What does this really mean -- in actual practice?

Flarbalard

Flarbalard

Senior Member
What does "Defund The Police" mean in real life? I know it doesn't mean to completely remove all funding, but that's all I know.

What kinds of funding shifts are proposed or have been enacted around the country?

This isn't meant to be political, nor to start any bickering. If it does, Moderators please remove it.

Thank you.
 

Who knows what it means? I've heard "what it really means" explained by authorities, but I doubt that is what it really means to most people that rally round it. I just sounds like a stupid thing to me. Let's defund fire departments, hospitals, and corporations too. That will fix everything and then we can all be happy when we've defunded stuff that needs to be defunded.

A better solution would be to fix what needs fixing. Defunding doesn't fix what's wrong with the police or any other poorly functioning agency.
 
It seems that certain idealists have the idea that if there are no police, there will be no crime. How ridiculous is that? The amazing thing is that our governments are happy to go along with it.
The same thing is happening in Britain. Police are so ineffectual, they mostly don't even bother to turn up to the scene of a crime, it is simply noted as a statistic.
 

Many of the articles and items i read were more of re-routing funding to for example the IDEA of sending social workers to domestic incidents even though those are often very dangerous calls....... a good friend of mine in that line of work simply said "NO we do not want to be on front lines to Talk with people that often are armed or dangerous" .......
i find many of the "ideas" are just slogans and they figure someone else will work out the details...... details matter...... for some places who embraced a SLOGAN now find they cannot keep or attract new police.....
in my state many midsize or smaller cities benefited from one big city that had a mass exodus of staff ......they hired almost 4 dozen street ready officers with experience even more left for other states and that city is a crime ridden hell hole that people i know who used to go into city for entertainment / dinner etc will not even go in broad daylight .....i am sure that tourism dollars had dried up even large corporations moved offices out to suburbs because employee safety getting to work........... details matter because for some reason many who say these things do not understand the cause and effect ... snowball down the hill reality.
 
Jeni said:
Many of the articles and items i read were more of re-routing funding to for example the IDEA of sending social workers to domestic incidents even though those are often very dangerous calls....... a good friend of mine in that line of work simply said "NO we do not want to be on front lines to Talk with people that often are armed or dangerous" .......
i find many of the "ideas" are just slogans and they figure someone else will work out the details...... details matter...... for some places who embraced a SLOGAN now find they cannot keep or attract new police.....
in my state many midsize or smaller cities benefited from one big city that had a mass exodus of staff ......they hired almost 4 dozen street ready officers with experience even more left for other states and that city is a crime ridden hell hole that people i know who used to go into city for entertainment / dinner etc will not even go in broad daylight .....i am sure that tourism dollars had dried up even large corporations moved offices out to suburbs because employee safety getting to work........... details matter because for some reason many who say these things do not understand the cause and effect ... snowball down the hill reality.
Click to expand...

In this area, that was the initial approach.. However, a little research into the underlying "agenda" is to eliminate police departments altogether. In other words, to let criminals run the place.. and it's kind of at that point already.
 
It doesn't mean anything. It's just a slogan that's been repeated by dummies because it sounds good and makes them seem noble, in their minds anyway.
 
Oh come on now, no one is suppose to ask for detailed definitions. It's just a term created to sensentionalize and cause controversy.

I say take the people who are screaming it and move them to a walled off city, no police and no government support. Let them have their little utopia.
 
Are you all aware that right now, the only people calling for defunding the police are far-right extremists?

I always thought that “defund the police” was an exceedingly dumb idea back when the lefties were the ones calling for it. Nothing has changed now that right-wingers are mad at the DOJ and the FBI.
 
It seems to mean something different to each of us.

I’m in favor of the unemotional enforcement of the law and have little sympathy for the people that refuse to comply with instructions from police or obey the law.

That seems to have become a problem on both sides of every encounter with police and is exacerbated by social media.

We need to be vigilant about weeding out the thugs from law enforcement and also the laws that we don’t seem to have the stomach to enforce.
 
This "defund" movement is a side effect of the George Floyd incident. As such, it is having the greatest effect on the poorer, inner city neighborhoods. The Only ones benefitting are the criminals and drug dealers. People should be Very Careful of what they wish for, as they may get it,
 
heron said:
Are you all aware that right now, the only people calling for defunding the police are far-right extremists?

I always thought that “defund the police” was an exceedingly dumb idea back when the lefties were the ones calling for it. Nothing has changed now that right-wingers are mad at the DOJ and the FBI.
Click to expand...
+1.

Originally "defunding" the police was the idea that(as Jeni mentioned) having social workers be involved with incidents where expertise in dealing with mental health patients is needed. Police departments would not be having their budgets cut, if anything they would receive additional funding to add mental health professionals.

Cops are good at what they do, but "bustin' heads" on mentally unstable arrestees is a rabbit hole that eats up public funds in civil suits payouts.

