Do we even need police?

[CoraSpia]

Yes, we need the police BUT the USA is turning into a police state. I have ideas to reduce the number of police (but police can't be entirely eliminated):

1) Take away unnecessary laws (such as not being allowed to drink beer in public or being forced to wear a seat belt or a bike helmet) and then the police will only have to focus on serious matters.

I agree with the beer but not using seatbelts or motorcycle helmets is an incredibly moronic thing to do. There's just no excuse for it.

It's on you if you die because you were a moron. The police should focus on things that actually matter, not things where the only victim will be the one doing it.

[Freiheit Reich]

Crime exists at such high rates because many people don't have much to lose. If we changed that then crime would certainly go down, but that doesn't mean we should abolish the profession that literally exists to stop people from doing it. Could it be done better? Certainly, but we shouldn't get rid of it.

I agree to an extant with you. One issue is the US school system should have more vocational training to prepare people for jobs after graduation. As well as more programs for adults that want to improve their skills (sometimes a man is 25 when he wakes up and realizes what he wants to do, not all high schoolers are mature enough to have an idea). Germany has far exceeded the USA in this regard. Many disillusioned graduates can't find jobs and turn to crime. A young auto mechanic who loves his job is less likely to become a criminal because he feels useful to society and satisfied in one area of his life. Many criminals feel bitter towards society and hopeless and feel they have nothing to lose.

[Sanghyeok]

Yes, we need the police BUT the USA is turning into a police state. I have ideas to reduce the number of police (but police can't be entirely eliminated):

1) Take away unnecessary laws (such as not being allowed to drink beer in public or being forced to wear a seat belt or a bike helmet) and then the police will only have to focus on serious matters.

2) Greatly reduce illegal immigration and slightly reduce legal immigration which will result in a lower population growth rate (meaning fewer police will need to be hired).

3) Subsidize birth control and abortions which will result in a lower population growth rate (meaning fewer police will need to be hired).

4) Legalize marijuana for consumption in private areas and decriminalize marijuana use in public areas (fines/community service if caught using it in a public park).

5) Make cities more pedestrian friendly reducing the need for traffic police as fewer people will need (or want) to drive.

6) Improve prisons to rehabilitate criminals so they can adapt better to the outside world. Don't treat them like savage animals. Also, seal criminal records once criminals are released so they can get jobs more easily (reducing their odds of being sent to prison again). This goes for ALL criminals-including sex offenders. Do the crime, do the time, and get a fresh start.

7) Bring back caning. I think caning will make criminals know what they did is wrong and reduce the number of repeat offenders. Singapore has a low crime rate and caning might be one reason for this.

These are a few ideas among many possibilities.

My opinion on 1 is mixed, we certainly need some laws if the lives or health of those besides the offender are in danger. 2 and 3 are rather silly, considering immigrants generally have similar if not lower rates of crime, and reducing per capita crime is more effective than reducing population growth. 4,5, and 6 are surprisingly good ideas. 7 is ridiculous.

[Apostate]

Do We even need police?

Answer: Yes. Unless you want gangs and mob rule and vigilantes avenging every perceived wrong ever nut-bar in the country assumes was afflicted upon them by another. They are the referee's we all need, but no one wants. For a social contract to exist however a trained force with civilian oversight is required to uphold said social contract.

Also, I cant believe this is a serious discussion.

[Freiheit Reich]

I don't think caning would really make a difference, I mean how is a few minutes of pain worse than being in jail? Plus jails and prisons are violent places to begin with, people get the shit beat out of them over nothing, so I don't see how the state doing it as an official punishment would worry any criminals.

I meant caning + another punishment. Caning is about humiliation more than actual pain. It is t break down the person to show them that their crime causes pain. A smug criminal will feel internal humiliation (even if he keeps a straight face while being caned) and this needs to be done before he can be built up. The military breaks recruits down before building them up in a similar way.

