Need your input: statistics on necessity of police

[HIMBOB]

I don't have facts but I think the below is clearly logical.

Every person and business would join a gang to most widely distribute the costs of their own protection of life and property.
So you'd have numerous quasi police forces protecting their members.

All would compete for business as scale is power.

They would also fight when their member claims to be wronged by another groups member.

All would have a separate method for establishing merits of a claim. Thus fighting between groups would be nearly constant.

In summary it is a laughably stupid idea that would advantage no one.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Wow....

The mediha wants you to believe in the purge, but the only purge that would happen would be 11-15 year old girls listening to dad's more, and maybe wives not being able to literally or figuratively spit in the faces of their husbands.

 

[Cid]

Because you can't approach a problem that has a small sample size the same way you would with massive numbers. That doesn't correlate.

This argument can be used for just about any reason. Racial make up, wealth, population density/lack thereof.

China constantly publicly executes people for non violent drug offenses. India is a third world country and doesn't keep good data on anything. Of the data that is kept on anything anywhere by Western countries, just the Punjab, which is the extreme Northwest portion of India, reports 1 million plus specifically heroin users in an area a little bit larger than Nevada. So India clearly has a much worse drug problem than we do.

It also has 10x the population of Nevada.

Lets double the number for a rough estimate of addicted/previously addicted like you listed for cocaine in America. I doubt a country like India is very effective at treating addicts.

2 million and 28 mil population. Your cocaine stats were 27/325 IIRC.

1/14 and 1/12 approx. Not really a huge difference.


There's a whole bunch of better reasons you can use to dismiss comparison. Like what you did with China.

Population still seems like the weakest one. Punjab is the closest part of India to Afghanistan which produces most of the worlds heroin. I'd wager distance from manufacturing hubs is also a much bigger factor than population.

I have little doubt that being miles away from everywhere helps my country.

 

[MaxMMA]

This is just terrible, awful posting. Yes, the police deter crime. Far from all of it, but far, far more than would occur if they didn't exist. You act like you know something about cops and criminals and then go on to act like you don't know anyone who hasn't been caught red handed in the act of committing a crime by a police officer. You also seem to think that the Police are one monolithic block and police the entire country as one entity. This is just an awful post.

I know both cops and criminals. And no, I've never known anyone personally that was caught red handed by the police. I'm not saying it never happens but the amount of cops to civilians makes it highly unlikely that you will be caught red handed by a law enforcement official. More often than not a perp is fingered by a civilian who then notifies law enforcement.

And where in my post am I advocating that the police should not exist? I'm merely saying their effectiveness would not be hindered if they operated in a similar way to the fire departmentments.

I'm well aware that the police operate out of different departments and counties. That doesn't change the fact that they all basically do the same job.

 

[MaxMMA]

I can tell by your post that you assume the very few people you know represent everyone, everywhere as well as your knowledge, is the worlds only knowledge.

I see you haven't actually refueted any of the claims in my post. I'm going to assume that's because you can't.

Besides traffic citation revenue being drastically reduced how would PDs operating in a similar way to FDs affect the effectiveness of law enforcement?

Unless you can pull up some statistics that show me a large portion of crimes are prevented by police randomly encountering crimes in progress, this is where I stand on the issue.

 

[lfd0311]

I know both cops and criminals. And no, I've never known anyone personally that was caught red handed by the police. I'm not saying it never happens but the amount of cops to civilians makes it highly unlikely that you will be caught red handed by a law enforcement official. More often than not a perp is fingered by a civilian who then notifies law enforcement.

And where in my post am I advocating that the police should not exist? I'm merely saying their effectiveness would not be hindered if they operated in a similar way to the fire departmentments.

I'm well aware that the police operate out of different departments and counties. That doesn't change the fact that they all basically do the same job.

The majority of people are hindered from commiting crimes by the mere threat of the police. Patrols hinder crime. That's a simple fact. That's why police don't operate like fire departments. Because if they did, the crime rate would sky rocket.

 

[trident]

Where and when was this?

'Murica

 

[lfd0311]

This argument can be used for just about any reason. Racial make up, wealth, population density/lack thereof.



It also has 10x the population of Nevada.

Lets double the number for a rough estimate of addicted/previously addicted like you listed for cocaine in America. I doubt a country like India is very effective at treating addicts.

2 million and 28 mil population. Your cocaine stats were 27/325 IIRC.

1/14 and 1/12 approx. Not really a huge difference.


There's a whole bunch of better reasons you can use to dismiss comparison. Like what you did with China.

Population still seems like the weakest one. Punjab is the closest part of India to Afghanistan which produces most of the worlds heroin. I'd wager distance from manufacturing hubs is also a much bigger factor than population.

I have little doubt that being miles away from everywhere helps my country.

