4 ms·

And what are the victims of violent crimes in those neighborhood do in the interim between the take resources from the already strained police departments and u

And what are the victims of violent crimes in those neighborhood do in the interim between the take resources from the already strained police departments and use them other for long-term measures? And I'm even assuming they even would have worthwhile results of course despite the premise that such programs would work is given in a matter of factly manner. Put yourself in the shoes of an innocent PoC who's house just got robbed. Will not having cops available to your neighborhood to respond to the call make you feel more or less prejudiced against? Will they derive that much comfort in knowing that maybe, in one or two generations thing MIGHT be slightly less bad. And will the criminal elements, seeing the lowering in police response, not grow more bold and escalate?

ngold 6y ago
Police should solve crime. Instead they are put in charge of everything that is not their job since there is no funding for mental health services, homeless, etc. etc.
p49k 6y ago
People saying “defund the police” are not advocating the complete elimination of police forces; they’re advocating for the elimination of the 75-90% of things that police spend their time on that has zero or negative ROI for society. “Responding to legitimate crimes” is not one of those things.
- fennecfoxen 6y ago
  Imagine arguing for a better world, instead of arguing about what your slogan means. You might be able to secure majority support for your policy proposal, instead of... checks YouGov poll again... 16% support, for the phrase "defund the police".
  - p49k 6y ago
    It’s also a nascent movement so it’s not surprising that many people don’t understand it. There are many successful policies that began with very low public support.
    - fennecfoxen 6y ago
      Yeah but the policy proposals spelled out earn actual majority support in polls, instead of tiny-minority support. It's a terrible self-defeating name/slogan.
      - p49k 6y ago
        I'm sorry but I find this kind of nitpicking in bad form. People are going out and taking action to bring attention to a problem in what is obviously the best way they can do so. If you have an idea about improving marketing, why not spend that energy helping/proposing something and volunteering? Aside from that, I think there is more to consider than just what will appeal to public opinion; dry attempts to shift one’s words to match opinion polls is how many politicians lose elections by coming off as pandering. There is a sense of urgency and emotion in the original phrase that might be important in the broader picture and in the long term.
- gentleman11 6y ago
  Except the areas that are dismantling their police forces. The expression means different things to different people
  - toofy 6y ago
    Could you be more specific, preferably with a link?
    - nfw2 6y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZevgdbMIB0&feature=youtu.be&t=2276 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZevgdbMIB0&feature=youtu.be... This is from Obama's town hall on June 3rd. The speaker is on the city council in Minneapolis, which seems to be leading the charge on this issue. *This isn't an example of an area that is actively dismantling their police force. But this person's view is that the target should be no police at all, not reduced police responsibilities.
    - ehvatum 6y ago
      Minneapolis, for example. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/us/minneapolis-police-abolish.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/us/minneapolis-police-abo... This solution urgently needs to be considered by San Francisco; the housing shortage will be immediately reversed and ASP will plummet, allowing POCs to populate the area, creating racial justice. https://www.zillow.com/minneapolis-mn/ https://www.zillow.com/minneapolis-mn/
      - toofy 6y ago
        But as the post above said: > People saying “defund the police” are not advocating the complete elimination of police forces And Minneapolis is absolutely not completely eliminating their police force. Minneapolis council member Phillipe Cunningham said [1]: > ”This isn't like, tomorrow we're not going to have a police department and we're going to have this huge gap," he said. "There will be intentional transition and investments and policies. I just want to make sure folks understand that there's not going to be suddenly no one to call when they need help.“ Councilman Jeremiah Ellison said [2]: > “I don’t want there to be this confusion of just, that there’s going to be nobody doing anything, that there’s gonna be nobody solving murders. No,” Ellison said. “We’re going to absolutely make sure there are systems in place to address an active shooter situation, for example.” In the link you just provided: > Councilman Jeremiah Ellison, who represents North Minneapolis, said he would not frame what the Council was doing as defunding the police, but rather as “funding a different safety strategy.” What concerns me is there are many people who are implying (if not outright saying) that people don’t want safety. And frankly that’s just silly. Every proposal I’ve seen has had community safety at its forefront. And a gradual shifting of funds towards alternatives to our (USians) current version of police does not mean that communities suddenly don’t value safety and stability. Either way, Minneapolis is absolutely not going to eliminate their police departments, no matter how panicky certain news orgs try to make people. They’re going to actually, over time, dismantle their current clusterfuck which makes communities’ quality of life terrible, and actually implement real changes. What does this look like? We don’t know yet, but at least they’re doing more than empty platitudes. They readily say “We’re going to make mistakes along the way.” but at least they’re finally actually addressing the situation and willing to do the work. [1] https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/07/vetoproof-majority-minneapolis-council-members-gives-support-dismantling-police-department https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/07/vetoproof-majority-... [2] https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/george-floyd/minneapolis-council-members-expand-on-calls-to-disband-police/89-77c01759-39fb-412c-aac2-7baddacb90c1 https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/george-floyd/minne...

