Defunding the Police?

[lpetrich]

That seems rather drastic.

Tarana J. Burke on Instagram: “There has been a lot of talk about the @mvmnt4blklives call to #defundthepolice in recent weeks and some folks are confused or think it’s a way radical idea. It’s not. This breakdown from @theslacktivists (via @djalibc ) is helpful.
#blacklivesmatter”
I've OCRed the Instagram pictures - OwlOCR is great. - and reformatted their text to make it more readable.

Why Do People Say Defund the Police?

In the last few days, you might have seen #DefundThePolice trending on Twitter. Here's a breakdown:

What does it mean to defund the police? Defunding the police means reducing police budgets (& power) on a local and state level and investing that money directly into poor communities of color through public services.

Reforming the police is not working. Policing reforms or "procedural reforms" are changes to police department protocols like implicit bias training, mindfulness, and police-community encounters. These procedural changes cost cities millions and even billions of dollars, like in NYC. Minneapolis was a model for progressive policing reform, but those efforts have been ineffective stopping police abuse.

In the last 40 years, police power and jurisdiction have expanded massively, especially in poor communities of color. Police response doesn't serve the best interests of poor communities of color. The police answer to mismanaged schools? School policing (school to prison pipeline). Inadequate mental health services? Police. Drug overdoses? Criminalize users. The police has historically adopted a hostile and aggressive "war on crime" mentality that leaves Black and brown people imprisoned or killed. Instead of investing in poor communities of colors, cities respond by putting greater police presence and granting them managerial authority.

Defunding the police reduces their presence in poor communities of color, reducing police-civilian interaction, and thus violent altercations.

Public institutions are being defunded while police budgets are increasing. Police budgets are consistently increased but community and public institutions are slashed like schools, hospitals, and libraries. Then, infrastructure in poor communities deteriorates, and police are put there as a solution to "solve" every social problem instead of addressing the root causes.

Redirected and reinvested public funds can uplift those communities while also reducing crime and increasing safety. Research shows that crime is a response to social conditions, so by defunding police and redirecting money into communities, violent crime is reduced and communities are uplifted.

What does defunding look like? Divesting & investing: money diverted away from police is redistributed to areas disproportionately affected by poverty and lack of infrastructure (often communities of color). Redirecting resources into community-based initiatives: this helps local grassroots groups that have been doing work in those areas for so long and who know and have been engaging with their own communities. Implementing non police solutions to social problems: Affordable housing, healthcare, employment--all are safety issues.
* Instead of punitive or criminalized, restorative and supportive community measures can address these issues.
* More counselors, after-school programs, trauma services, anti-violence programs.

How can I get involved with calling for defunding police in my city? Demand city councils and mayors to reject city budgets with expanded & militarized police budgets. Demand mayors to de-escalate police forces. Contact the Independent Budget Office for budget literacy. Email or call Director of Office and Management for the Mayor.

Possible script: "Hi my name is and am a resident of ___. I am asking to call an emergency council meeting and deny the mayor's proposed budget. I would like to redirect money away from __PD into these social service programs: (___) It is crucial that this meeting is called because police are currently being paid overtime for current protests."
@_erichu

Sources & more reading:

• The Only Solution Is to Defund the Police - The Nation
• The Pandemic Is the Right Time to Defund the Police - New Republic
• The answer to police violence IS not 'reform'. It's defunding. Here's why - The Guardian
• No More Money for the Police - NYT
• York Senator Makes The Case For Defunding the NYPD - The Appeal
• Defund The Police Now - The Appeal Defund Police: Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor Says Budgets Wrongly Prioritize Cops Over Schools, Hospitals - Democracy Now
• The Price of Defunding the Police - City Lab

"THE SAFEST COMMUNITIES DON'T HAVE THE MOST COPS; THEY HAVE THE MOST RESOURCES."
JILLIAN JOHNSON
DURNAM MAYOR PRO TEMPORE

That looks at least halfway sensible. There is a lot of policing that is just plain unnecessary. Like drug policing.

