"Defund the police" was a spectacular bad slogan for a position that usually boiled down to "stop paying for police to do stuff that isn't policing, and spend the money on specialists instead." Akin to removing ambulance-driving from police duties in the 60s and creating a trained, professional paramedic corps.
"Defund the police" was a spectacular bad slogan for a position that usually boiled down to "stop paying for police to do stuff that isn't policing, and spend the money on specialists instead." Akin to removing ambulance-driving from police duties in the 60s and creating a trained, professional paramedic corps.
For another example, if you spend the money you were using to give police an often inadequate level of training in social work to hire actual social workers, you are defunding the police, but almost every actual police officer will be grateful for having one less societal problem they're expected to fix. We've basically put every social problem except fires and people who need emergency stabilization on police to fix.
IOW, "Reform the Police" would have been a much better slogan and was even recommended. Yet it was rejected. Why? I think that is because there are some on the radical left who do want to defund and eliminate the police. They believe that police themselves cause crime because of their activities, especially in communities of color.
I think this absolute rubbish, as do most of those communities of color. See my prior comment on white liberals and their paid talking heads not understanding the people they deem to represent.
I read recently about a community (I wish I could remember where) that started sending social workers instead of police on certain types of calls and with over 2000 calls never had one that needed to call for police backup. De-escalation is a much better approach in many situations.
According to a recent report, it takes up to 8% of the 911 burden off the local police but does, in turn, need backup or accompaniment from the police about 8% of the time:
CAHOOTS does a lot of welfare checks (which police are often asked, but ill-equipped, to do), and has special skill in handling situations which may look violent to police but probably aren't (like mental illness and excited intoxication). It seems to have saved Eugene lives and money.
But the left wasn’t messaging it. The Republicans heard someone somewhere say it, and ran with it. I guess the Dems lacked message discipline in being to slow to disavow it, but I honestly never heard a Democratic official say it.
"Defund the police" was a spectacular bad slogan for a position that usually boiled down to "stop paying for police to do stuff that isn't policing, and spend the money on specialists instead." Akin to removing ambulance-driving from police duties in the 60s and creating a trained, professional paramedic corps.
For another example, if you spend the money you were using to give police an often inadequate level of training in social work to hire actual social workers, you are defunding the police, but almost every actual police officer will be grateful for having one less societal problem they're expected to fix. We've basically put every social problem except fires and people who need emergency stabilization on police to fix.
IOW, "Reform the Police" would have been a much better slogan and was even recommended. Yet it was rejected. Why? I think that is because there are some on the radical left who do want to defund and eliminate the police. They believe that police themselves cause crime because of their activities, especially in communities of color.
I think this absolute rubbish, as do most of those communities of color. See my prior comment on white liberals and their paid talking heads not understanding the people they deem to represent.
I read recently about a community (I wish I could remember where) that started sending social workers instead of police on certain types of calls and with over 2000 calls never had one that needed to call for police backup. De-escalation is a much better approach in many situations.
I think that was made up. I read it somewhere as something that might work.perhaps in a non violent domestic dispute
It was Denver https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/02/06/denver-sent-mental-health-help-not-police-hundreds-calls/4421364001/
Why do you think it was made up? I do think it was from a major media source.
There's CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets) in Eugene, OR:
https://www.eugene-or.gov/4508/CAHOOTS
According to a recent report, it takes up to 8% of the 911 burden off the local police but does, in turn, need backup or accompaniment from the police about 8% of the time:
https://www.eugene-or.gov/DocumentCenter/View/56717/CAHOOTS-Program-Analysis
CAHOOTS does a lot of welfare checks (which police are often asked, but ill-equipped, to do), and has special skill in handling situations which may look violent to police but probably aren't (like mental illness and excited intoxication). It seems to have saved Eugene lives and money.
All true, but the slogan is exhibit A of the lack of message discipline on the left.
I think because it's not a monolith. You have some far left and some left of center and many who can support various views neither right or left.
But the left wasn’t messaging it. The Republicans heard someone somewhere say it, and ran with it. I guess the Dems lacked message discipline in being to slow to disavow it, but I honestly never heard a Democratic official say it.
Cori Bush, Ayanna Pressley said it directly. This odor spread over the whole party because it was not disavowed immediately and repeatedly.