Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 137 posts

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#81

Post by neonate »

eric_b wrote: post #55
voisin wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about “Deunionize Police”? Doesn’t have the same ring, but would solve many of the issues people are protesting about (accountability, etc).

Personally I'd go with "Reform the Police" or "Police the Police". Or maybe "De-Militarize the Police" which is not the only goal but one with broader support.

Just as a slogan, "Reform" is too boring and vague. "Police the police" is catchy but sounds more about oversight, which is not really the idea here. I thought of "Reduce the police", which might get broader support than "defund", but isn't as catchy and maybe still wouldn't get majority support. Polls show the police are still popular, though obviously and justifiably less popular lately. I suspect these calls for defunding (and abolition) are going to scare public opinion back in the other direction, which is a pity, since there really is a reform position to stake out here. For example, I bet even most police offers don't want to be the ones to have to deal with mental illness, addiction, and homelessness. A moderate and non-scary reform movement would surely get massive public support at this time, while a radical one is likely to provoke a counterreaction. It probably always works that way though, and eventually something comes out of it anyhow.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#82

Post by mkolodny »

jonahrd wrote: post #61
mkolodny wrote: post #36

If the goal is to prevent police brutality, it seems like it would be more effective to deal with the problem directly - punish police officers who use excessive force. Derek Chauvin, the officer charged for murdering George Floyd, has had 18 previous complaints against him [0]. If police officers can get away with using excessive force, then they might think that it's acceptable behavior. Reducing the police force b…

The scope of what we consider "legitimate police activity" is too large and this call is to reduce that scope as well. A 20% reduction in police activity is not an unfortunate byproduct, it's the direct result that people are calling for.

Reducing the police department's scope may be a good call. I just don't think it will have the effect that people are hoping it will have - stopping police brutality.

It's similar to how some people thought going to war with Iraq would be retribution for 9/11. But the Iraq War just caused more problems. Dealing with the problem directly was a lot more effective (going after the people responsible for 9/11 - Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda).

If people want fewer police, that's one thing. But if people want to end police brutality, I think we should take that on directly.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#83

Post by twblalock »

adamsea wrote: post #70
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read another comment elsewhere with which I totally agree. I think we're at a tipping point in the US where if the slogan was "End the War on Drugs" you're likely to get majority support, and ending the war on drugs would do more than any single thing to bring about social justice in the US. Contrast that with "defund the police", the goals of which are amorphous even from its supporters , and if you don't think ca…

That’s actually not true about convincing the majority. A minority has had outsize political influence in the US for a decade or two now. Because of the electoral college and because of gerrymandering.

Most people are sympathetic to the protests but that doesn't mean there won't be a "law and order" backlash if they feel changes to policing are making them less safe. It's definitely happened before.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#84

Post by downerending »

ladberg wrote: post #4
downerending wrote: post #2

The need for policing is not going to disappear. If we don't have trained professionals, we'll have untrained amateurs. Doubt that will be an improvement.

"Defund the police" doesn't mean taking away all police. It just means reducing funding and reducing responsibilities of the police to avoid them becoming a catch-all for any civil issue.

I've been watching videos of politicians literally advocating shutting down police departments, and will continue to believe my own lying eyes.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#85

Post by leetcrew »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #26
the-dude wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am just pointing out that even unarmed civilians will be a problem.

Agree. Now imagine that the public have over 8 million (maybe as many as 15 million) semi-automatic "military-style" rifles. (These are the NRA's numbers, FWIW — I don't think anyone knows the number of AR-15s, etc. are in U.S. citizens possession.)

I'm not sure what relevance the number of civilian-owned rifles ("military-style" or otherwise) has to the daily life of a police officer. concealable weapons (mainly pistols) are of much greater concern when interacting with the public.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#86

Post by Fjolsvith »

eric_b wrote: post #60
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read another comment elsewhere with which I totally agree. I think we're at a tipping point in the US where if the slogan was "End the War on Drugs" you're likely to get majority support, and ending the war on drugs would do more than any single thing to bring about social justice in the US. Contrast that with "defund the police", the goals of which are amorphous even from its supporters , and if you don't think ca…

Yes! "End the War on Drugs" is exactly the kind of thing that could get meaningful traction and has a relatively concrete set of goals.

Probably still confusing in any place besides mid-to-large urban areas in the US.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#87

Post by Fjolsvith »

voisin wrote: post #38
eric_b wrote: post #24

I see a lot of people saying "Defund the police doesn't mean no police". Ok, fine. But it's a shitty slogan that, regardless of actual meaning, is doing more harm than good. Normal people don't get the nuance. To them it just sounds like the "defunders" want to get rid of all police. And normal people think that is a very fucking bad idea. Do you know what regular people do when they are worried about their safety, c…

How about “Deunionize Police”? Doesn’t have the same ring, but would solve many of the issues people are protesting about (accountability, etc).

Maybe we could reorganize the police as a private enforcement group that wouldn't answer to the courts or constitution?

Sort of like the brownshirts before WWII. [1]

Edit: Youtube took down a video of them back in 2019. [2]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmabteilung

2. https://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/youtube-bans-anti-nazi-docum...

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#89

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #86
eric_b wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! "End the War on Drugs" is exactly the kind of thing that could get meaningful traction and has a relatively concrete set of goals.

Probably still confusing in any place besides mid-to-large urban areas in the US.

Thanks to the opioid epidemic, this is no longer true. There are huge swaths of rural and Rust Belt America that now realize that the criminal justice approach to a drug problem is counter productive.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#90

Post by root_axis »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #67
root_axis wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are unions really the problem? Why not raise the standards and the wages for police officers instead of dismantling labor power?

Police unions are different than others in that they are the only group allowed to impose violence on other citizens. No issue with dismantling unions if it is not found to be an optimal organizational solution to minimizing harm.

I think the police's role in state sanctioned violence is a fair distinction, but is violence the only important factor? I have seen a lot of arguments against unions for e.g. harming children by protecting bad teachers; some would argue that the education of future generations underpins a large section of systematic inequality within our society, including poverty and crime, which are issues that also happen to intertwine with the problems surrounding police violence. Bad cops are easier to spot than bad teachers so I understand the impulse to dismantle systems that openly protect them, but I am not convinced that unions themselves are actually the issue.
Post reply on HN