iNow

It was counter intuitive to me, too. Where I landed as I worked through that in my own mind was that they want “effective” police presence and “appropriate” police presence and “just” police presence, while in parallel not just wanting more of the “current” or “bad” or “asymmetric” police presence. Just because the umpires in a baseball game aren’t calling balls and strikes fairly doesn’t mean we can’t still want to play or attend a game. I suspect that sentiment largely applies here on the policing question.

You know me better than that, MigL. We’re now on page 7 of this thread. My position should be clear and has been articulate. Summarized: Defund the police is stupid branding for a set of otherwise good ideas. The idea is to focus dollars into approaches which are more effective and which more efficiently help us improve. Throwing the mentally handicapped and drug addicted and poverty stricken into cells and fining the poor forcing them to pay into a system thousands of dollars they simply don’t have doesn’t achieve that. The idea is to increase social and anti-poverty programs and reduce asymmetric punishment; to reduce the way black communities are more heavily punished for the exact same crimes committed by white communities. The idea is to eliminate qualified immunity so police can still be held accountable for their actions when they do something wrong; so police are no longer treated as above the law in the US just because they’re a key part of the apparatus which enforces it. Specifically to the survey, of course people want their communities to be safe. Of course they want help from the police when things go wrong. Of course they want bad actors removed from their environment. Those facts are not mutually exclusive with being tired of getting targeted by police or being treated asymmetrically by the justice system at large due solely to the color of ones skin. Yes, defund the police is a dumb slogan. It’s ignorant marketing and bad branding for a set of otherwise good ideas which would almost certainly help us to realize and achieve a massively improved ROI if we actually implemented them. Also yes, of course people want the police to be more respectful. We all surely agree there, and that respect is critical. More than that, it’s foundational, but also currently lacking. Good policing is about trust and community, and respect is the glue which binds those things together. We need to reduce the funding for those who can’t be respectful and who fail to EARN that trust. So I sigh because so many of us keep focusing on HOW people are protesting and by doing so we keep ignoring the reasons WHY. Focusing on the HOW is a distraction. See also: The focus on Kapernick kneeling at football games instead of the focus on black families consistently being torn apart when US police officers keep murdering (or locking up for eye rolling reasons) key members of them. So what if the slogan is dumb? It’s not as dumb as the tea party morons who said “keep the governments hands off my Medicare!” When we focus on the slogan we forget the reason it’s being chanted or supported in the first place and we make it more likely that we’ll all simply continue on with the current unacceptable status quo. There is merit worth discussing on this topic, but we never will if we keep getting triggered when we hear/read the word “defund” and keep short circuiting the conversation any time that word gets introduced. Abolish. Defund. Whatever. We need to fundamentally improve how policing happens in the United States, and we need to transfer a significant amount of the revenues they receive instead into social, rehabilitation, and anti-poverty programs. It makes me sigh because even people I very much like, enjoy, and respect seem to keep doing it... to keep focusing on HOW the protests are happening instead of WHY. But sure... this is clearly all about me ignoring points which don’t conform to my personal narrative because I’m incapable of having a mature discussion on an online discussion forum. 🙄

An even more practical question is whether punishment really reduces crime and actually improves our society, or if instead our money would be better spent on rehabilitation and anti-poverty programs.

Sigh

I just got kicked out of a flat earth Facebook group because I asked if the 6 foot social distancing guideline had pushed anyone over the edge yet.

My intended point relates most closely to overcrowding and proximity. It's embedded within the system itself, as well as the culture and how/where people spend time. When eating, when in markets, when sleeping or on trains, when scavenging if they're destitute, bathing in the Ganges, etc.

Fair enough

It looks like our policy of, “Don’t worry bro, it’s just the flu” didn’t work. This is pretty funny, but does have some salty language.

Their reporting system is less relevant to me than their lifestyle. Close communal living and lack of education or hygiene are frustratingly common across the subcontinent.

As bad as US has been, India seems likely to surpass given their sheer size

Ok. Maybe.

My bigger point is that your mention of restrictions is interesting, but not relevant since they’re unenforceable and ignored by many.

You mean like all those millions of Americans who refuse even to wear a simple mask?

Bah. I can drive to Hawaii.. if my car is cool enough.

