EPThttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden_Police_Department_(New_Jersey)
(I'm pretty sure they don't mean get rid of their police entirely, but something similar to what Camden did)
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2387
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden_Police_Department_(New_Jersey) (I'm pretty sure they don't mean get rid of their police entirely, but something similar to what Camden did) | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 05 2020 12:21 GreenHorizons wrote: Minneapolis City Council is considering abolishing their police department www.citypages.com This has got to be something for the guy that advocated abolishing the police in this thread through all the flak. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On June 05 2020 12:21 GreenHorizons wrote: Minneapolis City Council is considering abolishing their police department www.citypages.com L m a o Dear fellow TL posters: GH has been proven correct, and so many of us wrong, so many times that I feel like at one point we need to recognize him as a time traveler. Headcanon for me is something arrival'esque. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24341 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On June 05 2020 16:03 GreenHorizons wrote: The lesson I took away is that burning down a police department is actually an effective way to prompt radical change. Can't really advocate it or emulate it myself, but the proof is in the pudding as they say. It's certainly on message. While lots of people have things to say about the other side effects of a riot - such as looting - it's hard to say that burning down a police station isn't extremely consistent with the theme and intent of a police brutality protest. | ||
|
StalkerTL
212 Posts
On June 05 2020 16:03 GreenHorizons wrote: The lesson I took away is that burning down a police department is actually an effective way to prompt radical change. Can't really advocate it or emulate it myself, but the proof is in the pudding as they say. Proof has been there for centuries, people just choose to ignore it for whatever reason. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4769 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8184 Posts
At that point, I call it reforming in depth rather than abolishing or disbanding, but I guess that's semantic. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24341 Posts
On June 05 2020 16:48 Silvanel wrote: There is a very long road between councilmen discussing it and it actually happening. Additionally they might be floating it in public to make police realize that they CAN actually be harmed with no real intention to go trough with it. Well that's going to be true for any of the superficial reform they offer too. Truth is they might not have money to have a police department anyway. On June 05 2020 17:00 Biff The Understudy wrote: Well, as far as I know, a modern society needs a police force. It's one thing to disband a police department, but you need to create another one - or another structure that does the policing - straight away. At that point, I call it reforming in depth rather than abolishing or disbanding, but I guess that's semantic. You might not know very far. If you don't (haven't done research) perhaps you should assign your perception an appropriate value. What is needed is a way for society to prevent and mitigate the damage caused by unacceptably aberrant behavior. The overwhelming majority of police/carceral interactions are not anything resembling what a healthy society would want or the science reflects is an effective way to do either of those things. The few that might (interrupting violent crimes in progress) while both a relatively rare occurrence to require an armed officer and often made worse by their presence, don't require anything resembling police as they exist or the training they have. A healthy society doesn't need police because community accountability is sufficient when complimented with a society that cares for its members. When you starve people and drive Ferraris past them you need a large and violently repressive police force. A lot of the supposed need for police stems from the internalized need to protect property (or the people with it) from poor people. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9245 Posts
| ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5204 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11977 Posts
I can't think of an example of one beyond maybe very small groups of people. That is not to say that the police force in the US isn't very shitty, and the whole US incarceration system is also disgusting. But i think some group of people is necessary to keep the peace, prosecute crimes and so forth. I have a hard time imagining a society without one. How does that society deal with people stealing stuff from other people? What happens when someone muders another person? Does this society also not have any laws, or are the laws just not enforced? Do we assume that every single person would obey the laws of that society? Or do we set up another organisation to do all the necessary things the police does, and just not call them police? At that point we are really just talking sematics. | ||
|
Sr18
Netherlands1141 Posts
