5 ms·

What the article does not consider is US police expenditure. In many major cities policing is ~30% of general fund expenditure. If US police expenditure was a c

What the article does not consider is US police expenditure. In many major cities policing is ~30% of general fund expenditure. If US police expenditure was a country’s military budget, it would astonishingly rank 3rd worldwide. Hiring more police is not the simple solution, there needs to be a fundamental cultural shift among American police away from militarization.

LordKano 4y ago
Considering how many people go into law enforcement because they want to play with military toys without the burdens of military service, it's going to be hard to pull them away from that.
- nopenopenopeno 4y ago
  Yeah, this seems like the most urgent cultural shift. The Right insists policing is an extremely risky job, but statistics suggest otherwise. That said, policing would be much more risky if we had police who actually took the risks they signed up for. Instead, American police by and large do not take seriously their duty to serve the people. Look no further than the despicable failures on the scene at Uvalde Elementary.
  - googlryas 4y ago
    > statistics suggest otherwise No, they don't. They clearly show it is a dangerous profession. I'm sure you're going to say something like "Being a pizza delivery driver is more dangerous than being a cop", because that is exactly how this conversation always goes, because it is a meme at this point that you're just repeating instead of thinking, but it doesn't make any sense, and would probably work better on reddit than on HN. Do you wear a seatbelt in a car? I'll assume so - why would you do that? Driving in a car without a seatbelt clearly isn't dangerous, because motorcyclists have a much higher rate of injuries while driving. See, that is a really stupid thing I just said. And it is the same exact logic that you're using to say being an officer isn't a dangerous profession. > Look no further than the despicable failures on the scene at Uvalde Elementary. So you're judging millions of people on the actions of a few people? That sounds suspiciously like a pretty serious flaw in rational thinking that "The Right" commonly falls subject to.
- cptcobalt 4y ago
  Yes, this, exactly. Two different people who bullied me in high school aggressively (for my sexuality and general nerdery) have gone on to be cops—they were the type to post pictures of themselves on Facebook shooting guns. I would run from them without hesitation if they ever pulled me over. They're not the right type to be cops. And I'm relatively confident that many, many cops are like them. It's chilling.
  - LordKano 4y ago
    I post pictures on Facebook of myself and my children shooting guns. I had one high school classmate who wanted to become a cop. He was a runt who discovered weightlifting and steroids. The thing that kept him from becoming a cop was that he got caught stealing from vending machines when we were teenagers. It's fantastic that he didn't get to carry a badge and gun.
    - cptcobalt 4y ago
      Yeah! I totally don't mean to cast such a wide net, but I think it was part of the character I saw in them as someone abused by them. I'm personally not much of a gun person myself, but I've been to a range a few times with friends, so gun ownership & use is not a "one and done" indicator by any means, but it's a concerning sign when correlated with various other negative personality ticks.
      - moistly 4y ago
        The difference between people who have guns as a sports tool, and those that have guns as an expression of their personal identity. Hunters & trap shooters, versus ammosexuals.
        LordKano 4y ago
        I'm probably one of those people that you hold in contempt. There are more guns than there are fingers in my house. I am unabashedly pro gun. I have testified at hearings on behalf of gun owners. Still, the point I'm making here is that there is something especially troubling about those cops who see themselves as the protagonist from an 80s action movie.
- googlryas 4y ago
  Ok - let's consider it - how many people go into law enforcement because they want to play with military toys without the burdens of military service? Do you have any idea? Or are you just going with your gut on this one?
  - LordKano 4y ago
    That's a fair call-out. I cannot link to any double-blind, peer reviewed studies. I'm referencing only my personal experience and gut.
lotsofpulp 4y ago
> In many major cities policing is ~30% of general fund expenditure It is even more if you include the understated costs of underfunding retiree benefits such as defined benefit pensions and healthcare.
rednerrus 4y ago
We've militarized the police because of the long term damage done during riots. The economic impact of riots in the 60s and 70s can not be overstated and is often overlooked when we have these discussions: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40056402#metadata_info_tab_contents https://www.jstor.org/stable/40056402#metadata_info_tab_cont....
- banannaise 4y ago
  You don't stop riots by shooting at them. You stop riots by preventing or resolving the economic and social conditions that lead to them; that is, by improving the quality of life of those who have the lowest quality of life. Unfortunately, shooting at them is easier to both conceptualize and implement, so governments tend to simply do that anyway.
  - azekai 4y ago
    That is... really complicated. 'Just improve their standard of living bro' isn't a real solution. It's like saying we can prevent murder by systemically renouncing violence and becoming a more peaceful society. This is obviously true, but the path forward is not obvious.
    - banannaise 4y ago
      Right. The actual solution is complicated, so we default to easy "solutions" that don't work. That's the exact point I just made.
- mcphage 4y ago
  > We've militarized the police because of the long term damage done during riots. Interesting—I've always assumed that we militarized the police because the military wanted to recoup some of the costs from replacing their hardware.
pstuart 4y ago
Absolutely! The War on Drugs is probably the biggest contributor to this problem -- it's beyond vexing that such a simple solution exists yet is rejected.

