
The Cities Taking Up Calls to Defund the Police - SamWhited
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2020/06/defund-police-city-council-budget-divest-public-resources/612694/
======
eric_b
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,
children or their property? They vote in candidates who are tough on crime.

I think for meaningful police reform the slogan needs to change. You need to
get normal people on board. "Defunding" is not the way to do that.

~~~
voisin
How about “Deunionize Police”?

Doesn’t have the same ring, but would solve many of the issues people are
protesting about (accountability, etc).

~~~
eric_b
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.

~~~
neonate
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 defunding (and abolition) are going to scare
public opinion back in the other direction, which is a pity, since there
really is a reform position to stake out here. For example, I bet even most
police offers don't want to be the ones to have to deal with mental illness,
addiction, and homelessness. A moderate and non-scary reform movement would
surely get massive public support at this time, while a radical one is likely
to provoke a counterreaction. It probably always works that way though, and
eventually something comes out of it anyhow.

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

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

------
the-dude
We have unarmed second tier 'enforcers' in NL ( BOA's ). They patrol some city
centers, give parking tickets etc.

They have been asked to enforce the 1.5m rule, encountered agression and
started protesting because ... they want to be armed.

( They have called for arms before COVID )

edit: Oh, forgot to add : we have these 'enforcers', and their
responsibilities have been extended, because we basically defunded the police.

~~~
chrischen
Part of the problem is that America's criminals are very well armed... and
that's due to America allowing people to be armed.

~~~
the-dude
I am just pointing out that even unarmed civilians will be a problem.

~~~
renewiltord
It does not make sense to me that unarmed members of the public are more
dangerous in the US than anywhere else.

~~~
tick_tock_tick
Whatever the reason be it cultural, environmental, or ?? the US violent crime
rate even removing all gun related incidents is still significantly high then
most other first world countries.

~~~
renewiltord
That's interesting to me. And this manifests in state workers who ask other
people to stay 1.5 m apart encountering that violence? Fascinating.

------
trianglem
I think the best thing for America would be to completely dissolve the police
union. This single action should fix a lot of the issues.

~~~
root_axis
Are unions really the problem? Why not raise the standards and the wages for
police officers instead of dismantling labor power?

~~~
minikites
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.

~~~
root_axis
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".

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

~~~
root_axis
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.

------
twblalock
If most people realized that protesters mean "abolish" when they say "defund",
the reaction would be a bit different (see
[https://newrepublic.com/article/158104/rush-redefine-
defund-...](https://newrepublic.com/article/158104/rush-redefine-defund-
police)).

When most people hear "defund the police" they assume it means cutting police
budgets, and perhaps also involves repurposing money for social services. But
reforming any organization generally takes more money, not less -- for
example, things like more/better/longer training for officers and better
handling of citizen complaints all cost money.

Both of the generally accepted options would have bad outcomes: a society
without any policing, or police departments mandated to reform without the
funding necessary to succeed.

~~~
nickff
Many police organizations have been violating rights and abusing people for
decades; saying that they need more money before they fix their problem just
astonishes me. Do you really think the populace will trust them to change?

If someone's been violating your trust for an extended period of time, they
need to earn it back _before_ you give them anything they want.

~~~
ghthor
Many federal government organizations have been violating rights and abusing
people for decades; saying that they need more money before they fix their
problem just astonishes me. Do you really think the populace will trust them
to change?

If someone's been violating your trust for an extended period of time, they
need to earn it back before you give them anything they want.

~~~
nickff
I'm not sure if this is intended as a rebuke or reductio ad absurdum, but I
agree with it.

------
mkolodny
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 by 20% could reduce police brutality by 20%. But
you're also reducing legitimate police activity by 20%.

I'd rather see efforts focused on getting justice for victims of police
brutality and excessive force.

[0] [https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/us/minneapolis-officer-
compla...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/us/minneapolis-officer-complaints-
george-floyd/index.html)

~~~
leviathant
>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/1270059013854711821](https://twitter.com/michaelhayes/status/1270059013854711821)

~~~
mkolodny
> 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.

~~~
verdverm
In the states, many of these laws are on a state by state basis. We could see
something at the federal level, and then we have one more law that will be
contended by someone. Even if a law where to be written, with more specifics,
we still have interpretation in the judicial system which can take many years
to become tested and understood enough.

------
designdesign
It's absurd that it's taken this much to have a national dialogue about how
problematic the "social services with a gun" approach is.

~~~
rodiger
It's a hard question because many "social services" calls are violent. Do we
expect a social worker to protect a child from an abusive parent? Do we send
both an officer and a social worker? How do we know the people calling 911
were accurate in their description of the situation or that it won't escalate?

Regardless, I agree that the dialogue is important and overdue.

~~~
designdesign
Right but on the other side, how many situations escalate because now they
have an _armed_ person with a few months of training on the scene.

"Do we expect a social worker to protect a child from an abusive parent?"

