A World Where George Floyd And Ma'Khia Bryant Would Still Be Here Is A World Without Police

[WhiskeyGrinder]

https://newsone.com/4143261/george-floyd-makhia-bryant-abolition-police/

Not only has there not been “justice,” there hasn’t been “accountability.” Chauvin hasn’t taken any responsibility for his actions, and neither have the three cops who stood by as he murdered Mr. Floyd. Cops across the country are trumpeting the trial as a miscarriage of justice. Militarized police preparations for anticipated protests of the trial’s outcome frame communities as enemy combatants. And the passage of laws across the country criminalizing dissent and authorizing violence against protesters demonstrate the stark reality that the verdict won’t do anything to protect Black communities facing brutal repression whenever we rise up in mourning and rage in the wake of each new police murder.

A single conviction of a single cop won’t change the system that produced and enabled him; in fact, it will embolden it to continue business as usual under the pretext that it can deliver justice. For every rare criminal conviction of a killer cop, thousands more Black people will be murdered, maimed, raped, criminalized and dehumanized without consequence. Since 2005 there have been 140 police arrests on murder or manslaughter charges, while cops have killed over 1000 people a year on average since at least 2014.

(snip)

Each of these prosecutions consumed tremendous amounts of resources while leaving a murderous system intact. Not one of them stopped the next killing. Yet each is offered up as an illusion that the system will somehow hold itself accountable. The state will gladly sacrifice a few officers in unique and spectacular cases to preserve the status quo while enabling policymakers to peddle the idea that justice has been done.

Policymakers are already making it clear that they no longer feel pressure to continue with the political theater of passing legislation that would have done nothing to prevent Mr. Floyd’s death and would pour $750 million more dollars into departments like the one that employed Chauvin to investigate police killings after the fact. They will use Chauvin’s conviction to argue that the system is working just as it should, and to stifle any efforts at substantive systemic change. In other words, George Floyd’s murder is being used to recuperate the institution that killed him in the midst of one of the greatest crises of legitimacy it has faced.

[Devil Child]

1. lol I'll happily take a world with police over the alternative

[WhiskeyGrinder]

18. If you have a world with police, then you have a world with police violence.

For some people, that's a fair trade. For me, it's not.

[Disaffected]

21. Tell me,

where is this Utopia of which you speak??

[WhiskeyGrinder]

22. I don't speak of utopia, although a lot of people like to put that word in my mouth.

[Devil Child]

26. I'm ok with a world with police and the inevitible police violence it brings

Much better than a police-free world at the mercy of unchecked criminality.

[catsudon]

23. yep

the society would be filled with rapists and pedophiles.

[Watchfoxheadexplodes]

2. Bodies of others

Would be stacked like cord wood.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

11. I know I can count on you.

[tonedevil]

15. So the only thing...

that saves civilization is the thin blue line?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

17. A pretty sad way of looking at the world, isn't it?

[Devil Child]

29. Not the only thing saving it but necessary.

[RegularJam]

3. Poorly written click-bait.

The author argues multiple points not in contention. Conflates societal norms and personal responsibility. Obfuscates the meaning of words.

[WarGamer]

4. A world with Ma'Khia Bryant still alive might be a world with Pink Jogger Suit Girl dead.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

10. In a world without cops, all that money goes toward programs that give people what

they need. If Ma'Khia's mother had had the support she needed instead of the state taking her kid away and killing her, the driveway confrontation is pretty unlikely.

[Tom Rinaldo]

42. All or Nothing? What sense does that make?

A world with less cops could be a world that provides the resources necessary to people so that less cops are needed. And then, in a century or two, maybe we could get to that world with "no cops" that you speak of. Meanwhile we live in a world where politics matter. Calls to abolish or defund policing right now lead to the election of more right wing Republicans who then further militarize the police with their votes. We almost lost the House of Reps in the last election in large part due to that. Had the Republicans picked off a relative handful of additional Democratic seats there would be no George Floyd act, period.

