In recent years, dozens of officers worked more than 1,000 hours of overtime annually. Experts say these levels of extra work can lead to accidents and poor decision making in use of force situations.
Think about a surgeon. We put peoples lives in their hands. We expect them to be preposterously educated, able to perform extreme tasks under significant duress, to maintain ongoing technical and specialized training, to prove that the training is effective, and they are compensated accordingly. If they fuck up, they can be held personally liable for their fuck ups. There are consequences to the career and its not a role to be taken on lightly.
Hear me out.
We raise the amount we pay cops to 1.5 million dollars a year… but.
No qualified immunity. It no longer exists (guess what? it already doesn’t exist for military service members). Any crimes they commit, the consequences are 10x’d and they are no longer allowed to engage in public service, ever. They can be publicly executed for any crimes beyond misdemeanor. They have to pay for their own equipment. They have to carry liability insurance for any violations of civil rights which might occur in the line of performing their duties.
The minimum qualification is a PhD in constitutional law. They need to be able to run a 6 minute mile, do 100 push ups in 2 minutes, 200 sit ups in 2 minutes, and 80 burpees in 2 minutes. They need to be able to carry 120 lbs for 10 minutes up an incline. They need to be able to recite the US Constitution, the state constitution, and the local city and county charters where they are stationed. They are expected to have advanced knowledge of any and all laws they are expected to be enforcing. They have to undergo annual psychological, physical, technical, and legal reassessments to prove their suitability for the job; these reassessments are maintained as a part of public record.
We 10x the pay and we hire 1/10th the number of cops. It becomes a career path somewhere between than a doctor or a lawyer or an astronaut. Its not something a HS drop out should be able to consider as a career path.
What about this, instead we just take that 1.5 mill a year and put it towards things that actual solve problems, rather than making sure we have the best and brights super soldiers doing traffic stops and taking notes on your break in.
But I think you’ll find no matter what you do, some version of a person whose role in society is to enforce the laws, a kind of “law enforcement”, emerges.
The properties of that role can vary widely from society to society, but pretty much every society independently comes to the same conclusion, that the role is necessary, once the society determines a common and well structured code of conduct is necessary.
100% abolish the police. They are a corrupt institution which finds their roots in re-enforcing a slave culture. 100% let every prisoner free. The roots of the prison system in the US are the same as the police state.
But countries with no history of slavery have police forces and prison systems. They are an emergent property of large social systems. Society will re-invent the role. We might as well fill the niche in a manner we want, instead of a manner we dont want.
But countries with no history of slavery have police forces and prison systems. They are an emergent property of large social systems. Society will re-invent the role. We might as well fill the niche in a manner we want, instead of a manner we dont want.
I mean yeah, if you don’t have means of enforcing law, the law becomes pointless, might as well abolish all laws.
And I mean that MIGHT be possible, but do we really want to test what it’d be like in a lawless society where it’s probably going to be money and violence that decides who’s right, kinda like now, but with no possibility of suing the people with money or violence, you could only respond with your own violence.
The idea that things devolve into a lawless society because a lack of police is absurdist reductionism.
Firstly, we already live in a lawless society; see any of the actions Trump has taken since January. Its just a matter of “for whom does the law apply?”
Second, and I posted this to your other response, the idea that we can’t “abolish a police department and rebuild it into something that serves its intended purpose” is also absurdist, in at least that we have the counter-factual of it actually happening: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/12/camden-policing-reforms-313750
So they didn’t abolish the police, they reformed it. That doesn’t disprove my statement, which in itself was not a shot at you, merely commentary on what you said.
You said
They are an emergent property of large social systems. Society will re-invent the role. We might as well fill the niche in a manner we want, instead of a manner we dont want.
And I don’t disagree, I merely stated that police of some sort, regardless of name, is not just an emergent property, but also a necessity. I never said that the way Americans do policing is THE way to do it. I’m not American myself.
Firstly, we already live in a lawless society; see any of the actions Trump has taken since January. Its just a matter of “for whom does the law apply?”
That’s more an America problem than a “police is inherently bad” problem if you ask me.
TL;DR: Yes, I agree, policing in the US needs heavy reforms. But the moment you go around saying “abolish the police”, you’re not talking about reforms, or at least that’s not what most people are going to hear. They’re going to think they’re going to have to live in The Purge. So maybe stop referring to it that way and people will give your ideas, which are actually good, more consideration.
