How much do we need the police? • Hacker News Board

Re: How much do we need the police?

#291

Post by fzeroracer » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:12 AM UTC

zarkov99 wrote: post #113

josephg wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that’s made much more true because that’s the image police forces in America have of themselves. “We’re here to beat up the bad guys”. Police here in Australia are far from perfect, but they are much more seen as part of the community. They don’t even carry firearms any more. In Australia I wouldn’t hesitate to contact the police or talk to them on the street if something happened. (Just like I wouldn’t hesit…

Police in the small US college town I live in is pretty much part of the community. I personally know many of the officers - and they are fine people. Even so, they are still a target for antifa agit-prop tactics. The playbook is always the same, catch the one cop that said or did, or appeared to say or do, the wrong thing, once, and you can tarnish the entire department, the entire profession, forever. And it works.…

> whose jobs regularly confront them with mortal danger and the darkest parts of human nature

Police officers in the US face 12.9 fatalities per 100,000 workers. In comparison, construction workers see 14.3, agricultural workers see 17.7, farmers and ranchers around 24 and truck drivers 26.9.

As for the rest of your argument, if the 'fine' police officers don't do anything to stand up to the bad police officers or adhere to the blue wall of silence: Then they are not fine people.

Re: How much do we need the police?

#292

Post by throwaway894345 » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:12 AM UTC

Supermancho wrote: post #149

vncecartersknee wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this a natural experiment? Anarchism isn't just "when there are no police" Obviously looting should be read as exposing underlying ills and unmet needs within society. Like are you suggesting the natural state of people is just to loot and behave completely selfishly? look how many people in just the US riots alone cooperated to form medical stations, to work against police tactics, to make sure protestors had…

> Like are you suggesting the natural state of people is just to loot and behave completely selfishly? 'Completely' is a meaningless term. Animals behave selfishly in almost every choice (even in altruism) as part of the survival instinct. There is a question of degree and there is a distribution curve that hasn't been fully explored. For some people, some desperate or casual situations lead to barbaric (lack of a be…

The natural state of people is to form into increasingly larger bands under increasingly hierarchical leadership whose power provides them with security and liberty. When you take away those power structures, everything indeed devolves back into chaos—this is the definition of a civilization collapsing. Anarchy is incompatible with security and consequently with peace and liberty as well.

Re: How much do we need the police?

#293

Post by ncallaway » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:14 AM UTC

ghthor wrote: post #287

wolf550e wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If their budget is reduced, the police will choose where to cut services in such a way as to inflict maximum fear in the population, to cause their budget to be restored. They will, for example, say they cannot investigate the rape of a white woman, supposedly because lack of funds. But they will have plenty of funds to harass poor and non-white people for maybe smoking pot, but mostly for being poor and/or non-white…

Using "completely peaceful" protestors is a disingenuous statement.

Some protestors have been completely peaceful. Some entire protests have been completely peaceful.

And some of those completely peaceful protests have still met tear gas, and/or pepper spray. For example, see the protest in DC that was peaceful and broken up before curfew.

Is your assertion that nationwide, over 9 days, there hasn't been any peaceful protests?

Re: How much do we need the police?

#294

Post by echlebek » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:16 AM UTC

jbay808 wrote: post #73

glitchc wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canadian police are no different. Living under a dangerous illusion.

I'd like to know why you think so. In my experience, at least in Vancouver, police tend to use violence and force as absolutely the last resort, and generally play a lot more of "social worker" type of role, especially when it comes to handling issues associated with drug addiction in the downtown east side. But I could be very wrong so I'm interested in hearing other viewpoints. Or maybe you're thinking of different…

Perhaps you are unaware of the VPD's extensive use of attack dogs.

https://www.vancourier.com/opinion/number-of-vancouver-polic...

Re: How much do we need the police?