It's actually 37 million. There is 27 million more cocaine specific addicts in the US than people in Portugal. And again, that's one specific drug per country. That isn't counting all of the other illegal ones or even the legal ones. So the logistics and organization neccessary to deal with that amount of people is much different than dealing with a smaller number of people. It isn't just a cost issue. It's also a logistics issue.

 

[lfd0311]

The mediha wants you to believe in the purge, but the only purge that would happen would be 11-15 year old girls listening to dad's more, and maybe wives not being able to literally or figuratively spit in the faces of their husbands.

Sure thing, guy.

 

[MaxMMA]

The majority of people are hindered from commiting crimes by the mere threat of the police. Patrols hinder crime. That's a simple fact. That's why police don't operate like fire departments. Because if they did, the crime rate would sky rocket.

Is that indeed a fact or just your opinion because it sounds like your opinion.

Units are on patrol to issue traffic citations. Patrols don't hinder crime because of two reasons.
1. Most patrol cars are set up in speed traps and traffic control.
2. As I've already stated twice, there aren't enough police on patrol to catch crimes in progress given the amount of crime that takes place.

Most people are conscious of where they commit crimes because of potential witnesses that will then report the crime to the police. Not because they think a random patrol car will drive by the exact moment they are making a handoff or walking armed into a liquor store.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

NO is considered part of the west now?

Still not close to as violent as movies make it out to be. It was actually rather peacefull compared to the rest of america at that time. Property rights were enforced in the west etc.

Excuse me, we are talking about MURDERS here...care to provide any stats proving that other crime rates were lower? There are none that are lower. This is how horse thieving got to the point where you were hanged for it. it was done too often.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

I see you haven't actually refueted any of the claims in my post. I'm going to assume that's because you can't.

What points? That YOU knew some criminals and they thought differently? A thing you provided as a counter to my points which actually hold up via statistics...

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Is that indeed a fact or just your opinion because it sounds like your opinion.

Units are on patrol to issue traffic citations. Patrols don't hinder crime because of two reasons.
1. Most patrol cars are set up in speed traps and traffic control.

You are the one presenting opinions here...

Not everywhere is a CITY or middle class suburb...where they have speed traps...there are even states that have laws against speed traps.

Thus, your points, aka opinion, holds no ground due to data that exists outside it...let alone the FACT, not opinion, that speed traps are a NEW thing, thus there was a time when police, did what you say they dont today!

 

[MaxMMA]

What points? That YOU knew some criminals and they thought differently? A thing you provided as a counter to my points which actually hold up via statistics...

You are the one presenting opinions here...

Not everywhere is a CITY or middle class suburb...where they have speed traps...there are even states that have laws against speed traps.

Thus, your points, aka opinion, holds no ground due to data that exists outside it...let alone the FACT, not opinion, that speed traps are a NEW thing, thus there was a time when police, did what you say they dont today!

You're not even replying to my entire posts. Are you going to refute the other points I have posted about YOUR opinion or are you going to cherry pick my posts to try to make yourself look smart?

Even if speed traps are illegal the cops in the other states will still fill the same purpose except they will just hang out on the road in plain view instead of in hiding.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Why do you think that?

The lack of police hardly equates to a lack of morality or consequences. People who are harmed are free to seek retribution, which is likely as much or more of a deterrent than being found guilty in a court of law and subsequently punished by the system.

 

[The Sole Survivor]

Oh, Cool. Portugal did something? Awesome. This is what I hate about these sort of arguments. There are about 27 million more people living in the US who are either current or recovering cocaine users than live in all of Portugal. That's one single drug. So stop using that tiny ass country as an example of something.

https://www.google.com/search?sourc........0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131._UKNxFngM4k

https://drugabuse.com/library/crack-history-and-statistics/

So because there are more drug users its not comparable? What????
Sounds like the US should do what Portugal is doing then huh?
All drugs decriminalized and all you can do is say "its a small country"
instead of realizing the big picture and see how ALL drug crime and use went down.
It worked and all you do is make excuses.

The massive hole in this logic is glaring. Having a gun and knowing how to use and be responsible with one are two vastly different things. Plus, some idiot rolling around with a gun is far more likely to shoot you or your dog, intentionally or otherwise, than the Police are.

Ok now I know you are trolling. Cops are more likely to shoot me or my dogs then some random person off the street. Hell even the UPS makes fun of cops since they shoot so many dogs. Link here.
https://www.facebook.com/upsdogs/

Not an argument at all. Decriminalizing drugs is not the same as having no police. That gun will surely help when a gang of 50 armed assholes invade your house. I don´t think you even know what exactly decriminalizing means.

