Maybe you should throw more money at the problem. This eventually will help. Right?
Too bad we've never tried that with K-12 in living memory.
I have a feeling the results would be very different than giving money to
the capital defense force"law enforcement."Surely, if we just give the police 80% of our cities budget instead of 70%, they’ll stop murdering innocent people and harassing minorities!
Many cities are literally being held hostage by their police force, who threaten to not only not do their jobs if held responsible for their actions or if their budget is lowered, in some instances police themselves will vow to become criminals if they are held to account.
The police system is literally strong men blackmailing entire communities into funding their own oppression.
Police don't prevent crime, they don't even solve crime, and they don't protect people. The only thing they do with any competence is traffic control. We don't need them.
Now thinking of it.
-If a crime happens, police are under no obligation to stop it.
-Once the crime happened, the solving if the crime falls under the jurisdiction of non-police (forensics, detectives, etc)
That means the only thing they do is abuse people on demand of those in power.
The only thing they do with any competence is traffic control.
They do? If that was the case, wouldn't they actually do something with the rampant amount of bikes without mufflers?
Also free Paid Vacation.
Civilian oversight and budget appropriation are an important step.
And by oversight I mean complete voting and staffing powers
Make payouts come out of the pension fund. Shit would clean up real quick.
@BartsBigBugBag Why would it be difficult to make sure the money goes into training? Usually government entities don't get to decide what they're spending money on...
Why would the training be any different than it has been previously? We don’t need more Dante Wrights training people, we need less police killing people. The easiest way to do that is to have less police and to give them less money. The majority of the functions police currently serve in our society are better served by civilians. Police departments take up to 70% of their entire cities budget, significantly cutting into programs that actually help people, like Eugene’s CAHOOTS program or subsidized housing.
You don’t lower crime by increasing criminalization. You lower crime by improving conditions for those most likely to commit criminal acts, the disaffected, the poor, the homeless, and the deranged. You lower crime by putting more money into direct methods of assistance, and preventing the situations that create criminality.
Is there an example of this happening? Would the money not be earmarked?
You'd think the fact that despite all the money for "training" the keep killing more and more people, would be evidence enough?
Well, the implication of the comic is that funds for police training go to police militarization. I'm asking if this actually happened, but like you suggest it's probably more of a vibes thing.
It seemed like a more specific claim. The culture problems could just be really bad, or the training was lazy or likely both.
Even in instances where it is used for training, often the training itself is problematic.
The answer is not to give more money to police, who already take on average between 30-70% of the entire budget in their cities. The answer is to work towards abolishing the police. This is done a few ways, all simultaneously, and a good first step is things like Eugene Oregons CAHOOTS program or Denver’s STARS program.
See: https://whitebirdclinic.org/what-is-cahoots/
And: https://www.denverpost.com/2022/02/20/denver-star-program-expansion/Even if you believe in the myth that police are there to protect, 90% of the functions they currently serve have nothing to do with protection, but rather their primary purpose is to ensure compliance and subordination to the systems. Policing is inherently right wing work, and will forever attract primarily right wing individuals.
The vast majority of police functions could and are better served by civilians. So even in you believe that we need police, there’s evidence to show that we don’t need police performing nearly as many functions as they do now. If they are to remain, they should remain only as acute crisis response teams, on a primarily volunteer basis, much in the way the fire department works.
their primary purpose is to ensure compliance and subordination to the systems.
Is the government not to ensure compliance? I don't see how most laws would work if you don't need to comply with them. The threat of violence is rarely used, but I would think it still needs to be there in some capacity.
