“a. It is a movement in public spending, to spend less on the justice systems and more on social programs.”
– You don’t have to spend less on police in order to spend more on social programs, unless one is pandering to the masses that are specific in their callings and want police as we know it defunded.
“b. Maybe the opposite. If police only focus on law enforcement and if there would be greater cooperation with communities, our cities should be safer.”
– I am not sure there is any type of cooperation or any activities that would make cities safe, you suggest that law enforcement focus on enforcing the laws, I believe that this is the scope of law enforcement all over the country.
“f. La-la land is where everything is always good even when danger is obvious. reverse la-la land is when everything is scary, even things that could be helpful.”
– Exactly, the politicians that are promoting doing away with the police (some calling it defund the police, others spelling it out more clearly, to shut them down) suggest a la la land, in which we will make believe that all is good, when it is not.
There are very serious crimes that require a competent and strong police force, such as active robberies, assaults (physical and sexual) and an endless list of stuff that bad and sick people do.
To make believe that this is some sort of ‘privilege’ or that none of this will be an issue, is living in la-la land.
One look at some cities that were left in shambles, explains very well why a strong police force is important for a normal stable society.
This is not something new, as someone pointed out earlier, this is brought down in the mishnah.