I fully agree with both comments. There's no way you can take a cop that's done nothing but service someplace like Cherry HIll and put them in Camden and expect them to perform as well as a native Camden cop from the start. Thinking otherwise is just silly. As a person who lives in a neighboring town of Camden, I'm pretty bummed out if this goes though. It's bad enough the scum from Camden have been infiltrating our town slowly but surely over the last decade or so, but this change will destroy all neighboring towns and will not help satisfy the primary objective in saving Camden.

 

I've said it before (and those of you who remember my stance on solving the border patrol/illegals issues shouldn't be surprised), that the only way to solve this Camden issue is to relocate the handful of good folks who are living there, then level the city by any and all means. Then rebuild from the ground up and let the displaced good people come back in.

 

Sounds just a little more "radical" than my idea of dropping a bomb on the slums, Philly-style, but along the same train of thought. Get my historical BB-62 outta there, then pull the plug and let it slide off it's foundation and sink into the Bay!

I know how to fix Camden.

 

Move.

Why not rename Camden to a name so embarrassing that no gang member would want to try to earn a reputation there. Who would want to be a parts of the Puppies and Rainbows bloods?

I'd love to hear your alternative solution. If you don't have one, that's fine too, just declare that.

 

My alternative solution? Because you're suggestion somehow isn't absurd hyperbole that can't actually happen and offers nothing even resembling an actionable idea? Riiight, ok.

 

Anyway, I'm not really that interested in seeing Camden get "better" I just want its continued existence to consume less public money and try to minimize how much of its crime gets exported to adjacent towns. Places like Camden do actually serve a purpose. The individuals that make Camden the Hellhole it is will always exist, and they have to live somewhere, so having them aggregated heavily in a few undesirable areas allows for the existence of lower crime areas elsewhere in the state.

 

Basically, Camden is like a garbage dump. Its a problem if it has surging operating costs and a sickening stench that burden its neighbors, but not the dump itself. However, having a dump in the first place is still necessary, because there will always be trash and it has to go somewhere.

My alternative solution? Because you're suggestion somehow isn't absurd hyperbole that can't actually happen and offers nothing even resembling an actionable idea? Riiight, ok.

 

Anyway, I'm not really that interested in seeing Camden get "better" I just want its continued existence to consume less public money and try to minimize how much of its crime gets exported to adjacent towns. Places like Camden do actually serve a purpose. The individuals that make Camden the Hellhole it is will always exist, and they have to live somewhere, so having them aggregated heavily in a few undesirable areas allows for the existence of lower crime areas elsewhere in the state.

 

Basically, Camden is like a garbage dump. Its a problem if it has surging operating costs and a sickening stench that burden its neighbors, but not the dump itself. However, having a dump in the first place is still necessary, because there will always be trash and it has to go somewhere.

Precisely, I'm glad to see someone else here hit on this. Places like Camden NEED to exist, same reason why discrimination and the "-ism"'s will always exist. People need the highs and lows not because culture drives people to be innately bad-- but because it sets the standard of how to live... thus keeping the bigger picture of society in order. Governments won't come out and say it, but this has been applied in every civilization, and throughout time.

It does suck though for the direct and contiguous residents, no doubt about that.

I know how to fix Camden.

 

Move.

 

 

How does that fix the city? I suspect most of the good folks left there can't afford to pick up and leave. Besides, why should they have to do that? The scum of the city certainly will not move, until such time that there's nothing left to steal and rob. I don't see how moving from Camden "fixes" Camden.

My alternative solution? Because you're suggestion somehow isn't absurd hyperbole that can't actually happen and offers nothing even resembling an actionable idea? Riiight, ok.

 

Anyway, I'm not really that interested in seeing Camden get "better" I just want its continued existence to consume less public money and try to minimize how much of its crime gets exported to adjacent towns. Places like Camden do actually serve a purpose. The individuals that make Camden the Hellhole it is will always exist, and they have to live somewhere, so having them aggregated heavily in a few undesirable areas allows for the existence of lower crime areas elsewhere in the state.

 

Basically, Camden is like a garbage dump. Its a problem if it has surging operating costs and a sickening stench that burden its neighbors, but not the dump itself. However, having a dump in the first place is still necessary, because there will always be trash and it has to go somewhere.

