Defunding Police

If having a police force is a bad idea, why do we have them in the first place?

Are we living in a make-believe world in which crime does not exist?

Some crimes involve injuring and killing of innocent people, why would we want not want to have a police force that can respond and handle these situations?

Calling to “defund the police” is a scare tactic. No one really believes that it makes sense. It’s just a rallying cry by leftists to further their agenda.

Defunding Police -“What you will have is the wild west with everone carrying a gun with the murder rate shooting through the roof. Criminal gangs will take over the cities and the rich and middleclass will move out”

I’m all for it! Actually, I’m all for No Laws at all – Everywhere!
I’d be for Laws if they would be applied equally. Actually, Not like the Libs screaming they Target the Blacks, my experience is they Target the Jews, esp. Orthodox.

Any Jew who supports defunding police is ignorant.

SB -“Camden, NJ got rid of their rotten-to-the-core police department and recreated a new one. They are doing much better now.”

That’s because the County Police are very good. The Camden City PD was full of Cops on the Take.

@n0mesorah
yep, man viciously beating woman… therapist steps in “how does this make you feel”?
crowd control by private firms? oh gosh, why? will THEY be better trained/unarmed?

Ilhan Omar uploaded a document on her twitter feed that there will be no need for police since people only do crimes sich as robbing banks because they have such a need, and by transferrin funds from the police to human services no one will NEED to rob a bank anymore.

I am not making this up.

Oh Charlie, –
“Further proof that there is no difference between the nutty far left and the Trumpies”

I know you’re Not a Trumpie, but All your posts seem to imply you’re from the NUTTY Far Left!

The left really doesn’t want to get rid of the police. The plan is simple: Stop paying the current police personnel and replace them with left-wing loyalists police who will assist in putting conservatives out of business. The “new police” can then arrest conservatives on trumped-up charges and put these racists in political re-education camps just like in the old Soviet Union. The left means business! Be forewarned.

“Domestic violence does not only refer to active aggression.”
No but very often it does. You want armed cops showing up to these situations. Social workers can get involved after.
I’m all for reducing cops responsibilities. For example, why do they need to respond to calls for homeless people sleeping on the street? Traffic accidents (unless a crime is suspected, dui,dwi etc.) The two examples I gave make up a significant percentage of 911 calls and both, among others, can be handled by non law enforcement personnel.

I don’t believe that the left-leaning politicians really want to defund the police, they are just pandering to the protesters, at least some of them that are calling for defunding the police. Its basic politics.

In fact, Trump himself proposed a fifty percent cut to the one federal program that helps local law enforcement agencies to hire additional officers. It is typical of Trump that he is falsely accusing Biden of wanting to do something that he himself proposed. And it is typical of Trump supporters that they are echoing the lie.

Unbelieveable how many people around the country are scaring themselves about a concept they never heard of before last week. On top of that, they refuse to find out about what it really means. Nobody is advocating for cities to be less safe. No reason to live in a reverse la-la land.

Jackk- verry entertaining, very substantive. If you wait til all the resignations are done there may be an openning for you in leftist media

akuperma -“The alternative to police is vigilantes”

That’s is exactly what happens in Guatamala. Go watch the Documentary about it.
I’m all for for it. Better than it is Now. Selective implementing of Justice.
We prosecute Cops for doing their job. And we let Criminals free!

Ha ha. So it’s either spinning reality, or making up your own. At least the spinners aren’t in denial.

Our usual liars come out of the woodwork.

Defunding means exactly what it says. If they didn’t mean it they wouldn’t say it. If they meant something else they would have used a different word. Only now that normal people have heard what they’re up to, and are reacting in horror, have the apologists come out and started “explaining” that they don’t mean what they say. That is BS. It is a pack of lies. They mean it exactly, because they support criminals. Criminals are their people. Now they must own it.

And even some of these apologists are careful not to say that private property must be defended. Because their base doesn’t believe in private property. Which makes them enemies of all civilization, who need to be exterminated.

Trump has never advocated defunding police. But the responsibility for a community’s safety rests on that community, not on anybody else. Trump didn’t propose completely eliminating federal subsidies for local police forces (i.e. forcing people from some communities to pay for other communities’ policing), but he proposed reducing it. This is the same as his just insistence that our NATO allies pay more of the cost of their own defense, and today’s announcement that since Germany has thumbed its nose at this demand he will move 10,000 US servicemen out of Germany.

And then there’s that weird aside from “jackk” as if there is some contradiction between the sanctity of marriage and ending a failed one. Are you daring to allege that either Mr or Mrs Hannity EVER violated the sanctity of their marriage? How dare you? They were married, and in the absence of ANY evidence to the contrary we must assume that they were both faithful to each other, but at some point it stopped working so they agreed to end it. What’s wrong with that? Now they’re not married any more, and they’re each free to look for someone else, if they so choose. He’s not Catholic, so that’s not an issue.

Dear Two,
Just a disclaimer. I do not have an opinion about this. If there will be serious positive change, there has to be a steady hand on the wheel for several years. That is not happening anywhere, and it is the source of most of our political problems. Yet, our justice system is not efficient, and not because of lack of funds.
a. It is a movement in public spending, to spend less on the justice systems and more on social programs.
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.
c. There is no reason why looting or rioting is tolerated. Mayors of cities has become a precocious position. And many of them are cowards or clowns.
d. The Governors are trying to do what will work to end the protests peacefully, and the pandemic safely. The conflict of interest is intrinsic. It is terrible optics for a governor to go to a protest. But still, neither crisis is in the hands of the Governor. Riot control is best done on a local level. (Community police. Reinforcements as needed.) Police policy is local government, or state legislature. When the pandemic ends, is not a political question. (Though it is great for bad journalism if we think it is.) Not much the Governors can do, other than talk.
e. I do not follow politicians much. Whom are you referring to? and, what did they say?
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.
I really liked the way you worded you post! I am not picking a side on this one. No need for the aggression. If I make up my mind then everyone can do their best to change it.

