13 ms·

This is fascinating because I am myself half black, lived in many communities of mixed demographics and never once heard a friend (of any race) say they want mo

This is fascinating because I am myself half black, lived in many communities of mixed demographics and never once heard a friend (of any race) say they want more police at all, ever. I guess I also don't know anybody who has done a gallup poll or anybody that knows anybody who has ever done a gallup poll in their lives so who knows? Edit: I don't know how or where these are conducted, or their exact phrasing of their questions, but I'm very curious about that. Because, some rural areas in America have a "posse" system where volunteers get to ride around armed, sometimes outfitted (by taxpayer money) with bulletproof vests and big stickers for their cars showing their semi-official affiliation with the police (or sheriff's department). On the record, they're only supposed to observe or report yet in practice I'd question why it's crucial in some places to outfit posses with bulletproof through taxpayer money in that case, especially in places that have a very low crime rate? I only bring this up because if I wanted to tilt a poll, I'd ask folks in areas where this is a possibility, where asking about a reduction in police force implies an increase in these somewhat-sanctioned vigilantes. You wouldn't even have to include it in the question, you'd just have to ask somebody standing in the right spot.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
pwim 6y ago
From the article, the question asked was "Would you rather the police spend more time, the same amount of time or less time as they currently spend in your area?", and was "administered by web in English and conducted as part of the newly launched Gallup Center on Black Voices". There's more information on how Gallup conducts polls more generally here: https://www.gallup.com/174158/gallup-panel-methodology.aspx https://www.gallup.com/174158/gallup-panel-methodology.aspx.
djsumdog 6y ago
I hated the police when I was younger and thought we'd be better with fewer police. I don't believe that anymore. The emergence of body cameras are amazing because they show just how bad we're constantly being lied to. YouTubers like Donut Operator really opened my eyes. I think back to my younger years and all the ways I've seen police go out of their way to do things they didn't need to. I've seem some do really shitty things too ... but overall, I think we need to remember they're human beings. We're all just human beings, and most people join the police because they want to do the right thing. If many of these problem cities, police forces are composed of a large number of minorities too. Especially during this time, let's try to remember we're all humans here.
- kenjackson 6y ago
  “We're all just human beings, and most people join the police because they want to do the right thing.” I think in theory this is the idea, but I think in reality it isn’t. I know four people I grew up with who became police and all four were not people I’d want to run into. One, in high school, stated that being a cop is the only job you can have where you are paid to beat people up (I argued boxing, not realizing he’d later be a cop). Another was the middle school bully. Another was a high school drug dealer — who I’m not sure ever stopped. And the one black guy I knew who became a cop was just a jerk. Maybe coincidence, but I have a feeling that the profession attracts exactly the mindset you don’t want as a cop. But people who don’t have that mindset probably don’t want to be cops.
  - codr7 6y ago
    Same goes for politics, or any position of power/authority really, the people who want it the most are the worst alternatives.
  - nemo44x 6y ago
    I can’t imagine it’s the most attractive job. Most people with options are going to do something else. The pay is generally ok in a lot of places but it’s a job where you’re going to work bad hours early on and for the most part you’re dealing with the uglier side of society. Your whole world view is going to be shifted negatively as you encounter so many people with drug issues, mental issues, violent people, etc. Who would want that? Who would want to spend their life interacting with this part of society day in and day out? I can only assume for many that take that job that it’s the best they can do. I interact with thoughtful, nice people every day to the point where I take it for granted. I’m not exposed to the desperate, degenerate, or depraved part of society. And I wouldn’t want to be.
    - blaser-waffle 6y ago
      To take this further, all available stats show that the average tenure of a police officer is <5 years. This is no surprise -- the hours are rough, the work can be exceptionally dangerous or stressful at times, pay is middling (generally 50-70k a year, tho often much lower in poorer counties), and there is an entire class of US society that is blatantly "fuck the police". Why get into fist-fights with crackheads at 4am when I can get an A+ and Network+ and answer tickets all day? Slightly less degrading and no one will try to shoot me. The result is that smart, qualified people rightly fuck-off to better paying or less stressful gigs. Additionally, there is no lateral move into higher levels of police leadership (unless you're transferring from another PD). So your mid-to-senior leadership is often whoever manages to stick around. See pg. 6 https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/wpor_ltpov.pdf https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/wpor_ltpov.pdf ("Why Police Officers Resign") also https://www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/police-and-detectives.htm https://www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/police-and-detect... (salary info)
Aa9C4xPz43Gg7k6 6y ago
I don't think it's race related. I've moved to neighborhood that's relatively dangerous in Bay Area. It's close to really dangerous ones. I wouldn't mind 2-3x amount of police that currently is here. I don't think that others would mind it either just because they have darker skin color.