 

 

Precisely, I'm glad to see someone else here hit on this. Places like Camden NEED to exist, same reason why discrimination and the "-ism"'s will always exist. People need the highs and lows not because culture drives people to be innately bad-- but because it sets the standard of how to live... thus keeping the bigger picture of society in order. Governments won't come out and say it, but this has been applied in every civilization, and throughout time.

It does suck though for the direct and contiguous residents, no doubt about that.

 

 

So, what you're saying is that places like Camden, Newark, Trenton, etc must stay in existence to make you feel better about yourselves and where you live? Because there are scumbag people and scumbag towns left in the state, it makes you feel better about your town and allows you to justify in your own minds, the taxes you pay for that "luxury"?

 

Using that thought, I guess you guys feel better knowing that they are still homeless people in the state and people that are unemployed and down on their luck, so it allows you to feel better about yourselves. I guess, if all things were equal (in your minds), you'd have no reason to "feel better" about yourselves than anyone else.

The only way to fix it is to create jobs for those people.. Then it can be policed and made better... Unfortunately one of the ways cities kept their residents employed was with factory's which america has sent over sea's...

They shootin...

 

Ha, made you look

So, what you're saying is that places like Camden, Newark, Trenton, etc must stay in existence to make you feel better about yourselves and where you live? Because there are scumbag people and scumbag towns left in the state, it makes you feel better about your town and allows you to justify in your own minds, the taxes you pay for that "luxury"?

 

Using that thought, I guess you guys feel better knowing that they are still homeless people in the state and people that are unemployed and down on their luck, so it allows you to feel better about yourselves. I guess, if all things were equal (in your minds), you'd have no reason to "feel better" about yourselves than anyone else.

 

Thats a healthy dose of intentionally poor reading comprehension coupled with a strong desire to distort the positions of people with different opinions than you, enabling you to believe that your own views are correct because everyone else is clearly an idiot.

 

Also, do you honestly think you're in a position to claim such self righteous indignation after having suggested that the only solution is to summarily execute the majority of Camden's 77,000 residents?

The only way to fix it is to create jobs for those people.. Then it can be policed and made better... Unfortunately one of the ways cities kept their residents employed was with factory's which america has sent over sea's...

 

 

Very true, however many/most of the citizens are probably just as happy not working. Sure, I'm speculating and painting with a broad brush, but that's what I think. Then you have the gang bangers and dealers who are quite happy doing what they do. They, along with the users of their products, are the ones that need to be exterminated. Once that is done, it's much easier to let the rest fall into place. Businesses will come back, small businesses will be created. People will get back to work, etc.

Thats a healthy dose of intentionally poor reading comprehension coupled with a strong desire to distort the positions of people with different opinions than you, enabling you to believe that your own views are correct because everyone else is clearly an idiot.

 

Also, do you honestly think you're in a position to claim such self righteous indignation after having suggested that the only solution is to summarily execute the majority of Camden's 77,000 residents?

 

 

Sorry if you take offense, however I call it as I see/read it. The folks I feel that should be exterminated are the dregs of society. They are scumbags. They has no business to be able to walk amongst society. What's your solution to "fix" those who rape, beat and rob old ladies and old men? What's your solution to "fix" those who kill 14-year old kids? What's your solution to "fix" those who assist in feeding the drug habits of young/old, rich/poor, black/white, etc? Remove these scums from the equation and you have hope for change. You have hope to fix most, if not all, of the problems. This holds true everywhere, not just in Camden.

 

Again, what's your solution? Do you have a position, other than to trash mine?

Precisely, I'm glad to see someone else here hit on this. Places like Camden NEED to exist, same reason why discrimination and the "-ism"'s will always exist. People need the highs and lows not because culture drives people to be innately bad-- but because it sets the standard of how to live... thus keeping the bigger picture of society in order. Governments won't come out and say it, but this has been applied in every civilization, and throughout time. It does suck though for the direct and contiguous residents, no doubt about that.

 

How exactly does that keep the bigger picture of society in order?

 

Criminals think they can do whatever they want because the consequences are negligible. They go to jail and get a free ride. Get out in a little bit and do the same crime again.

 

So what about countries like Thailand that have severe punishments for theft, rape or murder? Their crime rate is non existent.

