视频 | 崔娃访美前副总统拜登

学习英语，领悟翻译，沟通世界！

扫描关注

翻译与润色

社科论文；政府文件；文学艺术

宣传文案；时政新闻；法律合同；

微信推广；投稿合作

微信/QQ:563730218

英美剧大全 | 看剧学英语，囤起来~

点击以下关键字

有惊喜

118个外国名人视频

1. 布隆伯格哈佛商学院毕业典礼致辞
   

美国总统特朗普当地时间8日在白宫表示，不会撤销对警察部门的资助或解散警察部门，并夸99%的警察都是“非常棒的人”。

“不会撤销（对警察的）资助，不会解散我们的警察（部门）。我们的警察让我们过上了和平的生活。”特朗普说道。特朗普表示他想确保没有“坏演员”，他认为99%的警察都是“非常棒的人”“有时你会看到一些可怕的事情，就像我们最近目睹的那样，不过99（%），我说的是99.9（%），但让我们承认，他们中99%的人都是非常棒的人，他们完成了创纪录的工作。”特朗普说道。

那么，作为现任总统特朗普的头号也是唯一竞争对手拜登怎么看待美国警察的呢？一起来看看美国知名脱口秀主持人崔娃对拜登的9分钟专访。

Mr. Vice President, welcome to The Daily Social Distancing Show. It's good to be with you. 

-And it's a big distance now. 

 -Um... It definitely is a big distance. Um... You-you have been making news over the past few weeks, responding to what's happening in America, responding to what can easily be described as one of the most tumultuous times in not just American but world history. I want to talk a little bit about the op-ed that you put out today. Talk me through how you would plan to undo systemic oppression, how you would plan to undo systemic racism, and-and how you think you'll address the needs of the African American community. 

Well, first of all, uh, it's gonna take time. Uh, you know, Donald Trump didn't invent racism, but he sure has promoted it. And the systemic has been real-- the disparities in the country, especially in the economy right now. The combination. There's a-- There's just an awful combination: COVID-19, unemployment, systemic racism. And what's happening in terms of the way in which the-the-- George Floyd's, uh, death took place. 

-I mean, you know, I think about it. -Mm-hmm. When I was a kid, what really changed and sparked the civil rights movement-- as a kid, I was just involved in it-- no great shake, just a high school/college student-- was that television was around. And television came along. When they saw what Bull Connor was doing in Birmingham, Alabama, people went, "Whoa! I didn't know that really happened in America." 

-Right. 

-And then, now, today, everybody-- Not only should cops be wearing body cams. Everybody has a body cam. Everybody has a cell phone. And can you-- If the-the last words of George Floyd, "I can't breathe," they would have been consequential, but if they had not seen him take his last breath, none of this would have been nearly as consequential. Because people are now saying, "My God, did you see that?" 

And it's one of those inflection points. It really does feel like an inflection point, and it is a difficult one for many Americans to navigate. Because most Americans agree that there is a problem in policing between police and the black community and even many poor white communities. 

This is something that we know when we look at interactions between the police and American people. You have come out in favor of police reform. You know? But what-what does that actually mean? Because some people think that you cannot reform an institution that is fundamentally rotten in the core. 

Well, I don't think it's rotten in the core. And I don't think all cops are bad cops. But I think what-- Look, 90% of all the funding for police comes from local taxpayers. So the federal government, under our system, cannot-- other than taking a civil rights action-- say that you're "A", "B," "C," and "D." But what we can do is we can make sure that we insist on certain fundamental changes take place now, including giving-- making sure there's sensitivity training, making sure that all of cops', uh, past grievances-- uh, excuse me-- uh, transgressions are all made public. 

Because we can say, "If you don't, "we are not gonna provide the federal funding "that we provide for you through what they call Byrne grants and cop grants." And so we can, I think, now impact on significantly the desire of many police departments as well to fundamentally change the way they police. 

You know, many activists and organizers have come out saying there have been repeated attempts to reform many police departments. Were it not for civilian cameras, we wouldn't know the truth, oftentimes. I mean, we've seen three instances in the past few weeks of major police departments being contradicted by video evidence that comes out. 

