7 ms·

No serious person was saying we should abolish the police, that is just another lie from the former conservative media (former, because there is nothing recogni

No serious person was saying we should abolish the police, that is just another lie from the former conservative media (former, because there is nothing recognizably conservative about trumpism). There are legitimate questions about the use of police funding for militarization, and those questions have been raised by people all over the political spectrum. There are also serious problems with the differences in how the police handle calls, patrol work, and arrests in black neighborhoods and with black suspects versus white neighborhoods. Since the 90s the alarm has been sounded about the infiltration of police forces across the country by white nationalists and neonazis. Those concerns can be addressed by well-planned police reform, which is what people have actually been calling for. As for 20th century Europe, we are already there when armed terrorists invade the Capitol in an attempt to, as they themselves said, overthrow the government.

jMyles 6y ago
> No serious person was saying we should abolish the police I don't think any serious person is saying that "no serious person was saying we should abolish the police." Abolitionism has been a strong movement, close to the core of American values of liberty, since the beginning of professional police and the Charleston Watch, before the civil war. I am a serious person. And I do not believe that the institution of the police is the best way for a nation whose laws are based on the commonlaw tradition to establish justice or promote safety. Especially in 2020, when there are cameras everywhere and the capacity to report emergencies at lightspeed, I think that continuing to fund and empower this particular experiment is irresponsible.
cactus2093 6y ago
I guess a statement like that can always be true depending on how you define serious person. But millions of people were and are arguing for the strongest possible interpretation of “abolish the police”. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol... I have to admit I find it pretty disheartening that mainstream liberals are for the most part just as unwilling to take a critical look at the most extreme, “all cops are bad”, toppling statues of Abraham Lincoln and burning down police stations subset of the left or even acknowledge that it exists, as the mainstream republicans have been of condemning the trumpism/q-anon alt right.
- ABeeSea 6y ago
  Do you have a source for “millions of people”?
  - cactus2093 6y ago
    This article gives it a funny framing by just brushing it off as “few”, but claims 15% of Americans support abolishing the police https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/07/22/abolish-police-gallup-poll/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/07/22/abolish-pol... 15% of the roughly 200M adults in the US is 30 million people.
    - omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
      The article also stated that there may have been problems with the poll, like not differentiating between total elimination and partially dismantling police departments. If presented as total elimination of police departments, the survey might have missed support for more nuanced calls to dismantle police, said Phillip Atiba Goff, co-founder of the Center for Policing Equity. “One notion of abolition is the need for discontinuity from the violent and racist past of law enforcement,” he said.
      - cactus2093 6y ago
        The way I read it that quote is saying the 15% would be higher if you included both the people who want to abolish and those who want more moderate reform. It’s not saying that it already includes both groups.
    - ABeeSea 6y ago
      That’s not what your article says lol. Do you have another source for your outlandish claim?
      - dang 6y ago
        Please stop using HN for political battle and flamewar. We've already had to ask you this once: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23173294 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23173294, and we ban accounts that abuse the site like this, regardless of their politics. Other people being wrong or behaving badly doesn't make it ok to break the rules.
mopsi 6y ago
> No serious person was saying we should abolish the police, that is just another lie from the former conservative media "Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police" by Mariame Kaba. New York Times, 2020-06-12, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol...
- ABeeSea 6y ago
  That’s an opinion piece from a nobody.
- kevindong 6y ago
  That's an opinion piece. > By Mariame Kaba > Ms. Kaba is an organizer against criminalization.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - mwfunk 6y ago
    This is the thing: you can always tell when people come from utterly useless propaganda bubbles by 2 huge red flags: (1) They don't understand the difference between editorial content and reporting, because the media outlets they follow do their best to blur the distinction, all the way down to not even making a distinction organizationally or professionally, and making it seem like more legitimate sources of information don't make that distinction either. So the biggest red flag is that they don't even realize that there are professional standards and practices for keeping those things separate, and they don't understand things like fact checking or there being burdens of proof applied before something considered news reporting is published. To them, editorial content and news reporting are the same thing, with the same minimal burden of proof, because those are the nonexistent standards of literally every source of "information" they have. (2) They think that when a media outlet voluntarily issues corrections (not from a lawsuit or threat of a lawsuit), that it's a sign that that outlet is less reliable than the places they go that never ever issue corrections unless legally forced to. The reality is completely flipped around, but that's their mentality. Culturally, that dovetails with "never admit being wrong" and "never apologize", which are ideals that resonate REALLY REALLY hard with people in these propaganda bubbles. The lack of accountability makes them trust untrustworthy sources even more, not less. Accountability makes them trust trustworthy sources less, not more. I would add (3), how they react if they find out that something they themselves put out there isn't true. Watch what happens if they find out something they posted objectively isn't true. Instead of retracting it, they'll say something like, "well it doesn't matter, the meaning of the message is the same", or "well it doesn't matter the fake news media does it all the time". Which is the exact same thing that pathological liars and con artists say when their lies are exposed- that everyone does it, and maybe even that they are victims of hypocrites for being called out on it, because they assume the people calling them out surely lie about stuff all the time too. They're always looking for excuses to do worse, not better, and for excuses to think of themselves as victims, and for any possible reason to lower the bar for themselves rather than raise it for everyone.
