Are you sure you want to abolish the police?

[southernhybrid]

I'm not sure if I should have added this to another thread and have no problem if the mods think it needs to be added to an already open thread. I just can't remember for sure if we've discussed this one issue specifically, as we have so many threads that go off in different directions.

I'm using a link from the New. York Times because conservatives often say that the NYT is too liberal and progressives think it's too conservative. To me, it's one of the best sources of journalism in the country. It's known and respected for its careful investigative reporting so I take this article seriously.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/us/defund-police-seattle-protests.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Faizel Khan was being told by the news media and his own mayor that the protests in his hometown were peaceful, with “a block party atmosphere.”

But that was not what he saw through the windows of his Seattle coffee shop. He saw encampments overtaking the sidewalks. He saw roving bands of masked protesters smashing windows and looting.

Young white men wielding guns would harangue customers as well as Mr. Khan, a gay man of Middle Eastern descent who moved here from Texas so he could more comfortably be out. To get into his coffee shop, he sometimes had to seek the permission of self-appointed armed guards to cross a border they had erected.

“They barricaded us all in here,” Mr. Khan said. “And they were sitting in lawn chairs with guns.”

For 23 days in June, about six blocks in the city’s Capitol Hill neighborhood were claimed by left-wing demonstrators and declared police-free. Protesters hailed it as liberation — from police oppression, from white supremacy — and a catalyst for a national movement.

So, it appears as if doing away with the local police didn't work out so well.

The economic losses that businesses suffered during the recent tumult are significant: One community relief fund in Minneapolis, where early protests included vandalism and arson, has raised $9 million for businesses along the Lake Street corridor, a largely Latino and East African business district. “We asked the small businesses what they needed to cover the damage that insurance wasn’t paying, and the gap was around $200 million,” said Allison Sharkey, the executive director of the Lake Street Council, which is organizing the fund. Her own office, between a crafts market and a Native American support center, was burned down in the protests.

When the occupation in Seattle started in early June, Mayor Jenny Durkan seemed almost amused. “We could have the Summer of Love,” she said.

After President Trump took aim at the governor of Washington State and Seattle’s mayor on June 11, Ms. Durkan defended the occupation on Twitter as “a peaceful expression of our community’s collective grief and their desire to build a better world,” she wrote, pointing to the “food trucks, spaghetti potlucks, teach-ins, and movies.”

The idealistic apparently thought that everyone would behave and cooperate, but it didn't work out that way.

The employees of Bergman’s Lock and Key say they were followed by demonstrators with baseball bats. Cure Cocktail, a local bar and charcuterie, said its workers were asked by protesters to pledge loyalty to the movement: “Are you for the CHOP or are you for the police?” they were asked, according to the lawsuit.

The business owners also found that trying to get help from the Seattle Police, who declined to comment for this article, made them targets of activists.

Across from Cafe Argento is a funky old auto repair shop called Car Tender run by John McDermott, a big soft-spoken man. On June 14, Mr. McDermott was driving his wife home from their anniversary dinner when he received a call from a neighbor who saw someone trying to break into his shop.

Mr. McDermott and his 27-year-old son, Mason, raced over. A man who was inside the shop, Mr. McDermott said, had emptied the cash drawer and was in the midst of setting the building on fire. Mr. McDermott said he and his son wrestled the man down and planned to hold him until the police arrived. But officers never showed up. A group of several hundred protesters did, according to Mr. McDermott, breaking down the chain-link fence around his shop and claiming that Mr. McDermott had kidnapped the man.

“They started coming across the fence — you see all these beautiful kids, a mob but kids — and they have guns and are pointing them at you and telling you they’re going to kill you,” Mr. McDermott said. “Telling me I’m the K.K.K. I’m not the K.K.K.”

Hopefully, anyone who is interested can read the entire article. I support police reform. I support better training and more interaction with the local communities by the police. I support defunding the military equipment and extreme measures used in some police departments, but the idea of doing away with all law enforcement seems very foolish.

