# Abolish the police? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 7, 2020, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205 "2020-06-07T17:22:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 21
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/401 "2020-06-17T04:40:07Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > So groups are out saying “abolish the police” or “defund the police” and many people become afraid because they are too dimwitted to understand that this doesn’t really mean that those people want to abolish the police or defund the police (which amounts to the same thing), and this is Trump and the right wing media’s fault? If you don’t really want to abolish or defund the police, then choose your words better. This makes no sense, besides ignoring the point. The point was that most people are not dimwitted and do get that in America eventual negotiations almost never gives protesters all what they want. > [@UltraVires](#): > > And, again, you cannot claim Camden as an example of the nuanced way you are suggesting to abolish the police. If you just change the name of the organization but put the very same people at the same jobs in the new organization, then what you have done is “reformed” the police, which is something at this particular point in time, you would have an over 95% approval rating for doing. > > So why fuck that up with intentionally divisive language and lose any chance of getting what virtually everyone wants? Again that is like demanding that a hypothetical corrupted law firm hired the pettifoggers again, not to mention assuming that there was no getting rid of the apparatus that protected the bad lawyers. As for being divisive, what you claim is ironic, Trump and most of the congress Republicans are the most divisive leaders seen in America’s recent history. > **[‘Trump’s Re-Election Chances Are Going Down in Flames.’ How Trump’s Divisive...](https://time.com/5846311/trump-protests-republican-fallout/)** > > Some Republicans think the nationwide protests could prove fatal for Trump's re-election prospects and hurt GOP lawmakers in their races. > [@](#): > > Even before Floyd’s death unleashed this wave of racial unrest, the President was facing dueling economic and public health crises precipitated by the coronavirus pandemic. Some Republicans already thought the combination was dangerous for Trump’s prospects. Now they think the addition of racial tensions could prove fatal — and hurt GOP lawmakers seeking re-election in their own state races. An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted last week found that Biden holds a 5-point lead over Trump, even when factoring in low voter turnout, and that Trump’s disapproval rating had increased by 7 points since late March. Polls in key states where Democrats are trying to flip Senate seats, like Montana, Maine and Arizona, showed Republican incumbents trailing before the protests started. > > While some Republicans caution it is still too early to predict the party’s demise, others say the writing is on the wall. “Trump’s re-election chances are going down in flames with that Autozone building, police precinct building and burning police cars,” says Dan Eberhart, a Republican donor and Trump supporter. “It’s hard to see how these riots don’t boost Joe Biden’s claim to be the Alka-Seltzer America needs to sooth its stomach right now.” > [@](#): > > As protesters gathered near the White House to demonstrate against police violence and racial inequalities, law enforcement used tear gas to force their exit. Trump then delivered a speech from the Rose Garden, where he announced that he was urging all governors to deploy the National Guard to restore order, and that if local officials did not comply he would take executive action and do it for them. He then walked to St. John’s church — tracing the same path where the protesters had been — which had been damaged in the Sunday night protests, to take a photograph with a Bible. > > The display immediately dominated the national discourse, and for many Republicans, further exacerbated the fraught question of how to respond to the Trump’s increasingly extreme messaging. On Tuesday morning, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, usually a vocal supporter of the President, declined to comment on Trump’s speech. So did Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, who has often criticized the President. “These are times where my heart goes out to people,” Romney said Tuesday. “This is a challenging time for our country, and I’m really not going to be commenting on the daily developments that that are coming from the White House or elsewhere.” That BTW is from June 2, the polls are worse for Trump now. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/402 "2020-06-17T11:26:01Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Sure, but the point that I made was that after all the fears repeated Ad nauseam the result has been a counter, counter reaction when to discredit those absolutists Trump and the right wing media are overreaching and discrediting themselves, the results are reflected IMHO in the recent polling, I do think that the ones who are not Trumpists do get the context. And recognize the dishonesty coming from Trump and the right wing media. What Trumpists think is irrelevant in this context. It’s reasonable to assume, based on Trump’s statements, “Don’t be too nice”, that they don’t mind some police brutality as long as it’s aimed at the “other”. Sure, not feeding into Trump’s propaganda is always a nice-to-have. But it’s secondary to the conversation those of us who are on the same side of the issue are having. “Abolish the Police” is divisive rhetoric inside the big tent occupied by those who agree that police reform is urgently needed. Can we just this once not capitulate to our own extremists slogans and make sound policies that will achieve meaningful change? (It’s a rhetorical question.) Right now I’m seeing and hearing rational political and social leaders talking sense instead of calling for abolition. Still a very long way to go but I’m encouraged by the calmer, more pragmatic voices. I hope that you are also encouraged by this and are not still calling for radical labels that promise that which they will not deliver and serve only to further frustrate people desperate to see results. