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

101–110 of 159 posts

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

#101

Post by bassman9000 »

badRNG wrote: post #25
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.

"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.

"Fund social services" does.

You've either been deceived, or are consciously playing the game: Abolish the police means exactly what they want it to mean: no more police.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16181/black-lives-matter

They want to replace the police with militias they control.

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

#102

Post by bassman9000 »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #3

I really hate that in typical US manner this issue gets pushed to the extreme so in the end a reasonable discussion can’t be had but it’s only a fight with everybody digging in and not listening to each other. Abolishing the police was always nonsense but there are plenty of areas where police is overused and too aggressive. In my view there shouldn’t be police in schools or hospitals. The drug war causes a lot of un…

It wasn't like this a few years ago. Outraged responses are a feature of outrage culture, which is pretty recent. Media have been pushing it to drive clicks, and sell ads on cable TV, for years. Grifters push their instagrams, their vlogs, their books.

I think the decline started when University produced generation after generation of supposedly educated people that had no skill other than fanning the flames.

And social media has been the A-bomb against rational, paused discourse.

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

#103

Post by sascha_sl »

_zzaw wrote: post #73
sascha_sl wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defund is not actually a bad idea. The police are tasked with handling the fallout of failing or non-existent social systems and have been scaled respectively - in fact police funding is growing every year, and not insubstantially. If you work in tech you should know what happens if you transfer too many responsibilities to one bloated team. These funds would be better invested in actual support systems. Homeless she…

Yeah, but calling it "defund" sounds a lot like "no more police, anywhere". I think a lot of the insanity here could have been avoided if this was presented as what it was intended to be—a reallocation of resources based on a desire to more effectively address deep-seated problems that make society worse for everyone—and not as, you know, anarchy.

If you were making that argument about "abolish", I'd agree, but defund? I guess you'd need to know the massive funding increases the police has gotten over the past 20 years. Even abolish acknowledges there needs to be some form of community policing, it's just that the current model is militaristic, has little accountability, incentivizes the wrong things (arrest quotas) and (re-)hires the wrong people.

I don't think anarchy is what you think it is. It wrongfully has picked up the entire Mad Max vibe. Any Chomsky talk on anarchism or the book of the same name ("On Anarchism") are a bit more nuanced introductions. Anarchism and police are "natural enemies" because anarchists believe the power police hold right now is unproportionate and unjustifiable. See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24025920

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

#104

Post by williamgrant »

throwaway924385 wrote: post #56
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…

Not sure if this could have been more perfectly executed to discredit the idea of abolishing/defunding the police, which in my understanding has always been proposed as a structured, intentional shift away from heavily militarized policing toward a system of robust social services. I've seen others use the language of divest/invest to make clear that it's a shift in resources. Reading a little bit of abolitionist lit…

> Instead, you have a situation where the police to abandon a precinct all at once and not long after, far-right groups start showing up at night to stoke violence.

Do you have any references to support that? It flies in the face of everything I've observed so far but in all sincerely, given the extreme polarisation in how these events are being reported by seemingly all parties, I'd not be at all surprised to find I've missed something important and would appreciate a source to clear things up for me.

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

#105

Post by donkey-hotei »

thatsfine wrote: post #26
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.

That this article is written by someone who isn't from Seattle, and posted by someone on hacker news who isn't from Seattle, really amuses some of us who live on the hill.

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

#106

Post by donkey-hotei »

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…

For those of you who were not here when this happened: The police decided not to respond the actual 911 calls in or _near_ the CHOP (the auto shop was a block _away_, not within) was a retaliatory tactic they employed out of spite. Knowing full and well that it would look bad on the protesters and those who created the CHOP. Denying health services and aide is NOT what people who are advocating for defunding the police are advocating for.

I agree, this is absolutely a straw-man argument.

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

#107

Post by iron0013 »

donkey-hotei wrote: post #105
thatsfine wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That this article is written by someone who isn't from Seattle, and posted by someone on hacker news who isn't from Seattle, really amuses some of us who live on the hill.

Here in Minneapolis the feeling is similar. Suburban and rural folks seem awfully concerned about crime in the city, while those of us who actually live in the city just want the cops’ boots off our damn necks.

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

#108

Post by justSayin000001 »

low_common wrote: post #76
spaetzleesser wrote: post #3

I really hate that in typical US manner this issue gets pushed to the extreme so in the end a reasonable discussion can’t be had but it’s only a fight with everybody digging in and not listening to each other. Abolishing the police was always nonsense but there are plenty of areas where police is overused and too aggressive. In my view there shouldn’t be police in schools or hospitals. The drug war causes a lot of un…

You need police in hospitals to maintain security for the patients in there. It's not uncommon to have incidents with people from the outside trying to assault/murder someone they know in the hospital. Criminals shot on the street still have to go to the hospital and this leaves an opportunity for their would-be-murderer to come in and finish the job. Schools, it's sad but I'm in favor of school resource officers. Th…

You can call them “school resource officers”, but that doesn’t magically make them good. They are typically a role model for high school bullies who want to continue to bully after graduation (aka be a police officer).

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

#109

Post by xab31 »

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…

> I'd call this article a straw-man argument, but there are those on the extreme end of the scale, apparently.

I too found it hard to believe that such people exist, but my own wife said she agrees with the statement "I believe police cause overall more harm than good in the USA, and it would be better to have no police at all than policing in its current form."

And yes, she believes that all police, except for investigating detectives, could be replaced by social workers and the like. Many of her friends believe similarly. So it isn't a straw man, these people really exist.

As you suggest, "defunding the police" is a motte and bailey argument, in that "defund" CAN equal abolish, if the defunding is 100%. On the other hand, a 5% shifting of funds would be a minor reform. So advocates, if they are unscrupulous -- and not all of them are -- can simultaneously advocate for a radical change in policing and assert it will have modest impact, by equivocating on the meaning of the word "defund".

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

#110

Post by justSayin000001 »

ghthor wrote: post #91
shadowgovt wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's an uncomfortable environment happening on the incumbent's watch. That doesn't say much positive about the incumbent's ability to lead, and suggests new leadership is in order.

Yes, we need some strong Republican for the people mayors and governors to replace these weak democratic wannabe leaders.

More people have died from the weak and careless inaction of our president and his sycophant governors because of covid.
Post reply on HN