• LukeZaz@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Honestly? Considering how little the police actually do to help anyone, versus the huge amount of harm they cause, I’m not entirely convinced that “Get rid of all police” wouldn’t be a good idea, even if they got replaced with basically nothing. And I’ve seen a lot of leftists who felt similarly. So “those on the other side” aren’t entirely wrong; they just don’t understand how incredibly bad police are.

    This doesn’t mean we should replace the police with literally nothing — obviously things investing in social services and crisis intervention would be great. It’s just that I find it hard to do worse than what currently exists.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m not a fan of all or nothing, I think there’s a place for a well trained police force. Look at Europe and the UK, they aren’t armed, but they have power still. Someone has to take care of the person who stole a car and is speeding down the freeway going 100+, crisis councilors aren’t going to be driving trying to perform a PIT maneuver.

      I think it’s a blend, in my example the police would bring them into custody, and then trained people work with them after that working out what happened and working with the justice department. There are many things that police aren’t needed at, like domestic issues, but there are plenty we do need them at too. (However, reforming the police needs to happen, I’m not saying they are perfect right now.)

      • LukeZaz@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        The core problem is that there are so many things that can help prevent the problems from arising to begin with that need to be done before policing is even considered. Better healthcare, housing, education, etc. Police are, at best, a last resort solution to desperate cases, and they tend to be hammers looking for nails as a result. It might be possible to do it well, yes, but it’s very hard, and you should really be looking for a less antagonistic solution first.

        To take your idea of “speeding at 100+” as an example: This could be solved by replacing cars with public transport, such that people don’t really have so many opportunities to go 100+ to begin with, or by using traffic calming techniques to make it feel too unsafe for anyone to want to try, or using alternative road layouts to make it significantly harder to pull off at all (e.g. roundabouts). There are many options, almost all of which are better – and less punitive – than the police.

        Also, tangential, but…

        crisis councilors aren’t going to be driving trying to perform a PIT maneuver.

        Of course not; PIT maneuvers would kill people.

    • djsoren19@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The problem is that to argue this point, you have to start going through all of the facts like case conversion rates, the domestic abuse rates, the rates of racist attacks by law enforcement, and the membership overlap between law enforcement and white supremacist groups. Once you start bringing up that many numbers, the idiots get confused and their eyes roll out of their skull, whereas the centrists get too scared realizing that basically no cop is actually trying to keep the U.S. safe and try to shutdown the conversation.

      • anachronist
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Municipal police mostly came from the great railroad strike of 1871.