I think prisons should be made safer. US prisons are second-world when the USA claims to be first-world. The USA pays a lot of money for fairly crappy and very unsafe prisons. Criminals beat and raped in prison will get more bitter and likely commit crimes again. One problem I have with many politicians is that they are quite cruel towards criminals. It is easier to be a criminal than one thinks. Many crimes are just dumb mistakes and people forget how easy it is to be a criminal but I can empathize with many (except extreme ones like rapists, torturers, serial killers, and child abusers). I want them punished but without cruelness. I want them to have the chance to improve their minds and bodies with a healthy (but not too expensive or fancy) diet, vocational training, recreation opportunities (but no TV except a weekly movie, internet, or video games), and access to donated books and magazines (that are appropriate).

[CoraSpia]

I don't think caning would really make a difference, I mean how is a few minutes of pain worse than being in jail? Plus jails and prisons are violent places to begin with, people get the shit beat out of them over nothing, so I don't see how the state doing it as an official punishment would worry any criminals.

I meant caning + another punishment. Caning is about humiliation more than actual pain. It is t break down the person to show them that their crime causes pain. A smug criminal will feel internal humiliation (even if he keeps a straight face while being caned) and this needs to be done before he can be built up. The military breaks recruits down before building them up in a similar way.

I think prisons should be made safer. US prisons are second-world when the USA claims to be first-world. The USA pays a lot of money for fairly crappy and very unsafe prisons. Criminals beat and raped in prison will get more bitter and likely commit crimes again. One problem I have with many politicians is that they are quite cruel towards criminals. It is easier to be a criminal than one thinks. Many crimes are just dumb mistakes and people forget how easy it is to be a criminal but I can empathize with many (except extreme ones like rapists, torturers, serial killers, and child abusers). I want them punished but without cruelness. I want them to have the chance to improve their minds and bodies with a healthy (but not too expensive or fancy) diet, vocational training, recreation opportunities (but no TV except a weekly movie, internet, or video games), and access to donated books and magazines (that are appropriate).

I'm pretty sure that caning mainly serves to create mental trauma, rather than any sort of positive effect. If beatings in prison make a criminal bitter as you say I'm not sure why you think that beatings by the government won't have that effect.

As for the conditions within prison, I don't see a point in cutting prisoners away from tv/internet etc. Like it or not, those are the mediums by which we absorb culture now. When they come out of prison we want wider society to be less of a culture shock if rehabilitation is to work.

[San Lumen]

Do We even need police?

Answer: Yes. Unless you want gangs and mob rule and vigilantes avenging every perceived wrong ever nut-bar in the country assumes was afflicted upon them by another. They are the referee's we all need, but no one wants. For a social contract to exist however a trained force with civilian oversight is required to uphold said social contract.

Also, I cant believe this is a serious discussion.

Some people have even suggested the police force be volunteer.

[Freiheit Reich]

Yes, we need the police BUT the USA is turning into a police state. I have ideas to reduce the number of police (but police can't be entirely eliminated):

1) Take away unnecessary laws (such as not being allowed to drink beer in public or being forced to wear a seat belt or a bike helmet) and then the police will only have to focus on serious matters.

I agree with the beer but not using seatbelts or motorcycle helmets is an incredibly moronic thing to do. There's just no excuse for it.

It is a victimless crime just like prostitution (with consenting adults) and gambling and using marijuana. Propaganda should be used to encourage and educate people to use helmets and seatbelts BUT for those past puberty (perhaps age 15 or 16 could be a set age defined as a young adult) it should be an option. Eating candy and smoking tobacco is also bad for our health and kills people but I don't think it should be banned.

I was actually referring to bicycle helmet laws in some cities like Seattle and Spokane, Washington. Few people in Amsterdam wear bicycle helmets and I think helmet laws discourage people from cycling (it makes people see riding a bicycle as an extreme sport, like skateboarding or snowboarding, instead of simple transportation).

These silly laws make the police busier while real criminals are shooting and robbing folks.

[Freiheit Reich]

Yes, we need the police BUT the USA is turning into a police state. I have ideas to reduce the number of police (but police can't be entirely eliminated):

1) Take away unnecessary laws (such as not being allowed to drink beer in public or being forced to wear a seat belt or a bike helmet) and then the police will only have to focus on serious matters.