Millions of voters watch coverage of mass shootings such as the one at the FedEx facility where a cop got killed rushing in to confront the shooter and they think Democrats who call for "defunding" police are bat shit crazy. Messaging does count. Yes we should be pushing for "public safety" reforms that will lead to all of us being more safe, and some of that means redirecting some funds so that armed police are not always the first responders to non-violent situations. But the wrong use of inflammatory rhetoric and talking points only makes the situation worse

[Celerity]

43. Do you honestly think that social programmes will stop all human crime and violence?

Madness.

even your own words betray you

the driveway confrontation is pretty unlikely

no matter how effective a society is, there will ALWAYS be violence and crime at some level

and your 'no copper' fantasy is thus just that, a fantasy

[msongs]

5. one wonders if the girl in pink would still be here nt

[WhiskeyGrinder]

12. As I say above, in an abolitionist model, we build a world where that confrontation is much more

unlikely.

[Ace Rothstein]

6. Hard pass on a world without police.

[LearnedHand]

16. A world without police doesn't mean

a world without order and community support and protection.

[Ace Rothstein]

28. Maybe we can get there in a century or so.

In this current, violent country? No way. There's a few generations of people whose only response to a slight or wrongdoing is violence.

[Happy Hoosier]

7. LOSING. MESSAGE. NT

[Hoyt]

8. I read the OP Ed. Many of the other articles on that site are really good and recommended.

[RegularJam]

9. Spot on and far more polite than I was.

I like your wording.

[LearnedHand]

13. Represent, WhiskeyGrinder n/t

[Bored in the USA]

14. We need retrials too.

There’s so many cops who got away with murders on both black and white people (mostly black though) who had horrible jury’s. I don’t know if they were rigged but they had to be in such cases as that guy who pulled his pants up while crawling to the officer.

[sarisataka]

25. Are you suggesting

If a jury renders a verdict we don't like we do the trial again until they get it right?

If so I have a suggestion to save time and money...

[Demsrule86]

33. Did you ever hear of double jeopardy...you can't under any circumstances have retrials because

you don't like the verdict. A person who is found innocent in a court of law is innocent and can't be tried for the same crime again period. What we could do is try the person for civil right violations as they did in the case of KKK folks in the South...my feeling is the trials of police officers who use excessive force or kill someone should be in federal court...such a crime should be a federal crime...takes it out of the local area where the cop is friendly with the DA and many of the judges perhaps.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

34. Apparently Civics 101 is no long taught in our schools,

because you would know that Double Jeopardy would absolutely prevent that.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

19. 911 Call, Active Shooter

WhiskeyGrinder, you are the leader and you get the call.

What happens?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

20. This is a hard question to answer, because people who ask this question in bad faith see my answer

as a dodge: It depends. If you asked in bad faith, go ahead and mock. For you or anyone else who's truly curious about abolition (I know you're there!), keep reading.

It depends on the kind of world we've built without cops. The absence of cops means there's more room and resources for the presence of something else, and what abolitionists work for is the presence of systems and communities that are designed to support and care for people. We know the vast, vast majority of crime comes from unmet needs -- if people's needs are met, they don't turn to crime. Cops rarely prevent crime, aren't great at solving violent crime, and routinely retraumatize victims of crime -- not to mention create all sorts of victims of cop violence. What would happen if we built systems that actually helped people? We could do so while actively divesting these systems of white supremacy, which is baked into the prison industrial complex (as well as social work, health care and education, for that matter).

So the answer is less about the call for an active shooter, and more about how we better prevent active shooters. We're not great about preventing those now, so clearly cops aren't the answer. So why does someone become an active shooter? That's where to start.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

24. You are Preaching to the Choir

I honestly do not think I am in bad faith.
I believe any honest person would understand that you did not answer the question at all.

You have a great talking point, and like a politician you circle any question back to the talking point, hoping that it sinks in.

The thing I'm trying to show you, is that you will be disregard as a person living in a cartoon if you do not have some vision of how an emergency situation could successfully play out. You, probably hate to answer it, because it loses the idea of the COMPLETE abolishment. And you worry that then your talking point would get foggy. ( I don't think so)
However, in my opinion, discussing this idea with you is so clouded in needing you to acknowledge that there does need to be enforcers, that it is hard for me to embrace the further conversation of creating that better vision with you.

It would be better for someone to start an OP about a realistic vision, that contained all or most of what you are saying, while also mentioning that there would, of course, still be an emergency police force.


911 Call - A group of people are cutting down all of the power lines around town.

911 - Call A person just forced me out of my house and said they would be living there now.

