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

91–100 of 137 posts

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#91

Post by leetcrew »

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 suspect it is an example of this: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Motte_and_bailey

when in ideologically-friendly circles, you say "defund the police!" and don't worry about how literally people will take it. they will assume your position is the same as theirs and agree.

when an outsider questions you, you say "oh, of course we don't mean it literally". then you go back to using the unqualified version within your bubble. after a while, who knows what you mean? who cares?

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#92

Post by mkolodny »

leviathant wrote: post #65
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…

>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. Regulation without teeth is ineffective. This is another example of what people mean when they say the system is inherently flawed and needs to be disassembled and rebuilt from the ground up: https://twitter.com/michaelhayes/status/127005901385471182…

> Regulation without teeth is ineffective.

Then create regulation with teeth.

Create laws that make it clear what counts as excessive police force. Create a government body whose job is to investigate and prosecute officers charged with excessive force.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#93

Post by voisin »

neonate wrote: post #81
eric_b wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 d…

How about “Calm the Police” or “Calm 9-1-1”

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#94

Post by root_axis »

minikites wrote: post #79
root_axis wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard the same line of argumentation used against all kinds of labor unions though. e.g. "teachers unions are failing our kids because they protect bad/apathetic/partisan teachers" or "auto unions are why American auto companies are failing since they protect workers who work 30 minutes a day and slack off the rest".

You should examine who is telling you those things about non-police labor unions and what they stand to gain by saying those things.

Well sure, I am only human after all, but trying to have a discussion based off of what I perceive is going on in someone's head rather than based on the merit of the argument is usually not a fruitful way to have a discussion. Further, I have personally lived through experiences where bad teachers have been protected by the union, including a teacher who made a pass at students but was ultimately protected by the union. Years later, that teacher was eventually let go, but it was only after said teacher made some unsavory comments on social media and the school faced a ton of backlash because of it. That experience did not change my view on unions even though I felt that they should have been fired a very long time ago.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#95

Post by clairity »

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…

so the slogan is the problem, not the current policing regime, or the perceived benefits to ~200M people incentivized by comfort or complacency to keep that regime in place?

any slogan will be disparaged by vested interests. let's try not to distract from the core issue.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#96

Post by frankbreetz »

jonahrd wrote: post #71
frankbreetz wrote: post #51

Progressives are notorious for clutching defeat from the jaws of victory. Why are not calling this "reform the police" or "police aren't social workers" or "invest in prevention instead of police". The are literally hundreds of things we can call it that the majority of Americans would get behind. I find it very frustrating because there is much better ways to deal with a variety of issues like homelessness, drug add…

The takeaway from these events is clear: There are a very large portion of Americans who live in a separate world from you, where "defund the police" does sound like an ideal goal, and police interactions are solely a source of danger. Because the police are there to protect property of the upper class, it may be hard for a member of the upper class to envision a functioning society without those protections. However…

I don't know what "a very large portion of Americans" is, but if the question is "should we get rid of all police? " I would be very surprised if more then 10% of people agree with that.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#97

Post by thewebcount »

clairity wrote: post #95
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…

so the slogan is the problem, not the current policing regime, or the perceived benefits to ~200M people incentivized by comfort or complacency to keep that regime in place? any slogan will be disparaged by vested interests. let's try not to distract from the core issue.

> so the slogan is the problem, not the current policing regime

No, that's not what OP is saying at all. They're saying that the goal is good, but the slogan misleads people who haven't put in time to understand it. And most people haven't put in time to understand it, and won't based on the slogan. The goal is great, but the slogan is hurting the goal.

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#98

Post by danaris »

twblalock wrote: post #54
clamprecht wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I think it's healthy that actual defunding is on the table now. The police need to be accountable. It may be a solution to the police union problem. Defund, start over without the union.

Reforming an institution always costs more money, not less.

The point isn't to save money. It's to force reform by taking away the current police department's money.

(This is an excellent example of why the "defund" slogan is confusing; however, of the other suggestions I've seen in this thread, I haven't seen any that make clear the level of change that's needed.)

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#99

Post by neonate »

voisin wrote: post #93
neonate wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 d…

How about “Calm the Police” or “Calm 9-1-1”

Not energetic enough. How about "Replace the police"?

Re: The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police

#100

Post by thewebcount »

root_axis wrote: post #58
minikites wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason most other labor unions don't want anything to do with cops joining. A police union is closer to a mafia family that protects its members instead of a traditional labor union.

I've heard the same line of argumentation used against all kinds of labor unions though. e.g. "teachers unions are failing our kids because they protect bad/apathetic/partisan teachers" or "auto unions are why American auto companies are failing since they protect workers who work 30 minutes a day and slack off the rest".

> "auto unions are why American auto companies are failing since they protect workers who work 30 minutes a day and slack off the rest".

I grew up in Flint, MI and my father was an electrical engineer at one of the 3 major automakers. We would frequently go to the auto plants for school field trips. I remember one particular trip where we were walking around the production floor and there was a guy just sitting in a chair sleeping right in the middle of everything. Nobody seemed to think it was a good idea to wake him up. Everyone just worked around him like he wasn't there. It was kind of surreal.

I'm not saying that proves the point in your quote above, but the unions were notorious for making it impossible to fire employees even if they showed up drunk or high or didn't do their jobs. They also didn't seem to be protecting workers interests very well, as their wages have stagnated for decades and they've lost the great benefits they used to have. It doesn't mean unions are a bad idea, but the auto unions seemed to be a particularly bad implementation.

Post reply on HN