So some would say to you, um, uh, Mr. Vice President, if you were to become president, do you think that there would be a world where defunding the police would be the solution and getting-getting some of these responsibilities away from police forces-- you know, police in schools, police handling mental illness, police handling homelessness, et cetera? 

Well, I think a lot of changes, they can take place, period, without having to defund police completely. Here's what I think's happened. You have well over 80% of the American people going, "Whoa. I didn't know this. I didn't know this was happening.” I don't believe police should be defunded, but I think the conditions should be placed upon them where departments are having to take significant reforms relating to the-- 

We should set up a national use of force standard. If they don't sign on to it, then, in fact, they don't get any of the federal money. In addition, that they have to demonstrate that they release all the data that relates to misconduct by police. That all has to be sent to the Justice Department. If they don't send it to the Justice Department nationally, they don't get funding. 

But... as it relates to, for example, um, mental illness and homelessness and drug abuse and the like, many changes we can make. But the i-- For example, my daughter is a social worker. She has her master's in social work. The idea that she's gonna respond by herself to a 911 call that says that someone is overdosing or someone has a mental problem and they're acting out, the idea of going by themselves is not rational to expect. 

Conversely, cops shouldn't go alone. Sho-- Cops should go with, with people who are mental health experts. Do you not think though there's an opportunity to have somebody that's not a policeman? Because, you know, the-the old adage, um, if you-- if you are a hammer, then everything is a nail. 

And so do you not think there's an opportunity to have people who are not even police in these environments who are trained and specialized? I mean, at mental institutions, for instance, you know, it's not police who are helping these people. It's people who are trained in defusing these situations. 

No, but they are though. They also use force in those mental institutions when someone's out of hand. They put 'em in straitjackets. They put them in circumstances where they have big guys come in and hold somebody down. It's not just someone walking in and saying, "Look, here, you got to calm down now. I know how to deal with you. 

This is..." It-It's not that simple. But that should be the objective. So we should put the police second in those circumstances and not first. For example, we should change the way in which we deal with all drug abusers. Nobody should be going to jail for the use of drugs. They should be going to mandatory rehabilitation. We should be building rehab centers, not more prisons. 

You know, building trust between law enforcement and communities is-- and-and to increase safety is-is to invest in-in funding of community policing. When we were funding community policing, the crime rate went down and the visibility of the-- I mean, and-and the-- and the extent of brutality went down, too, because people know who's in the community. 

But it's-it's much bigger than that. It's complicated. And-- But I think we should turn over as much as we can to non-armed police officers to-to de-escalate things related to mental illness, homelessness, and drug abuse. 

One of-- one of the areas that almost everybody synon-synonymously agrees on is that police unions have shown themselves to be extremely strong and oftentimes have contracts that provide impunity for the police. You know? It is hard to-to get the bad apples out of police departments. I mean, just in the case of George Floyd, you had a police officer where, just from the record that people could get access to, you saw somewhere around 20 previous grievances against the police officer. So what is your plan to try and get police unions to sign on? And if they don't, is there a plan to remove some of their power or to deal with them differently? 

No. Well, the plan would be that their departments don't get funded if they don't do the things that have to change. For example, there are bad cops, there are bad senators, there are bad docs, there are bad lawyers, there are bad... And they're all very poor at policing themselves, every one of these institutions and organizations. 

So you got to say, "Here's the deal." When a police officer is tried with a violent crime or tried with violating the law, they should not be tried by the local prosecutor. It has to be a prosecutor that doesn't handle their cases. We're going to make that a law. So there's more distance between the two. 

Making sure that cops can be fired for cause. Cops can be fired when, in fact, you can make the case and bring a case that indicates they have violated the law, they have violated common decency. And when that happens, you're going to see police departments changing and police unions changing. 

And, by the way, not all unions are taking the same positions. Some unions are much more forward-leaning than other unions are. But the fact of the matter is, there has to be a fundamental change. You've got to be able to root out bad cops. And the good cops-- the majority of 'em are-- know how it makes them all look. They look bad. It makes everyone look bad. So I think you're going to see a lot more movement in terms of police unions, as well. But if it's not, they're going to have to obey the law as written. We're going to change the way in which we hold police departments accountable.

推荐关注

回复“号内搜”，快捷搜索