ardy42 6y ago
> Since the 90s the alarm has been sounded about the infiltration of police forces across the country by white nationalists and neonazis. IIRC, there have been big scandals about that in Germany recently. The neonazis have been infiltrating the military there, too, to the point where they had to disband an entire special forces unit, because it was too far gone to be cleaned up. Honestly, the liberal fixation on gun control seems a really short sighted to me, given that kind of infiltration and the general right-leaning nature of law enforcement and the military [1]. It seems far more likely to me that liberals (and minorities) would someday need to rise up against an oppressive government than conservatives would be, even though conservatives like to fantasize about that kind of thing more. [1] Proven very clearly by the events in Kenosha: police shot an unarmed black man in the back, but didn't even stop an armed white kid who just shot three people.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  > the events in Kenosha: police shot an unarmed black man in the back I believe it’s been established as fact that Jacob Blake was armed with a knife when he was shot. I’m not drawing any conclusion about the justification [not comparison], but he was not “unarmed”. https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/new-audio-shares-the-moment-jacob-blake-confessed-to-being-armed-das-investigation-reveals https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/new-audio-shares-the-mo...
  - ardy42 6y ago
    > I believe it’s been established as fact that Jacob Blake was armed with a knife when he was shot. I’m not drawing any conclusion about the justification [not comparison], but he was not “unarmed”. I stand corrected, though it doesn't detract any from my overall point. The shooting was still BS: > Blake details returning to his SUV while in possession of the knife. It was that knife that Sheskey said he saw moments before the DA said Sheskey followed his training and began firing until there was no longer a threat. Sheskey shot Blake seven times, paralyzing the 27-year-old father of three. I don't think someone holding a knife and walking away from you can be properly categorized as an actual "threat."
hertzrat 6y ago
Lots of people literally were wanting to abolish the police. The expression meant something different to almost everybody who said it. A city unanimously voted to do it[1] [1] https://nypost.com/2020/06/26/minneapolis-city-council-approves-measure-to-abolish-police-force/ https://nypost.com/2020/06/26/minneapolis-city-council-appro...
- ABeeSea 6y ago
  > The suggested department would consist of peace officers So there would still be officers, but the department would be rebuilt from the ground up. Sounds like a great idea. Some departments can’t be fixed and have to be rebuilt.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
snomad 6y ago
CHAZ and and the Minneapolis Autonomous Zone indicate it was far more serious then your post indicates. On Tuesday night, a cop killed a man in Modesto - it was the 4th person killed by the same cop [1]. As you say, their are serious questions to ask about the police force and militarization. However, the racist/right wing thing is far too reductionary and fails to capture lack of proper training, lack of proper post-shooting responses, etc. 1 - https://www.reddit.com/r/ActualPublicFreakouts/comments/krng30/modesto_police_officer_joseph_lamantia_shoots_and/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ActualPublicFreakouts/comments/krng...
karaterobot 6y ago
Wait, are we already rewriting history to eliminate the idea that, for months last summer, many people actually did want to abolish the police? Granted, a lot of that got walked back later, but it did happen. I live close enough to the CHOP that you can't really make me believe there wasn't an huge, loud, violent movement that unambiguously wanted to get rid of cops, period. As far as serious people (true Scotsmen) go, I guess you're defining them as rational, learned experts. But I would urge you to at least pay attention to what crazed maniacs think too, since it turns out they can do some damage if you ignore them long enough.
- betterunix2 6y ago
  Not just rational and learned experts; I also include people with significant political power or influence (significant meaning beyond well above the local level; senators, governors, presidents, etc.). The fact is that the people who were calling to abolish the police never amounted to anything more than the extreme fringe of the protests or activists. Plenty of attention was paid to the "crazed maniacs," but more important is the fact that nobody of any consequence actually told those crazed maniacs to riot, nor did anyone of consequence actively praise or encourage those who did riot (the worst were a few prominent politicians apologizing for riots by saying it is what happens when people's concerns are ignored -- not even close to praising the rioters or telling them to go riot). This is not a "true Scotsman" argument. There is a meaningful difference between fringe elements acting on their own and powerful politicians or people with actual influence actively encouraging, directing, or praising that fringe. That is what separates the riots that happened last year from what happened at the Capitol on Wednesday.
odessacubbage 6y ago
i guess the seattle and minneapolis city councils are not serious people then.
- mlyle 6y ago
  In both cases they are working to replace the existing department with a new department with a large contingent of peace officers-- to tear down what's there and replace it with something new.