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/403 "2020-06-17T14:51:51Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > What Trumpists think is irrelevant in this context. It’s reasonable to assume, based on Trump’s statements, “Don’t be too nice”, that they don’t mind some police brutality as long as it’s aimed at the “other”. Sure, not feeding into Trump’s propaganda is always a nice-to-have. But it’s secondary to the conversation those of us who are on the same side of the issue are having. “Abolish the Police” is divisive rhetoric inside the big tent occupied by those who agree that police reform is urgently needed. Can we just this once not capitulate to our own extremists slogans and make sound policies that will achieve meaningful change? (It’s a rhetorical question.) Right now I’m seeing and hearing rational political and social leaders talking sense instead of calling for abolition. Still a very long way to go but I’m encouraged by the calmer, more pragmatic voices. I hope that you are also encouraged by this and are not still calling for radical labels that promise that which they will not deliver and serve only to further frustrate people desperate to see results. That part about realizing that calmer more pragmatic voices, where the ones we should listen to and not the radical ones, was my line too since you did not notice. I guess I should be glad that you finally noticed. 😉 But the other point I was making is more valid than assigning a secondary value to it, I will have to notice too that you seem to ignore that I’ve been taking about convincing the ones that are not Trumpists. Again, as I have said in other words, the point here is that the talk from the pragmatic voices is a demonstration that a lot of people that were deeply scared of bad slogans should had worried less. They fell for what I could call fear porn\*, most people can get over a bad slogan to realize who are the ones that are doing bad by falling for their own fearful slogans and do real bad things as a result. > **[Michigan pollster: Trump’s Bible photo op caused immediate drop in support](https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/06/michigan-pollster-trumps-bible-photo-op-caused-immediate-drop-in-support.html?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=flintjournal_sf&utm_source=twitter)** > > President Donald Trump took a hit in Michigan polls after protesters were removed so he could pose for photos outside a historic church. > [@](#): > > Michigan pollster: Trump’s Bible photo op caused immediate drop in support > > President Donald Trump’s support among Michigan voters took a sharp dive in polls taken immediately after protesters were forcefully removed so Trump could have his photo taken holding a Bible outside a historic church. > > Two surveys of Michigan voters taken by Lansing polling firm EPIC-MRA found a widening gap between Trump and presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden after protests against police brutality began outside the White House and across the country. One poll conducted from May 30 to June 3 found Biden leading by 12 percentage points, but the second poll, which started and ended just one day later, recorded a 16-point lead for the former vice president. > > EPIC-MRA pollster Bernie Porn attributed the quick drop to public backlash and negative press resulting from Trump’s staged photo on June 1. The two polls collected responses from separate samples of 600 likely Michigan voters and both had a 4% margin of error. There was an attempt these days to make others fall for the fears about the slogan, the point here is that based on the polls, sure there is no wide support to abolish all police departments, but there is no need to fear that Trump is getting a gift, when most people do understand how limited is the reach of the absolutists and realized that the Trumpists and many Republicans are falling for the fear porn but most people are realizing how dumb is that. A very crazy aside: the name of the pollster cited in that article is really [Bernie Porn](https://brobible.com/guyism/article/meet-bernie-man-unfortunatefortunate-last-name/) :eek: ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/404 "2020-06-17T15:53:33Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > This makes no sense, besides ignoring the point. The point was that most people are not dimwitted and do get that in America eventual negotiations almost never gives protesters all what they want. > > Again that is like demanding that a hypothetical corrupted law firm hired the pettifoggers again, not to mention assuming that there was no getting rid of the apparatus that protected the bad lawyers. > > As for being divisive, what you claim is ironic, Trump and most of the congress Republicans are the most divisive leaders seen in America’s recent history. > > [How Trump's Divisive Rhetoric Could Hurt Republicans | TIME](https://time.com/5846311/trump-protests-republican-fallout/) > > That BTW is from June 2, the polls are worse for Trump now. I’m not sure why you keep mentioning Trump and Republicans as if that has anything to do with what I am saying. Everyone was outraged at the George Floyd thing. Everyone. There would have been broad consensus for a major overhaul bill for strong and lasting police reform. Might even have Nancy on hand in the Rose Garden for an historic signing ceremony. But instead of accepting the easy win, some on your side have made it racially divisive by continuing the “Black Lives Matter” banner, made ridiculous calls for abolishing and/or defunding the police, have brought the Confederate monument debate back up, and had UVA change its logo over a serpentine design on the sword handle. [UVA Changes Athletics Logo Design Linked With Slavery – NBC4 Washington](https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/uva-changes-athletics-logo-design-linked-with-slavery/2334591/) That is going to cause pushback and it might just be that after the fervor dies down, a few more Confederate monuments get removed, and universities and big corporations get to virtue signal like they always do, the police will go back to doing what they did before. This had the potential for real change. