4 ms·

> That is why there have been calls to radically re-think, or even eliminate, policing in the US. Isn't "defund the police" 99% "that's a nice slogan", not act

> That is why there have been calls to radically re-think, or even eliminate, policing in the US. Isn't "defund the police" 99% "that's a nice slogan", not actually "we'll be good without any form of law enforcement"? From what I understand it's a play to break unions: you defund and dismantle the police department and then you can create a new department, can start fresh with new people, new tactics etc pp. Might work, might not, but it's certainly not "eliminate policing".

drewwwwww 6y ago
that is how the message has been coopted. when meant sincerely it aims to drastically reduce both the responsibilities and budgets of law enforcement as close to zero as is practicable by replacing militarized violent enforcement with evidence-based programs that reduce criminality, often at much reduced cost. you can google for more details.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> Isn't "defund the police" 99% "that's a nice slogan No. > not actually "we'll be good without any form of law enforcement"? Not that, either. “Defund the police” is about shifting substantial amounts of funding from police to supportive/responsive social service instead of law enforcement. > From what I understand it's a play to break unions: That's probably true of some supporters of the related-but-distinct abolish/dismantle effort, but even there it's not the main focus. > you defund and dismantle the police department and then you can create a new department, can start fresh with new people, new tactics etc pp. Dismantle/abolish does allow that, but most of the push for it is not for abolish-and-directly-replace, but for rethinking public safety and community services more generally and redesigning how law enforcement fits into it. While any replacement includes law enforcement personnel employed somewhere, they may not include a single large centralized paramilitary organization like the dominant model for city police / county sheriffs offices, and might (for instance) involve domain-specific law enforcement officers embedded in a variety of different public agencies. It can, and for many people does, mean abolishing (not merely replacing) police departments as institutions, but, yes, it does not mean abolishing the law enforcement function of government.
- zests 6y ago
  I haven’t seen any concrete numbers. That’s what keeps it in “slogan” territory for me. I’ll admit to not looking very hard for numbers as a failing of my own. I want to see suggestions, for any major city, how much of their budget we should cut (as percentage and gross) as well as where this funding should go as a percentage of how much funding already goes to that place. Apologies if this is readily available, I haven’t seen it yet.
  - carlinmack 6y ago
    you can find more information about the movement here 8toabolition.com
    - catalogia 6y ago
      This is disappointingly sparse on details and does not seem to be a nuanced position. It's calling for the eventual abolition of police, not merely scaling back their funding: > The end goal of these reforms is not to create better, friendlier, or more community-oriented police or prisons. Instead, we hope to build toward a society without police or prisons, where communities are equipped to provide for their safety and wellbeing. When somebody breaks into my home, I don't need a counselor; I need some sort of investigator or detective who can track that man down and make sure he doesn't do it again. Maybe that guy needs a counselor instead of a prison sentence, I'm [skeptical of but] amenable to that idea, but who does the grunt work of figuring how who did it and where he's at? Who brings him to trial, where his guilt or innocence can be assessed? I can't find any answers for this on that site, so it's hard for me to take seriously. This document also mentions permanently closing all jails and freeing everybody from involuntary detention, etc. When a man refuses to stop beating his wife, where should he be put? I don't see any answers for this. Is the idea really to create a utopia where people no longer do shitty things to other people? Because if so, that's a pipe dream, not a serious proposal.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > I haven’t seen any concrete numbers. Within the movement, there are different groups with different policy proposals (which, even in the “defund” camp, are not limited to just moving money around), which inherently must vary in detail for specific police departments. But mostly the point right now is to get the people who legislate at the local level to agree that the broad principal is worthy of detailed discussion. And most advocates anywhere on the defund/dismantle spectrum will tell you that they are calling for a broad rethinking around a particular outline involving a variety of community and government groups, not selling a detailed package of ready-to-implement policies.
mc32 6y ago
I think the word “abolish” is unfortunate because it’s inaccurate. To most people “abolish” means “it shall exist no longer” rather than “we’ll replace current police departments with reformed police departments along with possibly some budgetary changes” It’s a bit of sloganeering as currently constructed, though admittedly the police need reforming and retraining especially deescallation with regard to mentally imbalanced, people as well as people who’re high and such.
domador 6y ago
"Defund the police" is very unfortunate terminology. It is viscerally appealing to the groups most upset about police brutality, but can scare away potential allies, who might get the impression that "defund" means doing away with any kind of armed law enforcement and leaving society at the mercy of violent criminals. "Defund" is a good example of a term which has a precise, nuanced, technical definition to its main users but which shouldn't be used in common speech because it is so easily and terribly misunderstood. For another example, think about the word "intercourse". It can just mean "communication"... but what is the first idea that comes to most people's mind when people come across that word?

