3 ms·

> "It’s a fakery to help the police feel OK about themselves, and more importantly to coerce us into accepting the need for their existence in the first place."

• komali2 4y ago
  The word "police" seems to mean something different in America than in many other places, so I'm not surprised at american police abolitionism. I have lived in places without police, or functionally without police, in the USA and elsewhere, and it seems totally uncorrelated with how safe I felt or, according to statistics, actually was. Far more strongly correlated (one way or the other) was local average material conditions and wealth disparity. Some of the places were quite populous, btw, at least in terms of density. And if we allow that the word "police" means something very different in the USA and other countries, I've lived in cities with populations greater than 2 million without police (the cops in taipei often aren't armed and their most common duty is to take statements in petty personal disputes, and we have some of the lowest crime rates in the world here). If the USA wants to respond to bad material conditions and high wealth disparity by spending money on cops that from over here seem to do nothing or make things worse (I just saw a video where a cop in the USA arrested an old lady for giving food to people), I guess that's their prerogative, but from where I sit the people saying "why are we spending money on this" make more sense. I guess you believe it will get worse when they aren't there to issue speeding tickets, harass the homeless, and laugh at you when you report a stolen bicycle?