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/405 "2020-06-17T16:16:56Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > That is going to cause pushback and it might just be that after the fervor dies down, a few more Confederate monuments get removed, and universities and big corporations get to virtue signal like they always do, the police will go back to doing what they did before. This had the potential for real change. Lots of money will exchange hands I’m sure with little going to help people who need it. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/406 "2020-06-17T16:27:38Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I’m not sure why you keep mentioning Trump and Republicans as if that has anything to do with what I am saying. > > Everyone was outraged at the George Floyd thing. Everyone. There would have been broad consensus for a major overhaul bill for strong and lasting police reform. Might even have Nancy on hand in the Rose Garden for an historic signing ceremony. > > But instead of accepting the easy win, some on your side have made it racially divisive by continuing the “Black Lives Matter” banner, made ridiculous calls for abolishing and/or defunding the police, have brought the Confederate monument debate back up, and had UVA change its logo over a serpentine design on the sword handle. [UVA Changes Athletics Logo Design Linked With Slavery – NBC4 Washington](https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/uva-changes-athletics-logo-design-linked-with-slavery/2334591/) > > That is going to cause pushback and it might just be that after the fervor dies down, a few more Confederate monuments get removed, and universities and big corporations get to virtue signal like they always do, the police will go back to doing what they did before. This had the potential for real change. Yeah, but no. Nancy’s invitation to the Rose Garden is permanently lost in the mail since the impeachment and the dramatic tearing up of Trump’s SotU address. More importantly, police reform, removal of confederate monuments and whatever other racists vestiges remain are all on the table for discussion and action. I don’t agree that one takes attention away from the other. Are you trying to say that a substantive number of supporters for dramatic police reform would quite like to hang on to Confederate monuments as important symbols of southern heritage? Is that the wedge issue here? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/407 "2020-06-17T16:34:55Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I’m not sure why you keep mentioning Trump and Republicans as if that has anything to do with what I am saying. Never said you did, I did say that because it is related a lot with the issue at hand. > [@UltraVires](#): > > Everyone was outraged at the George Floyd thing. Everyone. There would have been broad consensus for a major overhaul bill for strong and lasting police reform. Might even have Nancy on hand in the Rose Garden for an historic signing ceremony. > > But instead of accepting the easy win, some on your side have made it racially divisive by continuing the “Black Lives Matter” banner, made ridiculous calls for abolishing and/or defunding the police, have brought the Confederate monument debate back up, and had UVA change its logo over a serpentine design on the sword handle. [UVA Changes Athletics Logo Design Linked With Slavery – NBC4 Washington](https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/uva-changes-athletics-logo-design-linked-with-slavery/2334591/) > > That is going to cause pushback and it might just be that after the fervor dies down, a few more Confederate monuments get removed, and universities and big corporations get to virtue signal like they always do, the police will go back to doing what they did before. This had the potential for real change. Like I said, the evidence is that it is really your side the one that overreached in the way the ones condemning are using a very wide brush indeed, and most people (and even corporations) do understand now what “Black Lives Matter” actually means. [https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/gxyp8q/black\_lives\_matter/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/gxyp8q/black_lives_matter/) ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/408 "2020-06-17T16:34:58Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > This had the potential for real change. It is just unspeakably vile that there are people who would say “I would have fought against police killing unarmed people, but you asked for it in a mean way, so I’ll just have to support the continued killings.” Those are the people we’re supposed to be courting? We’re supposed to craft our message to entice a person with so little empathy that they will knowingly support police beatings because our slogans hurt their feelings? I’m going to tell a middle aged black man, whose spent his whole life targeted by LEOs that he needs to dial back his rhetoric because he might insult some white guy who isn’t quite sure that police violence is a problem? Nope. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/409 "2020-06-17T17:11:19Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Lots of money will exchange hands I’m sure with little going to help people who need it. Besides complaining that the message doesn’t quite suit your tastes, what actual steps have either of you taken to lessen police violence and suppression? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/410 "2020-06-17T18:03:43Z")