- newbie789 6y ago
  That sounds pretty awful. About a decade ago I spent some time in The Tenderloin in San Francisco (Turk and Hyde) and they had the most astounding open air drug market. It was constantly full of police but my friends were always able to purchase drugs. And violence was common. Unavoidable, even as perceived by those that spent more time there than I did. Maybe the police cruising down the street two or three times more often might've changed that. That's an interesting point. Edit: To clarify, no person I've ever met that lived in that area ever expressed a desire for more police. It was mostly things about housing and mental health care with that particular issue. I am specifically talking about my experience in the Tenderloin in this case.
  - opportune 6y ago
    2-3x as many police not enforcing laws doesn’t really change anything
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - yodsanklai 6y ago
    > It was constantly full of police but my friends were always able to purchase drugs. Personal anecdote. A while ago I was mugged while I was walking at 2am in Manhattan (around Union Square). I thought it was particularly safe as I always saw many cops everywhere (even just before I was mugged, and right after). Not saying police are useless, but retrospectively, I realize that seeing many cops doesn't mean a place is safe but rather the opposite.
istjohn 6y ago
Hidden under the counterintuitive headline is this tidbit: most Americans, especially Black Americans are not very confident police will treat them with courtesy and respect.
- ovao 6y ago
  I don't see that as counterintuitive. People wouldn't call for or desire for more police so they could have more encounters with more courtesy or more respect — they'd want more police because they feel it increases their level of safety and the level of safety of the community. A LEO can be incredibly discourteous to you while still keeping you safe, and you might reasonably accept the former to gain a greater sense of the latter.
- Wolfenstein98k 6y ago
  I don't see anything counterintuitive - I don't call the cops for respectful conversation, and if my actions have got them called in, I don't expect respectful treatment. Harsh maybe, but also true. Ideally they would be polite, but my interactions with police (here in Aus) are exclusively when something has gone wrong.
donw 6y ago
I found two examples in credible (for this topic) news sources of Sheriff's departments testing out volunteer auxiliary programs in rural counties. I see no indication that they are provided any equipment. No weapons, no "bulletproof vests", nada. Whether or not they have to pay for the required training is unclear. Also -- and I ask out of genuine curiosity -- how is this not aligned with the idea of community-based policing?
- newbie789 6y ago
  Thanks for asking! I maybe should have mentioned that I am speaking from a place of personal experience and also the experiences I've had relayed to me by my neighbors. I've also heard normal terrible stories about the police everywhere I've lived, but this posse thing is relatively new to me so I thought it prudent to highlight as one example. I currently live in a rural area where the sheriff's office provides bullet-proof vests using county funds, and has vowed to expand the program in the coming year. I am not aware of any training necessary to volunteer for the posse (the sheriff's office doesn't publish any clear guidelines about this.) All that I am aware of is that there are roughly ~30 officers total on this half of the county, and over 380 posse members according to published numbers. I have heard of a few cases of posse volunteers following people around in an intimidating fashion (Despite no wrongdoing occurring on the part of the of those followed. Every bit of weird behavior on their part was focused on Hispanic people and young women.) There was no news of anyone being reprimanded or ejected from the posse. As for community policing goes, I think that term may mean different things to different people. If by community policing you mean "possibly untrained, armed and armored people doing patrols with opaque rules and structure with limited accountability to the community, all on the taxpayer dime" it sounds somewhat similar to regular policing without having to pay salaries or pensions. I do not find that to be a meaningful difference (aside from the significant savings) , and not something that I would endorse.
  - donw 6y ago
    Honestly, unless you can present some evidence, something difficult to fake... this is fake news. Anybody on the internet could say this. I'd like to see an article from your local paper, a link to your sheriff's website with details on the program? How do you know it is taxpayer-funded? Where are those published numbers... published?
Wolfenstein98k 6y ago
"Retain presence", not "expand presence".
brobdingnagians 6y ago
Having spent a lot of time in poor areas with heavy gang presence, the people I know tend to not be gleeful or chummy about the police, but they understand they serve a purpose and want to keep the peace in their neighborhoods. When you have police helicopters going over your house at night on a regular basis and every window on every house has bars, you have a very real, visceral connection with wanting to be safe. They understand that some young people get mixed up in gangs, and want to help them. Part of that is in keeping the peace. Especially when you have rival gangs shooting innocent people randomly in the streets just because of the color of their skin; the color of the skin of the rival gang. I can see how people in those areas would be hesitant about abolishing the police, or even drastically reducing numbers. You just want to raise your kids in peace.
- charwalker 6y ago
