Social If we abolish police, what do we do with violent offenders?

[MilesAbove]

"Abolishment" of the current police structure does not negate policing with experts dealing in violent offenders. It removes the need for police to deal with situations they are not suited to deal with.

The current structure of policing is a bad model. Instead of fixing it they just keep saying "pay us more or things will get worse". That's not effective or sincere. It's essentially an abusive relationship with the public.

 

[nhbbear]

"Abolishment" of the current police structure does not negate policing with experts dealing in violent offenders. It removes the need for police to deal with situations they are not suited to deal with.

The current structure of policing is a bad model. Instead of fixing it they just keep saying "pay us more or things will get worse". That's not effective or sincere. It's essentially an abusive relationship with the public.

You are way off. This isn’t about defund or moving funds, these people are wanting no more police period.

 

[nhbbear]

Also, we may finally get some answers. kaepernick is releasing 30 short stories on the abolishment of police in a few months-though they admit they don’t have all the answers. It’s one of those “just trust us and try it” things

 

[The_Renaissance]

Also, we may finally get some answers. kaepernick is releasing 30 short stories on the abolishment of police in a few months-though they admit they don’t have all the answers. It’s one of those “just trust us and try it” things

Gotta love it when a millionaire sports star, who undoubtedly has his own private security guards he can call upon and lives in a wealthy, affluent neighbourhood with no crime tells regular people they need to live their lives at the whim of violent criminals otherwise they are racists.

 

[nhbbear]

Gotta love it when a millionaire sports star, who undoubtedly has his own private security guards he can call upon and lives in a wealthy, affluent neighbourhood with no crime tells regular people they need to live their lives at the whim of violent criminals otherwise they are racists.

I just want to have someone try to explain to me how the escape from
New York style neighborhoods with their own crime lords will be so much better than what we have now-the dangers of which to “black and brown bodies” are so ridiculously overexaggerated they they count armed people attacking police amongst their numbers to make it seem so much worse. Mkhia bryant will be included in those numbers and police action took her life but saved another-so yeah, we have to stop that shit right now. Rather than take the amount of unarmed black men killed by police and comparing that to the whole populations, they include all blacks-even the armed and shooting ones, in their numbers to make it look
More dire than it is to try to get to this utopia endgame that will be drastically worse for everyone.

 

[The_Renaissance]

I just want to have someone try to explain to me how the escape from
New York style neighborhoods with their own crime lords will be so much better than what we have now-the dangers of which to “black and brown bodies” are so ridiculously overexaggerated they they count armed people attacking police amongst their numbers to make it seem so much worse. Mkhia bryant will be included in those numbers and police action took her life but saved another-so yeah, we have to stop that shit right now. Rather than take the amount of unarmed black men killed by police and comparing that to the whole populations, they include all blacks-even the armed and shooting ones, in their numbers to make it look
More dire than it is to try to get to this utopia endgame that will be drastically worse for everyone.

Couldn't agree more. The demand for this stuff far exceeds the supply.

 

[Queen B]

Most of the time, the police are never needed and causes more problems than they solve

This article lists examples of when people didnt call the police and it may have adverted disaster



#1

That’s the same mindset Leah Knox, a 36-year-old sales operation analyst from Greensboro, North Carolina, took when someone pulling out of a gas station hit her car in October.

The driver appeared to be a Latino teenager, who was also very stressed and scared. Sensing his fear, she didn’t want to put any more pressure on him by calling the cops. So Knox told him that if he could exchange his insurance information with her and admit fault, they both could move on without getting the police involved. He cooperated completely, and his insurance came through and paid for the repairs.

#2

Marie Reimers, a white, 28-year-old legal aid attorney, believes that too. She was at home in Detroit on March 23 when her dog started barking and going berserk. She tried not to overthink it: Maybe she was being paranoid. Maybe it was directed at the cat, she thought.

But Reimers slowly realized it wasn’t her imagination. An intruder had broken in. And calling the police for help wasn’t an option. Police scare Reimers more than any home intruder could.
So, as an unknown person wandered around her first floor, Reimers barricaded her bedroom door on the second floor and started to text friends to let them know what was going on. And for reasons that she still can’t explain, she also posted about what was happening on Twitter.

“There is currently someone robbing my house. I am upstairs safe and fine but not sure what to do? I was hoping they would just leave. They haven't,” Reimers tweeted. She added: “If any of you call the cops I will murder you. I do not want cops at my house.”