 

[Harry Bosch]

That seems rather drastic.

Tarana J. Burke on Instagram: “There has been a lot of talk about the @mvmnt4blklives call to #defundthepolice in recent weeks and some folks are confused or think it’s a way radical idea. It’s not. This breakdown from @theslacktivists (via @djalibc ????????????) is helpful.
#blacklivesmatter”
I've OCRed the Instagram pictures - OwlOCR is great. - and reformatted their text to make it more readable.

Why Do People Say Defund the Police?

In the last few days, you might have seen #DefundThePolice trending on Twitter. Here's a breakdown:

What does it mean to defund the police? Defunding the police means reducing police budgets (& power) on a local and state level and investing that money directly into poor communities of color through public services.

Reforming the police is not working. Policing reforms or "procedural reforms" are changes to police department protocols like implicit bias training, mindfulness, and police-community encounters. These procedural changes cost cities millions and even billions of dollars, like in NYC. Minneapolis was a model for progressive policing reform, but those efforts have been ineffective stopping police abuse.

In the last 40 years, police power and jurisdiction have expanded massively, especially in poor communities of color. Police response doesn't serve the best interests of poor communities of color. The police answer to mismanaged schools? School policing (school to prison pipeline). Inadequate mental health services? Police. Drug overdoses? Criminalize users. The police has historically adopted a hostile and aggressive "war on crime" mentality that leaves Black and brown people imprisoned or killed. Instead of investing in poor communities of colors, cities respond by putting greater police presence and granting them managerial authority.

Defunding the police reduces their presence in poor communities of color, reducing police-civilian interaction, and thus violent altercations.

Public institutions are being defunded while police budgets are increasing. Police budgets are consistently increased but community and public institutions are slashed like schools, hospitals, and libraries. Then, infrastructure in poor communities deteriorates, and police are put there as a solution to "solve" every social problem instead of addressing the root causes.

Redirected and reinvested public funds can uplift those communities while also reducing crime and increasing safety. Research shows that crime is a response to social conditions, so by defunding police and redirecting money into communities, violent crime is reduced and communities are uplifted.

What does defunding look like? Divesting & investing: money diverted away from police is redistributed to areas disproportionately affected by poverty and lack of infrastructure (often communities of color). Redirecting resources into community-based initiatives: this helps local grassroots groups that have been doing work in those areas for so long and who know and have been engaging with their own communities. Implementing non police solutions to social problems: Affordable housing, healthcare, employment--all are safety issues.
* Instead of punitive or criminalized, restorative and supportive community measures can address these issues.
* More counselors, after-school programs, trauma services, anti-violence programs.

How can I get involved with calling for defunding police in my city? Demand city councils and mayors to reject city budgets with expanded & militarized police budgets. Demand mayors to de-escalate police forces. Contact the Independent Budget Office for budget literacy. Email or call Director of Office and Management for the Mayor.

Possible script: "Hi my name is and am a resident of ___. I am asking to call an emergency council meeting and deny the mayor's proposed budget. I would like to redirect money away from __PD into these social service programs: (___) It is crucial that this meeting is called because police are currently being paid overtime for current protests."
@_erichu

Sources & more reading:

• The Only Solution Is to Defund the Police - The Nation
• The Pandemic Is the Right Time to Defund the Police - New Republic
• The answer to police violence IS not 'reform'. It's defunding. Here's why - The Guardian
• No More Money for the Police - NYT
• York Senator Makes The Case For Defunding the NYPD - The Appeal
• Defund The Police Now - The Appeal Defund Police: Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor Says Budgets Wrongly Prioritize Cops Over Schools, Hospitals - Democracy Now
• The Price of Defunding the Police - City Lab

"THE SAFEST COMMUNITIES DON'T HAVE THE MOST COPS; THEY HAVE THE MOST RESOURCES."
JILLIAN JOHNSON
DURNAM MAYOR PRO TEMPORE

That looks at least halfway sensible. There is a lot of policing that is just plain unnecessary. Like drug policing.