jMyles 6y ago

> No serious person was saying we should abolish the police I don't think any serious person is saying that "no serious person was saying we should abolish the police." Abolitionism has been a strong movement, close to the core of American values of liberty, since the beginning of professional police and the Charleston Watch, before the civil war. I am a serious person. And I do not believe that the institution of the police is the best way for a nation whose laws are based on the commonlaw tradition to establish justice or promote safety. Especially in 2020, when there are cameras everywhere and the capacity to report emergencies at lightspeed, I think that continuing to fund and empower this particular experiment is irresponsible.

cactus2093 6y ago

I guess a statement like that can always be true depending on how you define serious person. But millions of people were and are arguing for the strongest possible interpretation of “abolish the police”. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol... I have to admit I find it pretty disheartening that mainstream liberals are for the most part just as unwilling to take a critical look at the most extreme, “all cops are bad”, toppling statues of Abraham Lincoln and burning down police stations subset of the left or even acknowledge that it exists, as the mainstream republicans have been of condemning the trumpism/q-anon alt right.

ABeeSea 6y ago
Do you have a source for “millions of people”?
- cactus2093 6y ago
  This article gives it a funny framing by just brushing it off as “few”, but claims 15% of Americans support abolishing the police https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/07/22/abolish-police-gallup-poll/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/07/22/abolish-pol... 15% of the roughly 200M adults in the US is 30 million people.
  - omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
    The article also stated that there may have been problems with the poll, like not differentiating between total elimination and partially dismantling police departments. If presented as total elimination of police departments, the survey might have missed support for more nuanced calls to dismantle police, said Phillip Atiba Goff, co-founder of the Center for Policing Equity. “One notion of abolition is the need for discontinuity from the violent and racist past of law enforcement,” he said.
    - cactus2093 6y ago
      The way I read it that quote is saying the 15% would be higher if you included both the people who want to abolish and those who want more moderate reform. It’s not saying that it already includes both groups.
  - ABeeSea 6y ago
    That’s not what your article says lol. Do you have another source for your outlandish claim?
    - dang 6y ago
      Please stop using HN for political battle and flamewar. We've already had to ask you this once: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23173294 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23173294, and we ban accounts that abuse the site like this, regardless of their politics. Other people being wrong or behaving badly doesn't make it ok to break the rules.

mopsi 6y ago

> No serious person was saying we should abolish the police, that is just another lie from the former conservative media "Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police" by Mariame Kaba. New York Times, 2020-06-12, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol...

ABeeSea 6y ago
That’s an opinion piece from a nobody.
kevindong 6y ago
That's an opinion piece. > By Mariame Kaba > Ms. Kaba is an organizer against criminalization.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- mwfunk 6y ago
  This is the thing: you can always tell when people come from utterly useless propaganda bubbles by 2 huge red flags: (1) They don't understand the difference between editorial content and reporting, because the media outlets they follow do their best to blur the distinction, all the way down to not even making a distinction organizationally or professionally, and making it seem like more legitimate sources of information don't make that distinction either. So the biggest red flag is that they don't even realize that there are professional standards and practices for keeping those things separate, and they don't understand things like fact checking or there being burdens of proof applied before something considered news reporting is published. To them, editorial content and news reporting are the same thing, with the same minimal burden of proof, because those are the nonexistent standards of literally every source of "information" they have. (2) They think that when a media outlet voluntarily issues corrections (not from a lawsuit or threat of a lawsuit), that it's a sign that that outlet is less reliable than the places they go that never ever issue corrections unless legally forced to. The reality is completely flipped around, but that's their mentality. Culturally, that dovetails with "never admit being wrong" and "never apologize", which are ideals that resonate REALLY REALLY hard with people in these propaganda bubbles. The lack of accountability makes them trust untrustworthy sources even more, not less. Accountability makes them trust trustworthy sources less, not more. I would add (3), how they react if they find out that something they themselves put out there isn't true. Watch what happens if they find out something they posted objectively isn't true. Instead of retracting it, they'll say something like, "well it doesn't matter, the meaning of the message is the same", or "well it doesn't matter the fake news media does it all the time". Which is the exact same thing that pathological liars and con artists say when their lies are exposed- that everyone does it, and maybe even that they are victims of hypocrites for being called out on it, because they assume the people calling them out surely lie about stuff all the time too. They're always looking for excuses to do worse, not better, and for excuses to think of themselves as victims, and for any possible reason to lower the bar for themselves rather than raise it for everyone.