Reimers now believes the intruder was a local homeless woman who has a mental illness and had come by and dropped off gifts on her porch before.
“When I realized that, I was even more thankful that I didn’t call the police,” she said.

#3

JeAnnette Singleton heard gunfire outside her home in Warren, Ohio, one night in August 2020. Two days later, she saw bullet holes in her and her son's cars. She was scared. But she knew she wouldn't call the police.
Singleton wanted someone to investigate the bullet holes. Yet she had to consider the optics. Officers might look at the damage and turn to her son, who just happens to wear his hair in locs. She worried they would assume he was a drug dealer or a gang member. They could hurt him, she thought, or more likely do nothing at all.

 

[Scerpi]

Most of the time, the police are never needed and causes more problems than they solve

This article lists examples of when people didnt call the police and it may have adverted disaster



#1


#2


#3

I'm sure Tionna Bonner would disagree with you

 

[Queen B]

I'm sure Tionna Bonner would disagree with you

That was a clear case for the need of social/mental health worker

 

[Here's the thing]

This is a question I often ask when reading about the abolishment of police. What do we do with rapists and murderers if there are no police to respond to these crimes. What do we do with the offenders if they are known? If there are no prisons, are these offenders left in society?

I read dozens of articles looking for an answer. The common answer is that without police, we have millions of dollars or more to devote to creating jobs, equity, and equality as well as addressing the needs of potential offenders and why they commit crime. But not one of these articles presents a clear answer with what to do with people that rape and murder. The closest I got to an answer was reformative and restorative justice or having a small group of social unarmed social servants that respond to such crimes and see that the needs
Of the victims and their families are met.

Not one of the sources I was able to find answered the question. One responds with more questions such as what are police actually doing about these crimes now? In fact, they claim that police are responsible for many rapes and murders.

Simply put, they have no answer with what to do with violent offenders that rape and murder without police or prisons. I challenge anyone to provide an answer or some answer as to what to do with those who commit violence in a society without police or prisons.

I think without police, we see more people taking justice into their own hands. I think we have more crime instead of less with no way to address violence or protect victims. The most violent gangs would run their territory anyway they see fit and will be responsible for almost all the violence. The common response would be capital punishment for offenders not part of the gang. The truth is that without police, violence goes unchecked and unchallenged. These same people wanting to abolish the police would be victims themselves with no redress for their victimization and with no way to force someone to submit to their new reformative justice, their solution is worse than even the most violent police we have now. Rich people would hire armed security while the rest of the population will not have access to these services. What’s to stop mass shootings, serial killers, gang violence, snd robberies without police-even lynchings and race related violence?

Again, someone provide a non violent way to deal with rapists and murderers in a society without police or prisons.

https://transformharm.org/what-about-the-rapists-and-murderers/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/17/abolish-police-sexual-assault-violence

https://www.peoplesworld.org/articl...on-re-imagining-public-safety-and-liberation/

If we get rid of the racist, white-supremacist police who cause all the problems in the first place, we won't have any more rapists and murderers. It's common sense, bro.

 

[Here's the thing]

That was a clear case for the need of social/mental health worker

Most of the time the police are never needed and cause more problems than they solve, and that was a clear case of the need for a social/mental health worker? You nailed it!

I think the fact that crimes and murders shoot through the roof right after there is a crackdown on police brutality (immediately after a black man gets murdered by a white cop) proves your point. Keep preaching the truth Queen B, you sure know your stuff!!

 

[nhbbear]

If we get rid of the racist, white-supremacist police who cause all the problems in the first place, we won't have any more rapists and murderers. It's common sense, bro.

seems like a well thought out reply. You’re truly a treasure

 

[SmilinDesperado]

So on the one hand we have people in this thread screaming "Strawman! Strawman! Nobody of any consequence says to abolish the police!!"

Aaaaaand...here we have a US Representative, an actual FUCKING LAWMAKER, that's advocating for EXACTLY that.

"But but but...that's not really what she means!" "But but but...she's just a junior congresswoman spouting off...she doesn't REALLY matter!"

What a bunch of sad, sad ostriches that think this is inconsequential. Talk about out of touch.

Twitter can be a useful tool to get across a message, or call attention to something. And it can also be a useful tool to misinform, confuse, and mislead people. Society is failing at using social media responsibly, as well as using their brains to interpret things appropriately and in context.

