zlacker

[return to "How much do we need the police?"]
1. seph-r+p7[view] [source] 2020-06-03 22:43:00
>>js2+(OP)
I prefer the idea of peace officers. The more peace oriented the position, the less toxic people will be attracted to it. At the same time, there should also be health/toughness standards lest we want to go full Demolition man.
◧◩
2. julian+Jc[view] [source] 2020-06-03 23:15:08
>>seph-r+p7
I think what is looking more like a solution I'd like to see tried, is:

1) Replace 90% of police with community officers (unarmed) and social workers. Have them working their 'beats' regularly, pro-actively monitoring their areas and checking in with their charges. Again, unarmed.

2) Keep 10% for old style police work, that are only escalated to when specific conditions are met: approved by a municipal authority, wear bodycams, and have the permission of the caller to appear (within reason). Make it a real pain in the neck to bring them out, so they only show up for truly dangerous situations, not like some guy reselling cigarettes that ends in death.

A lawyer recently made an observation that really stuck with me: Only call the police when you're okay with the person you're calling about possibly dying. Sounds pretty strong when you put it that way - but it's just making explicit the implicit idea that the police will show up, the police are authorized (expected, even) to use force, and if there's disobedience or even just misunderstanding, the person could end up dead. See for example this story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Justine_Damond

If peace officers did most of the work, that could be a game-changing improvement.

[go to top]