For the more radical folks who truly support abolishing the police, not merely reforming them - they don’t seem to consider that whatever replacement arises for the police will have \*\*\*less \*\*\*accountability than the current police. A vigilante group that patrols a neighborhood will NOT be answerable to trials or juries. No matter how faulty or leaky the current system is to hold cops accountable, vigilantes would be even less accountable. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/411 "2020-06-17T18:44:22Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > For the more radical folks who truly support abolishing the police, not merely reforming them - they don’t seem to consider that whatever replacement arises for the police will have \*\*\*less \*\*\*accountability than the current police. > > A vigilante group that patrols a neighborhood will NOT be answerable to trials or juries. No matter how faulty or leaky the current system is to hold cops accountable, vigilantes would be even less accountable. Since the more rational reforms after a specific department has been found to be corrupt still have patrols, the point here about vigilantes looks a bit strawmanish even for the radicals calling for abolition, harm reduction policies do not talk about vigilantes either so, do you have a cite? ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/412 "2020-06-17T19:48:49Z")
Thank you, **GIGObuster**. for being nicer than I would’ve been. There is[plenty of evidence](https://s3.amazonaws.com/documents.lexology.com/b68c43b1-5fb4-46e7-b3f9-0cd3bb11f59a.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAVYILUYJ754JTDY6T&Expires=1592422022&Signature=oaiV8pKf8Hvokgxg9wwV9LY3clg%3D) that [increased policing](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0011128710382263) does not necessarily [lead to less crime](http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/rethinkingtheblues_final.pdf). And even [some evidence](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/25/does-more-policing-lead-to-less-crime-or-just-more-racial-resentment/) that decreased policing can lead to less crime. Where is the proof that “disbanding the police will lead to rampant crime and chaos?” mc ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/413 "2020-06-17T20:20:41Z")
> [@mikecurtis](#): > > Thank you, **GIGObuster**. for being nicer than I would’ve been. > > There is[plenty of evidence](https://s3.amazonaws.com/documents.lexology.com/b68c43b1-5fb4-46e7-b3f9-0cd3bb11f59a.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAVYILUYJ754JTDY6T&Expires=1592422022&Signature=oaiV8pKf8Hvokgxg9wwV9LY3clg%3D) that [increased policing](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0011128710382263) does not necessarily [lead to less crime](http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/rethinkingtheblues_final.pdf). And even [some evidence](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/25/does-more-policing-lead-to-less-crime-or-just-more-racial-resentment/) that decreased policing can lead to less crime. > > Where is the proof that “disbanding the police will lead to rampant crime and chaos?” > > mc This is some serious misrepresentation of what the reports say. What the reports say is that when more violent crime rates fall, police look for less serious crimes and make arrests they otherwise would not. Police make more drug arrests when more serious crimes have been reduced. When police force is reduced in size, they therefore make less arrests related to less serious crimes, like drug related offenses. If you want to make the argument that some crimes should be de-scoped from police enforcement, then make it. But what you boldly claimed is far more nuanced than how you presented it. Disbanding the police entirely remains a fundamentally absurd idea. ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/414 "2020-06-17T20:27:49Z")
> [@](#): > > Disbanding the police entirely remains a fundamentally absurd idea. prove it ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/415 "2020-06-17T20:42:24Z")
From the cites i gave: > [@](#): > > This data suggests that the salary of a police officer could be better used to decrease crimethrough spending efforts that target the true causes of crime; such as poor education,employment, mental health or family dysfunction. > [@](#): > > No relationship between the number of police officers per capita and perceptions of the risk of arrest was found, suggesting that increases in police manpower will not increase general deterrent effects and decreases will not reduce these effects. The authors also considered the possibility that police manpower levels influence the number of criminals incarcerated, and thus affect crime rates via the incapacitative effects of incarceration, but concluded that such an effect is unlikely. These findings point to a need to reconsider previous interpretations of findings as supportive of a deterrent effect of increased police manpower on crime rates. > [@](#): > > Therefore, additional police only contributed to increases in arrests for both serious and minor offenses, without significantadditional impact on crime–althoughlaw enforcement took creditfor declines. The increases in arrests were, however, a likely major driver of incarceration rates, which increased 39 percent from 19935to 2010, reaching 732 per 100,000.6And the greatest impact of these policies was seen in communities of color. > [@](#): > > Reducing police presence didn’t apparently lead to more crime — at least during this period. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/416 "2020-06-17T20:53:18Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > For the more radical folks who truly support abolishing the police, not merely reforming them - they don’t seem to consider that whatever replacement arises for the police will have \*\*\*less \*\*\*accountability than the current police. > > A vigilante group that patrols a neighborhood will NOT be answerable to trials or juries. No matter how faulty or leaky the current system is to hold cops accountable, vigilantes would be even less accountable. Wasnt that the issue with the neighborhood watch person that killed the kid who just went out for Skittles in Florida I think? Also it brings up where, when, and how people can go after people on their property. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/417 "2020-06-17T20:56:57Z")