LordKano 4y ago

Considering how many people go into law enforcement because they want to play with military toys without the burdens of military service, it's going to be hard to pull them away from that.

nopenopenopeno 4y ago
Yeah, this seems like the most urgent cultural shift. The Right insists policing is an extremely risky job, but statistics suggest otherwise. That said, policing would be much more risky if we had police who actually took the risks they signed up for. Instead, American police by and large do not take seriously their duty to serve the people. Look no further than the despicable failures on the scene at Uvalde Elementary.
- googlryas 4y ago
  > statistics suggest otherwise No, they don't. They clearly show it is a dangerous profession. I'm sure you're going to say something like "Being a pizza delivery driver is more dangerous than being a cop", because that is exactly how this conversation always goes, because it is a meme at this point that you're just repeating instead of thinking, but it doesn't make any sense, and would probably work better on reddit than on HN. Do you wear a seatbelt in a car? I'll assume so - why would you do that? Driving in a car without a seatbelt clearly isn't dangerous, because motorcyclists have a much higher rate of injuries while driving. See, that is a really stupid thing I just said. And it is the same exact logic that you're using to say being an officer isn't a dangerous profession. > Look no further than the despicable failures on the scene at Uvalde Elementary. So you're judging millions of people on the actions of a few people? That sounds suspiciously like a pretty serious flaw in rational thinking that "The Right" commonly falls subject to.
cptcobalt 4y ago
Yes, this, exactly. Two different people who bullied me in high school aggressively (for my sexuality and general nerdery) have gone on to be cops—they were the type to post pictures of themselves on Facebook shooting guns. I would run from them without hesitation if they ever pulled me over. They're not the right type to be cops. And I'm relatively confident that many, many cops are like them. It's chilling.
- LordKano 4y ago
  I post pictures on Facebook of myself and my children shooting guns. I had one high school classmate who wanted to become a cop. He was a runt who discovered weightlifting and steroids. The thing that kept him from becoming a cop was that he got caught stealing from vending machines when we were teenagers. It's fantastic that he didn't get to carry a badge and gun.
  - cptcobalt 4y ago
    Yeah! I totally don't mean to cast such a wide net, but I think it was part of the character I saw in them as someone abused by them. I'm personally not much of a gun person myself, but I've been to a range a few times with friends, so gun ownership & use is not a "one and done" indicator by any means, but it's a concerning sign when correlated with various other negative personality ticks.
    - moistly 4y ago
      The difference between people who have guns as a sports tool, and those that have guns as an expression of their personal identity. Hunters & trap shooters, versus ammosexuals.
      - LordKano 4y ago
        I'm probably one of those people that you hold in contempt. There are more guns than there are fingers in my house. I am unabashedly pro gun. I have testified at hearings on behalf of gun owners. Still, the point I'm making here is that there is something especially troubling about those cops who see themselves as the protagonist from an 80s action movie.
googlryas 4y ago
Ok - let's consider it - how many people go into law enforcement because they want to play with military toys without the burdens of military service? Do you have any idea? Or are you just going with your gut on this one?
- LordKano 4y ago
  That's a fair call-out. I cannot link to any double-blind, peer reviewed studies. I'm referencing only my personal experience and gut.

lotsofpulp 4y ago

> In many major cities policing is ~30% of general fund expenditure It is even more if you include the understated costs of underfunding retiree benefits such as defined benefit pensions and healthcare.

rednerrus 4y ago

We've militarized the police because of the long term damage done during riots. The economic impact of riots in the 60s and 70s can not be overstated and is often overlooked when we have these discussions: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40056402#metadata_info_tab_contents https://www.jstor.org/stable/40056402#metadata_info_tab_cont....

banannaise 4y ago
You don't stop riots by shooting at them. You stop riots by preventing or resolving the economic and social conditions that lead to them; that is, by improving the quality of life of those who have the lowest quality of life. Unfortunately, shooting at them is easier to both conceptualize and implement, so governments tend to simply do that anyway.
- azekai 4y ago
  That is... really complicated. 'Just improve their standard of living bro' isn't a real solution. It's like saying we can prevent murder by systemically renouncing violence and becoming a more peaceful society. This is obviously true, but the path forward is not obvious.
  - banannaise 4y ago
    Right. The actual solution is complicated, so we default to easy "solutions" that don't work. That's the exact point I just made.
mcphage 4y ago
> We've militarized the police because of the long term damage done during riots. Interesting—I've always assumed that we militarized the police because the military wanted to recoup some of the costs from replacing their hardware.

pstuart 4y ago

Absolutely! The War on Drugs is probably the biggest contributor to this problem -- it's beyond vexing that such a simple solution exists yet is rejected.