Such as? I know New York has said that people from certain other states (like mine) must self-quarantine for 2 weeks upon arriving, but that’s not possible to enforce in any way. IMO, it’s a bit like putting the tag on the bottom of a mattress which says do not remove under penalty of law. I’ve removed tens of them and nobody was ever the wiser. I can also fly into any airport and walk right out the sliding doors into an Uber without so much as a temperature check. I can kayak from South Dakota into North Dakota and go into town and wander the streets going into and out of shops and food services as I see fit without any identification... and other countless similar examples. Given this, I’m unclear on the point your communicating. Did you have any specific restrictions in mind?

Also, the virus doesn’t recognize state borders. I can drive to any state from any state, so having one approach in Ohio that differs from the approach in Michigan is pretty dumb. National standards are the only way to do this right.

It sort of has to be. If the logistics are centralized at the federal level, who other than the WH would manage it? They’re the executive branch and consequently are responsible for executing national policies and programs.

This was a good article that speaks neatly to many of the same issues we’ve explored in this thread: We train police to be warriors — and then send them out to be social workers https://www.vox.com/2020/7/31/21334190/what-police-do-defund-abolish-police-reform-training More at the link. Agree / disagree? Anything you’ve found insightful or inciteful?

He was banned as a sock puppet of a previously banned member

I think it’s more of a “they all look the same to” vibe

More sad than funny, but sorry, Marco. Wrong black guy https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/07/18/sen-marco-rubio-mixes-up-john-lewis-elijah-cummings-tribute/5465516002/ Humiliating that he also made the pic of him with the wrong black guy his profile photo

You're raising a valid and sound / reasonable point overall, but the qualified immunity police enjoy due to the insane power the police unions have has prevented charges from being brought in 97% of all police killings between 2013 and 2019. I think maybe one cop went to jail during all those years. We've seen a few more go to jail this year in response to protests, but the number is still somewhere around 5 total. Hope you're not vacationing in Florida, mate 😎

This is not an accurate generalization. I always have my knife with me, and have guns in the home or when hunting / camping. Just can't have either at the airport or government building.

Okay, so basically item #3 above, with the new variable if “nighttime” included, and without the addition of police presence. Got it. Have you ever considered that some people are just scared of the dark and that this has little to do with actual danger? To be clear, I’m not suggesting things are perfectly safe nor that there aren’t real dangers, just that your claims are not as rooted in facts as you seem to think. You’re own biases are coloring your stance (and, in fairness, my biases do the same to me). Also, did you notice your Gallop survey didn’t ask how the presence of police... specifically the pretense of police with martial arts training and new non-lethal toys... would affect those feelings of being unsafe at nighttime walking down the street, yet that’s the argument you’re attempting to support with your survey link? Hell, sometimes I feel unsafe walking around the woods at night; and I promise you having a cop there wouldn’t make me feel any better. 😂 Then let me address this head on. More funding isn’t required for this. They already receive tons of funding and they could use it for more training in better ways already today. It doesn’t require new revenue injections to do what you propose. Hiring a sensei from the Cobra Kai dojo down the street to train some beat cops doesn’t require a ton of extra cash. Extra money also doesn’t equate to extra accountability, nor does extra training equate to extra discipline. It may help, but you’re building castles made of sand IMO if you think this will kill this weed at the root. I say this as a firm believer in the benefits of martial arts training and discipline. You’re advocating additional expenditures to already balance sheet bloated police departments, and that IMO is well intentioned, but misguided. If we’re to spend more money, the higher ROI very clearly comes from increased social services and engagement on the mental health side of this equation.

I know. It was an analogy. I’m stunningly bad at them so it’s unsurprising you missed it. The word you’re looking for is pedantic. Just to clarify, are you saying: 1) People CAN’T safely walk down the street without police present anywhere in all of the 50 US states 2) People CAN’T safely walk down the street without police present, but only in some areas 3) People FEEL LIKE they can’t walk safely down the street without police present anywhere in all of the 50 US states 4) People FEEL LIKE they can’t walk safely down the street without police present, but only in some areas 5) Violent crime data SUGGESTS people can’t walk down the street without police present anywhere in all of the 50 US states 6) Violent crime data SUGGESTS people can’t walk down the street without police present, but only in some areas 7) Something similar to one of the items above, but police presence isn’t the relevant variable Or... Something else? Asking because you said, “There will always be a need for police, especially in the current situation where citizens CAN'T safely walk down the street...” ... and you seemed to use it to argue that fewer police or fewer physical response options for them like new martial arts techniques or additional non lethal toys would lead to some sort of dystopian hellscape where we’re defending grandmas house with a spiked baseball bat and 50-cal.