Attempt to Defund the Police = Trump Re-election in 2020.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Defunding may be at the mercy of whatever current union contract they are operating under. I’m sure they’ve got their asses covered six ways to Sunday as to what cities can and cannot do. Another thing that has happened over the last forty years is when contracts came up for negotiations and cash-strapped cities couldn’t sweeten pay and benefits, they ended up negotiating away management control of their police departments.
So, in many instances, cities may have to wait until contracts are up. In the meantime, expect the unions to fight tooth and nail.

 

[laughing dog]

Defunding may be at the mercy of whatever current union contract they are operating under. I’m sure they’ve got their asses covered six ways to Sunday as to what cities can and cannot do. Another thing that has happened over the last forty years is when contracts came up for negotiations and cash-strapped cities couldn’t sweeten pay and benefits, they ended up negotiating away management control of their police departments.
So, in many instances, cities may have to wait until contracts are up. In the meantime, expect the unions to fight tooth and nail.

I would expect any union to fight a give-away of any type. I would expect some foresight police unions to co-operate in order to improve their image. But none of that will happen without strong public support that translates into strong political will.

 

[Axulus]

This seems lazy. Where is the cost benefit analysis? "Some police engage in abuse and violence, therefore we all benefit by defunding them."

Hmm, at least provide some convincing data. Why no mention of victims of crimes not perpetuated by police, for example. Seems implausible that there will be zero impact on them.

Also, isn't the position on the left that "starve the beast", the defunding of government departments, makes them less effective and more dysfunctional? What makes the police different? For example, less funds will be spent on training and screening new applicants.

Finally, the OP starts with a false premise, that reforms are not working. Then why are police shootings and killings of black Americans and unarmed suspects on the decline over the past 6 years (~10% decline)? Just pure luck?

https://www.vox.com/2020/6/2/21276472/police-killing-statistics-african-american

 

[Harry Bosch]

Yea, I don't mean to demean anyone. But this is one of the silliest ideas that I've ever heard on this forum. Sure, people are extremely upset at the George Floyd killing. They want change and accountability. However, the vast majority do prefer law and order. Not chaos and fear. The left pushing this would be an absolute dream for Trump.

 

[ruby sparks]

Yea, I don't mean to demean anyone. But this is one of the silliest ideas that I've ever heard on this forum. Sure, people are extremely upset at the George Floyd killing. They want change and accountability. However, the vast majority do prefer law and order. Not chaos and fear. The left pushing this would be an absolute dream for Trump.

It’s certainly a risk.

But there’s defunding and there’s defunding, and if the savings are seen to be going into things that voters also care about.....

What’s the alternative. Don’t prune back on an arguably problematic, oversized and overfunded (partly dysfunctional) police system merely in order not to risk giving Trump something he can use? It sort of stinks doesn’t it. It might not even work. It might be underestimating the amount of recently revealed support for grasping the nettle, in which case not doing it does not bring kudos. It looks weak. Could backfire?

I admit I don’t know enough about the likely voter outcomes to make a decent assessment.

 

[DBT]

Some have suggested private enterprise policing. Imagine the problems with that, quotas to fulfill, profit margins.....

 

[Harry Bosch]

Yea, I don't mean to demean anyone. But this is one of the silliest ideas that I've ever heard on this forum. Sure, people are extremely upset at the George Floyd killing. They want change and accountability. However, the vast majority do prefer law and order. Not chaos and fear. The left pushing this would be an absolute dream for Trump.

It’s certainly a risk.

But there’s defunding and there’s defunding, and if the savings are seen to be going into things that voters also care about.....

What’s the alternative. Don’t prune back on an arguably problematic, oversized and overfunded (partly dysfunctional) police system merely in order not to risk giving Trump something he can use? It sort of stinks doesn’t it. It might not even work. It might be underestimating the amount of recently revealed support for grasping the nettle, in which case not doing it does not bring kudos. It looks weak. Could backfire?

I admit I don’t know enough about the likely voter outcomes to make a decent assessment.