911 Call A group is using the Highway, all day long, to hold drag races.


It looks obvious that you will need police or the military, etc to handle these things.
Perhaps everyone can have a gun and a gang like the Hatfields and McCoys to take care of it themselves?
If you do not answer, "what happens"? It may be you that is in bad faith. Just dodge and back to the Talking Point.

Since you said there would be NO POLICE, then what will you do when the call comes in?

[tonedevil]

27. You have an active imagination...

a group of people cutting down power lines all over town? I suspect the response of the police as they are today in cities across the US would be inadequate and increase the danger to all involved.
I've already heard the rest of your argument for decades. When I was young there was a bumper sticker that said, If you don't like the police next time you're in trouble call a hippie. It seemed like a better alternative at the time and still probably is, although hippies are harder to find now.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

30. What is your argument?

What is it that you think I am arguing for?

I am arguing for an answer to what would we do in those situations.
I suppose, until I see a better alternative, I'm arguing for at least a minimal police force.

We could have less police than we do now.
Have appropriate non-police response units.
Create less poverty.
Have better mental health support.
Better physical health care.
Decent housing/shelter and food available for the homeless.
Free college.

So, what is it that you think I am arguing FOR, that you are not for?


PS they are cutting them down for the Copper. ( they figure no one will stop them)

PSS When YOU get the 911 call, and you are the leader, what do you do?

[BGBD]

31. I'll be interested to see how minority communities

fair when the police are abolished and instead of patrol cars it's Toyota pickups with bed mounted M-60s and loads of guys with "RWDS" tattoos and Pinochet shirts running around instead. The Mosul model of society will be great.



Don't assume that getting rid of the police and adding some social services is going to stop crime, especially now. You best be ready to start carrying a gun and enforcing justice yourself. That's essentially how it was done in the Old West.

I'm guessing most people don't have the stomach for that and are going to be much more in favor of letting police keep dealing with all the fucked up shit in the world so they don't have to.

What do you do when a pedophile moves in next door? A kids starts shooting at the local middle school? A man murders his family? Are we going back to public hangings by lynch mobs?

[Demsrule86]

32. There is never going to be a world without police that is just nonsense.

[NickB79]

35. I see a world without police as putting all our eggs in one basket

You're relying on an entirely pro-active approach to prevent crime and lawlessness, devoting resources to prevent people from turning to crime and violence. Policing, on the other hand, is largely a reactive approach, going after people that have already become violent and/or criminals.

It sounds like Utopia, and I'd love to believe it could work.

That said, I question whether we could ever reach such a world, given the history of violence that human societies worldwide seem to have in common.

[yagotme]

37. Humans have been violent since day 1.

Hunters. Want to keep your game for your tribe? Run off or kill interlopers. Need more food? Kill off your neighbors, take theirs. Deep down, we're animals, just like in the wild. Society is what keeps us, as humans, "decent". Societal evolution has taken eons, and is still a work in progress. Older generations have to accept new norms, or die off. Seen any videos of toddlers smacking each other in the head? Well, they don't know better, haven't been taught. Some people have never really learned, or something is wrong with them chemically/internally. Some people just don't have the "I shouldn't do that" switch. Some mass murderers, for example. They know it's "wrong" to kill, they just can't help themselves, due to pleasure of it, etc.

Police are needed, at times, and if you get rid of them, you're probably going to get something much worse.

[Calculating]

36. A world without police is the wild west

Better than ready to buy some guns and defend yourself and your family.

[Progressive Jones]

38. A World without police is bad idea. I shouldn't have to explain this to anyone. nt

[Willto]

39. Absurd

It's hard for me to take eliminating all police as even being a serious suggestion. To genuinely believe that you could do such a thing and it would improve society is so naive it's scary. Sorry but there are some very bad people in the world. People who will do whatever they feel they can get away with doing. And without any form of law enforcement what they can get away with would become unbounded. And what recourse will honest citizens have to stop them. Who will they turn to? A social worker? No they would be forced to take the law into their own hands. Our country would dissolve into a swirling mess of emboldened criminals vs private citizens forced to defend themselves. It would become a world of violent criminals vs vigilante justice. In other words a hot violent mess. Name me one country on this earth that has abolished all police. Because I can't think of a single functional example.

[Raine]

40. and everyone running around with a gun being a vigilant shooting at everything is so much better 🙄

because that is exactly what would happen. People will create their own citizen's police force, taking the law into their own hands. Wild West anarchy is what it would be ... no thanks!