Was/Is "defund the police" a good policy for Democrats?

[CaughtInThe]

all that's gonna happen is police are gonna be under a bigger microscope to make sure they aren't killing people when they shouldn't.

which, i'm sure, some people hate.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I understand the theory that once social problems have been solved (corrected?) then crime would drop, but that is not going to be accomplished by reducing the police budget as step one.

I agree, in general it wont, but the motivation behind this seems to have more to do with militarization of the police as well as their shift in attitude over the last two decades. In a lot of areas, the police are seen as basically just another gang (except with legal immunity) where doing things like stop and frisk, civil asset forfeiture, no knock warrants, unnecessary shootings, overly strong police unions, etc cause people to want another solution.

I don't think just reducing police budgets is an answer. Making the police responsive to the concerns of the community is though. Right now they are too insulated from the consequences of how they operate and are losing the respect of their communities as a result.

People are looking for any other answer because they don't want to be in danger.

 

[Common Sense 1]

It NEVER was a dem iniative.

Good grief.

Your post sounds like it has been "Foxed"

Gaslighting? Yup.....

 

[ttwtt78640]

I agree, in general it wont, but the motivation behind this seems to have more to do with militarization of the police as well as their shift in attitude over the last two decades. In a lot of areas, the police are seen as basically just another gang (except with legal immunity) where doing things like stop and frisk, civil asset forfeiture, no knock warrants, unnecessary shootings, overly strong police unions, etc cause people to want another solution.

OK, but that indicates the problem lies with those elected officials allegedly in charge of the police. The idea that the police (with strong public union support) should be allowed to treat these (criminal?) acts as ‘personnel problems’ (subject to internal investigations and arbitration) needs to be addressed. Reducing police budgets was not going to git-r-done.

 

[Common Sense 1]

It just showed what the democrats actually support. They have been beat up pretty bad over their support of defund the police so some are singing a new tune now.

But then there are the progressive DA's that are releasing criminals to prey on innocent citizens. The election in November can't get here quick enough.

 

[Slartibartfast]

OK, but that indicates the problem lies with those elected officials allegedly in charge of the police. The idea that the police (with strong public union support) should be allowed to treat these (criminal?) acts as ‘personnel problems’ (subject to internal investigations and arbitration) needs to be addressed. Reducing police budgets was not going to git-r-done.

I would say its the legal doctrines surrounding police activity, which politicians can't really do too much about.

If something like having a national do-not-hire list for officers that victimize people and those officers could face monetary consequences, then a lot of this stuff would clean up pretty quickly. You would probably see a bit of an exodus of people who are in the profession for the wrong reasons, but that would be a good cleansing. If lawyers can be disbarred, then cops should have something similar.

 

[Common Sense 1]

OK, but that indicates the problem lies with those elected officials allegedly in charge of the police. The idea that the police (with strong public union support) should be allowed to treat these (criminal?) acts as ‘personnel problems’ (subject to internal investigations and arbitration) needs to be addressed. Reducing police budgets was not going to git-r-done.

Spot on! Why are local officials absent when it comes to police misconduct/criminal behavior? If citzens are tired of this change your leadership now!

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Why?

Your premise is:

Was/Is "defund the police" a good policy for Democrats?​

Your entire premise thus depends on "Defund the police" being a democrat policy.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Spot on! Why are local officials absent when it comes to police misconduct/criminal behavior? If citzens are tired of this change your leadership now!

If it were as simple as electing a politician, then Lightfoot would have rebuilt the chicago police department by now.

The current supreme court is a mockery in many ways, but they are making the right moves when it comes to removing legal protections that the police can hide behind when they abuse people.

 

[Josie]

Your premise is:

Was/Is "defund the police" a good policy for Democrats?​

Your entire premise thus depends on "Defund the police" being a democrat policy.

"Democrats" doesn't mean "the entirety of the Democratic Party from sea to sea".

 

[Common Sense 1]

If it were as simple as electing a politician, then Lightfoot would have rebuilt the chicago police department by now.

The current supreme court is a mockery in many ways, but they are making the right moves when it comes to removing legal protections that the police can hide behind when they abuse people.

Lightfoot is a massive failure....

