Page 4 of 57

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:30 pm
by The Imzadi Islands
Bombadil wrote:
Jabberwocky wrote:Ask me again after you've been mugged; when your liquor store is robbed; when you've been the victim of domestic abuse.


However the police didn't stop you being mugged, or your liquor store being robbed or the domestic abuser. So it seems more rational to pour resources into means of lessening the likelihood of these happening than introducing a host of new laws to react to anything that occurs due to addressable reasons.

And that would reduce the need for the police.

I just want to understand what is being said here: Because not everyone has a personal policeman standing next to them 24 hours a day, it would be better to get rid of the police and instead spend perhaps trillions of dollars in an attempt to create some sort of utopia in which the flaws of 100,000 years of human nature and human interaction are somehow completely eliminated, thus making police unnecessary? Is that your idea or did I miss something?

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:31 pm
by Yooper
The Two Jerseys wrote:Next we're going to ban airplanes because the Boeing 737 MAX has faulty computer programming...

Lmao, probably yes if it isnt fixed (which maybe it is?) soon.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:36 pm
by Paddy O Fernature
Some People: "Professional police need to be abolished because they cannot be trusted for XYZ reasons!"

Other People: "Yes, and we should replace them with a volunteer based force that will clearly do better then then full time professionals!"

Both groups nod in agreement.

Me: Let me know how that works out for you...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:37 pm
by Bombadil
The Imzadi Islands wrote:
Bombadil wrote:
However the police didn't stop you being mugged, or your liquor store being robbed or the domestic abuser. So it seems more rational to pour resources into means of lessening the likelihood of these happening than introducing a host of new laws to react to anything that occurs due to addressable reasons.

And that would reduce the need for the police.

I just want to understand what is being said here: Because not everyone has a personal policeman standing next to them 24 hours a day, it would be better to get rid of the police and instead spend perhaps trillions of dollars in an attempt to create some sort of utopia in which the flaws of human nature and human interaction are somehow completely eliminated, thus making police unnecessary? Is that your idea or did I miss something?


Hyperbolic but sort of, it's not that the flaws of human nature are eliminated but they are identified, addressed and managed. Ultimately the tools for police to manage anything is essentially violence and detainment, so throw them at problems and you'll get a large amount of violence and incarceration, which is what we see in the US for example.

Same here in HK, rather than address an issue just throw police at the problem - what do you get? Violence and incarceration.

Police are generally not a good solution, they're a solution of last resort by the system. Better to invest in solutions that actually minimise the problem over exaggerating it.

Do we even need police?

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:39 pm
by Deacarsia
Yea, of course we need the police.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:47 pm
by Resilient Acceleration
Different areas of the world might mean different answers. In my country at least, there are two types of police: the national police, and the region-controlled Satpol PP. Satpol PP are basically street thugs recruited by regional governments to become their arm of law enforcement, particularly in things such as enforcing regional tax collection, beat up radical Islamist groups or local gangs, provide urban security, enforce zoning laws, etc. and it'll be hard for regional governments to exercise their executive power without them.

Actually, without them, public security will fall into the hands of the already influential local mass organizations, basically racketeering mafia groups tolerated by the government in exchange of cooperation in maintaining public order.

The national police is responsible for larger or more general tasks, most importantly counter-terrorism (and they do succesfully reduce terror activities throughout the 2000's by a significant amount). That, and also issues like national criminal investigations, crackdown on illegal resource extractions by large businesses, or drug policy enforcements aren't something that can be done by community policing.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:48 pm
by Vaspelia
Without enforcement, laws are nothing but a piece of paper. But in my humble opinion and knowledge, i dislike pro-bootlicking rhetoric, as law alone without justice can be a crime too; this is why also the alternative to police: mob justice, is undesireable. In rage, a mob doesn't care about the rights of the suspect (like for example: "Innocent until proven the opposite") and can be extremly brutal.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:53 pm
by Port Myreal
We could replace police with a system of private protection firms, which compete in a free market. But instead of having large security corporations we should focus on small, but well-organized family-owned businesses. These would then establish some kind of commission to oversee their activities and mediate conflicts that may arise between them.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:54 pm
by Romextly
Port Myreal wrote:We could replace police with a system of private protection firms, which compete in a free market. But instead of having large security corporations we should focus on small, but well-organized family-owned businesses. These would then establish some kind of commission to oversee their activities and mediate conflicts that may arise between them.