 

As far as jobs I think the unemployment and welfare needs to be restructured. There are people that never had a job in their life and spent their whole life playing the system. Most of them wait for that check so they can buy cigarettes and booze.

Again, what's your solution? Do you have a position, other than to trash mine?

 

I was tempted to reply with everything I find wrong or contradictory about your 1st paragraph, but we're already at least ten paces into Unproductive Internet Argument Land, so I'll instead just focus on this piece.

 

Again, I don't really believe there is a way to turn Camden into a decent place to live, or that destroying it wouldn't just create someplace like it somewhere else. My problem with it's current state of existance is that staggering amounts of money gets pumped in, and yet it still gets worse every year. That said, off the top of my head [and in keeping with the website we;re on], the following might be a means of improving things marginally:

 

1) Take a complete 180 on gun ownership and endevor to promote a streamlined process for Camden citizens with clean records to obtain gun permits fairly easily.

 

-Actively seek to promote legal gun ownership among the poor, but law abiding portion of the population.

 

-Allow low income residents to receive government assistance to cover the cost of fingerprints, NJSP background check, etc.

 

-Offer free NRA or comparable instruction at the local police department for citizens that have active & valid FID cards.

 

-Reverse default hostility to firearms stores & shooting ranges and actually try to provide some incentive for some to open up within city limits.

 

-Allow Camden residents to purchase a police trade-in pistol at a highly discounted price, with a limit of one per year. Allow additional trade in purchases, but at actual market value.

 

-Instruct police to conduct investigations of home defense shootings under the premise that the home owner is in the right by default, unless there is significant reason to assume otherwise.

 

 

2) Fund the above by discontinuing ineffective crime prevention programs such as gun buybacks, gang outreach and any community 'education' program that cannot statistically evidence any appreciable benefit to the community in the time it has existed. Such a change in direction on 2nd amendement rights might even open up the door for good will donations from 2A organizations.

 

 

Desired Outcome:

-Create a slight decrease in the number of criminals on the streets or in prison by making it more common for them to be killed while committing a crime.

 

-Increase the number of supspects that can be caught because they have to seek medical treatment after being shot by the person they targeted.

 

-Shifting the risk/reward ratio for commiting a crime by increasing a perpetrator's risk of picking the wrong house and being killed or injured by a victim that's actually prepared to defend themselves with deadly force. Would slightly depress the criminal activity of opportunistic 'part-timers', but likely not hardened criminals.

 

-Slight increase in incidents of criminals fleeing upon encountering an armed homeowner.

 

-Reducing the number of "soft" targets available to violent criminals by giving law abiding citizens, of all ages/genders/income levels, some teeth to bite back with.

 

-Observable reduction in violent crime by way of the accumulated small gains from the above benefits of more armed citizens.

How exactly does that keep the bigger picture of society in order?

 

Criminals think they can do whatever they want because the consequences are negligible. They go to jail and get a free ride. Get out in a little bit and do the same crime again.

 

So what about countries like Thailand that have severe punishments for theft, rape or murder? Their crime rate is non existent.

 

As far as jobs I think the unemployment and welfare needs to be restructured. There are people that never had a job in their life and spent their whole life playing the system. Most of them wait for that check so they can buy cigarettes and booze.

First off, I'm not arguing anybody here. My statement is based in the research done on cultural trends and evolution. There is a hegemonic underlying to how things function in the world. Of course things may differ from culture to culture, but you guys still proved my point:

The idea is that the authorities dictate what is "good" and "bad," and this understanding is passed to the peons-- the people. These ideas become hegemonic because they are grafted into the very fabric of society... through religion, values, other beliefs, etc. So, after this indoctrination of sorts, the values are then accepted-- and, more so, set as the standard. This is how we (as individuals) judge others without much thought of our own sins.