  I've taken the approach to anything with political implications that everything is more complicated than it seems, even after digging into the issue. In this case, "Defund the Police" can mean a hundred different policy approaches from as simple as cut funding/staff/resources to as complex as redistributing that funding and resources to non-police support structures like social workers, mental health professionals, and the other roles that an omnibus police department handles. In that sense, I don't support straight defunding of police. I do support redistributing funding/resources to new or expanded public health departments with a push for mental health and drug abuse support. But that needs to happen as part of a larger approach to decriminalization of drug possession/use (not selling/distributing, just possession/use), criminal justice reform where those convicted of such nonviolent crimes are released and record scrubbed, plus support for those to gain an education or employment without stigma. Ideally we can establish programs and tools to tackle the problems that led to a life of crime or drug abuse, focusing on reform. That should also include immigration reform and the elimination of 'illegal' terms by expanding quotas and simplifying the process for citizenship. Cheaper education, child care, and medical care/prescriptions are also needed to reduce the burden on most working Americans so they can educate themselves, find better employment, and better care for themselves and their family. Ending food insecurity (which, by the way, it's insane the US even has) would be a solid start. People join gangs because they solve problems they face like wanting to belong, physical/financial security, etc. By working to resolve those issues for anyone in the states, immigrant or citizen, we can address the root cause not the symptoms. Much more complicated that it seems, and that's not even getting into the various departments/programs/bills/etc required to progress that. This is also a heavily opinionated comment that clearly leans liberal and would face plenty of challenges from the current conservative side of US politics. But it would also be progress toward solving a series of issues that undermine freedom and peaceful society.
jariel 6y ago
" never once heard a friend (of any race) say they want more police at all, ever." I have never in my life heard anyone talk about having 'more or less police' - so why is it surprising that you haven't heard about it. The polls is not about 'what someone was saying unsolicited' - it was about 'what they actually think'. There's nothing surprising or funny about it. "Because, some rural areas in America have a "posse" system where volunteers get to ride around armed, sometimes outfitted (by taxpayer money) with bulletproof vests and big stickers for their cars showing their semi-official affiliation with the police" This has nothing to do with anything. People want more or less police for the obvious reasons - also - despite the rhetoric, most Black communities are actually under policed, not over policed.
- newbie789 6y ago
  Fascinating! >I have never in my life heard anyone talk about having 'more or less police' I've personally known quite a few homeless people (and been one!) that had been repeatedly displaced by police that spoke at length about how they'd prefer fewer police, since the demolition of homeless camps are often perceived as being for show or just something that happened because officers were bored and simply had nothing to do that day. They perceived it as being for show since they'd often be able to reconstruct the camp the very next day and largely be left alone for weeks or even months afterward. I also know a woman that had a seriously dangerous stalker that had friends in the local police that somehow had the clout to send officers to her home on a whim. She's been arrested multiple times without ever being convicted of anything, usually not even charged at all. One time, she was 5150'd (mandatory 72 hour psychiatric evaluation) while in the middle of serving cake at her son's birthday because the stalker (who was about 300 miles away on that day) called his buddies and said she'd threatened suicide. She was able to produce proof on the scene that she hadn't contacted him at all, but was taken in anyway. She has personally expressed on many occasions that she wished the police stuck to a more strictly defined set of duties so that there would be less opportunity for an abuser to use his connections to use them as his own personal harassment squad, which includes a reduction in total numbers of police presence. I suppose we just know different people! Re: My thought about posses. >This has nothing to do with anything. I felt as though I explained the connection in the next paragraph, but I'm more than happy to explain in more detail how a person could in some situation prefer the presence of trained police than state-funded posses that have considerably less oversight and accountability. If you could clarify why you think this is incorrect, I am more than happy to discuss this further. > most Black communities are actually under policed, not over policed. Can you expand on this? I'd love more data on this point. If you're referencing the poll itself, you'll see that I already am skeptical about how it should be interpreted.
swebs 6y ago
I used to live in a bad neighborhood in Philadelphia and everyone I talked to wanted more police. And this included people of every race.
cestith 6y ago
I don't know that fewer or more police either one is the answer. Better police, demilitarized, with better screening, better training, and a better focus on police work is what we need. Most of the things police are doing do not require police, and definitely don't require high-tension interactions between armed police and the public. We need social workers, clinical psychologists, trauma counselors, food security plans, and such. The police should be a last resort, not a first interaction with people struggling with a difficult situation.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