My point is, in most cases, you can't get someone's full view on a matter via a tweet. These are subjects that require actual conversations.
At the same time, these politicians need to be responsible and mindful of the messages they put out there. Rashida is probably my least liked member of the Squad because she brings too much protest energy into her words, when she has the power and platform to speak intelligently and convincingly on the ideas of what the protestors are screaming.
There is too much performance going on to let protestors know that "We hear you", instead of actually saying and doing the things that would get things done. Letting protest language lead on what you do in the halls of Congress isn't smart or effective.

The messaging on the left is often really poorly done--and then you will have people that will refuse to change their rhetoric/messaging because they believe they are morally and unquestionably right, and thus, the wrong party should have to meet me on my terms, study what I've studied, and then they would obviously see that I am correct. It's a terrible approach to get people that don't like you, and think you're dumb to pay your movement any mind. Even if you are correct, you aren't going to sway anyone over to your side with this approach.
That being said, the conversation on 'defund the police' has never been "abolish the police/defund the police....And do nothing else".

If I were to go by what you're saying, you think we want to get rid of the police, jails, and then...make stopping/punishing crime illegal?
People/the media/politicians just focus on the 'defund/abolition the police' part, and ignore the rest of the demands that were made at the same time.
Defund or abolish the police is one part of a plan.
It can be defund or abolish police AND then* make a community force that patrols
* focus money on better schools--infrastructure--jobs--so that we won't create the conditions that require police,
*Have a separate force that handles traffic infractions, and have police work on more specific types of crimes.
*Decriminalize certain crimes so that we can naturally reduce police/civilian interactions
*Have community leaders and groups settle minor disputes like fights and vandalism
You can agree or disagree with some of those ideas, but even the 'abolish the police!" folks are saying 'abolish the police and do ___________"
You're just not going to get that conversation in a tweet.

 

[Loiosh]

Only the most idiotic of individuals or criminals truly want the abolishing of police . Would turn into wild west in short order.

The demonizing of police right now is doing nothing but long term damage IMO.

The "wild west" had far stricter gun laws than exist now. You weren't allowed to carry in most towns.

 

[bobgeese]

then* make a community force that patrols,Have a separate force that handles traffic infractions,
*Have community leaders and groups settle minor disputes .

You are literally suggesting police.


Unless of course you're suggesting local mobs of people who take care of crime themselves?

 

[SmilinDesperado]

You are literally suggesting police.


Unless of course you're suggesting local mobs of people who take care of crime themselves?

It'd be cool if you read the whole post, Bobby.

I said that was one of many suggestions made, and that all of those suggestions are open to debate and criticism. You would need to get into a deeper conversation on exactly what their vision of a community force is.

Obviously, a community force wouldn't have the power of the state, or the power to beat up or kill people. It also doesn't mean that the community force would handle any and all crimes. For example, they could just patrol, and handle minor issues like fights and vandalism.
There's a Muslim group that does it for their neighborhood somewhere in NY.
Again, I"m not advocating for one policy over the other---but nobody is saying "abolish the police....and let the rape and murder party begin".

 

[wheel2wheel]

These dumb people, who are pushing pushing for the ousting of the cops will realize how important of having police in your neighbourhood once they're gone

 

[The_Renaissance]

These dumb people, who are pushing pushing for the ousting of the cops will realize how important of having police in your neighbourhood once they're gone

They will be on their knees crying out for help, and the government will help - in the form of private security services. Who are even more heavy-handed and brutal than the police.

 

[the ambush]

St. Louis mayor proposes $4 million cut from police budget - TheGrio

"St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones proposed a new city budget including a $4 million cut from the police department.

According to the St. Louis Post-Disptach, Jones has shown a commitment to her promise to change the city’s approach to law enforcement and crime. On her first day in office, the freshman mayor proposed a new city budget that takes funding from the police budget and allocates the money to other causes."

FIRST DAY IN OFFICE

 

[bobgeese]

It'd be cool if you read the whole post, Bobby.

I said that was one of many suggestions made, and that all of those suggestions are open to debate and criticism. You would need to get into a deeper conversation on exactly what their vision of a community force is.

Obviously, a community force wouldn't have the power of the state, or the power to beat up or kill people. It also doesn't mean that the community force would handle any and all crimes. For example, they could just patrol, and handle minor issues like fights and vandalism.
There's a Muslim group that does it for their neighborhood somewhere in NY.
Again, I"m not advocating for one policy over the other---but nobody is saying "abolish the police....and let the rape and murder party begin".

And how exactly does a community force handle a fight?