You guys are proving my point because you are calling people "scum bags" and "criminals" and other names. These are socially constructed terms, and if you looked at their situations from differing perspectives, you might understand them as attempting to survive, making a name for themselves and their career, etc. With that said, I don't necessarily agree with that, but I can accept that understanding cultures require differing perspectives. And no, this isn't some mumbo-jumbo that I'm spewing because if it was, then the problem could be fixed by brute strength-- meaning it would have been fixed eons ago. In fact it's not really a matter of "fixing" the issue with a tactical nuclear strike as some of you would want, but a matter of understanding, coming to an agreement at the most basic levels, and pressing forward... but that won't happen because people need the scum of the earth to help them create what their image of good and bad actually is. I think those who are questioning what I wrote are looking at the issue from a personal level, and not thinking like those arseholes that see us all as numbers and quantify everything. Do I agree with it? Of course not, I've said that at least three times now. And maybe its hegemonic for me to even say that it really can't be changed-- but I just don't see a legitimate solution because those in power don't want there to be one.

 

ETA:

To stay on topic, I think the whole situation is really, really, really crappy for the LEOs in place. I talked to my best bud who's, fortunately, a cop up north about it, and he and others in the community are pretty irate with the logic the mayor is taking. Again, she's quantifying a majorly personal issue... and I'll admit, her math seems like it could work, but her solution just doesn't seem like it would sit well with me if I lived in Camden or the surrounding area.

Friend/cop at CCounty Sherriff's dept working in Camden calls it all a "fiasco". But then again, he makes almost $80k per yr standin round in a courthouse mostly. Plus 250-350k in yearly pensions by 2032? Dunno, could be higher, didnt do the math.

 

I work armed in Camden in 2 of 3 jobs. Going today as matter of fact. Philly 'gangbangers' are violent, but understand some respect. Camden is littered w mental patients, crack-heads and whores, junkies and the like.

 

The South does some county-wide policing pretty effectively w ALOT lower taxes, so I personally wonder what all the fuss is about.

 

This is why I really like the South Alot Better and have relatives outside Atlanta. No, im not White either.

 

 

I was tempted to reply with everything I find wrong or contradictory about your 1st paragraph, but we're already at least ten paces into Unproductive Internet Argument Land, so I'll instead just focus on this piece.

 

Again, I don't really believe there is a way to turn Camden into a decent place to live, or that destroying it wouldn't just create someplace like it somewhere else. My problem with it's current state of existance is that staggering amounts of money gets pumped in, and yet it still gets worse every year. That said, off the top of my head [and in keeping with the website we;re on], the following might be a means of improving things marginally:

 

1) Take a complete 180 on gun ownership and endevor to promote a streamlined process for Camden citizens with clean records to obtain gun permits fairly easily.

 

-Actively seek to promote legal gun ownership among the poor, but law abiding portion of the population.

 

-Allow low income residents to receive government assistance to cover the cost of fingerprints, NJSP background check, etc.

 

-Offer free NRA or comparable instruction at the local police department for citizens that have active & valid FID cards.

 

-Reverse default hostility to firearms stores & shooting ranges and actually try to provide some incentive for some to open up within city limits.

 

-Allow Camden residents to purchase a police trade-in pistol at a highly discounted price, with a limit of one per year. Allow additional trade in purchases, but at actual market value.

 

-Instruct police to conduct investigations of home defense shootings under the premise that the home owner is in the right by default, unless there is significant reason to assume otherwise.

 

 

2) Fund the above by discontinuing ineffective crime prevention programs such as gun buybacks, gang outreach and any community 'education' program that cannot statistically evidence any appreciable benefit to the community in the time it has existed. Such a change in direction on 2nd amendement rights might even open up the door for good will donations from 2A organizations.

 

 

Desired Outcome:

-Create a slight decrease in the number of criminals on the streets or in prison by making it more common for them to be killed while committing a crime.

 

-Increase the number of supspects that can be caught because they have to seek medical treatment after being shot by the person they targeted.

 

-Shifting the risk/reward ratio for commiting a crime by increasing a perpetrator's risk of picking the wrong house and being killed or injured by a victim that's actually prepared to defend themselves with deadly force. Would slightly depress the criminal activity of opportunistic 'part-timers', but likely not hardened criminals.

 

-Slight increase in incidents of criminals fleeing upon encountering an armed homeowner.

 

-Reducing the number of "soft" targets available to violent criminals by giving law abiding citizens, of all ages/genders/income levels, some teeth to bite back with.

 

-Observable reduction in violent crime by way of the accumulated small gains from the above benefits of more armed citizens.

 

 

Thanks for the feedback. I agree with many of your points and recommendations.