pwim 6y ago

From the article, the question asked was "Would you rather the police spend more time, the same amount of time or less time as they currently spend in your area?", and was "administered by web in English and conducted as part of the newly launched Gallup Center on Black Voices". There's more information on how Gallup conducts polls more generally here: https://www.gallup.com/174158/gallup-panel-methodology.aspx https://www.gallup.com/174158/gallup-panel-methodology.aspx.

djsumdog 6y ago

I hated the police when I was younger and thought we'd be better with fewer police. I don't believe that anymore. The emergence of body cameras are amazing because they show just how bad we're constantly being lied to. YouTubers like Donut Operator really opened my eyes. I think back to my younger years and all the ways I've seen police go out of their way to do things they didn't need to. I've seem some do really shitty things too ... but overall, I think we need to remember they're human beings. We're all just human beings, and most people join the police because they want to do the right thing. If many of these problem cities, police forces are composed of a large number of minorities too. Especially during this time, let's try to remember we're all humans here.

kenjackson 6y ago
“We're all just human beings, and most people join the police because they want to do the right thing.” I think in theory this is the idea, but I think in reality it isn’t. I know four people I grew up with who became police and all four were not people I’d want to run into. One, in high school, stated that being a cop is the only job you can have where you are paid to beat people up (I argued boxing, not realizing he’d later be a cop). Another was the middle school bully. Another was a high school drug dealer — who I’m not sure ever stopped. And the one black guy I knew who became a cop was just a jerk. Maybe coincidence, but I have a feeling that the profession attracts exactly the mindset you don’t want as a cop. But people who don’t have that mindset probably don’t want to be cops.
- codr7 6y ago
  Same goes for politics, or any position of power/authority really, the people who want it the most are the worst alternatives.
- nemo44x 6y ago
  I can’t imagine it’s the most attractive job. Most people with options are going to do something else. The pay is generally ok in a lot of places but it’s a job where you’re going to work bad hours early on and for the most part you’re dealing with the uglier side of society. Your whole world view is going to be shifted negatively as you encounter so many people with drug issues, mental issues, violent people, etc. Who would want that? Who would want to spend their life interacting with this part of society day in and day out? I can only assume for many that take that job that it’s the best they can do. I interact with thoughtful, nice people every day to the point where I take it for granted. I’m not exposed to the desperate, degenerate, or depraved part of society. And I wouldn’t want to be.
  - blaser-waffle 6y ago
    To take this further, all available stats show that the average tenure of a police officer is <5 years. This is no surprise -- the hours are rough, the work can be exceptionally dangerous or stressful at times, pay is middling (generally 50-70k a year, tho often much lower in poorer counties), and there is an entire class of US society that is blatantly "fuck the police". Why get into fist-fights with crackheads at 4am when I can get an A+ and Network+ and answer tickets all day? Slightly less degrading and no one will try to shoot me. The result is that smart, qualified people rightly fuck-off to better paying or less stressful gigs. Additionally, there is no lateral move into higher levels of police leadership (unless you're transferring from another PD). So your mid-to-senior leadership is often whoever manages to stick around. See pg. 6 https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/wpor_ltpov.pdf https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/wpor_ltpov.pdf ("Why Police Officers Resign") also https://www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/police-and-detectives.htm https://www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/police-and-detect... (salary info)

Aa9C4xPz43Gg7k6 6y ago

I don't think it's race related. I've moved to neighborhood that's relatively dangerous in Bay Area. It's close to really dangerous ones. I wouldn't mind 2-3x amount of police that currently is here. I don't think that others would mind it either just because they have darker skin color.

