>I never said it was the only way. You wrote: "police departments take a lot (in some cases a plurality) of total tax revenue that could be used to help victim

>I never said it was the only way. You wrote: "police departments take a lot (in some cases a plurality) of total tax revenue that could be used to help victims in ways beyond deterrence. That is why we talk about defunding police." Where is the evidence that the police budget is what is preventing social programs to be funded? That is a fiction driven from the inane sloganeering around 'defund the police'. You can fund any program you democratically pass and that has nothing to do with police budget. That's the false choice you're putting out there .. that somehow you have to choose between 'funding the police' OR funding social programs. Here's the reality, we're spending billions on social programs. There are no silver-bullet social programs that we know will lower crime rate. >It's incredibly common. Uh huh. Care to quantify that? Because I think you're basing this on nothing.