General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhen activists say defund the police they literally mean it
There are certainly a diversity of opinions out there about policing in general and about 'defunding' the police. But make no mistake, some of the defund the police activists mean a world with NO police.
Charlene Carruthers of the Movement for Black Lives
Well, I understand that the process to living in a society where safety exists beyond policing will take a very it'll take time. It won't happen overnight.
So, what I would like to see are local governments and also local police departments commit to a process in which we move essential safety services from the power and control of police departments into our communities.
That means crisis response. And that also means what how we deal with violence, conflict and harm. It means that actually, eventually, the police are not the people who intervene or show up in instances of crisis, conflict, harm, or violence, but, in fact, it's a community-based response that's outside of systems of policing, prisons and jails.
and:
I do not believe that we have we should have a partnership between community and the police in order to deal with conflict, harm and violence in our communities. What that power, those decisions and that role, including the money, needs to actually be completely shifted, and not simply into social service agencies, because we also know and understand that many social service agencies act in proxy to the police department across the country.
She was interviewed on PBS Newshour
here:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/2-views-on-the-future-of-american-policing
FWIW
I do not support this at all. As a theory, it sounds nice - in practice?
Blues Heron
(5,926 posts)Absurd that we let these aggressive violent defectives interact with our most vulnerable citizens.
janterry
(4,429 posts)Sure, if I want to section someone, I'd rather someone go out to talk calmly and reassuringly to the person. But I've had clients prepared to do violence-often to themselves.
As a MSW, I don't want to just go out by myself and 'talk' someone down who is potentially dangerous to themselves or others.
As you probably know, the police also go in a supportive role with social workers who work with DCF when they have to remove children. I think this is necessary.
Yes, there are many mistakes. Yes, there should be a patient, calm intervention (I've known of cases where the police blew things up). But I also know of instances where having the police calmed things down. And, ultimately, as a social worker - I don't want to go into a home - where things might get dangerous - without back up.
I remember, once, when I was just a case manager, going into a teenagers home and he was sitting next to me (slightly psychotic) and 'stabbing at the couch with a screwdriver). He didn't harm me. But I knew, in that moment, that if he wanted to - I would be dead.
There was nothing in my (extensive!) physical management training that could protect me. And this was NOT a case of coercion. I was just offering support. (He was angry at the neighbors, not me. But I was shaking when I left).
My supervisor, by the way, was attacked by a client in his home (she was not attempting anything more than support - we did not work for children and families, but for the department of mental health. We had no ability to coerce anything. The client was psychotic and became dangerous. Thankfully, he had family there who DID call the police. My supervisor was hospitalized, but recovered.
Blues Heron
(5,926 posts)not gun totin' street cops though , no. Too much killing from those. I think we should disarm most cops actually.
The Magistrate
(95,241 posts)It needs no explanation, and accurately reflects the sentiments of the mass of protesters in the streets, and of those who support them from their homes.
If left academics and activists were any good at framing issues, we would be in a very different political reality than we are. To say these generally have a tin ear far overstates their abilities in the agit-prop line.
"We should have had Socialism long since were it not for the Socialists."
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)replace the call for redirecting funding to social programs that "defunding" actually means. I haven't heard a slogan as short and clear as "police the police" for that yet.
The Magistrate
(95,241 posts)He put it up yesterday, and I have shamelessly adopted it.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213564482
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)most people across the political spectrum, all but the strongest authoritarians. So let's hope all those who don't know what defunding means switch to it.
We need a good, short slogan for the real meaning of "defunding," one that also states "to redistribute functions police shouldn't be doing, along with the funding for them, to social agencies" in 3 or 4 words. Since it's intrinsically progressive and means spending money and doesn't mean spiting the police, it won't have quite as broad appeal.
The Magistrate
(95,241 posts)Then just about anything can be roped in as something needed to 'police the police'. Some of that can even be presented as helping police, freeing them from functions they cannot perform well or safely, and letting them concentrate on preventing and solving crimes.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Response to janterry (Original post)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
janterry
(4,429 posts)and the poor - well.
Response to janterry (Reply #5)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)and corporations hired mercenaries for protection and crime cartels took over.