No. The abolished it. They didn’t reform it. They abolished it.
But the moment you go around saying “abolish the police”, you’re not talking about reforms, or at least that’s not what most people are going to hear.
Stop it.
Don’t both misinterpret what I said and then put words I didn’t put down into my mouth. If your balls shrink into your chest when you hear “abolish the police”, thats a you problem. Likewise, if you are basing your decision making on “what most people want to hear”, you probably are both a) not an effective strategist, and even further b) not a very good person.
Abolish the police. If you can’t do that, de-fund them. Tip-toeing around the sensitivities of a deeply immoral people isn’t a strategy that gets results. It only gets you halfway to no-where.
Maybe I’m too easy to please but I’d be happier if they took the money that currently goes towards tanks and “how to shoot first” seminars and put it towards ongoing education for officers on law, de-escalation tactics, and critical thinking in stressful situations.
I mean, I agree entirely with the “abolish the police” movement. I don’t think policing in the US is recoverable. Its rotten to the core. Its a remnant of slavery. In that sense I’m an abolitionist.
But I also think its a thing that “law enforcement” is a thing that will be expected to happen. So if you are going to abolish policing as we currently know it, you need to replace it with something different.
Any law enforcement will be called police. Frankly it’s a bit silly to say police are rotten so if we abolish them we should change their name. That’s basically just rebranding. And I mean, sometimes that works, so I guess I shouldn’t discount it entirely.
Replace it with what? Militsiya? Pretty much every country in the world calls their law enforcement “police” these days. I suppose there are some that have gendarmerie or carabinieri or similar, though those exist next to police rather than instead of them usually.
Wikipedia seems to think they still have a police department. So the police as an institution isn’t being replaced, it’s just being reformed. It’s controlled by a different level of local government and it has different rules now, but it’s still police. If this is what you’re supporting, you’re not for abolishment of police, you’re for police reform. Which the US does heavily need. Abolishment of police means something else entirely.
This is the way. I can’t tell you how much it hurts me when I see an obese cop.
Practicality-wise though, if the police have recruitment issues now though, finding recruits with a PhD will be impossible. People really overestimate how many PhD’s are out here in the wild.
Think about a surgeon. We put peoples lives in their hands. We expect them to be preposterously educated, able to perform extreme tasks under significant duress, to maintain ongoing technical and specialized training, to prove that the training is effective, and they are compensated accordingly. If they fuck up, they can be held personally liable for their fuck ups. There are consequences to the career and its not a role to be taken on lightly.
Hear me out.
We raise the amount we pay cops to 1.5 million dollars a year… but.
No qualified immunity. It no longer exists (guess what? it already doesn’t exist for military service members). Any crimes they commit, the consequences are 10x’d and they are no longer allowed to engage in public service, ever. They can be publicly executed for any crimes beyond misdemeanor. They have to pay for their own equipment. They have to carry liability insurance for any violations of civil rights which might occur in the line of performing their duties.
The minimum qualification is a PhD in constitutional law. They need to be able to run a 6 minute mile, do 100 push ups in 2 minutes, 200 sit ups in 2 minutes, and 80 burpees in 2 minutes. They need to be able to carry 120 lbs for 10 minutes up an incline. They need to be able to recite the US Constitution, the state constitution, and the local city and county charters where they are stationed. They are expected to have advanced knowledge of any and all laws they are expected to be enforcing. They have to undergo annual psychological, physical, technical, and legal reassessments to prove their suitability for the job; these reassessments are maintained as a part of public record.
We 10x the pay and we hire 1/10th the number of cops. It becomes a career path somewhere between than a doctor or a lawyer or an astronaut. Its not something a HS drop out should be able to consider as a career path.
Look, obviously, hyperbole. Or is it?
What about this, instead we just take that 1.5 mill a year and put it towards things that actual solve problems, rather than making sure we have the best and brights super soldiers doing traffic stops and taking notes on your break in.
Since we’re engaging in fantasy, sure.
But I think you’ll find no matter what you do, some version of a person whose role in society is to enforce the laws, a kind of “law enforcement”, emerges.
The properties of that role can vary widely from society to society, but pretty much every society independently comes to the same conclusion, that the role is necessary, once the society determines a common and well structured code of conduct is necessary.
100% abolish the police. They are a corrupt institution which finds their roots in re-enforcing a slave culture. 100% let every prisoner free. The roots of the prison system in the US are the same as the police state.