Thing is the rich people will have their own private security, bodyguards, live in gated communities, or live in quiet, safe areas. The rest of us will live in lawless areas where every vigilante group will set their own rules. Basically what the CHAZ thing in Seattle is (which right now is quiet and safe but that can change). ---
**Author:** ![mikecurtis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikecurtis/32/3284_2.png) [@mikecurtis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mikecurtis)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/418 "2020-06-17T20:59:33Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > . . . The rest of us will live in lawless areas where every vigilante group will set their own rules. . . . On what do you base this belief? mc ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/419 "2020-06-17T21:10:32Z")
Perhaps the [Peelian principles - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_principles) are worth taking a renewed look at. One of the first modern civil police forces was that founded in London by Sir Robert Peel. Thanks to the bitter experiences of the English Civil War in the 17th century, the English were no fonder than we are of empowered thugs kicking in doors, brutalizing people and in general acting like the biggest and best armed gang in town. Yet the old system of night watchmen, constables and if necessary rousing the populace in a “hue and cry” simply didn’t seem to be workable in a 19th century industrializing metropolis. Peel’s task then was to work out how to establish a truly civil police force rather than an occupying army. This led to the nine Peelian Principles, which even today minorities in the USA wish were completely adhered to and which if they were would largely address most of the problems we’re having. > [@](#): > > The nine principles were as follows: > > [ul] > [li]To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.[/li][li]To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfill their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.[/li][li]To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.[/li][li]To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.[/li][li]To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.[/li][li]To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.[/li][li]To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.[/li][li]To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.[/li][li]To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them[/li][/ul]. Unfortunately in the USA, we seem to have inherited police forces that despite some reforms were apparently founded on a combination of big city machine politics, suppression of labor unrest, and keeping minorities and the poor bottled up where “decent” people didn’t have to deal with them. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205/420 "2020-06-17T21:12:19Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > No. The correct analogy is that you are asking omnivores to come to your new vegan restaurant and enjoy your food with a “Meat is Murder” slogan. That would be using someone who opposes meant’s slogan. I’d say a more apt analogy would be a slogan of “Must Eat Meat!” Some people object, because they don’t want to have to eat meat, and they insist that the slogan means that that is all they are allowed to eat. And of course, the vegans only have an incentive to fan the flames. > [@](#): > > It seems to me that police are trained to enforce laws of the land. As laws changed, police policies changed. It’s absolutely true that there are racist garbage cops that need to be rooted out of the police force. No question. But changing laws and transforming police practices will go a long way to root them out. It will also change what kind of people are going to be attracted to police work in the future. Police culture will change when the laws they enforce and the duties they perform change in line with expectations & results. We have changed laws, we have transformed police practices. We still have problems with police brutality. Police culture will change when you don’t have older cops training younger cops on police culture. It doesn’t change because a bureaucrat said so. > [@](#): > > I can see an immediate problem with respect to adjacent communities and uneven enforcement policies. Not just for the cops but especially problematic for the citizens. Yeah, we already have that though. You don’t think that different neighborhoods are policed in very different ways right now? That if a cop sees Timmy selling drugs behind the clubhouse, he’ll take the drugs and threaten to tell Timmy’s parents. Then he sees Trayvon standing on the corner, shakes him down, and when he doesn’t find anything, plants Timmy’s drugs on him and arrests him. The only difference I see with my proposal is that the members of Trayvon’s community have a voice in how their neighborhood and the people within it are policed, as well as the affluent neighborhoods. > [@](#): > > I submit that laws and policies of enforcement are the place to start. Abolish the police who refuse to obey the changes and regs. This relies on other police to report the police who refuse to obey the changes and regs. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205.md?page=20) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abolish-the-police/855205.md?page=22)