Liberal In Texas
(13,531 posts)Reform is one thing, but this phrase is already being used by the trumparty to scare the begeezes out of the middle class and to puff up the Siberian Candidate as the law and order candidate.
janterry
(4,429 posts)I live in a very liberal town in Vermont. There is already talk by the younger folks - that this is a good idea. One person posted on our Facebook page (someone who just moved to town, mind you!) that this WILL happen.
This is just wrong
agingdem
(7,805 posts)I dont think it means what they think it means unless those calling for defunding mean prevent from receiving funds.. dissolving whole police department.. lousy idea..redirect portions of the police budget towards community awareness, employ professional therapists and crisis counselors who can assess the damage in real time ..and as for police unions .. make them fiscally responsible for each and every officer that does harm .. fire them.. no second chances .. no rehiring.. deny them their pensions ..
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and the achievement of the competent.
janterry
(4,429 posts)though(?) this was aired on PBS. So, the fools are getting a bit of press
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)A lot of those will mature into more sensible attitudes, of course, and some not. They can all have documentation of their current efforts to show their children if they wish though.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,911 posts)We live in an unstable world. There literally are terrorists who try to maim and murder. Some belong to international extremist groups, others are domestic terrorists, almost always ideologically Right Wing.
And then there are the shooters, psychologically sick and broken men (in almost all cases) who are moved to slaughter those around them. School shooters, church shooters, crowd shooters, work place shooters etc.
And then there are the more routine psychopaths; serial killers, and more garden variety murderers and rapists.
The legitimate scope of policing needs to be significantly reduced. Police are now dispatched to handle problems that need to be dealt with differently The control structure of the policing that remains needs to be redesigned. Current police culture must be uprooted and replaced with one centered around service to the community. Police need to reflect the communities they serve and live in the communities they serve. So many changes needed, but we still need some cadre of armed first responders.
Response to janterry (Original post)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,307 posts)I wasn't saying "defund the police." I was saying "abolish the police." It's a transformative idea that is less about the absence of police and more about the presence of systems that prevent needing police.
janterry
(4,429 posts)I would, of course, take you at your word
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,307 posts)good idea.
Response to WhiskeyGrinder (Reply #15)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,307 posts)requires a level of community care that they are neither trained for nor get into the career to do. We ask the police to be the very last backstop of harm reduction, and as a system it's disproportionately harsh in the vast majority of cases, because it relies on trauma to work.
We generally know why people commit crimes; they have needs that have not been met. We have the resources to meet those needs -- particularly if we're not paying to punish people whose needs were not met. The abolitionist model does not shut off the lights at the precinct and send cops home -- getting people to consider it is the easiest part. In Minneapolis, we'll see where the real work begins -- separating the duties cops really don't need to do and funding support systems for crisis response in those areas; building stronger communities that can keep themselves safe; overhauling health care, education, social services and other systems to dismantle the systemic racism and oppression in them as they serve the community more effectively, etc.
Response to WhiskeyGrinder (Reply #23)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,307 posts)before that bill passed, and most experts understand now that crime was dropping because of an improving economy, lower unemployment and an aging population. It certainly increased incarceration, though!
Response to WhiskeyGrinder (Reply #32)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,307 posts)and training board that focused on IPV. It was certainly eye-opening.
Response to WhiskeyGrinder (Reply #34)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
quickesst
(6,280 posts)"It means that actually, eventually, the police are not the people who intervene or show up in instances of crisis, conflict, harm, or violence, but, in fact, it's a community-based response that's outside of systems of policing, prisons and jails."
If I am a mental health worker or a drug counselor, you can bet your sweet ass that I am not walking into that situation until I know that I will be safe, and that there are no gun or knife wielding persons who will pose a threat to me or other citizens. Take a wild guess as to who is going to ensure my safety. That is where things need to change. At that point, if the situation is safely under control, the appropriate responders should take charge, and the police should withdraw having carried out their duty to ensure a safe situation. Not having them show up at all is only going to get innocent people killed.
janterry
(4,429 posts)and I've been in that situation
quickesst
(6,280 posts).... armed with a dose of Narcan, Bible, or a mental health manual just doesn't seem like the smart thing to do. Entering that situation assured that the situation is safe would be much better. Thanks for the reply janterry.
Response to quickesst (Reply #16)
jmg257 This message was self-deleted by its author.
quickesst
(6,280 posts).... that so much of the obvious sorely lacks in the use of logic and common sense.
quaint
(2,551 posts)Many activists support police reform, including defunding militarization. Campaign Zero