People want security. They want to believe that they are safe in their house. Even though the US has the 2nd amendment, the truth is most Americans have never fired a weapon and don't really want to. You ask most voters, they favor funding for schools, police (security), fire (security) and SSN (financial security). To defund the police would guaranty Trump's reelection.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Some have suggested private enterprise policing. Imagine the problems with that, quotas to fulfill, profit margins.....

The rich already have private policing. This is another example that most people really do want security.

 

[DBT]

Some have suggested private enterprise policing. Imagine the problems with that, quotas to fulfill, profit margins.....

The rich already have private policing. This is another example that most people really do want security.

The rich have security personal who act in the interest of their employer, who holds the purse strings.

 

[Derec]

Some have suggested private enterprise policing. Imagine the problems with that, quotas to fulfill, profit margins.....

 

[ruby sparks]

Yea, I don't mean to demean anyone. But this is one of the silliest ideas that I've ever heard on this forum. Sure, people are extremely upset at the George Floyd killing. They want change and accountability. However, the vast majority do prefer law and order. Not chaos and fear. The left pushing this would be an absolute dream for Trump.

It’s certainly a risk.

But there’s defunding and there’s defunding, and if the savings are seen to be going into things that voters also care about.....

What’s the alternative. Don’t prune back on an arguably problematic, oversized and overfunded (partly dysfunctional) police system merely in order not to risk giving Trump something he can use? It sort of stinks doesn’t it. It might not even work. It might be underestimating the amount of recently revealed support for grasping the nettle, in which case not doing it does not bring kudos. It looks weak. Could backfire?

I admit I don’t know enough about the likely voter outcomes to make a decent assessment.

People want security. They want to believe that they are safe in their house. Even though the US has the 2nd amendment, the truth is most Americans have never fired a weapon and don't really want to. You ask most voters, they favor funding for schools, police (security), fire (security) and SSN (financial security). To defund the police would guaranty Trump's reelection.

As I say, I don’t know enough about likely voter outcomes (or whether they’ve changed in light of recent events) to be able to say, but it would seem to be a risk of the sort you describe, yes.

So, maybe we should leave defunding off the menu and stick to looking at other reforms.

That said, I read that the most proactive (and therefore expensive) policing is done, by and large, in the areas where less policing might (a) be welcome and (b) might even reduce incidents, if it were the case that proactive policing was counter-intuitively, not helping matters.

We might call this a redeployment rather than a defunding.

It kind of sticks in the throat to have to say that we should continue with what might be overstocked or overzealous police forces just so that Trump can’t use sensible reductions to scare people into voting for him.

 

[cycomiko]

As ruby said, it's not like Minneapolis is saying it will totally get rid police. It's saying it will dismantle the current police department in favor of something that, I'm assuming, isn't quite as militarized and is more based on SERVING and PROTECTING rather than policing.

"In practice, this will probably involve diverting police funding to treatment services such as mental health counselors and drug addiction experts. While a smaller police force may remain, it won’t be the default body interacting with the community at the time of crisis." -The Guardian

that doesn't sound bad to me but I'm not particularly the type to get scared by hyperbolic rhetoric from the likes of FFvC. Also, I'm a white, heterosexual male who works in the defense industry. I probably wouldn't be affected either way and I recognize that.

 

[Politesse]

Ill-advised. If police feel that they are being poorly supported by the community, they will react with more violence, not less. These are terrorists we're talking about, not kindergarten teachers. They aren't just going to sigh and buy crayons out of their personal budgets when the well runs dry.

 

[Trausti]

There are examples where police pulled back, stopped patrolling and making arrests. Like Baltimore after the Freddie Gray riots. What result?

