.
“I understand the reaction law enforcement had in regard to the actual language that has been filed for HB 4603. It is very broad,” the Democrat from Chicago said.
Also from the above link:
The representative introduced the bill to address “significant racial disparities as they related to police, traffic and pedestrian stops” of Black and Brown people.
Wait, what?
He didn’t double down? He’s going to reconsider the details? This is not stupid enough.
Wrong party. 
believe it or not but Nixon (!) floated a health plan similar to Obamacare but Ted Kenndey killed it
Did you purposely reply to a comment that’s not only 13 years old, but one of the earliest in an 8000+ post thread?
On the plus side he gets to have the last word.
Truman_Burbank hasn’t posted here for three years.
Since we’re revisiting old posts in this thread, here’s one from an unmissed oldie that has aged like milk:
I wonder if he still holds that view?
I would bet yes. The rationalization is strong in this one.
But it also gives police an excuse to turn their backs and have another donut when ‘mob justice’ rears it’s ugly head.
Not that they do much about it now…
“It’s not ‘road rage’. It’s political free speech when cars run you off the road for looking liberal ( and when chase cars cam it all for REDDIT in case you dare to react ).”
There’s a video floating around on Twitter in which JD Vance gets out of a car with his dog and he’s just draping the lead over his hand and then holding onto it with two fingers and all of the reactionary liberals over there are making absolute fucking morons out of themselves going about – “I bet it’s a rented dog … he doesn’t know how to hold a leash … I bet he’s never seen a dog in his life …”
It’s his extremely well-behave German Shepherd Dog. I’ve seen other videos of him walking the dog without a lead at all. It is one good fucking dog. I hate JD Vance, but this criticism is so off base and ridiculous that it has set me off as a dog owner and I’m just trying to stop myself from replying to all of them over there about what idiots they’re being.
As a person most would consider liberal, I couldn’t agree with you more.
Enough with calling people “weird”, the mattress nonsense and this crap. It has nothing to do with anything. Talk policy. That is all I want to hear about. If other politicians are morons I’ll figure it out for myself, thanks.
Have you seen how triggered Trump gets over “weird” comments?
If this kind of shallow nonsense is what works (over substantive debat), that is a sad indictment of our society. But if Trump is elected, that’s worse. So, indict out society as much as is needed.
That’s fair.
But no, I haven’t seen it. My current events intake is 99% reading - I rarely see video of any kind unless it’s a necessary part of the issue (George Floyd, Jan 6, that sort of thing). So I’m aware that Trump and his ilk have reacted poorly to “weird”, but I still don’t care because it’s not a matter of substance. There are plenty of reasons I would not vote for Trump long before we get to his apparently unhinged reaction to “weird”.
I take the point that extraordinary steps should be taken to prevent Trump’s re-election. But I still refuse to consider or give attention to this sort of BS, no matter who it’s directed at. We need to normalize talking about policy goals, period.
That’s a prescriptivist approach, which is very risky when you’re trying to win over people or convince them of something…
It’s all well and good to say “we should be better than this”, but if you play to the electorate you wish your country had instead of the one it actually does, you will lose.
Again, a fair point. But I refuse to participate in the spewing of nonsense. Everyone else can do what they like, but I will encourage them to be concerned with matters of substance.
My higher level self agrees with this, but my more base side is tired of being the Mr. Nice when they go low we go high guy. If a baseless criticism of no significance plants a negative impression off the opposition in the minds of some people and that in turn might lead to fewer of them voting for him. Go for it. We’re in a street fight for the fate of our country. Following Queensberry rules is just going to get us kicked in the nuts.
At least you can hold your head high when they line you up against the wall.