zlacker

Yes, you're right that this won't achieve real change. I truly like the idea of civilian oversight boards.

However, I think any meaningful change or even competent governance is of the table in the US until something is done about the broken and polarized two party system. Right now the two factions are about evenly matched and can hardly agree on anything. Until that changes the US will continue to have their most unproductive governments in their history.

>>eloff+(OP)
Multiple choice voting. (I.e. you give 1 point to all candidates you like, the ones with most amount of points wins. Very simple to understand system with no spoiler effect.) It will fix the issue within one set of elections and I don't even think it would require any changes to the constitution.

>>collle+Wf
The constitution is completely silent on voting methodology. States are free to choose whatever they wish so long as it is representative, with the exception of federal Senators (and maybe representatives), I believe.

>>eloff+(OP)
We agree on violent policing! Seriously, just look at where these cops firing rubber bullets and tear gas work. Almost all working for mayors with D besides their names. The level of police aggression isn’t palpably different whether you’re in Orlando or Minneapolis, and those two cities have vastly different politics.

>>rayine+LT
I think everyone agrees they don't like violent policing. I think as per usual both sides will disagree about what the solution should be.

>>eloff+7W
> I think everyone agrees they don't like violent policing

That is not completely true. For example, the narrative on thedonald.win wrt recent rioting is that most protesters are looters and that looters deserve being shot. They seem to be ok with militarized, strong-men police.

Also, "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" is used as a justification for violent policing. "Of course you're gonna get tazed/hit/shot at if you don't comply with orders/resist arrest/insult the officers."

Now, we can argue about how representative thedonald.win is to the entire population (I think a non-negligent part of the population subscribes to those views), but the point is, party affiliation does affect one's position wrt violent policing.

>>maest+ab1
True, everybody agrees is an oxymoron. What I mean to say is most people agree they don't like violent policing. I think that's probably true for some value of most.