I agree with the beer but not using seatbelts or motorcycle helmets is an incredibly moronic thing to do. There's just no excuse for it.

It is a victimless crime just like prostitution (with consenting adults) and gambling and using marijuana. Propaganda should be used to encourage and educate people to use helmets and seatbelts BUT for those past puberty (perhaps age 15 or 16 could be a set age defined as a young adult) it should be an option. Eating candy and smoking tobacco is also bad for our health and kills people but I don't think it should be banned.

I was actually referring to bicycle helmet laws in some cities like Seattle and Spokane, Washington. Few people in Amsterdam wear bicycle helmets and I think helmet laws discourage people from cycling (it makes people see riding a bicycle as an extreme sport, like skateboarding or snowboarding, instead of simple transportation).

These silly laws make the police busier while real criminals are shooting and robbing folks.

[Freiheit Reich]

Yes, we need the police BUT the USA is turning into a police state. I have ideas to reduce the number of police (but police can't be entirely eliminated):

1) Take away unnecessary laws (such as not being allowed to drink beer in public or being forced to wear a seat belt or a bike helmet) and then the police will only have to focus on serious matters.

I agree with the beer but not using seatbelts or motorcycle helmets is an incredibly moronic thing to do. There's just no excuse for it.

It is a victimless crime just like prostitution (with consenting adults) and gambling and using marijuana. Propaganda should be used to encourage and educate people to use helmets and seatbelts BUT for those past puberty (perhaps age 15 or 16 could be a set age defined as a young adult) it should be an option. Eating candy and smoking tobacco is also bad for our health and kills people but I don't think it should be banned.

I was actually referring to bicycle helmet laws in some cities like Seattle and Spokane, Washington. Few people in Amsterdam wear bicycle helmets and I think helmet laws discourage people from cycling (it makes people see riding a bicycle as an extreme sport, like skateboarding or snowboarding, instead of simple transportation).

These silly laws make the police busier while real criminals are shooting and robbing folks.

[Freiheit Reich]

Do We even need police?

Answer: Yes. Unless you want gangs and mob rule and vigilantes avenging every perceived wrong ever nut-bar in the country assumes was afflicted upon them by another. They are the referee's we all need, but no one wants. For a social contract to exist however a trained force with civilian oversight is required to uphold said social contract.

Also, I cant believe this is a serious discussion.

I think it is a valid discussion. Why do we need the police? Why do people commit crimes against their fellow citizens? How can we reduce the need for police?

It would be nice to live in a world where the police and military are not even needed. Yes, it is idealistic, but we should not give up on ideals. The idea of a decent sewage system, clean and easily accessible drinking water, and access to free public libraries, was considered idealistic (and still is in some countries) but in most (sadly not all) of the USA, it is now a reality. Perhaps one day the police will not be needed and people will be kinder. Lets go for this ideal and not give up on it.

[Freiheit Reich]

I meant caning + another punishment. Caning is about humiliation more than actual pain. It is t break down the person to show them that their crime causes pain. A smug criminal will feel internal humiliation (even if he keeps a straight face while being caned) and this needs to be done before he can be built up. The military breaks recruits down before building them up in a similar way.

I think prisons should be made safer. US prisons are second-world when the USA claims to be first-world. The USA pays a lot of money for fairly crappy and very unsafe prisons. Criminals beat and raped in prison will get more bitter and likely commit crimes again. One problem I have with many politicians is that they are quite cruel towards criminals. It is easier to be a criminal than one thinks. Many crimes are just dumb mistakes and people forget how easy it is to be a criminal but I can empathize with many (except extreme ones like rapists, torturers, serial killers, and child abusers). I want them punished but without cruelness. I want them to have the chance to improve their minds and bodies with a healthy (but not too expensive or fancy) diet, vocational training, recreation opportunities (but no TV except a weekly movie, internet, or video games), and access to donated books and magazines (that are appropriate).