This already happens a lot. Often police can't do anything substantive unless
there's a crime in action or some existing record. A social worker might be
the only safe long-term presence around (and availability/quality of social
workers is an enormous problem). Removing children from their homes can often
put them in the foster system, which is also woefully inadequate and has
funding/employment issues.

If it doesn't come from defunding the police, I think the major piece to take
away from this overall conversation is that Americans are in dire need of
better social programs that can better treat these things before policing is
needed.

At the moment we have a weak mental health system and an overbearing policing
system. It's no wonder our prisons are filled, our homeless have rampant
addiction issues, and people are getting shot on the street.

~~~
rodiger
Having done work as an EMT, people get violent on their own volition more
often than you may think. Completely anecdotal but I've seen dozens of
drunk/high/mentally ill etc people attack others and zero incidents where the
cops escalated the situation.

It seems to me that cops/no cops each has its own pros and cons and neither is
a clear "right" solution.

We definitely need more mental health support and less frivolous prosecution
for things like drug possession and homelessness. Social programs would
(hopefully) go a long way in addressing some of these at their root cause.

------
frankbreetz
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 addiction, and even some traffic stops, but the slogan
is going to keep that from happening.

~~~
jonahrd
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, what these demonstrations are trying to show is
that there is a large portion of society in which the police are simply an
oppressive force.

~~~
frankbreetz
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.

------
SkyBelow
One idea I've seen is the idea that a dollar of funding spent elsewhere can
reduce crime more than a dollar of funding spent on policing. This isn't true
for every dollar, as funding often comes with diminishing returns. For
example, $400k away from police but instead spent in youth programs will give
kids more ways to engage in the activities which reduce their likelihood of
being engage in petty crimes due to boredom.

As for those demanding full defunding, I doubt they actually want that.
Demanding exactly what they want would be a bit like walking into a salary
negotiation and starting with the salary you are willing to accept.

------
guscost
Disciplinary policies are "on the table" in negotiations between many city
governments and police unions. Taking away funding for salaries will actually
add more pressure to make other concessions, which will make the police
brutality problem even worse. Collective bargaining with police (for these
concessions, at least) needs to end now.

[https://www.npr.org/2020/06/03/869176943/police-unions-
and-c...](https://www.npr.org/2020/06/03/869176943/police-unions-and-civilian-
deaths)

------
downerending
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.

~~~
ladberg
"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.

~~~
wolco
What it really means is taking a public sector job and moving it to the
private sector.

Private police forces employed by the rich will maintain order on private
property. The poor will be less protected.

~~~
skannamalai
Okay, but in that scenario, that private police officer won't have the
collective benefit of a public union. A DA won't be biting the hands that feed
them if they choose to prosecute a private police officer.

And the poor are dying from a death of a thousand social services cuts-
diminished mental and physical health services, childcare and teen programs,
etc. It's not unreasonable to assess whether local spending on police and
other services can be re-balanced for better community outcomes.

~~~
wolco
DA are elected. Voted[in by the same people who want a powerful private police
force.

I think it would go the other way and protections would be granted to these
private forces when they are asked to take over public enforcement in public
spaces.

They also wouldn't be bound by same standards police have now. DAs wouldn't
have access to public information they have now because the information would
be private. Nor would private police be forced underlaw to declose facts. That
notepad that gets handed in doesn't exist nor does the body camera footage.

Don't say it can't happen because many prisons are private and much worse for
the prisioner, the guards, the families. Think slave labor doesn't exist? Try
earning 45 cents an hour.. in America in jail.

------
cheaprentalyeti
We'll get rid of the police departments and replace them all with Committees
of Public Safety.

It'll be really cutting edge.

~~~
dang
First, please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN.

Second, it looks like you've been using this site primarily for political and
ideological battle. We don't allow that, regardless of which ideology you
favor, because it destroys the curious conversation this site is supposed to
exist for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

If you or anyone wants more info about how and why we moderate HN on this
question, there are many past explanations at these links:

[https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20primarily%20test&sort=byDate&type=comment)

[https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20political%20overlap&sort=byDate&type=comment)

------
KorematsuFred
You can't make good policies as emotional reaction of a recent event. I have
seen next to 0 non-radical politically feasible research from left wing or
black think tanks. Most of the research focused on reducing police violence
comes from the Libertarian think tanks like Cato or Fee. Conservative think
tanks somehow like police brutality. President's tweet today[1] perfectly
summarizes the position of conservatives on police violence.

"Defund the police" could have been sensible slogan had these people talked
about it for last 10 years producing research and suggestions. Right now it is
just a rallying cry.

[1] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-draws-
rebukes-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-draws-rebukes-for-
suggesting-75-year-old-protester-pushed-to-the-ground-in-buffalo-was-part-of-
a-set-up/2020/06/09/968ed40e-aa66-11ea-9063-e69bd6520940_story.html)

------
mydongle
Sounds fun until you think about how the wealthy/rich already have private
security and so they never needed police. The police was primarily for the
regular people who don't and can't afford to have private security.