If the NYTimes didn't investigate what really happened in Seattle, I wouldn't have realized how much damage was done. If anyone here still supports the idea of ending police departments, please tell us how you would handle crime, protect small businesses, and the citizens in these police free zones. If someone was threatening you or trying to break into your home, who would you call for help? I'm not fond of many things that the police do and I have no doubt that there is systemic racism in some police departments, but it seems as if there are better ways to solve these issues than by simply doing away with policing. We need police reform. That's what's worked in Camden, NJ. We don't need to abolish the police. Even my generation who sometimes referred to the police as "pigs" knew that we needed some type of law enforcement. To be honest,

 

[KeepTalking]

I'm not sure if I should have added this to another thread and have no problem if the mods think it needs to be added to an already open thread. I just can't remember for sure if we've discussed this one issue specifically, as we have so many threads that go off in different directions.

I'm using a link from the New. York Times because conservatives often say that the NYT is too liberal and progressives think it's too conservative. To me, it's one of the best sources of journalism in the country. It's known and respected for its careful investigative reporting so I take this article seriously.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/us/defund-police-seattle-protests.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage




So, it appears as if doing away with the local police didn't work out so well.

When the occupation in Seattle started in early June, Mayor Jenny Durkan seemed almost amused. “We could have the Summer of Love,” she said.

After President Trump took aim at the governor of Washington State and Seattle’s mayor on June 11, Ms. Durkan defended the occupation on Twitter as “a peaceful expression of our community’s collective grief and their desire to build a better world,” she wrote, pointing to the “food trucks, spaghetti potlucks, teach-ins, and movies.”

The idealistic apparently thought that everyone would behave and cooperate, but it didn't work out that way.

The employees of Bergman’s Lock and Key say they were followed by demonstrators with baseball bats. Cure Cocktail, a local bar and charcuterie, said its workers were asked by protesters to pledge loyalty to the movement: “Are you for the CHOP or are you for the police?” they were asked, according to the lawsuit.

The business owners also found that trying to get help from the Seattle Police, who declined to comment for this article, made them targets of activists.

Across from Cafe Argento is a funky old auto repair shop called Car Tender run by John McDermott, a big soft-spoken man. On June 14, Mr. McDermott was driving his wife home from their anniversary dinner when he received a call from a neighbor who saw someone trying to break into his shop.

Mr. McDermott and his 27-year-old son, Mason, raced over. A man who was inside the shop, Mr. McDermott said, had emptied the cash drawer and was in the midst of setting the building on fire. Mr. McDermott said he and his son wrestled the man down and planned to hold him until the police arrived. But officers never showed up. A group of several hundred protesters did, according to Mr. McDermott, breaking down the chain-link fence around his shop and claiming that Mr. McDermott had kidnapped the man.

“They started coming across the fence — you see all these beautiful kids, a mob but kids — and they have guns and are pointing them at you and telling you they’re going to kill you,” Mr. McDermott said. “Telling me I’m the K.K.K. I’m not the K.K.K.”

I feel compelled to point out that the above is not an example of abolishing the police. The SPD is still intact. I do, however, see examples of police not doing their jobs in the above. There are actual examples of "abolishing" police, some have worked out, others have not done quite so well.

Hopefully, anyone who is interested can read the entire article. I support police reform. I support better training and more interaction with the local communities by the police. I support defunding the military equipment and extreme measures used in some police departments, but the idea of doing away with all law enforcement seems very foolish.

Then you support defunding the police. Don't listen to the conservatives who will tell you that "defund" can only mean "abolish", and "abolish" can only mean "do away with forever".

 

[Politesse]

Who is advocating for abolition of the police? Is this the new "I'll never let them take away my guns"?

 

[Patooka]

I've got a different question: how fucked do the Police have to be for "abolish the Police" to be a legitimate argument?

 

[skepticalbip]

Who is advocating for abolition of the police? Is this the new "I'll never let them take away my guns"?

Quite a few, though not all, activists. Here's one noted activist printed in the NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html

Opinion

Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police
Because reform won’t happen.

By Mariame Kaba
Ms. Kaba is an organizer against criminalization.

 

[Politesse]

Okay, so you're up to... one, so far.