Friend/cop at CCounty Sherriff's dept working in Camden calls it all a "fiasco". But then again, he makes almost $80k per yr standin round in a courthouse mostly. Plus 250-350k in yearly pensions by 2032? Dunno, could be higher, didnt do the math.

 

I work armed in Camden in 2 of 3 jobs. Going today as matter of fact. Philly 'gangbangers' are violent, but understand some respect. Camden is littered w mental patients, crack-heads and whores, junkies and the like.

 

The South does some county-wide policing pretty effectively w ALOT lower taxes, so I personally wonder what all the fuss is about.

 

This is why I really like the South Alot Better and have relatives outside Atlanta. No, im not White either.

 

 

... and what's that got to do with anything?

I've been to the southern states, many times. It's a different culture compared to many/most of the people in Camden. It's a totally different class of people. People who were raised to work hard and earn a living, not trained how to work/beat the system and collect monies for doing nothing. A county run force will take resources from the neighboring towns of CC, while trying to enforce the laws of Camden.

I'd like to know what the residents of Camden County (other than Camden City), think about this.

 

I love how all the people from North Jersey and stuff think this is the best thing since sliced bread. I hate unions, so I'm giving this a chance, but honestly, you have no idea what it's like living around here.

 

Then again, in my experience, the police here are absolutely useless anyway. They only enforce traffic violations. I've called about repeated break-ins into the cars in our neighborhood 3 times over the past few months, and my neighbors have done the same thing. The arrested the guy, but ended up letting him go, so, the most recent time that our stuff was broken into, we didn't even bother calling the police. They're useless cowards. Hypocritical too, they'll make an illegal turn on red, drive a half mile, see someone make a rolling stop, and pull them over. They'll bust you on Stone Road near us ffor doing 28mph, but take 45 minutes responding to an assault three blocks from the station.

 

Anyway, I know I'm busting on cops, it's true. I've never once had a good experience with a cop actually assisting me. I know there are good police out there, but many, many more just aren't. They don't want to serve and protect, they only care about getting a job with decent pay and a pension. And I am scared about how much crime spill-over is going to occur when these guys are patrolling Camden.

 

Oh- and just another story, our police are so inept that when a person broke into my house (A person whose relation to me will not be stated) I gave them their name, age, where to find them, there were fingerprints on the lock-box they smashed open, they'd left a hammer next to it, I had seen a few times outside the house, I had given the time they would have had to enter the house. Hell, I could have given their social security number, and yet the police refused to accept that they had broken in and stolen my money, despite my lock-box being smashed in with a hammer.

So, what you're saying is that places like Camden, Newark, Trenton, etc must stay in existence to make you feel better about yourselves and where you live?

 

No, that is not what he was saying.

Sorry if you take offense, however I call it as I see/read it.

 

You see it or read it wrong.

 

Again, what's your solution? Do you have a position, other than to trash mine?

 

Another solution or none at all has no correlation with your 'solution', and cannot serve to substantiate or negate it. The 'solution' itself does that. In the case of your 'solution', I had assumed it to be rhetoric, but if it wasn't, then it was being trashed because it was garbage.

 

I hope you don't take offense to me calling it garbage. Because you are right on with the cause. It is the people. So yes, just eliminating them all would do wonders to fix the problem. But it isn't practical, feasible, logical, or moral.

 

Since I am still unsure, was your 'solution' in fact a hyperbole? If so, then I agree! If not.....

Friend/cop at CCounty Sherriff's dept working in Camden calls it all a "fiasco". But then again, he makes almost $80k per yr standin round in a courthouse mostly. Plus 250-350k in yearly pensions by 2032? Dunno, could be higher, didnt do the math.

 

I work armed in Camden in 2 of 3 jobs. Going today as matter of fact. Philly 'gangbangers' are violent, but understand some respect. Camden is littered w mental patients, crack-heads and whores, junkies and the like.

 

The South does some county-wide policing pretty effectively w ALOT lower taxes, so I personally wonder what all the fuss is about.

 

This is why I really like the South Alot Better and have relatives outside Atlanta. No, im not White either.