I'm pretty sure that caning mainly serves to create mental trauma, rather than any sort of positive effect. If beatings in prison make a criminal bitter as you say I'm not sure why you think that beatings by the government won't have that effect.

As for the conditions within prison, I don't see a point in cutting prisoners away from tv/internet etc. Like it or not, those are the mediums by which we absorb culture now. When they come out of prison we want wider society to be less of a culture shock if rehabilitation is to work.

You can't make prison too soft or people will want to go. Also, TV doesn't improve the mind as much as books do. Why do you think it is called 'the boob tube'? Magazines and newspapers will ensure people know what is going on in the world. For criminals that can't read, classes can be set up and lower level books (like PG and G rated comics such as 'Garfield' and 'Peanuts' ) can be provided.

[Freiheit Reich]

Do We even need police?

Answer: Yes. Unless you want gangs and mob rule and vigilantes avenging every perceived wrong ever nut-bar in the country assumes was afflicted upon them by another. They are the referee's we all need, but no one wants. For a social contract to exist however a trained force with civilian oversight is required to uphold said social contract.

Also, I cant believe this is a serious discussion.

Some people have even suggested the police force be volunteer.

In most nations it is voluntary (just like the military). It is made up as volunteers that are paid. It is also competitive. Not everybody is accepted into the police or military.

[Serbije]

We need police because without police there is crime.

[San Lumen]

Some people have even suggested the police force be volunteer.

In most nations it is voluntary (just like the military). It is made up as volunteers that are paid. It is also competitive. Not everybody is accepted into the police or military.

When I said volunteer I meant as in it being similar to volunteer firefighters. They get no salary.

[Freiheit Reich]

In most nations it is voluntary (just like the military). It is made up as volunteers that are paid. It is also competitive. Not everybody is accepted into the police or military.

When I said volunteer I meant as in it being similar to volunteer firefighters. They get no salary.

That might work in very small towns or as a supplement to the police force, but I can't see it working well in Mexico City or Detroit or Caracas with their extreme crime rates and huge densely populated (and often gang infested) territories to cover.

[Freiheit Reich]

We need police because without police there is crime.

Then the question becomes 'why do people need to have fear of authority to avoid committing crime? Why can't people be kinder to each other simply because they desire to be decent people? How can we fix our culture to make it less violent?

Did Native American tribes have a police force in the 18th century? I doubt it. However, they had methods to deal with troublemakers within their communities without needing a full-time police force (I am sure they had a few rapists, abusers, and violent folks within their communities as well even before Europeans entered their domain).

[San Lumen]

When I said volunteer I meant as in it being similar to volunteer firefighters. They get no salary.

That might work in very small towns or as a supplement to the police force, but I can't see it working well in Mexico City or Detroit or Caracas with their extreme crime rates and huge densely populated (and often gang infested) territories to cover.

There is no way it would work. It barely works for volunteer fire departments.

[Adamede]

We need police because without police there is crime.

Then the question becomes 'why do people need to have fear of authority to avoid committing crime? Why can't people be kinder to each other simply because they desire to be decent people? How can we fix our culture to make it less violent?

Did Native American tribes have a police force in the 18th century? I doubt it. However, they had methods to deal with troublemakers within their communities without needing a full-time police force (I am sure they had a few rapists, abusers, and violent folks within their communities as well even before Europeans entered their domain).

The Native Americans didn’t have a modern western style court system either.

And frankly I would prefer we keep that over anything else.

[Freiheit Reich]

Then the question becomes 'why do people need to have fear of authority to avoid committing crime? Why can't people be kinder to each other simply because they desire to be decent people? How can we fix our culture to make it less violent?

Did Native American tribes have a police force in the 18th century? I doubt it. However, they had methods to deal with troublemakers within their communities without needing a full-time police force (I am sure they had a few rapists, abusers, and violent folks within their communities as well even before Europeans entered their domain).

The Native Americans didn’t have a modern western style court system either.

And frankly I would prefer we keep that over anything else.