But countries with no history of slavery have police forces and prison systems. They are an emergent property of large social systems. Society will re-invent the role. We might as well fill the niche in a manner we want, instead of a manner we dont want.
I mean yeah, if you don’t have means of enforcing law, the law becomes pointless, might as well abolish all laws.
And I mean that MIGHT be possible, but do we really want to test what it’d be like in a lawless society where it’s probably going to be money and violence that decides who’s right, kinda like now, but with no possibility of suing the people with money or violence, you could only respond with your own violence.
The idea that things devolve into a lawless society because a lack of police is absurdist reductionism.
Firstly, we already live in a lawless society; see any of the actions Trump has taken since January. Its just a matter of “for whom does the law apply?”
Second, and I posted this to your other response, the idea that we can’t “abolish a police department and rebuild it into something that serves its intended purpose” is also absurdist, in at least that we have the counter-factual of it actually happening: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/12/camden-policing-reforms-313750
So they didn’t abolish the police, they reformed it. That doesn’t disprove my statement, which in itself was not a shot at you, merely commentary on what you said.
You said
And I don’t disagree, I merely stated that police of some sort, regardless of name, is not just an emergent property, but also a necessity. I never said that the way Americans do policing is THE way to do it. I’m not American myself.
That’s more an America problem than a “police is inherently bad” problem if you ask me.
TL;DR: Yes, I agree, policing in the US needs heavy reforms. But the moment you go around saying “abolish the police”, you’re not talking about reforms, or at least that’s not what most people are going to hear. They’re going to think they’re going to have to live in The Purge. So maybe stop referring to it that way and people will give your ideas, which are actually good, more consideration.
No. The abolished it. They didn’t reform it. They abolished it.
Stop it.
Don’t both misinterpret what I said and then put words I didn’t put down into my mouth. If your balls shrink into your chest when you hear “abolish the police”, thats a you problem. Likewise, if you are basing your decision making on “what most people want to hear”, you probably are both a) not an effective strategist, and even further b) not a very good person.
Abolish the police. If you can’t do that, de-fund them. Tip-toeing around the sensitivities of a deeply immoral people isn’t a strategy that gets results. It only gets you halfway to no-where.
For a couple of teachers?
I don’t understand what you mean.
Like pay for teachers not cops.
Maybe I’m too easy to please but I’d be happier if they took the money that currently goes towards tanks and “how to shoot first” seminars and put it towards ongoing education for officers on law, de-escalation tactics, and critical thinking in stressful situations.
I mean, I agree entirely with the “abolish the police” movement. I don’t think policing in the US is recoverable. Its rotten to the core. Its a remnant of slavery. In that sense I’m an abolitionist.
But I also think its a thing that “law enforcement” is a thing that will be expected to happen. So if you are going to abolish policing as we currently know it, you need to replace it with something different.
Any law enforcement will be called police. Frankly it’s a bit silly to say police are rotten so if we abolish them we should change their name. That’s basically just rebranding. And I mean, sometimes that works, so I guess I shouldn’t discount it entirely.
Replace it with what? Militsiya? Pretty much every country in the world calls their law enforcement “police” these days. I suppose there are some that have gendarmerie or carabinieri or similar, though those exist next to police rather than instead of them usually.
These questions aren’t being asked in a vacuum: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/12/camden-policing-reforms-313750. Maybe ask a Camdenite? I’m sure we’ve got a few laying about.
Its not a hypothetical to dissolve a department of a government which is dysfunctional and rebuild it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden_County_Police_Department
Wikipedia seems to think they still have a police department. So the police as an institution isn’t being replaced, it’s just being reformed. It’s controlled by a different level of local government and it has different rules now, but it’s still police. If this is what you’re supporting, you’re not for abolishment of police, you’re for police reform. Which the US does heavily need. Abolishment of police means something else entirely.
This is the way. I can’t tell you how much it hurts me when I see an obese cop.
Practicality-wise though, if the police have recruitment issues now though, finding recruits with a PhD will be impossible. People really overestimate how many PhD’s are out here in the wild.
1.5 million dollars a year.
police preferentially dont hire people with that much education on purpose.
We are so bad about this across the board. Why is society so content to expect the worst from people like police and politicians?
Honestly, probably because we’ve been conditioned to get angry at the employees of the super rich rather than the hoarders themselves.