 

Ok your friend is correct, it will be a disaster, because the original plan is already dissolving..yet they went ahead anyway. the IDEA was to do away with ALL Municipal departments in the county, and go with a County Police Dept. a NEW Agency, separate from the already existing County SO. Sounds Great, until they did the math, and the Municipalities realized that they were going to get the shaft with little to NO regular police coverage, after Camden soaked up ALL of the available Resources.... If they were lucky each municipality MIGHT have had 2 officers per shift if they were lucky. YES the countywide system works..in Rural Areas, but it's also where people are already USED to 45 minute to an hour wait time for Non Emergency calls, and only having a couple of Deputies to cover an area of a few hundred Square miles. When you have people paying the property Taxes that places like Cherry Hill do, that will NOT be acceptable. So, ALL of the municipalities have pulled out of the agreement. Camden had already laid off 50% of the Department, Now they are going to fire the rest, then hire them into this new agency (Those willing to take it) at heavily reduced Salaries and benefits. What they have done was take a Department that was already in bad shape, with nothing but New people looking desperately to test and get hired ANYWHERE else, Older guys who couldnt afford to lateral/test for other agencies, and Incompetents who CANT get hired anywhere else, and now make it even LESS attractive for good, solid, competent people to work there. Camden Count and the City have effectively managed to recreate the conditions that contributed to New Orleans being the bastion of corruption that it had become. I forsee a contractual stipulation that will require new Hirees to remain for 5 years to try and stop the "Stepping Stone' rep Camden PD already has, which will only serve to reduce the number of even HALF decent applicants they normally get. The NJ is already looking to get out of there, and the Aquarium will follow soon afterward, and with THOSE gone, the concerts will dry up, and then there wont be any reason at all for anyone to ever go there.

So what about countries like Thailand that have severe punishments for theft, rape or murder? Their crime rate is non existent.

 

Is that sarcasm?

No, that is not what he was saying.

 

 

You see it or read it wrong.

 

 

 

Another solution or none at all has no correlation with your 'solution', and cannot serve to substantiate or negate it. The 'solution' itself does that. In the case of your 'solution', I had assumed it to be rhetoric, but if it wasn't, then it was being trashed because it was garbage.

 

I hope you don't take offense to me calling it garbage. Because you are right on with the cause. It is the people. So yes, just eliminating them all would do wonders to fix the problem. But it isn't practical, feasible, logical, or moral.

 

Since I am still unsure, was your 'solution' in fact a hyperbole? If so, then I agree! If not.....

 

 

Unfortunately, the solution I proposed (understanding it would never be allowed to occur) is really want I'd like to see done. Seriously, the scum must be exterminated, just as murders need to be killed, without question, without haste. Illegals need to be warned once to not cross our borders. Once they ignore that warning, they should be shot/killed where they stand. I don't understand why this concept is so difficult to grasp. Is it because it's extreme? Is it because others find it a "stupid" solution? I don't know your age/generation, but what many fail to understand, is that people from earlier generations are tired of this crap. They are tired of being taken advantage of. They are tired of being robbed, raped and shot just because of something stupid. They are tired of being scared to walk down the street. They remember "the good ol' days" when people actually gave two sh*ts about their neighbors and others. They want to take their communities back, but lack the means, whether it be financial or flat out scared to speak-up. I'm a firm believer that violence must be met with violence. The percentage of violent criminals that have been able to successfully rehabilitate and blend back into society are so low, that it's not worth jailing a rapist, murderer or child molester. If they're proven guilty of said crimes, kill them, right there, on the spot. Sure, we might get one or two wrong every once in awhile, but that's a risk that has to be taken. Look at this j*rkoff that's still in jail for killing that cop. How many decades ago was that? How many repeals has that gone through? Would you venture to guess how much that's cost you and I to jail that scumbag for all this time? The only good part about that entire case, is that he's been in jail this entire time and not allowed to walk the streets. What about these repeat offenders of violent crimes, Why do they deserve to have any rights whatsoever? Why are they given the chance, time and time again, to destroy someone's family by doing harm to one of their loved-ones? I guess I really don't understand the reasons behind not wanting to exterminate those who have performed this terrible acts.

 

Really, I could go on and on, but would rather not. I find that I always am backed into a corner trying to justify my thoughts and opinions on the subject, but because they are not the norm and involve matter-of-fact, straight-to-the-point fixing of the issues, by exterminating the scumbags that create the issues. I'm sure there's a small percentage that feel the same way, however they've decided to keep quite. Just like those who turn a blind-eye to crimes being committed every single day.

