What exactly is the purpose of the police?

tjohn said:

drummerboy said:

jimmurphy said:

You know, I find myself agreeing with a lot of posts in this thread- last post is a good example.

I guess the thing that annoys me is the thread title, which strikes me as similar to the failed “Defund the Police” line.

No doubt there are many police abuses, and that conservative Asshats are drawn to that line of work, but do you really question the purpose of the police?

We have an uptick in crime lately. Sensationalized by the right, yes.

But would you feel safer if the police did not exist?

Must the focus be on the outliers?

we went through this in an earlier part of the thread. I think the only thing we ended up agreeing on was that the police actually played a positive role in stopping speeders.

Other than that they are completely reactive and have practically no effect on crime rates, which is the basic point of the thread title. And they kinda suck at solving crimes too.

They definitely don't do anything to justify the outrageous amounts of money and privilege they get.

Not that it will ever happen (as we can see from the hysterical reactions to "defund the police") but it's an institution that should be scrapped and redesigned from the bottom up.

Policing needs to be reformed in place.  Starting over isn't an option.  I don't really feel like becoming a gun owner while Drummerboy reinvents policing.

lol

anyway, of course starting over isn't an option. we never start over to fix things.

and the prospect of reform has been poisoned by "defund" anyway. The dems reaction to defund was to give cops more money.

I read an interesting tweet the other day that proposed that maybe the best solution is to actually militarize the police, maybe at the state level. Not by giving them weapons so they can play soldier, but by running them according to military discipline and training and chain of command.

It wasn't really fleshed out, but sounded like an interesting idea.


drummerboy said:


I read an interesting tweet the other day that proposed that maybe the best solution is to actually militarize the police, maybe at the state level. Not by giving them weapons so they can play soldier, but by running them according to military discipline and training and chain of command.

It wasn't really fleshed out, but sounded like an interesting idea.

The military isn't immune to corruption.  But still, an idea worth exploring.

As an aside, one of the building security guys where I worked was an Army M.P. and was training to become a police officer in Perth Amboy.  He said that the rules governing the use of deadly force were stricter in the Army.


tjohn said:

drummerboy said:

I read an interesting tweet the other day that proposed that maybe the best solution is to actually militarize the police, maybe at the state level. Not by giving them weapons so they can play soldier, but by running them according to military discipline and training and chain of command.

It wasn't really fleshed out, but sounded like an interesting idea.

The military isn't immune to corruption.

...

I know. I know.

Believe me, for me to think that militarization is better than what we've got shows you how desperate I am here.


For any system that you want to change, you need to focus on feedback loops. If the consequences of actions don't come back in some form to affect the actor, there's no reason to expect any change. That's as true for social systems as mechanical ones.

The police are too insulated from the effects of their action, IMO, and any effective reform needs to target that. The police know this too -- hence the fierce resistance to any accountability measures.


good piece on the effects of police militarization (i.e. giving them silly weapons).

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/police-training-militarization-mass-shootings-uvalde/661295/

If paywalled, try a different browser.


Have you caught up with this? 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/07/alabama-city-disbands-police-force-racist-text-messages-revealed

How unwise/puerile too have this conversation via traceable social edit in the first place, let alone ‘in this day and age’. It doesn’t matter if the cultural demographics of the town don’t reflect much diversity; we should all know better by now ESPECIALLY if we work in such responsible positions. 

*still shaking my head in disbelief*


joanne said:

Have you caught up with this? 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/07/alabama-city-disbands-police-force-racist-text-messages-revealed

How unwise/puerile too have this conversation via traceable social edit in the first place, let alone ‘in this day and age’. It doesn’t matter if the cultural demographics of the town don’t reflect much diversity; we should all know better by now ESPECIALLY if we work in such responsible positions. 

*still shaking my head in disbelief*

these people really don’t care anymore. They are hoping for a race war to justify their itching fingers. 


Jaytee, on top of everything else going on?? Unbelievable. 
And yet in Washington the healthcare care bill was passed, giving a glimmer of hope.   If this were all written into a novel, I just wouldn’t believe it.  (Haven’t read or watched Handmaid’s Tale, so all that sexist power-playing just baffles me too)


joanne said:


And yet in Washington the healthcare care bill was passed, giving a glimmer of hope.

Glimmer is right. There are good things but don't expect real healthcare cost medical insurance reforms.

For example, like the big ado about Medicare being able to negotiate drug prices. The thing is it doesn't take effect until 2026 and then only 10 drugs can be selected for negotiation. A joke. Also, should the Republicans take control before they'll be able to reverse that teeny little glimmer.

Then we have the Republicans blocking the law to cap insulin drug prices in private insurance plans. The senate parliamentarian ruled that a $35-per-month limit law on insulin costs did not comply with the budget reconciliation process which would have allowed Democrats to pass that bill with a bare majority. So they needed 60 votes which are not available due to Republican intransigence.

But if the Democrats really wanted, they could have disregarded the parliamentarian and passed that with a simple majority. Its just a senate rule, not a law. Rules or standards change as we saw when the Republicans refused to put Obama's SC nomination before the senate and then reversing themselves to push Trump's replacement for Ginsburg through.


RTrent said:

joanne said:


And yet in Washington the healthcare care bill was passed, giving a glimmer of hope.

Glimmer is right. There are good things but don't expect real healthcare cost medical insurance reforms.

For example, like the big ado about Medicare being able to negotiate drug prices. The thing is it doesn't take effect until 2026 and then only 10 drugs can be selected for negotiation. A joke. Also, should the Republicans take control before they'll be able to reverse that teeny little glimmer.

Then we have the Republicans blocking the law to cap insulin drug prices in private insurance plans. The senate parliamentarian ruled that a $35-per-month limit law on insulin costs did not comply with the budget reconciliation process which would have allowed Democrats to pass that bill with a bare majority. So they needed 60 votes which are not available due to Republican intransigence.

But if the Democrats really wanted, they could have disregarded the parliamentarian and passed that with a simple majority. Its just a senate rule, not a law. Rules or standards change as we saw when the Republicans refused to put Obama's SC nomination before the senate and then reversing themselves to push Trump's replacement for Ginsburg through.

The Dem leadership sure does seem to enjoy getting ****.


Police get your goat?

Well, I’m sure your local coverage is full of similar puns.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/02/goat-cedar-county-fair-auction-california
I’m kinda surprised at the lack of compassion, and the over-reaction to a young schoolchild’s  natural nurturing tendency in an animal husbandry program. Especially after a year of family trauma. Surely they could have forgiven the auction, per the mother’s request on condition the family ‘sponsors’ another kid-goat for next season’s auction?  


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.

Advertise here!

Sponsored Business

Find Business

Rentals