On June 05 2020 17:18 GreenHorizons wrote: Well that's going to be true for any of the superficial reform they offer too. Truth is they might not have money to have a police department anyway. You might not know very far. If you don't (haven't done research) perhaps you should assign your perception an appropriate value. What is needed is a way for society to prevent and mitigate the damage caused by unacceptably aberrant behavior. The overwhelming majority of police/carceral interactions are not anything resembling what a healthy society would want or the science reflects is an effective way to do either of those things. The few that might (interrupting violent crimes in progress) while both a relatively rare occurrence to require an armed officer and often made worse by their presence, don't require anything resembling police as they exist or the training they have. A healthy society doesn't need police because community accountability is sufficient when complimented with a society that cares for its members. When you starve people and drive Ferraris past them you need a large and violently repressive police force. A lot of the supposed need for police stems from the internalized need to protect property (or the people with it) from poor people. This goes completely against both logic and my professional experience, so I'm going to call bullshit on this. As long as there are people who won't willingly follow the law, you will need law enforcement. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On June 05 2020 19:24 Simberto wrote: I still have a problem with the concept of a society completely without a police force. (Which is where "abolish" leads me to) I can't think of an example of one beyond maybe very small groups of people. That is not to say that the police force in the US isn't very shitty, and the whole US incarceration system is also disgusting. But i think some group of people is necessary to keep the peace, prosecute crimes and so forth. I have a hard time imagining a society without one. How does that society deal with people stealing stuff from other people? What happens when someone muders another person? Does this society also not have any laws, or are the laws just not enforced? Do we assume that every single person would obey the laws of that society? Or do we set up another organisation to do all the necessary things the police does, and just not call them police? At that point we are really just talking sematics. I think most people, myself included, assume some sort of replacement. I want something to take its place but I really do see the current system as broken beyond repair. It feels appropriate to wipe it clean and start over. The major issue at the moment is the idea that police occupy some elevated position in society. I consider most cops to be truly awful people. | ||
|
Sr18
Netherlands1141 Posts
On June 05 2020 20:27 Mohdoo wrote: I consider most cops to be truly awful people. If this is not hyperbole, that truly saddens me. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10950 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
Also props to GH, guess he was right after all calling for police to be abolished. I know that was one area where I didn't see eye to eye with him, but that was also before all this. I've had no problem saying fuck it, burn it all down and start over after this started, and police across the country have shown their true colors. Seeing how deep the problem really went has changed my tune a bit. Maybe that's my privilege that I only really noticed how bad it is now, though. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9064 Posts
On June 05 2020 17:00 Biff The Understudy wrote: Well, as far as I know, a modern society needs a police force. It's one thing to disband a police department, but you need to create another one - or another structure that does the policing - straight away. At that point, I call it reforming in depth rather than abolishing or disbanding, but I guess that's semantic. The article called it disbanding and others are calling it abolishing. It's not semantics, it's a very important distinction. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8184 Posts
On June 05 2020 17:18 GreenHorizons wrote: Well that's going to be true for any of the superficial reform they offer too. Truth is they might not have money to have a police department anyway. You might not know very far. If you don't (haven't done research) perhaps you should assign your perception an appropriate value. What is needed is a way for society to prevent and mitigate the damage caused by unacceptably aberrant behavior. The overwhelming majority of police/carceral interactions are not anything resembling what a healthy society would want or the science reflects is an effective way to do either of those things. The few that might (interrupting violent crimes in progress) while both a relatively rare occurrence to require an armed officer and often made worse by their presence, don't require anything resembling police as they exist or the training they have. A healthy society doesn't need police because community accountability is sufficient when complimented with a society that cares for its members. When you starve people and drive Ferraris past them you need a large and violently repressive police force. A lot of the supposed need for police stems from the internalized need to protect property (or the people with it) from poor people. Yeah, again I am talking about the real world. Several revolutions have based their programs on "Oh but when our great ideas are implemented, there won't be any crimes - people won't be greedy at all anymore - everyone will be honest, just and virtuous - and it has always ended with having to eliminate the millions of people who (surprise!) were just as vicious as in the good old days. I am sorry GH, but you are hopelessly naive. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
| ||