That's and idea that will fail

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:54 pm
by Romextly
Port Myreal wrote:We could replace police with a system of private protection firms, which compete in a free market. But instead of having large security corporations we should focus on small, but well-organized family-owned businesses. These would then establish some kind of commission to oversee their activities and mediate conflicts that may arise between them.

That's and idea that will fail

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:55 pm
by Cordel One
Port Myreal wrote:We could replace police with a system of private protection firms, which compete in a free market. But instead of having large security corporations we should focus on small, but well-organized family-owned businesses. These would then establish some kind of commission to oversee their activities and mediate conflicts that may arise between them.

No, that would be worse.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:55 pm
by San Lumen
Cordel One wrote:
Jabberwocky wrote:Ask me again after you've been mugged; when your liquor store is robbed; when you've been the victim of domestic abuse.

40% of cops are domestic abusers.

Prove it. Reform is better than abolition. How about more transparency by banning encryption of radios, established civilian review boards, encouraging community policing instead of turning people off with extremist rhetoric?

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:56 pm
by Resilient Acceleration
Vaspelia wrote:Without enforcement, laws are nothing but a piece of paper. But in my humble opinion and knowledge, i dislike pro-bootlicking rhetoric, as law alone without justice can be a crime too; this is why also the alternative to police: mob justice, is undesireable. In rage, a mob doesn't care about the rights of the suspect (like for example: "Innocent until proven the opposite") and can be extremly brutal.

This, actually. Law should be enforced by an organized institution based on codes of conduct. Whether the execution is fair in practice is a matter of reform, but it is certainly better than letting Islamist "community mobs" burn down your store for allegedly selling alcohol during Ramadan.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:58 pm
by The Imzadi Islands
Bombadil wrote:
The Imzadi Islands wrote:I just want to understand what is being said here: Because not everyone has a personal policeman standing next to them 24 hours a day, it would be better to get rid of the police and instead spend perhaps trillions of dollars in an attempt to create some sort of utopia in which the flaws of human nature and human interaction are somehow completely eliminated, thus making police unnecessary? Is that your idea or did I miss something?


Hyperbolic but sort of, it's not that the flaws of human nature are eliminated but they are identified, addressed and managed. Ultimately the tools for police to manage anything is essentially violence and detainment, so throw them at problems and you'll get a large amount of violence and incarceration, which is what we see in the US for example.

Same here in HK, rather than address an issue just throw police at the problem - what do you get? Violence and incarceration.

Police are generally not a good solution, they're a solution of last resort by the system. Better to invest in solutions that actually minimise the problem over exaggerating it.

The problem with police here in the US is many jurisdictions allow them to be trained to behave in a cowardly fashion rather than be brave and when the inevitable manifests itself, they are protected by police unions which for some reason are allowed to stand between the officers and the citizenry who demand accountability/ Forgive me my period key seems not to be working/ I have given you specific problems with specific obvious solutions/ Can you please be more specific in your solution ideas rather than these vague statements? What exactly are you talking about? Invest in what solutions?

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:58 pm
by Cordel One
San Lumen wrote:
Cordel One wrote:40% of cops are domestic abusers.

Prove it.

ok
San Lumen wrote:Reform is better than abolition. How about more transparency by banning encryption of radios, established civilian review boards, encouraging community policing instead of turning people off with extremist rhetoric?

The system's rotten to the core, reform isn't enough.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:59 pm
by San Lumen
Cordel One wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Prove it.

ok
San Lumen wrote:Reform is better than abolition. How about more transparency by banning encryption of radios, established civilian review boards, encouraging community policing instead of turning people off with extremist rhetoric?

The system's rotten to the core, reform isn't enough.

What’s wrong with anything I proposed?

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:59 pm
by Yeet Nationss
Romextly wrote:Of course we need the police. Soon, if the left has it's way, there will be extremely tight gun laws leaving more people defenseless. Take away the police and what you have is a bloodbath

AMEN

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:02 pm
by Cordel One
San Lumen wrote:
Cordel One wrote:ok

The system's rotten to the core, reform isn't enough.

What’s wrong with anything I proposed?

I'm not gonna go in circles with you again, look back at pages 1 and 2 for the answers.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:04 pm
by Galloism
Cordel One wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Prove it.

ok
San Lumen wrote:Reform is better than abolition. How about more transparency by banning encryption of radios, established civilian review boards, encouraging community policing instead of turning people off with extremist rhetoric?

The system's rotten to the core, reform isn't enough.

Here’s the problem. If you abolish police, and I do mean abolish abolish, power vacuums get filled.