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

There are examples where police pulled back, stopped patrolling and making arrests. Like Baltimore after the Freddie Gray riots. What result?

https://talkfreethought.org/showthr...-protests-quot&p=799436&viewfull=1#post799436

 

[Trausti]

There are examples where police pulled back, stopped patrolling and making arrests. Like Baltimore after the Freddie Gray riots. What result?

https://talkfreethought.org/showthr...-protests-quot&p=799436&viewfull=1#post799436

'Neighborhoods are crying out': Baltimore has highest homicide rate of U.S. big cities

Baltimore had the worst homicide rate among the nation’s 50 largest cities last year and the second-highest violent crime rate overall, according to new data from the FBI.

The grim news was the latest reminder of the sustained cycle of violence that has gripped the city since 2015, when the annual number of homicides soared above 300 for three consecutive years after the unrest that followed Freddie Gray’s death from injuries suffered in police custody.

The irony of BLM is that its victories lead, predictably, to many more dead black men.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

What a shock you didn't actually read anything I posted in that thread:

For years, activists have argued that MPD has failed to actually keep the city safe, and City Councilmembers echoed that sentiment today during their announcement. MPD’s record for solving serious crimes in the city is consistently low. For example, in 2019, Minneapolis police only cleared 56 percent of cases in which a person was killed. For rapes, the police department’s solve rate is abysmally low. In 2018, their clearance rate for rape was just 22 percent. In other words, four out of every five rapes go unsolved in Minneapolis. Further casting doubt on the department’s commitment to solving sexual assaults, MPD announced last year the discovery of 1,700 untested rape kits spanning 30 years, which officials said had been misplaced.

So, it's understandable why places like Minneapolis (and Baltimore, or NY) would be contemplating something that might actually work better than paramilitary thugs:

Would defunding police lead to an uptick in violent crimes?

Defunding police on a large scale hasn't been done before, so it's tough to say. But there's evidence that less policing can lead to less crime. A 2017 report, which focused on several weeks in 2014 through 2015 when the New York Police Department purposely pulled back on "proactive policing," found that there were 2,100 fewer crime complaints during that time.

The study defines proactive policing as the "systematic and aggressive enforcement of low-level violations" and heightened police presence in areas where "crime is anticipated."

That's exactly the kind of activity that police divestment supporters want to end.

From the study referenced:

In the last few decades, proactive policing has become a centrepiece of ‘new policing’ strategies across the globe. The logic, commonly associated with the broader theory of order maintenance policing (OMP; also known as broken windows), is that rather than wait for citizens to report criminal conduct, law enforcement should proactively patrol communities, maintaining order through systematic and aggressive low-level policing. According to proponents, increasing police stops, quality-of-life summonses, and low-level arrests deters more serious criminal activity by signalling that the area is being monitored and that deviance will not be tolerated. As a corollary, following a phenomenon termed the Ferguson effect, disengaging from proactive policing emboldens criminals, precipitating spikes in serious crime.

But while elected officials commonly justify proactive policing by pointing to the enforcement of legal statutes, the strategy’s efficacy continues to be debated. A serious concern is that proactive policing diverts finite resources and attention away from investigative units, including detectives working to track down serial offenders and break up criminal networks. Proactive policing also disrupts communal life, which can drain social control of group-level violence. Citizens are arrested, unauthorized markets are disrupted, and people lose their jobs, all of which create more localized stress on individuals already living on the edge. Such strains are imposed directly through proactive policing, and thus are independent from subsequent judgments of guilt or innocence. Inconsistency in aggressive low-level policing across community groups undermines police legitimacy, which erodes cooperation with law enforcement. The cumulative effect increases ‘legal cynicism’—individual reliance on extra-legal sanctions and informal institutions of violence as a replacement for police. Reflecting these mechanisms, we propose that sharply reducing proactive policing in areas where it had been deployed pervasively may actually improve compliance with legal authority, thereby reducing major crimes.

 

[ruby sparks]

Ill-advised. If police feel that they are being poorly supported by the community, they will react with more violence, not less. These are terrorists we're talking about, not kindergarten teachers. They aren't just going to sigh and buy crayons out of their personal budgets when the well runs dry.

It’s awful but I know you’re probably not wide of the mark there.

The only positive thing I could say was that it was a bit like that here. And yet change was made to happen. Police were reined in.