How will defunding the police solve anything?

8 Answers

Relevance
  • God
    Lv 7
    4 months ago

    Defunding the police essentially means firing all the current police.  The money used for the old police force would be re-allocated to whatever the office holders decided.  If money is re-allocated the crooked politicians doing the re-allocating would keep some of it for themselves.  So defunding the police only makes the crooked politicians richer.

  • Anonymous
    4 months ago

    It can't and it won't. 

    Just like all the safety backup systems can't keep men from crashing airplanes. 

    The police, in general, have a problem.  They take their job personally.  There needs to be rules that are followed, by all police.  Police are often people with an unreasonable view of their duty and society. 

    I have a question for all: 

    Is it allowable to break the law in order to enforce the law? 

    There are SOME people in society who are going to be malevolent no matter what.  They don't seem to be trainable. Are they the true survivors?  Or should we just get rid of them?  I'm talking about the criminals and police who like to injure people. 

    Like these 2 guys: 

    https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2019/06/28/nort...

    At 3:03 while handcuffed and in custody, the officer breaks both of the man's arms.  I swear I could hear them breaking.  We need bully/thugs like this?

    https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2019/06/28/nort... 

    We need 𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗣𝗘𝗥𝗟𝗬 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗜𝗡𝗘𝗗 police officers who have no mental problems and who fear doing wrong.  We'd be better off with robots. 

    Gort:  Klaatu barada nikto!

  • sam
    Lv 5
    4 months ago

    Defunding the police is a confusing word to choose for the issue, since it doesn't really say what people protesting want it to say.

    When people hear 'defund the police', they think it means 'abolish the police', which isn't actually what most protesters want. They do want to keep the police, but they want to reconsider how much money cities put towards their police department versus social services. Also, the police have currently been given responsibilities for things they’re not trained to handle, such as mental issues and homelessness.If some of the money now spent on the police was diverted to help programs solving the root causes, such as mental health, housing and education, then many crimes would be prevented. The police could then focus on their main jobs, and the streets would be safer.

  • ?
    Lv 7
    4 months ago

    I am from a small town.  We had 5 cops about 20 years ago.  Then= 9/11 and the cops used it as an excuse to get more police officers and more equipment.  In 5 years the town had about 20 cops.  In the meantime the population of the town dropped from a little less than 3000  to just barely over 2000.  Explain why this small town needs 4 times as many cops to 'protect and serve' 2/3 as many people?  They were doing fine with 5 cops .. if anything, when the population dropped then the number of cops should have dropped.  Instead the cops patrol the closest section of interstate highway giving out as many speeding tickets as they can. 

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 4 months ago

    It does solve lots of things if you make a habit of stealing, assault, vandalism, arson etc.

  • Sandy
    Lv 7
    4 months ago

    I know. how is taking away money from people who are paid to serve and protect you, going to help them do their jobs better? stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. 

  • As has probably been explained to you multiple times, defunding the police is not synonymous with "dismantle the police."  Take funding that the police currently get and put that funding into paying for mental health programs, homelessness programs, counselors, addiction programs, etc...  Instead of relying on the police (who aren't trained to handle these sorts of things) to solve any and all social issues, we can apply effective treatment to social ills.

    The analogy I use is to think of a hospital.  Let's say you need 50 doctors at your hospital and you decide to hire just general practitioners.  For the most part, they'd be pretty good at handling many of the needs of the patients.  But what happens when you need a cardiologist?  What happens when you need an oncologist, or a neurologist, or a endocrinologist?  Suddenly, having 50 GPs isn't such a great idea.  It'd be better to go ahead and replace 20 of them with doctors who are specialized.  In effect, you've "defunded" the GP payroll.  But what have you gained compared to what you have lost?  Now your hospital can help many more patients, your level of care hasn't decreased, and you didn't have to raise your operating costs in the process.

    The police are not a panacea, and we don't need them to handle every issue.  They're being asked to handle domestic disputes, minor and major.  They're being asked to handle vagrancy and homelessness.  They're being asked to fight the drug problems in communities.  They're being asked to serve as jacks of all trades and masters of none.  So, they need to be defunded and those resources need to go to specialized services.  The police need to be a last resort and not the first response to an issue.  They have their purpose and their necessity, but they're not necessary for everything.

  • Anonymous
    4 months ago

    It solved a lot of problems when it was done in Camden, New Jersey.  Look it up.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.