Of course now "defunding" has become a weaponized term used along with "snowflake" and other ignorant shit those people say to insult.
 
jujube said:
The first time a social worker responding to a domestic incident gets killed and his/her family sues the city/county/state for ten million dollars, and wins, you can bet they'll "re-fund" the police. Are we going to arm all those social workers?
Click to expand...
Well, something must be done to protect innocent people from the abuses of the police.
I recall a case of a mental patient in a mental ward. He was "out of control" at least so the nurses said. They called the police who entered the mental ward and encountered the patient who was "armed " with a pencil. The police promptly shot him dead.

There have been literally thousands of cases of police brutality. Locally, there was film on the news of a State Trooper sitting on the stomach of a black woman and punching her in the face as hard as he could. Her "offence" ? She did not show the proper respect for the cop.

On and on and on it goes. Perhaps defunding the police may not work , BUT at minimum, I advocate firing and prosecuting cops who commit brutality, AND then sending them to prison.
 
Nathan said:
+1.

Originally "defunding" the police was the idea that(as Jeni mentioned) having social workers be involved with incidents where expertise in dealing with mental health patients is needed. Police departments would not be having their budgets cut, if anything they would receive additional funding to add mental health professionals.

Cops are good at what they do, but "bustin' heads" on mentally unstable arrestees is a rabbit hole that eats up public funds in civil suits payouts.

Of course now "defunding" has become a weaponized term used along with "snowflake" and other ignorant shit those people say to insult.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
When I think about cops, I am reminded that entirely too many of them are little better than thugs.
We all know that in the day to day routine of police work, they can be involved in physical confrontations. So, ask yourselves, what kind of people either don't mind violence OR actually enjoy it ? Those should be the 1st to be fired.

We all know quite well that many police harass folks over the slightest thing. So, the 1st thing I'd do if I was in charge of a police dept, is to prohibit police from stopping people who have committed super minor traffic infractions. Example: one tail light out, burned out licence plate light, too many stickers on rear window., etc etc. These super minor traffic infractions are often a way to harass folks who they don't like.

Regarding police brutality. I'd keep precise records of all cops who get involved an excess number of physical confrontations, AND then I'd fire one or two of the worst offenders each month.

In cases of police brutality, many of them resign before they can be fired. Thus they end up in a different police dept and they soon continue to be violent. I'd put a stop to that and damn quickly. NO RESIGNATIONS ALLOWED IF UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR POLICE BRUTALITY.

Lastly, I'd go after cops, who engage in sexual harassment of women, AND, make an example of them.
 
Nathan said:
+1.

Originally "defunding" the police was the idea that(as Jeni mentioned) having social workers be involved with incidents where expertise in dealing with mental health patients is needed. Police departments would not be having their budgets cut, if anything they would receive additional funding to add mental health professionals.

Cops are good at what they do, but "bustin' heads" on mentally unstable arrestees is a rabbit hole that eats up public funds in civil suits payouts.

Of course now "defunding" has become a weaponized term used along with "snowflake" and other ignorant shit those people say to insult.
Click to expand...
I agree that the interpretation you laid out comes closer to the progressive’s real proposal. But, somehow, “defund the police” became accepted shorthand for the idea for some reason … and allowing that was exceedingly dumb.
 
senior chef said:
When I think about cops, I am reminded that entirely too many of them are little better than thugs.
We all know that in the day to day routine of police work, they can be involved in physical confrontations. So, ask yourselves, what kind of people either don't mind violence OR actually enjoy it ? Those should be the 1st to be fired.

We all know quite well that many police harass folks over the slightest thing. So, the 1st thing I'd do if I was in charge of a police dept, is to prohibit police from stopping people who have committed super minor traffic infractions. Example: one tail light out, burned out licence plate light, too many stickers on rear window., etc etc. These super minor traffic infractions are often a way to harass folks who they don't like.

Regarding police brutality. I'd keep precise records of all cops who get involved an excess number of physical confrontations, AND then I'd fire one or two of the worst offenders each month.

In cases of police brutality, many of them resign before they can be fired. Thus they end up in a different police dept and they soon continue to be violent. I'd put a stop to that and damn quickly. NO RESIGNATIONS ALLOWED IF UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR POLICE BRUTALITY.

Lastly, I'd go after cops, who engage in ****** harassment of women, AND, make an example of them.
Click to expand...
Police unions make it extremely difficult to fire bad cops. Same with bad teachers and their unions.
 
SeniorBen said:
Police unions make it extremely difficult to fire bad cops. Same with bad teachers and their unions
Click to expand...
Quite true. However, if all else fails it would still be possible transfer bad cops to jobs that make their lives miserable. Off the top of my head, I can't think of what those jobs might be , BUT there must be certain jobs that cops would hate. Maybe walking a beat, writing parking tickets ?
 
senior chef said:
Quite true. However, if all else fails it would still be possible transfer bad cops to jobs that make their lives miserable. Off the top of my head, I can't think of what those jobs might be , BUT there must be certain jobs that cops would hate. Maybe walking a beat, writing parking tickets ?
Click to expand...
Teaching? :ROFLMAO:
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top