 

What I've outlined is the 99% guaranteed solution to the violence we have in this country. It's violence treating violence, it's quick, it's immediate, it's clear-cut and it will work. Unlike most other policies/procedures, you get immediate results the day something like this is implemented. The problem is that this society will not allow it to occur for whatever reason.

Anyone that's really interested in learning and understanding how/why this thing is going down, spend a few hours reading. What you can quickly learn is that this attempt is being made without any proper planning, funding or understanding its long-term shortcomings.

 

http://www.facebook.com/#!/SaveCamdenPolice

I'm not sure if you are doing so intentionally or unintentionally, but I'm not sure you are understanding properly. I get your position. Your premise is sound. Scummy people who do scummy things and breed other scummy humans are a problem that can only be fixed by eliminating them. The only way to curb violence, is with violence. I get it. I agree. I'm not arguing with you. I'm just confused whether or not you really think the mass murder of an entire city is a good idea or not, and why this idea itself being a bad one is confusing to you...

I love how all the people from North Jersey and stuff think this is the best thing since sliced bread. I hate unions, so I'm giving this a chance, but honestly, you have no idea what it's like living around here.

 

Then again, in my experience, the police here are absolutely useless anyway. They only enforce traffic violations. I've called about repeated break-ins into the cars in our neighborhood 3 times over the past few months, and my neighbors have done the same thing. The arrested the guy, but ended up letting him go, so, the most recent time that our stuff was broken into, we didn't even bother calling the police. They're useless cowards. Hypocritical too, they'll make an illegal turn on red, drive a half mile, see someone make a rolling stop, and pull them over. They'll bust you on Stone Road near us ffor doing 28mph, but take 45 minutes responding to an assault three blocks from the station.

 

Anyway, I know I'm busting on cops, it's true. I've never once had a good experience with a cop actually assisting me. I know there are good police out there, but many, many more just aren't. They don't want to serve and protect, they only care about getting a job with decent pay and a pension. And I am scared about how much crime spill-over is going to occur when these guys are patrolling Camden.

 

Oh- and just another story, our police are so inept that when a person broke into my house (A person whose relation to me will not be stated) I gave them their name, age, where to find them, there were fingerprints on the lock-box they smashed open, they'd left a hammer next to it, I had seen a few times outside the house, I had given the time they would have had to enter the house. Hell, I could have given their social security number, and yet the police refused to accept that they had broken in and stolen my money, despite my lock-box being smashed in with a hammer.

 

I don't know what any of that has to do with my comment. What I meant was, why should the people of say, Sicklerville, have their tax money go to police Camden?

I'm not sure if you are doing so intentionally or unintentionally, but I'm not sure you are understanding properly. I get your position. Your premise is sound. Scummy people who do scummy things and breed other scummy humans are a problem that can only be fixed by eliminating them. The only way to curb violence, is with violence. I get it. I agree. I'm not arguing with you. I'm just confused whether or not you really think the mass murder of an entire city is a good idea or not, and why this idea itself being a bad one is confusing to you...

 

 

You may have missed the part where I said to remove the few good and law-abiding people prior to taking action on the scumbags of the city. Bottom line, we need to get the troublemakers out of there and everywhere else, permantly.

 

.

I don't know what any of that has to do with my comment. What I meant was, why should the people of say, Sicklerville, have their tax money go to police Camden?

 

 

I'd bet that's the feelings of all Camden County towns. With all the money that's been dumping into Camden City over the last 20-30 years with no improvements being shown, you can't blame the towns for having those feelings. I live in a neighboring town and don't like the fact that we travel into Camden for fire support, etc.

I don't know what any of that has to do with my comment. What I meant was, why should the people of say, Sicklerville, have their tax money go to police Camden?

 

Because I live in Camden County, not at all far from Camden, and I'm anticipating a lot more crime due to our already lousy police potentially patrolling Camden.

 

 

As for those that want to destroy Camden and start again, though I joke about that, it would never work. Like roaches fleeing in the light, the Criminals would just end up spreading out and bringing crime with them. Also it's impossible to "remove the good and law abiding people" because in all truth, you do not know who they are, just because someone has a clean record doesn't mean they have not committed crime. Likewise, not every person who is charged is truly guilty.