ok so let's take that as read for the sake of discussion.
how is that a refutation of the fact that providing these people with a moderate amount of resources so that they don't feel compelled to commit crime is a more effective way to reduce crime than a militarized police force which punishes them for having done crime?
It is probably true that if you just give these thugs enough money that they can live their lifestyle without the risk of stealing and robbing that many of them would decide that stealing and robbing for even more money is not worth it.
That does not make it a good policy to pay thieves and robbers to stop stealing and robbing. It's basically government paying a form of protection money to these thugs.
firstly, food stamps and section 8 and "etc" generally result in having the economic resource to exist barely above the poverty line, IE those things are baaaaaarely a scratch above living in an alley and eating out of a dumpster.
First, these programs are supposed to be supplemental. Second, they are part of the social
safety net. It's not a social hammock. It's not meant to provide a comfortable middle class life for doing nothing.
secondly, there is a certain percentage of the human population which is just... fucked up. this is true of the rich, the poor, every strand of humanity in every direction. that sometimes those fucked up people are poor is no more the fault of 'the poor' than harvey weinstein is the fault of 'the rich'. though of course environmental factors can make such inclinations far worse.
Causality can go the other way too. Many are and stay poor because they are what you call "fucked up". But should those people be rewarded for being fucked up, even when they manifest their fuckupedness as criminal behavior such as robbery.
There was a case of some preteen boys robbing a woman on Atlanta's Belt Line.
11-year-old, 12-year-old arrested, accused of armed robbery on Beltline
What should be done with them? A pat on the back and a generous stipend so they are not tempted to do it again? Hell no!
thirdly, for the most part the answer to your question is yes. if you took every burglar and repeat-offender petty criminal and just gave them a house or a decent apartment and 45k a year, petty crime would plummet.
That would amount to rewarding people for being thieves and robbers. Why should anybody work for a living when they can just burgle a house once and get a free house plus a life stipend of $45k?
you probably wouldn't see an immediate change in social and cultural behavior from that segment of the population, because unfortunately humans tend to be highly susceptible to behavior and attitudes learned up to their early teens and it's extremely difficult for them to unlearn those, but within a generation or two you'd see a radical change in that portion of society.
Even if you did, you'd have done it by basically paying protection money. Here's a free house plus $45k a year for life so you don't rob people. It's a really dumb idea. And what happens to their kids? Do they get a $45k stipend automatically (for being part of the subsidized criminal class by descent) when they turn 18 or do they have to commit a crime or two first?
Committing crimes and getting away with them.
"defund the police" as a political movement wants to take away military gear from cops, and to shift public spending away from the current paradigm of "assault, subdue, punish" and put money into "assist, rehabilitate, provide"
.
First of all, "military gear" is a misnomer. Police departments do not have main battle tanks, F/A18s or F21s, or artillery. What they have is crowd control gear, something very necessary in light of widespread rioting and unrest. Of course extremists want police to get rid of those tools, as it would mean they will have an easier time when they decide they want to riot, burn and loot again in one or several US cities.
And no, "defund" is not just restricted to gear. They want to drastically cut police budgets and staffing. In some cases, they want outright police and prison abolition.
People like AOC and Cori Bush are dangerous anti-police extremists.
how does that change how easy it is to commit crime?
Fewer cops on the beat, and thugs have an easier time thugging.