“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.

Dear Two,
As I mentioned, I do not have an opinion (yet) on this. Let us explore what the range of possible is.

a. True. Inner city communities are generally underfunded. (They do not vote much or participate.) There is not much extra room because they do not hold hope for revenue increases. There used to be advocacy to spend less on policing bad neighborhoods, and more on policing the surrounding areas. (I believe this was implemented successfully in Brooklyn.) Today, they are advocating to have smaller a police force, and more social spending. (They think the two problems are related.)

b. As noted above, police do a lot for us that is not law enforcement. (We call Hatzolah and other organizations. They only call 911.) Basic education, youth centers, etc. are connected with decreases in violent crime.

f. Please name these politicians or point give a quote. I am not sure what you are referring to. The ‘Defund the Police’ idea is from community activists. Not politicians.

g. Only part of the force, polices violent crime. In my understanding of ‘Defund’ that part of the force would remain, and probably get higher salaries and more resources. If we abolish then the Feds or State Police handles violent crime. This is done in some countries. However, there does not seem to be any real traction for ‘Police Abolition’ now. So, there is not much written on how it could work.

h. Strong policing is necessary when there is strong incentive to commit crimes. Nobody claims that strong policing will turn Ferguson, Missouri, into Irvine, California,

I. It is not new. But the Mishna is pointing to a complete or competent government. One that is unbiased toward it’s citizenry. Which is where racism comes in.

Som1 -“Ilahn omar- “The Minneapolis Police Department is rotten to the root and so when we dismantle it, we get rid of that cancer and we allow for something beautiful to rise.”

I guess she thinks – her Country Somalia with NO Law & Order, is Something Beautiful!

From the News in Minn.:
“With threat of Minneapolis police being disbanded, Anoka County sheriff says ‘many agencies’ don’t want to go back to the city and restore order.
The idea of the Minneapolis Police Department being disbanded by the city council is not sitting well with Anoka County Sheriff James Stuart, who on Sunday said his agency has “no appetite” for working in the city if the police department is abolished.
Sheriff Stuart, however, doesn’t want his outfit to have to return to Minneapolis if the police department is disbanded.
“The members of the Minneapolis City Council should be mindful that numerous other law enforcement agencies have responded to support them, to restore order, to protect their citizens and to return peace to their city during recent tragic days,” wrote Sheriff Stuart.
“There are clearly concerns to be addressed and areas to be fixed. However, If they choose to eliminate their police department through defunding operations without a realistic plan, they must also choose to live with the consequences of their decisions.
“We are one of many agencies who have no appetite for going back to their city to restore order again; especially if their decision is to actively compromise the safety of the city.”

“b. As noted above, police do a lot for us that is not law enforcement. (We call Hatzolah and other organizations. They only call 911.) Basic education, youth centers, etc. are connected with decreases in violent crime.’

Hatzoloh is an EMS system that replaces either municipality, volunteer, or hospital-based EMS. I am not really sure the police force has other functions aside from enforcing the law.

Regarding youth centers and similar projects, great! Yet what does that have to do with defunding or changing anything that is going on on the police side?

“g. Only part of the force, polices violent crime. In my understanding of ‘Defund’ that part of the force would remain, and probably get higher salaries and more resources. If we abolish then the Feds or State Police handles violent crime. This is done in some countries. However, there does not seem to be any real traction for ‘Police Abolition’ now. So, there is not much written on how it could work.”

Can you simplify this, are you referring to detectives or parking enforcement agents?

“h. Strong policing is necessary when there is strong incentive to commit crimes. Nobody claims that strong policing will turn Ferguson, Missouri, into Irvine, California,”

What is this based on?

Strong policing is necessary where crime is present, so I believe.

“I. It is not new. But the Mishna is pointing to a complete or competent government. One that is unbiased toward it’s citizenry. Which is where racism comes in.”

Assuming that this is the interpretation, you would first need to establish systemic racism in policing, not some random anecdotal episodes, and that the supposed racists acts that exist and are systemic are so severe that doing away with the police is more important than the crime control.

This means that rape, physical assault, armed robberies, and violent gangs are preferred over the supposed systemic racism.

Dear Two,
I am enjoying the conversation. To me make it easier on myself (And the wonderful people who moderate for us.) I will break it up into smaller posts. please point out to me if I miss anything.

b. My point with Hatzolah was that a response is required for every 911 call. Fire, EMS, and anything else only come when they are needed. Anything undefined, they send the Police. When I was learning in Lakewood, I called Hatzolah for an unstable person who was lying in the street. If I would have been in a city and called 911i the police would have come. A lot of policing has nothing to do with crime. Suicide attempts. Lost children. Traffic control. Accident reports. Drug overdose.
The police brutality storyline will go away when people go back to work. Even if the bad cops are removed by then, it will not be enough to heal relations on the ground. The goal is to start a process that allows these neighborhoods the possibility of becoming better places to live. (This is one version. There are a lot of other ways to connect these two different parts of the communal system.)
Activists are pushing for a trade off of inner city spending. It appeals to (normal) Mayors that do not have the time or understanding to devote to fixing these communities. This way the City does not have to overspend to fund these projects. The money is there if they downsize the police force.