Is Mariame Kaba in any position to implement or even influence such a policy change? What is her position within the government? I notice that in her first three sentences, she confesses that the entire liberal wing is united against her proposal. She cannot be that much of a threat, with the so-called left wing of American politics standing against her.

So yes, this is another "they'll never take my guns". That is, an attempt to build hysteria over a threat that isn't really a threat, phrased in terms of a wild generalization about a political party that is in fact unified in not advocating for the position in question.

 

[skepticalbip]

Okay, so you're up to... one, so far.

My experience is that the NY Times does not publish op-eds from lone nuts. They do publish op-eds from people in groups that have enough of a following to make it newsworthy.

Your rebuttal is akin to someone saying there were no Nazis in 1940s Germany unless you can identify several thousand of them by name.

 

[Politesse]

Okay, so you're up to... one, so far.

My experience is that the NY Times does not publish op-eds from lone nuts. They do publish op-eds from people in groups that have enough of a following to make it newsworthy.

Your rebuttal is akin to someone saying there were no Nazis in 1940s Germany unless you can identify several thousand of them by name.

It is not, in fact, very difficult to demonstrate that the Nazis were a political party.

 

[Arctish]

Every movement has its kooks.

No doubt there are some folks who are quite certain they want to abolish the police. But most people realize it's a lot easier to tear something down than to build something new, which is why I think the Abolish the Police faction won't make much headway unless and until a few places try out some alternatives and can demonstrate that

1. they're doable
2. they're affordable, and most importantly
3. they're successful.

 

[bilby]

America doesn't need to abolish the police.

They need to introduce them, to replace the quasi-military, quasi-organised crime stupidities that they are currently infested by in crazy over-abundance.

The police are the public, and the public are the police. The police are just members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen, in the interests of community welfare and existence.

Show me any (of the tens of thousands) American "police" department that has been founded upon, and maintains, the Peelian principles that define a police service (as distinct from a mere law enforcement agency).

That word "service" isn't just a quaint foreign figure of speech. A service isn't a force, and vice-versa.

 

[Politesse]

Oh, our police definitely don't see themselves as a "service". If anything, it's the other way around.

 

[ruby sparks]

Okay, so you're up to... one, so far.

"The police abolition movement is a political movement, largely in the United States, that advocates replacing policing with other systems of public safety. Police abolitionists believe that policing, as a system, is inherently flawed and cannot be reformed—a view that rejects the ideology of police reformists."

Police abolition movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_abolition_movement

"The call for police abolition gained national traction soon after the 2014 Ferguson rebellion and is encapsulated by the slogan: “disband, disempower, and disarm the police!”. This is more than a slogan however. The over-arching strategy is to eliminate the institution of policing, while disarmament and disempowerment are two inter-related tactics used to achieve this goal."

‘Disband, Disempower, and Disarm’: Amplifying the Theory and Practice of Police Abolition.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10612-018-9400-4

 

[Harry Bosch]

Every movement has its kooks.

No doubt there are some folks who are quite certain they want to abolish the police. But most people realize it's a lot easier to tear something down than to build something new, which is why I think the Abolish the Police faction won't make much headway unless and until a few places try out some alternatives and can demonstrate that

1. they're doable
2. they're affordable, and most importantly
3. they're successful.

There are some on the far left who want to abolish the police (a small minority). But of course savy republicans will push this narrative heavily as they know that this is a winning political argument for them.

 

[Swammerdami]

... If anyone here still supports the idea of ending police departments, please tell us how you would handle crime, protect small businesses, and the citizens in these police free zones. If someone was threatening you or trying to break into your home, who would you call for help? ...

You are arguing against a strawman.

Sure, you can find a few zanies on YouTube or Wherever that want to abolish the police. You can also find some that want to inject bleach into their veins; some think Elvis Presley is alive and well on the moon. But to pretend these zanies are rational, or real opinion-makers is to fall for right-wing caricatures.

What some liberals have proposed is to start over with police. To abolish the existing police departments — which are full of racists, sadists and improperly trained goons; and which have too many duties beyond policing — and immediately build new police departments, using the buildings, equipment and what personnel can be salvaged from the abolished departments.