#295

Post by _jahh » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:19 AM UTC

wolf550e wrote: post #276

ncallaway wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The demand in Seattle to defund the police isn't calling to totally remove funding. It's calling for a 50% reduction in the budget. Just a heads up that "defund the police" isn't actually that different from "we need to rethink the roles where we have police"

If their budget is reduced, the police will choose where to cut services in such a way as to inflict maximum fear in the population, to cause their budget to be restored. They will, for example, say they cannot investigate the rape of a white woman, supposedly because lack of funds. But they will have plenty of funds to harass poor and non-white people for maybe smoking pot, but mostly for being poor and/or non-white…

or they'll spend less of their budget on highly expensive military equipment and more on less expensive deescalation skills and community engagement...HA

Re: How much do we need the police?

#296

Post by rayiner » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:19 AM UTC

yowlingcat wrote: post #237

rayiner wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that’s just the short term. Look at places like Somalia or Afghanistan to see what happens when law and order breaks down in a systematic way. The issue isn’t even just “crime” in the sense of robbery, etc. When there is no police, organized crime can take over. When we lived in Bangladesh in the 1980s, a minibus full of criminals showed up at the gate of our house. (This being Dhaka in the 1980s, we had a brick…

Damn, that's nutty. My parents always warned me that the Bangladesh they grew up in and knew is, in their words "a place where you have to be at least a little crooked" to survive (although they left in the 70s as soon as they could), and I know that the 80s was the era of Ershad's reign which was a particularly rough time. By the right people, does that mean in the government or organized crime or who knows?

I mean the police. My dad hated the bribery system. He tried to get a second phone line installed and gave up because the installer demanded a bribe. We left in 1989. Things are a bit better now. Not normal, exactly, but Sheikh Hasina wants to keep foreign investment flowing and is instilling some normalcy.

Re: How much do we need the police?

#297

Post by elliotec » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:21 AM UTC

wolf550e wrote: post #276

ncallaway wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The demand in Seattle to defund the police isn't calling to totally remove funding. It's calling for a 50% reduction in the budget. Just a heads up that "defund the police" isn't actually that different from "we need to rethink the roles where we have police"

If their budget is reduced, the police will choose where to cut services in such a way as to inflict maximum fear in the population, to cause their budget to be restored. They will, for example, say they cannot investigate the rape of a white woman, supposedly because lack of funds. But they will have plenty of funds to harass poor and non-white people for maybe smoking pot, but mostly for being poor and/or non-white…

This is so obvious. Defund the police, and regulate their roles.

Prioritize rape/violence/home invasion, deprioritize protests/drugs/etc., and as you say punish offenders.

This is obvious.

Re: How much do we need the police?

#298

Post by electricviolet » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:23 AM UTC

gnusty_gnurc wrote: post #193

electricviolet wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the left leaders I follow and trust are specifically opposed to police unions due to the fact that they protect violent officers. Let's not lump other public sector unions in with police unions; the teacher's union has nothing to do with police brutality.

I don't follow socialist stuff too much but I thought there'd be some interesting work from Jacobin to see how they perceive it. Turns out there is: > However, in most cities and states, police unions are treated as members in good standing of local labor councils and federations. They often work closely with other municipal unions, from firefighters to teachers, to protect labor rights and municipal budgets. Given t…

This is really interesting -- thanks for the link.

Re: How much do we need the police?

#299

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:25 AM UTC

BurningFrog wrote: post #38

Montreal once had a 16 hour police strike, creating a natural experiment in what happens without police. Steven Pinker describes how that went: > "As a young teenager in proudly peaceable Canada during the romantic 1960s, I was a true believer in Bakunin's anarchism. I laughed off my parents' argument that if the government ever laid down its arms all hell would break loose. Our competing predictions were put to the…

[deleted]

Re: How much do we need the police?

#300

Post by CalmStorm » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:32 AM UTC

Preventive measures may be cheaper than enforcement. UBI could reduce the crime rate and therefore save money on law and order. I think it targets the root cause rather than fixing the symptoms through more policing.