ardy42 6y ago

> Since the 90s the alarm has been sounded about the infiltration of police forces across the country by white nationalists and neonazis. IIRC, there have been big scandals about that in Germany recently. The neonazis have been infiltrating the military there, too, to the point where they had to disband an entire special forces unit, because it was too far gone to be cleaned up. Honestly, the liberal fixation on gun control seems a really short sighted to me, given that kind of infiltration and the general right-leaning nature of law enforcement and the military [1]. It seems far more likely to me that liberals (and minorities) would someday need to rise up against an oppressive government than conservatives would be, even though conservatives like to fantasize about that kind of thing more. [1] Proven very clearly by the events in Kenosha: police shot an unarmed black man in the back, but didn't even stop an armed white kid who just shot three people.

sokoloff 6y ago
> the events in Kenosha: police shot an unarmed black man in the back I believe it’s been established as fact that Jacob Blake was armed with a knife when he was shot. I’m not drawing any conclusion about the justification [not comparison], but he was not “unarmed”. https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/new-audio-shares-the-moment-jacob-blake-confessed-to-being-armed-das-investigation-reveals https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/new-audio-shares-the-mo...
- ardy42 6y ago
  > I believe it’s been established as fact that Jacob Blake was armed with a knife when he was shot. I’m not drawing any conclusion about the justification [not comparison], but he was not “unarmed”. I stand corrected, though it doesn't detract any from my overall point. The shooting was still BS: > Blake details returning to his SUV while in possession of the knife. It was that knife that Sheskey said he saw moments before the DA said Sheskey followed his training and began firing until there was no longer a threat. Sheskey shot Blake seven times, paralyzing the 27-year-old father of three. I don't think someone holding a knife and walking away from you can be properly categorized as an actual "threat."

hertzrat 6y ago

Lots of people literally were wanting to abolish the police. The expression meant something different to almost everybody who said it. A city unanimously voted to do it[1] [1] https://nypost.com/2020/06/26/minneapolis-city-council-approves-measure-to-abolish-police-force/ https://nypost.com/2020/06/26/minneapolis-city-council-appro...

ABeeSea 6y ago
> The suggested department would consist of peace officers So there would still be officers, but the department would be rebuilt from the ground up. Sounds like a great idea. Some departments can’t be fixed and have to be rebuilt.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

snomad 6y ago

CHAZ and and the Minneapolis Autonomous Zone indicate it was far more serious then your post indicates. On Tuesday night, a cop killed a man in Modesto - it was the 4th person killed by the same cop [1]. As you say, their are serious questions to ask about the police force and militarization. However, the racist/right wing thing is far too reductionary and fails to capture lack of proper training, lack of proper post-shooting responses, etc. 1 - https://www.reddit.com/r/ActualPublicFreakouts/comments/krng30/modesto_police_officer_joseph_lamantia_shoots_and/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ActualPublicFreakouts/comments/krng...

karaterobot 6y ago

Wait, are we already rewriting history to eliminate the idea that, for months last summer, many people actually did want to abolish the police? Granted, a lot of that got walked back later, but it did happen. I live close enough to the CHOP that you can't really make me believe there wasn't an huge, loud, violent movement that unambiguously wanted to get rid of cops, period. As far as serious people (true Scotsmen) go, I guess you're defining them as rational, learned experts. But I would urge you to at least pay attention to what crazed maniacs think too, since it turns out they can do some damage if you ignore them long enough.

betterunix2 6y ago
Not just rational and learned experts; I also include people with significant political power or influence (significant meaning beyond well above the local level; senators, governors, presidents, etc.). The fact is that the people who were calling to abolish the police never amounted to anything more than the extreme fringe of the protests or activists. Plenty of attention was paid to the "crazed maniacs," but more important is the fact that nobody of any consequence actually told those crazed maniacs to riot, nor did anyone of consequence actively praise or encourage those who did riot (the worst were a few prominent politicians apologizing for riots by saying it is what happens when people's concerns are ignored -- not even close to praising the rioters or telling them to go riot). This is not a "true Scotsman" argument. There is a meaningful difference between fringe elements acting on their own and powerful politicians or people with actual influence actively encouraging, directing, or praising that fringe. That is what separates the riots that happened last year from what happened at the Capitol on Wednesday.

odessacubbage 6y ago

i guess the seattle and minneapolis city councils are not serious people then.

mlyle 6y ago
In both cases they are working to replace the existing department with a new department with a large contingent of peace officers-- to tear down what's there and replace it with something new.