Several recent exposés have shown that many American police departments are rotten to the core. Reluctantly, informed Americans must agree the time has come for drastic action.

A thread discussing how to make the transition to better police departments might be useful. But let's not just joust at strawmen.

 

[KeepTalking]

"The call for police abolition gained national traction soon after the 2014 Ferguson rebellion and is encapsulated by the slogan: “disband, disempower, and disarm the police!”. This is more than a slogan however. The over-arching strategy is to eliminate the institution of policing, while disarmament and disempowerment are two inter-related tactics used to achieve this goal."

‘Disband, Disempower, and Disarm’: Amplifying the Theory and Practice of Police Abolition.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10612-018-9400-4

The above wording "Ferguson rebellion" caught my attention, as I thought it was a rather dramatic way to frame the Michael Brown riots. So I went to the link and started reading. Here is the second sentence from the abstract of this "scholarly" article:

More recently, the rebellions in Ferguson, Baltimore, Milwaukee, and Charlotte have made racialized police violence and police reform issues of national concern

So, we have had recent rebellions in all those places? Wow, first I have heard of them, and I live within 30 miles of Ferguson.

The article also has a tendency to use Fox News as a source, so we might as well throw that "scholarly" bit out the window (no wonder the journal it was published in has an impact factor that hovers right around 1). I admit I only got through the section titled "Conceptualizing Abolition" before I had to stop, so I am not sure if they continued to rely on Fox News as a source. That section was a real piece of work though, as the sole purpose there seems to be to conflate police abolishment with the movement to abolish slavery. Their point seeming to be that since the Abolition Movement that started in the late 1700s was uncompromising in their zeal to abolish slavery, then the modern police abolitionist movement must be as well.

No thanks, I'm out. You should try to find better sources.

 

[Harry Bosch]

... If anyone here still supports the idea of ending police departments, please tell us how you would handle crime, protect small businesses, and the citizens in these police free zones. If someone was threatening you or trying to break into your home, who would you call for help? ...

You are arguing against a strawman.

Sure, you can find a few zanies on YouTube or Wherever that want to abolish the police. You can also find some that want to inject bleach into their veins; some think Elvis Presley is alive and well on the moon. But to pretend these zanies are rational, or real opinion-makers is to fall for right-wing caricatures.

What some liberals have proposed is to start over with police. To abolish the existing police departments — which are full of racists, sadists and improperly trained goons; and which have too many duties beyond policing — and immediately build new police departments, using the buildings, equipment and what personnel can be salvaged from the abolished departments.

Several recent exposés have shown that many American police departments are rotten to the core. Reluctantly, informed Americans must agree the time has come for drastic action.

A thread discussing how to make the transition to better police departments might be useful. But let's not just joust at strawmen.

It's not a strawman in the least. The night protestors in Portland want the police disbanded. Anyway, could I see your source that existing police departments are full of racists, sadists and improperly trained goons? Or a source that shows that they are "rotten to the core"?

I agree that the vast majority of police are very badly trained.

 

[southernhybrid]

Okay. It does seem as if nobody here wants to abolish the police. That's good, but there is evidence that there is an "abolish the police" movement. Hopefully it's small. I think defunding the police is a stupid term too. It has given those on the right plenty of ammunition to attack liberals. Why not just have a "reform the police" movement? Most police departments need to be reformed. They need to be held accountable for killing unarmed citizens, and for using harsh methods to suppress protests etc. But when one says that want to defund the police, it gives some the impression that means ending the police. Without funding, there will be no police. I realize that's not what is meant, but I've seen some of my liberal friends say that they wish the term "defund" the police was never use because it gives people the wrong impression. And, abolishing the police is exactly what some of the protesters in Seattle wanted. The point is that it didn't work out very well.

From what I've read most cities that talk about defunding aren't talking about doing away with the police, but that term is one that can be interpreted to mean just that.

So, how do we reform the police? The Seattle City Council wants to "defund" by 50%, but some are saying that's not enough. I'm just wondering what the answer is in dealing with the problems that we currently have with police departments, especially in large metro areas. So far, I haven't seen any good solutions. Reform must be realistic. Camden, NJ did a pretty good job when they reformed their police department. Is that the model that others should consider?