newbie789 6y ago
That sounds pretty awful. About a decade ago I spent some time in The Tenderloin in San Francisco (Turk and Hyde) and they had the most astounding open air drug market. It was constantly full of police but my friends were always able to purchase drugs. And violence was common. Unavoidable, even as perceived by those that spent more time there than I did. Maybe the police cruising down the street two or three times more often might've changed that. That's an interesting point. Edit: To clarify, no person I've ever met that lived in that area ever expressed a desire for more police. It was mostly things about housing and mental health care with that particular issue. I am specifically talking about my experience in the Tenderloin in this case.
- opportune 6y ago
  2-3x as many police not enforcing laws doesn’t really change anything
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- yodsanklai 6y ago
  > It was constantly full of police but my friends were always able to purchase drugs. Personal anecdote. A while ago I was mugged while I was walking at 2am in Manhattan (around Union Square). I thought it was particularly safe as I always saw many cops everywhere (even just before I was mugged, and right after). Not saying police are useless, but retrospectively, I realize that seeing many cops doesn't mean a place is safe but rather the opposite.

istjohn 6y ago

Hidden under the counterintuitive headline is this tidbit: most Americans, especially Black Americans are not very confident police will treat them with courtesy and respect.

ovao 6y ago
I don't see that as counterintuitive. People wouldn't call for or desire for more police so they could have more encounters with more courtesy or more respect — they'd want more police because they feel it increases their level of safety and the level of safety of the community. A LEO can be incredibly discourteous to you while still keeping you safe, and you might reasonably accept the former to gain a greater sense of the latter.
Wolfenstein98k 6y ago
I don't see anything counterintuitive - I don't call the cops for respectful conversation, and if my actions have got them called in, I don't expect respectful treatment. Harsh maybe, but also true. Ideally they would be polite, but my interactions with police (here in Aus) are exclusively when something has gone wrong.

donw 6y ago

I found two examples in credible (for this topic) news sources of Sheriff's departments testing out volunteer auxiliary programs in rural counties. I see no indication that they are provided any equipment. No weapons, no "bulletproof vests", nada. Whether or not they have to pay for the required training is unclear. Also -- and I ask out of genuine curiosity -- how is this not aligned with the idea of community-based policing?

newbie789 6y ago
Thanks for asking! I maybe should have mentioned that I am speaking from a place of personal experience and also the experiences I've had relayed to me by my neighbors. I've also heard normal terrible stories about the police everywhere I've lived, but this posse thing is relatively new to me so I thought it prudent to highlight as one example. I currently live in a rural area where the sheriff's office provides bullet-proof vests using county funds, and has vowed to expand the program in the coming year. I am not aware of any training necessary to volunteer for the posse (the sheriff's office doesn't publish any clear guidelines about this.) All that I am aware of is that there are roughly ~30 officers total on this half of the county, and over 380 posse members according to published numbers. I have heard of a few cases of posse volunteers following people around in an intimidating fashion (Despite no wrongdoing occurring on the part of the of those followed. Every bit of weird behavior on their part was focused on Hispanic people and young women.) There was no news of anyone being reprimanded or ejected from the posse. As for community policing goes, I think that term may mean different things to different people. If by community policing you mean "possibly untrained, armed and armored people doing patrols with opaque rules and structure with limited accountability to the community, all on the taxpayer dime" it sounds somewhat similar to regular policing without having to pay salaries or pensions. I do not find that to be a meaningful difference (aside from the significant savings) , and not something that I would endorse.
- donw 6y ago
  Honestly, unless you can present some evidence, something difficult to fake... this is fake news. Anybody on the internet could say this. I'd like to see an article from your local paper, a link to your sheriff's website with details on the program? How do you know it is taxpayer-funded? Where are those published numbers... published?

Wolfenstein98k 6y ago

"Retain presence", not "expand presence".

brobdingnagians 6y ago

Having spent a lot of time in poor areas with heavy gang presence, the people I know tend to not be gleeful or chummy about the police, but they understand they serve a purpose and want to keep the peace in their neighborhoods. When you have police helicopters going over your house at night on a regular basis and every window on every house has bars, you have a very real, visceral connection with wanting to be safe. They understand that some young people get mixed up in gangs, and want to help them. Part of that is in keeping the peace. Especially when you have rival gangs shooting innocent people randomly in the streets just because of the color of their skin; the color of the skin of the rival gang. I can see how people in those areas would be hesitant about abolishing the police, or even drastically reducing numbers. You just want to raise your kids in peace.

