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

Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 159 posts

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#21

Post by noarchy »

People want security. That means different things to different people. Law enforcement is not necessarily the same thing as security. Law enforcement means just that, and the laws themselves may not be what many would consider just. The laws are likely to reflect the prejudices of those in power, which may lend itself to why we're seeing the clashes we're seeing in the US right now.

Those with the resources to do so have on-site security. This ranges from gated communities, to some condo/apartment buildings, and even shopping malls. Even this isn't necessarily free of problems, but it needs to be seen as something fundamentally different from law enforcement. So when we talk about "abolishing" the police, we have to ask what we really want in its stead.

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#22

Post by capableweb »

hartator wrote: post #12
dorian-graph wrote: post #6

> “Seattle’s unprecedented decision to abandon and close off an entire city neighborhood, leaving it unchecked by the police, unserved by fire and emergency health services, and inaccessible to the public” Is this what people advocating for abolish the police are advocating for? Removal of health services? Isn't it literally the opposite, to have more and more varied health (and social) services, that people are advo…

> “Abolish the police” is a scale Words have meaning though. No one on the political board is against reforms but “abolish”, “defund”, or “shut down” mean what it means.

Sure, and sometimes different people have different understandings of the meaning of a particular word. Someone can say "abolish the police" and mean that there should be no one with monopoly on violence. Another one can say "abolish the police" and refer the to current state/situation with the police in the US, and simply want the police to stop shooting people at sight and instead act like police in other countries, where they try to de-escalate instead of using their guns.

So while it's easy to try to put everyone in one bucket, it's hardy useful to do so in reality.

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#23

Post by jkingsbery »

hartator wrote: post #12
dorian-graph wrote: post #6

> “Seattle’s unprecedented decision to abandon and close off an entire city neighborhood, leaving it unchecked by the police, unserved by fire and emergency health services, and inaccessible to the public” Is this what people advocating for abolish the police are advocating for? Removal of health services? Isn't it literally the opposite, to have more and more varied health (and social) services, that people are advo…

> “Abolish the police” is a scale Words have meaning though. No one on the political board is against reforms but “abolish”, “defund”, or “shut down” mean what it means.

> "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

> "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abolish :

> to end the observance or effect of (something, such as a law) : to completely do away with (something)

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#24

Post by DHPersonal »

dorian-graph wrote: post #15
hartator wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “Abolish the police” is a scale Words have meaning though. No one on the political board is against reforms but “abolish”, “defund”, or “shut down” mean what it means.

Well, yes, duh? In what movements are there not scales attached to pithy lines? I even said: > Maybe "abolish" was a poor choice of a word.

I don’t think it necessarily is a bad choice for some: many people who do use that word want what we call “policing” to be abandoned completely and replaced with something far less punitive in its reactions to emergencies.

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#25

Post by badRNG »

hartator wrote: post #12
dorian-graph wrote: post #6

> “Seattle’s unprecedented decision to abandon and close off an entire city neighborhood, leaving it unchecked by the police, unserved by fire and emergency health services, and inaccessible to the public” Is this what people advocating for abolish the police are advocating for? Removal of health services? Isn't it literally the opposite, to have more and more varied health (and social) services, that people are advo…

> “Abolish the police” is a scale Words have meaning though. No one on the political board is against reforms but “abolish”, “defund”, or “shut down” mean what it means.

"Let's move funds from police departments to public health infrastructure, and additionally, use remaining funding on accountability mechanisms"

doesn't exactly roll off the tongue at a protest.

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#26

Post by thatsfine »

elil17 wrote: post #10

“Business owners describe a harrowing experience of calling for help and being left all alone.” No one advocating defunding the police was saying it would be good for business owners. The point of the whole movement is that police protect the rich and powerful at the expense of everyone else.

Then the businesses will leave and the local economy will suffer. Those with little will have less. Those with enough to start over elsewhere will leave. This phenomenon is called "blight".

Good luck Seattle.

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#27

Post by commandlinefan »

dorian-graph wrote: post #7
collyw wrote: post #2

Was anyone surprised by this? Defund / Abolish the police sound like the stupidest ideas ever.

> Abolish the police What does this mean to you?

What does "abolish" mean, you mean? The 13th amendment to the U.S. constitution "abolished" slavery. It means get rid of completely, and make sure it never comes back.

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#28

Post by andrew_ »

dleslie wrote: post #17
collyw wrote: post #2

Was anyone surprised by this? Defund / Abolish the police sound like the stupidest ideas ever.

As an outsider looking in, it seems to me like reducing the scope of responsibility , and increasing accountability, of your police forces would be a boon to public safety.

It really should. But in a highly polarized, incredibly litigious society like the US, that would likely lead to more trench-digging, and sadly the opposite of an increase to public safety.

Re: Abolish the Police? Survivors of the Chaos in Seattle Aren’t So Sure

#29

Post by throwaway0a5e »

dleslie wrote: post #17
collyw wrote: post #2

Was anyone surprised by this? Defund / Abolish the police sound like the stupidest ideas ever.

As an outsider looking in, it seems to me like reducing the scope of responsibility , and increasing accountability, of your police forces would be a boon to public safety.

Obviously the details would be contentions but I think reducing the scope of policing in abstract is widely supported across America. You'd be hard pressed to find someone who can't think of an entire category of behavior the government is currently in, and should not be, in the business of micromanaging with violence.

But when people say "abolish the police" they do not come across as meaning "reduce the scope of policing in a careful manner" to a sizeable fraction of the other people in the country.

Post reply on HN