To be perfectly honest, I wish a lot of these things had waited until after the November election because some of these confusing terms are simply giving Republicans an opportunity to use them to attack Democrats. Protests are fine, but a lot of what is happening now could end up making things worse. I hope not, but I am concerned.

 

[Politesse]

Okay. It does seem as if nobody here wants to abolish the police. That's good, but there is evidence that there is an "abolish the police" movement. Hopefully it's small. I think defunding the police is a stupid term too. It has given those on the right plenty of ammunition to attack liberals. Why not just have a "reform the police" movement? Most police departments need to be reformed. They need to be held accountable for killing unarmed citizens, and for using harsh methods to suppress protests etc. But when one says that want to defund the police, it gives some the impression that means ending the police. Without funding, there will be no police. I realize that's not what is meant, but I've seen some of my liberal friends say that they wish the term "defund" the police was never use because it gives people the wrong impression. And, abolishing the police is exactly what some of the protesters in Seattle wanted. The point is that it didn't work out very well.

From what I've read most cities that talk about defunding aren't talking about doing away with the police, but that term is one that can be interpreted to mean just that.

So, how do we reform the police? The Seattle City Council wants to "defund" by 50%, but some are saying that's not enough. I'm just wondering what the answer is in dealing with the problems that we currently have with police departments, especially in large metro areas. So far, I haven't seen any good solutions. Reform must be realistic. Camden, NJ did a pretty good job when they reformed their police department. Is that the model that others should consider?

To be perfectly honest, I wish a lot of these things had waited until after the November election because some of these confusing terms are simply giving Republicans an opportunity to use them to attack Democrats. Protests are fine, but a lot of what is happening now could end up making things worse. I hope not, but I am concerned.

Because "reforming the police" has been the dogma of the Left since the Progressive Era, and a full century of banging on that particular gong has yet to do a damn thing for communities of color.

 

[southernhybrid]

Okay. It does seem as if nobody here wants to abolish the police. That's good, but there is evidence that there is an "abolish the police" movement. Hopefully it's small. I think defunding the police is a stupid term too. It has given those on the right plenty of ammunition to attack liberals. Why not just have a "reform the police" movement? Most police departments need to be reformed. They need to be held accountable for killing unarmed citizens, and for using harsh methods to suppress protests etc. But when one says that want to defund the police, it gives some the impression that means ending the police. Without funding, there will be no police. I realize that's not what is meant, but I've seen some of my liberal friends say that they wish the term "defund" the police was never use because it gives people the wrong impression. And, abolishing the police is exactly what some of the protesters in Seattle wanted. The point is that it didn't work out very well.

From what I've read most cities that talk about defunding aren't talking about doing away with the police, but that term is one that can be interpreted to mean just that.

So, how do we reform the police? The Seattle City Council wants to "defund" by 50%, but some are saying that's not enough. I'm just wondering what the answer is in dealing with the problems that we currently have with police departments, especially in large metro areas. So far, I haven't seen any good solutions. Reform must be realistic. Camden, NJ did a pretty good job when they reformed their police department. Is that the model that others should consider?

To be perfectly honest, I wish a lot of these things had waited until after the November election because some of these confusing terms are simply giving Republicans an opportunity to use them to attack Democrats. Protests are fine, but a lot of what is happening now could end up making things worse. I hope not, but I am concerned.

Because "reforming the police" has been the dogma of the Left since the Progressive Era, and a full century of banging on that particular gong has yet to do a damn thing for communities of color.

That's not an answer. If you don't like the term reform the police and if defund the police is being interpreted to mean abolish the police, what and how do you think we can change things? I've never heard anyone talk about reforming the police were I live, so perhaps that term is used more often in academia than it is in general. It's just not something that I ever hear where I live. But, let's not get hung up on semantics.

Please tell us your plan as to how we can change things. The police in many places are simply out of control and while it mostly impacts minorities, it's not limited to them. I, an older white woman, feel very uncomfortable when I'm around the police, well other than my black neighbor who was recently promoted to police detective. . Seriously, I've heard no reasonable ideas from anyone about how we can change things in a realistic way.