charwalker 6y ago
I've taken the approach to anything with political implications that everything is more complicated than it seems, even after digging into the issue. In this case, "Defund the Police" can mean a hundred different policy approaches from as simple as cut funding/staff/resources to as complex as redistributing that funding and resources to non-police support structures like social workers, mental health professionals, and the other roles that an omnibus police department handles. In that sense, I don't support straight defunding of police. I do support redistributing funding/resources to new or expanded public health departments with a push for mental health and drug abuse support. But that needs to happen as part of a larger approach to decriminalization of drug possession/use (not selling/distributing, just possession/use), criminal justice reform where those convicted of such nonviolent crimes are released and record scrubbed, plus support for those to gain an education or employment without stigma. Ideally we can establish programs and tools to tackle the problems that led to a life of crime or drug abuse, focusing on reform. That should also include immigration reform and the elimination of 'illegal' terms by expanding quotas and simplifying the process for citizenship. Cheaper education, child care, and medical care/prescriptions are also needed to reduce the burden on most working Americans so they can educate themselves, find better employment, and better care for themselves and their family. Ending food insecurity (which, by the way, it's insane the US even has) would be a solid start. People join gangs because they solve problems they face like wanting to belong, physical/financial security, etc. By working to resolve those issues for anyone in the states, immigrant or citizen, we can address the root cause not the symptoms. Much more complicated that it seems, and that's not even getting into the various departments/programs/bills/etc required to progress that. This is also a heavily opinionated comment that clearly leans liberal and would face plenty of challenges from the current conservative side of US politics. But it would also be progress toward solving a series of issues that undermine freedom and peaceful society.

jariel 6y ago

" never once heard a friend (of any race) say they want more police at all, ever." I have never in my life heard anyone talk about having 'more or less police' - so why is it surprising that you haven't heard about it. The polls is not about 'what someone was saying unsolicited' - it was about 'what they actually think'. There's nothing surprising or funny about it. "Because, some rural areas in America have a "posse" system where volunteers get to ride around armed, sometimes outfitted (by taxpayer money) with bulletproof vests and big stickers for their cars showing their semi-official affiliation with the police" This has nothing to do with anything. People want more or less police for the obvious reasons - also - despite the rhetoric, most Black communities are actually under policed, not over policed.

newbie789 6y ago
Fascinating! >I have never in my life heard anyone talk about having 'more or less police' I've personally known quite a few homeless people (and been one!) that had been repeatedly displaced by police that spoke at length about how they'd prefer fewer police, since the demolition of homeless camps are often perceived as being for show or just something that happened because officers were bored and simply had nothing to do that day. They perceived it as being for show since they'd often be able to reconstruct the camp the very next day and largely be left alone for weeks or even months afterward. I also know a woman that had a seriously dangerous stalker that had friends in the local police that somehow had the clout to send officers to her home on a whim. She's been arrested multiple times without ever being convicted of anything, usually not even charged at all. One time, she was 5150'd (mandatory 72 hour psychiatric evaluation) while in the middle of serving cake at her son's birthday because the stalker (who was about 300 miles away on that day) called his buddies and said she'd threatened suicide. She was able to produce proof on the scene that she hadn't contacted him at all, but was taken in anyway. She has personally expressed on many occasions that she wished the police stuck to a more strictly defined set of duties so that there would be less opportunity for an abuser to use his connections to use them as his own personal harassment squad, which includes a reduction in total numbers of police presence. I suppose we just know different people! Re: My thought about posses. >This has nothing to do with anything. I felt as though I explained the connection in the next paragraph, but I'm more than happy to explain in more detail how a person could in some situation prefer the presence of trained police than state-funded posses that have considerably less oversight and accountability. If you could clarify why you think this is incorrect, I am more than happy to discuss this further. > most Black communities are actually under policed, not over policed. Can you expand on this? I'd love more data on this point. If you're referencing the poll itself, you'll see that I already am skeptical about how it should be interpreted.

swebs 6y ago

I used to live in a bad neighborhood in Philadelphia and everyone I talked to wanted more police. And this included people of every race.

cestith 6y ago

I don't know that fewer or more police either one is the answer. Better police, demilitarized, with better screening, better training, and a better focus on police work is what we need. Most of the things police are doing do not require police, and definitely don't require high-tension interactions between armed police and the public. We need social workers, clinical psychologists, trauma counselors, food security plans, and such. The police should be a last resort, not a first interaction with people struggling with a difficult situation.