Citizen militias will almost certainly spring up in their absence, and the results will be bloodier. A lot bloodier. A lot of people that used to leave in handcuffs will leave in a body bag.

I understand we have some very serious problems, but this idea takes us out of the frying pan and into the fire.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:04 pm
by Bombadil
San Lumen wrote:
Cordel One wrote:40% of cops are domestic abusers.

Prove it. Reform is better than abolition. How about more transparency by banning encryption of radios, established civilian review boards, encouraging community policing instead of turning people off with extremist rhetoric?


..because a lot of these ideas have been tried and failed, the issue is that the focus is always that the solution is to reform the police in some way without addressing fundamental underlying issues that the police are simply not equipped to deal with.

Take homelessness for example, what exactly can the police do other than move them somewhere else or arrest them, and if any resistance there's violence. None of your solutions address this. The police should not be in the business of managing homeless people. Or take drugs for example, which is generally the major cause of burglaries.. what is the benefit of making it a police problem in terms of arresting drug dealers, which thus leads to mass incarceration. Even domestic abuse, that pre-empts a major amount of murders.. the police can't do much unless the victim presses charges, which they're generally unlikely to do for fear of the consequences.. why are police managing this??

Violence and incarceration are the tools police have, throw police at a problem and you'll get greater violence and incarceration. Instead funding should be diverted to better housing, better drug treatment facilities and programs, better social services.

Fundamentally a lot more money should be diverted into modern, free and universal education and healthcare. That would solve 90% of issues societally. No one expects to eliminate crime so the question is what's the best means of reducing it?

Did you see the items listed in the latest US budget, the fucking waste.. no one can really say this isn't all very affordable given a degree of focus and not just throwing police at societal problems.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:05 pm
by The Two Jerseys
Paddy O Fernature wrote:Some People: "Professional police need to be abolished because they cannot be trusted for XYZ reasons!"

Other People: "Yes, and we should replace them with a volunteer based force that will clearly do better then then full time professionals!"

Both groups nod in agreement.

Me: Let me know how that works out for you...

Remember when the crime rate in CHAZ/CHOP rose 525% while the Totally Not Police were on patrol there?

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:07 pm
by Resilient Acceleration
Port Myreal wrote:We could replace police with a system of private protection firms, which compete in a free market. But instead of having large security corporations we should focus on small, but well-organized family-owned businesses. These would then establish some kind of commission to oversee their activities and mediate conflicts that may arise between them.

We tried that actually, i believe it's called civil defense. We do keep the state police, though. We open training centers and recruit street thugs to join it, turn them into civil defense officers which will then be recruited by security firms, and then businesses can employ their service to give protection. The "comission" however is still controlled by the government. So basically a national security guard program. It does successfully reduce urban crime which was high in the 80's, but it also turn cities into plots of gated communities.

Then again, it's objectively better than the "mysterious shooter" program the government was enforcing in parallel, where the police would basically shoot anyone that looks like a thug and dump their bodies in community centers as a "warning against criminals".

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:12 pm
by Cordel One
Galloism wrote:
Cordel One wrote:ok

The system's rotten to the core, reform isn't enough.

Here’s the problem. If you abolish police, and I do mean abolish abolish, power vacuums get filled.

Citizen militias will almost certainly spring up in their absence, and the results will be bloodier. A lot bloodier. A lot of people that used to leave in handcuffs will leave in a body bag.

I understand we have some very serious problems, but this idea takes us out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Which is why police abolition must be gradual and not immediate.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:14 pm
by Galloism
Cordel One wrote:
Galloism wrote:Here’s the problem. If you abolish police, and I do mean abolish abolish, power vacuums get filled.

Citizen militias will almost certainly spring up in their absence, and the results will be bloodier. A lot bloodier. A lot of people that used to leave in handcuffs will leave in a body bag.

I understand we have some very serious problems, but this idea takes us out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Which is why police abolition must be gradual and not immediate.

Abolition is not going to be the right solution ever. There will always be a segment that will require force to contain them to maintain a peaceful society.

But I do think we need to very much focus on the true causes of crime in addition to just mopping it up afterward. Then we wouldn’t need near so many police.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:21 pm
by The Two Jerseys
Port Myreal wrote:We could replace police with a system of private protection firms, which compete in a free market. But instead of having large security corporations we should focus on small, but well-organized family-owned businesses. These would then establish some kind of commission to oversee their activities and mediate conflicts that may arise between them.

It's almost as if people realized decades ago that a shitty police force that's at least accountable to the public is still better than the alternatives...