ngold 6y ago

Police should solve crime. Instead they are put in charge of everything that is not their job since there is no funding for mental health services, homeless, etc. etc.

p49k 6y ago

People saying “defund the police” are not advocating the complete elimination of police forces; they’re advocating for the elimination of the 75-90% of things that police spend their time on that has zero or negative ROI for society. “Responding to legitimate crimes” is not one of those things.

fennecfoxen 6y ago
Imagine arguing for a better world, instead of arguing about what your slogan means. You might be able to secure majority support for your policy proposal, instead of... checks YouGov poll again... 16% support, for the phrase "defund the police".
- p49k 6y ago
  It’s also a nascent movement so it’s not surprising that many people don’t understand it. There are many successful policies that began with very low public support.
  - fennecfoxen 6y ago
    Yeah but the policy proposals spelled out earn actual majority support in polls, instead of tiny-minority support. It's a terrible self-defeating name/slogan.
    - p49k 6y ago
      I'm sorry but I find this kind of nitpicking in bad form. People are going out and taking action to bring attention to a problem in what is obviously the best way they can do so. If you have an idea about improving marketing, why not spend that energy helping/proposing something and volunteering? Aside from that, I think there is more to consider than just what will appeal to public opinion; dry attempts to shift one’s words to match opinion polls is how many politicians lose elections by coming off as pandering. There is a sense of urgency and emotion in the original phrase that might be important in the broader picture and in the long term.
gentleman11 6y ago
Except the areas that are dismantling their police forces. The expression means different things to different people
- toofy 6y ago
  Could you be more specific, preferably with a link?
  - nfw2 6y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZevgdbMIB0&feature=youtu.be&t=2276 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZevgdbMIB0&feature=youtu.be... This is from Obama's town hall on June 3rd. The speaker is on the city council in Minneapolis, which seems to be leading the charge on this issue. *This isn't an example of an area that is actively dismantling their police force. But this person's view is that the target should be no police at all, not reduced police responsibilities.
  - ehvatum 6y ago
    Minneapolis, for example. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/us/minneapolis-police-abolish.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/us/minneapolis-police-abo... This solution urgently needs to be considered by San Francisco; the housing shortage will be immediately reversed and ASP will plummet, allowing POCs to populate the area, creating racial justice. https://www.zillow.com/minneapolis-mn/ https://www.zillow.com/minneapolis-mn/
    - toofy 6y ago
      But as the post above said: > People saying “defund the police” are not advocating the complete elimination of police forces And Minneapolis is absolutely not completely eliminating their police force. Minneapolis council member Phillipe Cunningham said [1]: > ”This isn't like, tomorrow we're not going to have a police department and we're going to have this huge gap," he said. "There will be intentional transition and investments and policies. I just want to make sure folks understand that there's not going to be suddenly no one to call when they need help.“ Councilman Jeremiah Ellison said [2]: > “I don’t want there to be this confusion of just, that there’s going to be nobody doing anything, that there’s gonna be nobody solving murders. No,” Ellison said. “We’re going to absolutely make sure there are systems in place to address an active shooter situation, for example.” In the link you just provided: > Councilman Jeremiah Ellison, who represents North Minneapolis, said he would not frame what the Council was doing as defunding the police, but rather as “funding a different safety strategy.” What concerns me is there are many people who are implying (if not outright saying) that people don’t want safety. And frankly that’s just silly. Every proposal I’ve seen has had community safety at its forefront. And a gradual shifting of funds towards alternatives to our (USians) current version of police does not mean that communities suddenly don’t value safety and stability. Either way, Minneapolis is absolutely not going to eliminate their police departments, no matter how panicky certain news orgs try to make people. They’re going to actually, over time, dismantle their current clusterfuck which makes communities’ quality of life terrible, and actually implement real changes. What does this look like? We don’t know yet, but at least they’re doing more than empty platitudes. They readily say “We’re going to make mistakes along the way.” but at least they’re finally actually addressing the situation and willing to do the work. [1] https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/07/vetoproof-majority-minneapolis-council-members-gives-support-dismantling-police-department https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/06/07/vetoproof-majority-... [2] https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/george-floyd/minneapolis-council-members-expand-on-calls-to-disband-police/89-77c01759-39fb-412c-aac2-7baddacb90c1 https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/george-floyd/minne...