 

[jaypatriot]

Defund The Police

We call for a national defunding of police. We demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.

defundthepolice.org

Was/Is this a good strategy/policy for Democrats to get behind?

It had to be the dumbest idea ever popularized by the terrorist group BLM, feckless city managers that bought into it, and useless Democrat politicians who were virtue signaling to their naive constituencies that they intended to reduce police brutality by reducing the number of police on the force.
Great idea, right? No common sense whatsoever.
People in neighborhoods threatened by thugs and criminals want MORE police walking around, not LESS. That's what the numbers say.

 

[Indydave]

it's not only a bad policy, it's just plain dumb......and imo most people calling for it initially agree.....why make it harder to police our cities than it already is

 

[ttwtt78640]

Spot on! Why are local officials absent when it comes to police misconduct/criminal behavior? If citzens are tired of this change your leadership now!

Replacing one pro-union moron with another is not apt to change much.

 

[CharloTexan]

The spectacular failure of the "defund the police" movement was educational in a few ways, big and small.

1) Messaging is important. This is a "No duh" statement to most, but you'd be surprised by how many people seem perplexed by the fact that a good idea has to have good packaging. "The slogan doesn't matter! It wins by the virtue of its rightness alone!" As Dr. Phil would say, "How's that working out for you?" And if you answer, "It's working out great!" just remember that this is specifically the reason why Biden doesn't get to have a domestic agenda, and why Democrats aren't allowed to take a crap in the morning unless Manchin and Sinema approve of it first.

The ideas contained within "Defund the police" are good. Unfortunately, the slogan itself can only make people not already on board with it imagine a hellscape in which Mad Max marauders have taken over the neighborhood and are beating, robbing and raping their loves ones with impunity. Messaging matters. Sorry, guys. Otherwise you're going to have to explain why marketing is a multibillion dollar industry, or why Fox News exists.

2) Crime matters to the American people. Another "Duh" comment, but you can't tackle head-on the fact that right wing pundits get this concept just fine and are weaponizing it handily. Democrats have to show they take it seriously just as much as Republicans. The problem is doing so in a way that doesn't devolve into the same old "tough on crime" tropes that make society worse. Which brings us to the most important point...

3) Police aren't to blame for all their abuses; we are. Before the 2020 election, the onus for my condemnation of law enforcement and the justice system in whole fell on the justice system. Traffic ticket quotas, unlawful search and seizure, civil asset forfeiture, qualified immunity, the strength of police unions in thwarting accountability, plea bargaining, mandatory minimums, legalized corruption as a result of the war on drugs...I blame police and the justice system. (And this isn't even getting into the things police and the courts themselves have no involvement in, such as the treatment of inmates and how they fit back into society once they exit the prison system, all of which are their own dumpster fires).

But in 2020, the public saw police beat peaceful protesters across the country and we still punished Democrats for wanting to hold them accountable anyway. This illustrates that all the abuses I listed above didn't come out of a vacuum. We put the politicians in power who create laws that make them possible. So if you don't like those abuses, just ask yourself if you're the one who voted for the guy who promised to be "tough on crime." If you did, then the problem is you.

I wish I had said most of that, maybe even all of it.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Replacing one pro-union moron with another is not apt to change much.

Guess I would ask who is to blame then?
If citizens know what is happening and do nothing to change that behavior?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Your premise is:

Was/Is "defund the police" a good policy for Democrats?​

Your entire premise thus depends on "Defund the police" being a democrat policy.

OK, but your “entire premise” seems to be that if only a few demorats acted on it then it’s somehow OK.

 

[Lutherf]

Defund The Police

We call for a national defunding of police. We demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.

defundthepolice.org

Was/Is this a good strategy/policy for Democrats to get behind?

The policy is fine. There should be no police as the only reason to have police is to preserve and enforce the systemic racism of the American political system. Unless and until we get rid of police and start respecting the fact that "criminals" is merely the catch all term used to perpetuate an anti-black agenda, and distract from the fact that people of color that steal, assault and murder only do so because of the centuries of abuse heaped on them, we can never be a free nation.