drewwwwww 6y ago

that is how the message has been coopted. when meant sincerely it aims to drastically reduce both the responsibilities and budgets of law enforcement as close to zero as is practicable by replacing militarized violent enforcement with evidence-based programs that reduce criminality, often at much reduced cost. you can google for more details.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Isn't "defund the police" 99% "that's a nice slogan No. > not actually "we'll be good without any form of law enforcement"? Not that, either. “Defund the police” is about shifting substantial amounts of funding from police to supportive/responsive social service instead of law enforcement. > From what I understand it's a play to break unions: That's probably true of some supporters of the related-but-distinct abolish/dismantle effort, but even there it's not the main focus. > you defund and dismantle the police department and then you can create a new department, can start fresh with new people, new tactics etc pp. Dismantle/abolish does allow that, but most of the push for it is not for abolish-and-directly-replace, but for rethinking public safety and community services more generally and redesigning how law enforcement fits into it. While any replacement includes law enforcement personnel employed somewhere, they may not include a single large centralized paramilitary organization like the dominant model for city police / county sheriffs offices, and might (for instance) involve domain-specific law enforcement officers embedded in a variety of different public agencies. It can, and for many people does, mean abolishing (not merely replacing) police departments as institutions, but, yes, it does not mean abolishing the law enforcement function of government.

zests 6y ago
I haven’t seen any concrete numbers. That’s what keeps it in “slogan” territory for me. I’ll admit to not looking very hard for numbers as a failing of my own. I want to see suggestions, for any major city, how much of their budget we should cut (as percentage and gross) as well as where this funding should go as a percentage of how much funding already goes to that place. Apologies if this is readily available, I haven’t seen it yet.
- carlinmack 6y ago
  you can find more information about the movement here 8toabolition.com
  - catalogia 6y ago
    This is disappointingly sparse on details and does not seem to be a nuanced position. It's calling for the eventual abolition of police, not merely scaling back their funding: > The end goal of these reforms is not to create better, friendlier, or more community-oriented police or prisons. Instead, we hope to build toward a society without police or prisons, where communities are equipped to provide for their safety and wellbeing. When somebody breaks into my home, I don't need a counselor; I need some sort of investigator or detective who can track that man down and make sure he doesn't do it again. Maybe that guy needs a counselor instead of a prison sentence, I'm [skeptical of but] amenable to that idea, but who does the grunt work of figuring how who did it and where he's at? Who brings him to trial, where his guilt or innocence can be assessed? I can't find any answers for this on that site, so it's hard for me to take seriously. This document also mentions permanently closing all jails and freeing everybody from involuntary detention, etc. When a man refuses to stop beating his wife, where should he be put? I don't see any answers for this. Is the idea really to create a utopia where people no longer do shitty things to other people? Because if so, that's a pipe dream, not a serious proposal.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > I haven’t seen any concrete numbers. Within the movement, there are different groups with different policy proposals (which, even in the “defund” camp, are not limited to just moving money around), which inherently must vary in detail for specific police departments. But mostly the point right now is to get the people who legislate at the local level to agree that the broad principal is worthy of detailed discussion. And most advocates anywhere on the defund/dismantle spectrum will tell you that they are calling for a broad rethinking around a particular outline involving a variety of community and government groups, not selling a detailed package of ready-to-implement policies.

mc32 6y ago

I think the word “abolish” is unfortunate because it’s inaccurate. To most people “abolish” means “it shall exist no longer” rather than “we’ll replace current police departments with reformed police departments along with possibly some budgetary changes” It’s a bit of sloganeering as currently constructed, though admittedly the police need reforming and retraining especially deescallation with regard to mentally imbalanced, people as well as people who’re high and such.

domador 6y ago

"Defund the police" is very unfortunate terminology. It is viscerally appealing to the groups most upset about police brutality, but can scare away potential allies, who might get the impression that "defund" means doing away with any kind of armed law enforcement and leaving society at the mercy of violent criminals. "Defund" is a good example of a term which has a precise, nuanced, technical definition to its main users but which shouldn't be used in common speech because it is so easily and terribly misunderstood. For another example, think about the word "intercourse". It can just mean "communication"... but what is the first idea that comes to most people's mind when people come across that word?