Biden is not for defunding the police. He is for putting restrictions and regulations on the money local police forces receive from the feds.
I am hoping this is more in line with what people are meaning when they say "Defund the Police". https://www.npr.org/sections/live-u...n-n-j-force-police-need-consent-of-the-people
Im for big reform but defunding police as an anti police tactic I question? I'm always for defunding agencies and departments that are not needed.
I haven't heard him speak out on it as yet, many politicians are afraid to take a stand one way or the other.
If this is the only way to break the toxic police unions and their culture of protect and serve the policemen on the back of the vulnerable population... I am fine with it.
Defunding it in order to restructure it with new rules is the method that makes sense, I do not think anyone believes that a police as a concept is one that makes no sense, what makes no sense is a police with authority and no regulation, responsibility and the ability to enforce changes - that's basically tax-payer funded anarchistic militia.
well, it's pretty goddamn close to an unmitigated disaster right now I guess people haven't been paying close attention to this because the police reform movement didn't just start 3 months ago. It's been going on for decades. And thru it all, the police have simply accumulated more power and shed more accountability. In many cities now, police & their unions have become completely unresponsive to civilian oversight. Reforms haven't worked; review boards don't work; oversight doesn't work. Police departments have become more obstinate; more militarized; more brutal; and less accountable. And thru their unions they have managed to game the legal system heavily in their favor so why the fuck should city councils and mayors and normal citizens think that if reformers just work a little harder and have a little more patience, they'll be able to break down the blue walls when those same blue walls are thicker, higher, and more impenetrable than they were 10 or 20, or 30 years ago? That dog don't hunt. George Floyd died 65 years after Emmet Till was lynched the one lever the cities can pull is the budget. De-funding is as much about leverage as it is about reform and a new normal. If police and their out-of-control unions resist any meaningful change and fight any attempt at legitimate oversight, then slash their fucking budgets....by a lot. It's time for all those good cops that people keep talking about to step up and break that thin blue line because the line is thick, not thin, and the blue is stained red with the blood of victims like George Floyd and Tamir Rice
All the people that complain that good cops will be let go / suffer through no fault of their own if there is a de-funding of the police are basically complaining that people who did no wrong are hurt through no fault of their own other than association to a group...
Well okay then. I guess you guys want crime rates to skyrocket as well. Because that will happen if you defund the police.
Actually if you focus the police it's been shown the crime goes down. There are a few very good examples of this. Go read about Camden, NJ. They defunded their police department years ago and then expanded the county sheriff's office. There has been some good and bad and I'm not providing links because it's something that you should look for in your favorite news sources. Google it, read about it. Then go read about crime in Colorado since pot was legalized. Their taxing of the pot was better than ours, some money went to specific police programs. Combine that also with the police not having to deal with pot anymore and they were able to focus on solving real crimes. Then there is the fact that police have long enjoyed increased funding at the expense of reducing services in other areas. Biggest one: Mental health. In Portland we're training police to do mental health evaluations. That's not their job and a 2 week class doesn't help the community. This leads to increased homelessness. The police aren't going to refer people to mental health and services. Then look at how the police are still agents for the DMV. The police can run your plate and know instantly if your car has valid registration and insurance. Yet still they ask for these things because they're required too. These are civil tickets. So much of what the police do isn't solving or stopping crime. It's getting stats so they can claim they're doing things. Defunding is also another term for refocusing. We need to refocus police to stop crime.
Agree, and accountability should start with the local governments to establish the needed standards. The mayor usually appoints the commissioner If he/she isn’t doing it themselves. With superb leadership in critical areas as this, there should be positive results.
There needs to be performance reviews that are more than a formality for the police. Measure each cop objectively by criteria established from a representation of those heading up the new reforms. Cannot let the union be a short circuit to getting something done.
If defunding is another term for refocusing then I suggest using the term refocusing. Defunding by definition means reducing the amount of funds available to the organization. I don't believe that is an appropriate action to take.
The refocusing may necessarily take some of the public safety focus off of cops and onto other measures that reduce the crime rate. If so, we'd be spending less on the police (defunding) and spending more on other public safety measures. It's all about the most efficient way to spend money to create safer communities--the answer may not be "throw more cops at it."
I say cut the money off from districts that are failing terribly to protect and serve....start there...regroup and reallocate public service funds to groups that keep neighborhoods clean, fed and out of trouble....the Black Panthers were very successful in ghettos by holding fish fries and feeding poor people while getting them to register to vote...When the cops start passing out food and providing homeless with simple shelters...they'll be viewed as protectors instead of feared as henchmen
wait...you're in favor of reform just as long as it isn't called de-funding? how about this then: "we plan on revising budgetary priorities and reallocating limited resources, and the police will not be exempt from that process" is that better?
