Defund the police

[Ken-1122]

Does anybody here think this is a good idea? I’ve never heard an adequate response for what it to be done when you are attacked or robbed; will everything be run by street gangs? If there is an entity in place to prevent illegal activity, how do you know that entity will not do the same thing the Police are doing now? Your thoughts?

 

[.Mikha'el.]

I've heard that "defunding the police" means shifting a portion of the funding used for police services into community programs, particularly in the area of mental health. I personally don't have a strong opinion of that. It would be lying to say that no one is calling for outright abolition, but I think anyone who is falls into two groups, extremists who think outright anarchy would actually be feasible, and people who are reacting on a purely emotional knee-jerk level to the shootings reported by the media without taking the time to properly consider the consequences.

 

[Tanj]

Does anybody here think this is a good idea? I’ve never heard an adequate response for what it to be done when you are attacked or robbed; will everything be run by street gangs? If there is an entity in place to prevent illegal activity, how do you know that entity will not do the same thing the Police are doing now? Your thoughts?

I think it would be nice it it was the actual "defund the police" concept you created a thread about, rather than this strawman version you created that no-one not right out on the fringe believes.

 

[Ken-1122]

I've heard that "defunding the police" means shifting a portion of the funding used for police services into community programs, particularly in the area of mental health. I personally don't have a strong opinion of that.

City budgets are not determined that way; they don’t rob Peter to pay Paul, the budget from one entity is not determined by how much is taken from another. If they want to fund community and mental health programs, they can fight to fund those, without insisting the money comes from the Police. And why only defund the police, what about the park department, transit system, and countless other agencies in the city budget in order to fund those programs if that were their true intent?

 

[Ken-1122]

I think it would be nice it it was the actual "defund the police" concept you created a thread about, rather than this strawman version you created that no-one not right out on the fringe believes.

Care to describe this "defund the police concept" that you speak of?

 

[bèlla]

No city will completely abolish the police’s presence. Business and shopping districts will still be covered. They wouldn’t diminish revenue or tourism to put it in place.

Yours in His Service,

~bella

 

[Tanj]

Care to describe this "defund the police concept" that you speak of?

Nope. It's your thread, and you asked for thoughts, so I provided mine. If you'd created a thread on the actual topic rather than this right wing distortion of it, then sure.

 

[Blade]

I guess it could come down to WHERE you live. All for looking into ways to change things but defund? haha never.

 

[Ken-1122]

Nope. It's your thread, and you asked for thoughts, so I provided mine. If you'd created a thread on the actual topic rather than this right wing distortion of it, then sure.

How about if you respond on what you perceive as the actual topic?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I think it comes from a foolish perspective that you don't need state enforced violence to create order. It's almost libertarian which is probably why I have a problem with it. The problem I have, is that the sorts of people encouraging defunding the police likely want to limit someone's gun rights and thus you have the perfect breeding ground for private citizens to fill in the power gap that government is typically supposed to fill.

 

[OddityCrisis]

I think it comes from a foolish perspective that you don't need state enforced violence to create order. It's almost libertarian which is probably why I have a problem with it. The problem I have, is that the sorts of people encouraging defunding the police likely want to limit someone's gun rights and thus you have the perfect breeding ground for private citizens to fill in the power gap that government is typically supposed to fill.

But with no police, who are they going to to get to come disarm us?

I say defund them all. Then, without state paid thugs to have their back, let's see how bold the politicians get with their stupidity & treason.

 

[Nithavela]

"Defund the police" has been one of the worst slogans in political history of the last few decades.

 

[GDL]

"Defund the police" has been one of the worst slogans in political history of the last few decades.

Thanks for saying this!

 

[gaara4158]

City budgets are not determined that way; they don’t rob Peter to pay Paul, the budget from one entity is not determined by how much is taken from another. If they want to fund community and mental health programs, they can fight to fund those, without insisting the money comes from the Police. And why only defund the police, what about the park department, transit system, and countless other agencies in the city budget in order to fund those programs if that were their true intent?

The idea is that militarized, aggressive police departments aren’t equipped to prevent crime in high-crime areas. They’re equipped to find crimes and punish those committing them, which hasn’t proven to be an effective way of reducing crime overall. If anything, it perpetuates a cycle of poverty and crime, locking these communities into third-world material conditions. We do not need to throw more police at high-crime areas. We need to invest in education and economic opportunities in these areas, giving the police a break from being the only line between those communities and total chaos.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

"Defund the Police" =/= "abolish the police"

As others have said, it means taking money from police departments used for purchasing military grade equipment like APCs and body armor and diverting into other social programs to "fight crime" at the source through expanded mental health services, education and assistance programs. I think it also entails some kind of change in the training and, ultimately, the culture of policing in this country that trains officers to think like soldiers on a battle field where everyone other than other cops are potential "enemy combatants", especially non-white citizens.

 

[GDL]

The idea is that militarized, aggressive police departments aren’t equipped to prevent crime in high-crime areas. They’re equipped to find crimes and punish those committing them, which hasn’t proven to be an effective way of reducing crime overall. If anything, it perpetuates a cycle of poverty and crime, locking these communities into third-world material conditions. We do not need to throw more police at high-crime areas. We need to invest in education and economic opportunities in these areas, giving the police a break from being the only line between those communities and total chaos.

One of the better summaries I've read here. Thanks.

The problem is that the slogan doesn't present this well & the visuals of violence coupled with the slogan suggest getting rid of police, which is insane.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

One of the better summaries I've read here. Thanks.

The problem is that the slogan doesn't present this well & the visuals of violence coupled with the slogan suggest getting rid of police, which is insane.

That's a fair critique.

 

[GDL]

As others have said, it means taking money from police departments used for purchasing military grade equipment like APCs and body armor and diverting into other social programs to "fight crime" at the source through expanded mental health services, education and assistance programs. I think it also entails some kind of change in the training and, ultimately, the culture of policing in this country that trains officers to think like soldiers on a battle field where everyone other than other cops are potential "enemy combatants", especially non-white citizens.

And as usual, bureaucracies are about the worst at handling such programs. We should probably go for a "Defund the Government" slogan and elaborate with a decent explanation as you and some others are doing.

 

[Ken-1122]

But with no police, who are they going to to get to come disarm us?

I say defund them all. Then, without state paid thugs to have their back, let's see how bold the politicians get with their stupidity & treason.

Politicians and anyone with money can easily afford paid security; it won’t be a problem for them, the problem will be for those of us who cannot afford private security.

 

[gaara4158]

One of the better summaries I've read here. Thanks.

The problem is that the slogan doesn't present this well & the visuals of violence coupled with the slogan suggest getting rid of police, which is insane.

It lends itself to bad-faith reactionary misrepresentations, that’s true, but it’s a no-win situation. If they used a feel-good, vague slogan, they’d be criticized for not having a clear goal in mind. If they used a more nuanced slogan, it would probably be too cumbersome to catch on.