 

[Cardinal]

The policy is fine. There should be no police as the only reason to have police is to preserve and enforce the systemic racism of the American political system. Unless and until we get rid of police and start respecting the fact that "criminals" is merely the catch all term used to perpetuate an anti-black agenda, and distract from the fact that people of color that steal, assault and murder only do so because of the centuries of abuse heaped on them, we can never be a free nation.

Lutherf's post also highlights the most glaring failure in the slogan, "defund the police": it puts the person who supports the policy on the defensive. Lutherf takes the implication of the name (defund the police) and effortlessly argues as given that it means the wholesale elimination of the police. The other side is forced to use all their energy and time explaining what it really means, which means he's constantly on the defensive.

Lutherf will then respond to my post, insisting that it does in fact mean the elimination of the police, forcing me in turn to explain that it doesn't mean that at all.

And if you're having to explain yourself, you're losing.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Lightfoot is a massive failure....

She has a democratic city council and could accomplish this goal if there weren’t issues beyond political control.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Defund The Police

We call for a national defunding of police. We demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.

defundthepolice.org

Was/Is this a good strategy/policy for Democrats to get behind?

It worked out much better for the Republicans who are able to mine it for unlimited political points.

The one thing Democrats are consistently good at is self-sabotage.

 

[Lycanthrope]

The spectacular failure of the "defund the police" movement was educational in a few ways, big and small.

1) Messaging is important. This is a "No duh" statement to most, but you'd be surprised by how many people seem perplexed by the fact that a good idea has to have good packaging. "The slogan doesn't matter! It wins by the virtue of its rightness alone!" As Dr. Phil would say, "How's that working out for you?" And if you answer, "It's working out great!" just remember that this is specifically the reason why Biden doesn't get to have a domestic agenda, and why Democrats aren't allowed to take a crap in the morning unless Manchin and Sinema approve of it first.

The ideas contained within "Defund the police" are good. Unfortunately, the slogan itself can only make people not already on board with it imagine a hellscape in which Mad Max marauders have taken over the neighborhood and are beating, robbing and raping their loves ones with impunity. Messaging matters. Sorry, guys. Otherwise you're going to have to explain why marketing is a multibillion dollar industry, or why Fox News exists.

2) Crime matters to the American people. Another "Duh" comment, but you can't tackle head-on the fact that right wing pundits get this concept just fine and are weaponizing it handily. Democrats have to show they take it seriously just as much as Republicans. The problem is doing so in a way that doesn't devolve into the same old "tough on crime" tropes that make society worse. Which brings us to the most important point...

3) Police aren't to blame for all their abuses; we are. Before the 2020 election, the onus for my condemnation of law enforcement and the justice system in whole fell on the justice system. Traffic ticket quotas, unlawful search and seizure, civil asset forfeiture, qualified immunity, the strength of police unions in thwarting accountability, plea bargaining, mandatory minimums, legalized corruption as a result of the war on drugs...I blame police and the justice system. (And this isn't even getting into the things police and the courts themselves have no involvement in, such as the treatment of inmates and how they fit back into society once they exit the prison system, all of which are their own dumpster fires).

But in 2020, the public saw police beat peaceful protesters across the country and we still punished Democrats for wanting to hold them accountable anyway. This illustrates that all the abuses I listed above didn't come out of a vacuum. We put the politicians in power who create laws that make them possible. So if you don't like those abuses, just ask yourself if you're the one who voted for the guy who promised to be "tough on crime." If you did, then the problem is you.

Best post of the thread, well done.

 

[OrphanSlug]

No, "defund the police" was a monumentally stupid idea but not exclusively because of the slogan (for lack of a better word.)

The real issue is what it always is with modern liberalism, poor communication on what to do with moreover liberal faction fighting that gives terrible message consistency. Mess on top of mess then they wonder why they do not retain power for very long.

The actual social issues of law enforcement mentality and our broken criminal justice system fail to be advanced.

It is as if the slogan and the rhetoric is more important than doing something, get the support by saying something that has a feel good aspect to it with no real substance in undoing the mess that leads to so many people (of any type) being killed by the police.

More of an issue of division, something to get people upset about, over doing something more may agree on.

 

[reflechissez]

"Democrats" doesn't mean "the entirety of the Democratic Party from sea to sea".

So, what are you talking about?

 

[uptower]

It was always more of a slogan than policy, but no it doesn't play well.