Do you think what happened in Camden, NJ would work in other places?

I don't have all the answers but I think we absolutely need to demilitarize police departments for starters. I also think that instead of riding around town wit blacked out windows which disallows citizens to even see the police, that the police need to be back walking on the streets in urban areas and getting to know the citizens that they are supposed to be protecting and serving.

Raising salaries and requiring at least a college degree might also be a good starter. It can be a two year degree in law enforcement. It just needs to be the type of education that puts more emphasis on how to interact with people in a calm and peaceful way. Police need more training on interacting with mentally ill folks too. So, training and education are a big deal imo.

I mentioned pay because in some places, the salary that police are paid is insanely low. They are very low in my small city. No well educated, reasonable person is going to take a job with so much potential danger for 25K or 30K per year. I guess you get what you pay for.

 

[Politesse]

Okay. It does seem as if nobody here wants to abolish the police. That's good, but there is evidence that there is an "abolish the police" movement. Hopefully it's small. I think defunding the police is a stupid term too. It has given those on the right plenty of ammunition to attack liberals. Why not just have a "reform the police" movement? Most police departments need to be reformed. They need to be held accountable for killing unarmed citizens, and for using harsh methods to suppress protests etc. But when one says that want to defund the police, it gives some the impression that means ending the police. Without funding, there will be no police. I realize that's not what is meant, but I've seen some of my liberal friends say that they wish the term "defund" the police was never use because it gives people the wrong impression. And, abolishing the police is exactly what some of the protesters in Seattle wanted. The point is that it didn't work out very well.

From what I've read most cities that talk about defunding aren't talking about doing away with the police, but that term is one that can be interpreted to mean just that.

So, how do we reform the police? The Seattle City Council wants to "defund" by 50%, but some are saying that's not enough. I'm just wondering what the answer is in dealing with the problems that we currently have with police departments, especially in large metro areas. So far, I haven't seen any good solutions. Reform must be realistic. Camden, NJ did a pretty good job when they reformed their police department. Is that the model that others should consider?

To be perfectly honest, I wish a lot of these things had waited until after the November election because some of these confusing terms are simply giving Republicans an opportunity to use them to attack Democrats. Protests are fine, but a lot of what is happening now could end up making things worse. I hope not, but I am concerned.

Because "reforming the police" has been the dogma of the Left since the Progressive Era, and a full century of banging on that particular gong has yet to do a damn thing for communities of color.

That's not an answer. If you don't like the term reform the police and if defund the police is being interpreted to mean abolish the police, what and how do you think we can change things? I've never heard anyone talk about reforming the police were I live, so perhaps that term is used more often in academia than it is in general. It's just not something that I ever hear where I live. But, let's not get hung up on semantics.

Please tell us your plan as to how we can change things. The police in many places are simply out of control and while it mostly impacts minorities, it's not limited to them. I, an older white woman, feel very uncomfortable when I'm around the police, well other than my black neighbor who was recently promoted to police detective. . Seriously, I've heard no reasonable ideas from anyone about how we can change things in a realistic way.

Do you think what happened in Camden, NJ would work in other places?

I don't have all the answers but I think we absolutely need to demilitarize police departments for starters. I also think that instead of riding around town wit blacked out windows which disallows citizens to even see the police, that the police need to be back walking on the streets in urban areas and getting to know the citizens that they are supposed to be protecting and serving.

Raising salaries and requiring at least a college degree might also be a good starter. It can be a two year degree in law enforcement. It just needs to be the type of education that puts more emphasis on how to interact with people in a calm and peaceful way. Police need more training on interacting with mentally ill folks too. So, training and education are a big deal imo.

I mentioned pay because in some places, the salary that police are paid is insanely low. They are very low in my small city. No well educated, reasonable person is going to take a job with so much potential danger for 25K or 30K per year. I guess you get what you pay for.

You didn't ask if I thought their approach was correct, you asked why they aren't content with calls for reform. That's why. They have no real reason to believe that anything will change, based on past experience.