It just shows that societies can function well without the police and courts if the culture is a certain way. Perhaps they enforced their 'laws' (every society has 'laws', even if they are not written down) in smaller groups and handled things locally (like a village dealing with its people without getting the state involved). Of course, in most places this would be difficult. I can't see such a method working well in big cities like London or Chicago.

Would we need police if everybody followed the law?

[Bahia Roja]

We need police because without police there is crime.

Not necessarily. Systematic analysis of 256 findings from 58 studies by researchers at Western Illinois University and Sam Houston State University (Huntsville, TX) state: "Although the types of crime rates used in each study varied, most of the findings produced negative relationships rather than positive ones between police levels and crime rates regardless of their significance levels."

There's also this systematic review “of 62 studies and 229 findings” (1971 - 2013) by the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati.

“Findings vary considerably over time. However, compared to research standards and in comparison to effect sizes calculated for police practices in other meta-analyses, the overall effect size for police force size on crime is negative, small, and not statistically significant. Changes in research methods and units of analysis cannot account for fluctuations in findings. Finally, there is extremely little variation in police force size per capita over time, making it difficult to estimate the relationship with reliability . . . This line of research has exhausted its utility. Changing policing strategy is likely to have a greater impact on crime than adding more police.”

I don't agree with abolishing police. But, we do need some serious reforms in the police, which is something that I hope we can agree on.

[Nilokeras]

As is typical, the majority of this thread consists of pro-police people talking amongst themselves and creating imaginary arguments about anarchy while ignoring that the primary point of police abolition is not that the function of police services (law enforcement, public security, etc) should be eliminated, but that instead police services as institutions should be destroyed and reconstituted into other more accountable agencies.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

We need police because without police there is crime.

Then the question becomes 'why do people need to have fear of authority to avoid committing crime? Why can't people be kinder to each other simply because they desire to be decent people? How can we fix our culture to make it less violent?

Did Native American tribes have a police force in the 18th century? I doubt it. However, they had methods to deal with troublemakers within their communities without needing a full-time police force (I am sure they had a few rapists, abusers, and violent folks within their communities as well even before Europeans entered their domain).

That’s often much worse than modern policing. You know, murder and rape are sometimes legalized especially when committed against outsiders and low status people while at the same time low status people can be falsely accused of murder and rape and executed.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

You’re an absolute idiot if you don’t know the answer to that question. I’m so fucking tired of seeing pOliCe bAD sheep-brains like you acting as if police are the most evil force to exist. I’m willing to bet you never thought twice about this issue prior to 2020, yet now all of a sudden it’s all your angry dim-witted little mind can parrot. Law enforcement is/was present in pretty much every successful society. Why? Because degenerates and defectives enjoy tearing down and destroying structures that keep order, and they tend to wreak havoc on society if they are not detained.

Most of the so-called “unjust” killings made by the police were done towards violent lunatics who would have definitely killed others or caused excessive damage if they weren’t dealt with forcibly. That isn’t to say that there aren’t a few bad apples, but you’re infinitely stupid if you use the small flawed minority to justify getting rid of an entire organization that has served a vital purpose throughout history. No doubt you’re the exact same type of person who’ll scream “dEFUnd dA pOLiCe” in the streets, but then piss your pants and wail for the cops the minute someone triggers your social anxiety. People like you are sickening.

It’s quite amazing how many of you losers think police are bad when many of the largest riots and violent protests were spurned by the same types of people who most hate police. Criminals are more likely to hold liberal and anti-police views as well. Hmm. I wonder why.

Get a fucking clue.

Funny how I never call the police but you claim "you piss your pants and wail for the cops the minute someone triggers your social anxiety." But go off I guess.

[Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire]

As is typical, the majority of this thread consists of pro-police people talking amongst themselves and creating imaginary arguments about anarchy while ignoring that the primary point of police abolition is not that the function of police services (law enforcement, public security, etc) should be eliminated, but that instead police services as institutions should be destroyed and reconstituted into other more accountable agencies.

As I've already said before, this just sounds like police reform with extra steps.