Yes we know you have no argument no need to tell me.
Just like dont think you know what a gun is. Learn what they are and learn to protect yourself. Cops already do not have to legally protect you.
Also when was the last time a "gang of 50" invaded anyones house?
Unless you mean the 1985 Move bombing?
I remember when cops ganged up and blew up a few neighborhoods though...
Cops dropped a bomb, yes a bomb, on a neighborhood, setting miles of houses on fire....I think it was close to 75 houses lost...
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/05/18/407665820/why-did-we-forget-the-move-bombing

 

[lfd0311]

So because there are more drug users its not comparable? What????
Sounds like the US should do what Portugal is doing then huh?
All drugs decriminalized and all you can do is say "its a small country"
instead of realizing the big picture and see how ALL drug crime and use went down.
It worked and all you do is make excuses.

First of all, all drugs were not decriminalized. You're off base from the start of your argument. They did widen the amount of drugs you could have legally. So you first need to know and understand what you're even arguing on behalf of to argue it correctly, which you clearly don't.

Ok now I know you are trolling. Cops are more likely to shoot me or my dogs then some random person off the street. Hell even the UPS makes fun of cops since they shoot so many dogs. Link here.
https://www.facebook.com/upsdogs/

UPS? Cool, guy. Does UPS serve warrants and forcibly enter people's houses? No? Call me when they do. Then that comparisson won't be total shit. I get it you're a Libertarian. But try not have such trash arguments. It's these two arguments specifically why Libertarians will never be a popular, mainstream party.

 

[lfd0311]

Is that indeed a fact or just your opinion because it sounds like your opinion.

Units are on patrol to issue traffic citations. Patrols don't hinder crime because of two reasons.
1. Most patrol cars are set up in speed traps and traffic control.
2. As I've already stated twice, there aren't enough police on patrol to catch crimes in progress given the amount of crime that takes place

Oh boy.... Claims I'm stating my opinion, proceeds to list off a bunch of opinions...

No. "Most" patrol cars are not out running traffic control on any given day. In fact in most P.D.s, no matter the size there is an entire divison just for traffic.

The entire rest of Officers on duty at the time are on patrol in a specific area. That presence alone is enough to deter large amounts of crime. Note how I didn't say "all".

Most people are conscious of where they commit crimes because of potential witnesses that will then report the crime to the police. Not because they think a random patrol car will drive by the exact moment they are making a handoff or walking armed into a liquor store.

You're at this point talking about hard core criminals who are going to commit crimes regardless of the consequences. No amount of deterent is going to stop them. The Police frankly aren't even trying to deter them because they can't be deterred. You don't seem to understand the divide in the two groups.

 

[The Sole Survivor]

First of all, all drugs were not decriminalized. You're off base from the start of your argument. They did widen the amount of drugs you could have legally. So you first need to know and understand what you're even arguing on behalf of to argue it correctly, which you clearly don't.




UPS? Cool, guy. Does UPS serve warrants and forcibly enter people's houses? No? Call me when they do. Then that comparisson won't be total shit. I get it you're a Libertarian. But try not have such trash arguments. It's these two arguments specifically why Libertarians will never be a popular, mainstream party.

Ah troll confirmed. Last response to you.
All drugs in Portugal where decriminalized, reading goes along way.... But you are a troll.
https://news.vice.com/article/ungas...-after-decriminalization-drugs-weed-to-heroin
"Today, Portuguese authorities don't arrest anyone found holding what's considered less than a 10-day supply of an illicit drug — a gram of heroin, ecstasy, or amphetamine, two grams of cocaine, or 25 grams of cannabis"
http://time.com/longform/portugal-drug-use-decriminalization/
But in 2001, Portugal took a radical step. It became the first country in the world to decriminalize the consumption of all drugs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
"The drug policy of Portugal was put in place in 2001, and was legally effective from July 2001. The new law maintained the status of illegality for using or possessing any drug for personal use without authorization. However, the offense was changed from a criminal one, with prison a possible punishment, to an administrative one if the amount possessed was no more than a ten-day supply of that substance."

So you now admit cops do kill more dogs then the average person because they forcibly enter houses?
Bye troll.

 

[MaxMMA]

Oh boy.... Claims I'm stating my opinion, proceeds to list off a bunch of opinions...

No. "Most" patrol cars are not out running traffic control on any given day. In fact in most P.D.s, no matter the size there is an entire divison just for traffic.

The entire rest of Officers on duty at the time are on patrol in a specific area. That presence alone is enough to deter large amounts of crime. Note how I didn't say "all".



You're at this point talking about hard core criminals who are going to commit crimes regardless of the consequences. No amount of deterent is going to stop them. The Police frankly aren't even trying to deter them because they can't be deterred. You don't seem to understand the divide in the two groups.

Actually I'm talking about ALL criminals. Including the millions of people that work in the drug trade. If you think the police patrols deter them from doing their "work" then you are out of your mind.

I guess you think the cops parading around on social media with their 5lb drug busts are denting the drug trade and making others think twice about making the easiest money they'll ever make in their entire lives.

Let's get back to the units working traffic. Which have the highest presence on the street. They can't even deter regular people from speeding or parking illegally and you think police patrols make people think twice about doing things above that?

Unbelievable.