U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do you support the defunding of the Police in Philly?
Yes, I support the defunding of the Police 11 36.67%
No, I don't support the defunding of the Police 19 63.33%
Voters: 30. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2020, 06:00 PM
 
41,711 posts, read 43,554,365 times
Reputation: 17637

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireshaker View Post
The positive experiences of Camden (yes, Camden) shows that this is an idea with a ton of merit.

The approach in Camden was effectively to fire the union and every cop. Rehire the better cops at lower salary allowing you to hire even more cops.



Democrats are ***** footing around this with "defund the police". It's OK, come out and say it. You need to curtail or eliminate the police union.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2020, 08:56 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
6,956 posts, read 3,351,285 times
Reputation: 4427
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Democrats are ***** footing around this with "defund the police". It's OK, come out and say it. You need to curtail or eliminate the police union.
Here's the problem: The calls to "defund the police" in the beginning came from the radical-left fringe, and they meant the term literally.

But the calls were loud enough that others who wanted police reform had to respond, and they've been defining the term downward since.

Shifting police funds for certain functions we ask of them to those better equipped to do it is a good way of redefining the term. Domestic disputes and calls involving those with behavioral-health problems would be better handled by social workers and mental-health professionals.

I know this retired cop-turned-truck driver (like me, African-American; unlike me, a conservative Trump supporter) who argues that this is a bad idea because, well, what if someone there could cause physical harm with their behavior? I've not yet explained this to him, but part of the problem is that many cops think like him — that all disturbances could turn violent, and thus one must come prepared to inflict violence if necessary. Sometimes what's needed are de-escalation skills, not escalation ones, and the cops aren't trained in de-escalation (or if they are, the training's sure ****-poor).

I'm with you about where the problem really lies. The police unions in most big cities will cover, nay, stick up, for cops who express openly racist views when talking amongst themselves and foster the us-against-them attitude many white cops have towards black neighborhoods they patrol. Camden's FOP lodge fought the proposed changes the head of the new Camden County Police Department ferociously, and not just because one of them was paying the officers less. So the new management jettisoned the FOP lodge instead.*

In Philadelphia, I'd say that doing the same with FOP Lodge 5 would be a good start. I'd also suggest that any new union be placed under the management of the officers of the Guardian Civic League (the organization that speaks for the African-American officers on the force).

And since many of the police unions have gone over to the GOP (Lodge 5 has), taking them on costs Democrats no points politically; I suspect that the AFL-CIO would be willing to be silent on the matter or at the outside issue pro format statements of solidarity but not back them with real muscle.

*I said to someone else that the situation with the police parallels that of big-city public schools in that a powerful union that puts its own members' interests (and prejudices) above all other concerns is actually working to undermine the effectiveness of that which they profess to defend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2020, 09:02 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,531 posts, read 11,005,010 times
Reputation: 5480
Personally, I don't support any defunding of the police department. I would rather them just fairly punish the individual bad cops that abuse their power. Defunding the police is insane. The residents who live in the most dangerous neighborhoods in the city will the most negatively affected by it. Overall crime would certainly increase, and that's not a good look for a city with an already high crime rate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2020, 06:28 AM
 
7,753 posts, read 8,161,711 times
Reputation: 11139
1) I wish proponents of what "defunding" is supposed to accomplish -- would STOP using the word defunding. I pray it's not too late to steer the conversation away from that usage.

People hear the word "defunding" and automatically are opposed....BUT when they hear what "defunding" is supposed to accomplish, then they say, "well, OK. THAT that I could support."

Why not use the word "reallocate" -- "re-appropriate" "re-direct?" People I know believe the word "defund" was intentionally chosen because certain parties knew if you said "defund" people would say "no."

2) IF you really mean: re-direct law enforcement police money to ancillary support professionals who could respond along with police to certain situations and calls, then I could see that.

POLICE ALONE don't need to be called for many of the things they're called to respond to. Why can't a "police social worker" go along? "Why can't a professional police psychologist go along on a domestic case?
Or a case where someone has autism?

We DO ask police to do things and call them for situations that are NOT law enforcement. Many calls they get aren't necessarily a "law enforcement" issue. And smart, intelligent police officers know that....on scene! They'll say this isn't a law enforcement issue. Who do you want me to call?"

Now, that does NOT excuse ANY officer from not knowing how to deescalate a situation. You don't need to be a psychologist to know if an UNarmed adult has autism.....you more than likely won't need to shoot him! OR if a person is drunk sleeping in a car -- treat him they way you'd treat one of your own officers if you got there and saw it was him.....you'd take him home...and that's it.

And please...."defunding" is not about more police training. You don't need "training" to know you don't shoot someone in the back or stay on their neck for 8 minutes. THAT is not about training.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2020, 07:41 AM
 
207 posts, read 64,901 times
Reputation: 589
The issue with calls to 'defund', in my opinion, seems to be that they want to give less money to the police (to spend elsewhere), while also improving the police force with more training, more oversight, and more vetting/hiring better officers. It sure seems like much more money needs to flow to police departments in order to accomplish those goals.



My personal pet peeve is that legislators get to escape any criticism for this mess. They could, with the stroke of a pen, drastically reduce the need for police and decrease police-citizen interactions by legalizing most drugs and eliminating minor traffic offenses. Things like no-knock warrants should never have been a thing. Insanely dangerous for everyone involved; if your case hinges on evidence that can be 'destroyed' in a few minutes, your 'case' is trash to begin with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2020, 10:03 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia/South Jersey area
3,187 posts, read 1,695,171 times
Reputation: 11516
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
Personally, I don't support any defunding of the police department. I would rather them just fairly punish the individual bad cops that abuse their power. Defunding the police is insane. The residents who live in the most dangerous neighborhoods in the city will the most negatively affected by it. Overall crime would certainly increase, and that's not a good look for a city with an already high crime rate.
but the problem is they will never do that. I always hear the "it's just a few bad cops", well no, it's a lot of good cops that say nothing and do nothing that allows them to do whatever they please.

I don't want the police to be totally defunded but we definitely need a better system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2020, 10:22 AM
 
1,821 posts, read 676,158 times
Reputation: 1207
As I am aware, PPD will still get what they've been getting, no? Crime is up in some areas but it's down in others and I think they need to pick themselves up by their straps and be more efficient with the money they're given. And if no-chin Mcnesby wants to throw a hissyfit and say nasty things about the Mayor/DA/Police Comm., then we should just ignore him.

I would even be so bold as to suggest even further cuts to the PPD. Doesn't Philly have one of the highest percentages of a city's budget going to police funding? I think Philly is a city where more police aren't necessarily going to make the city safer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2020, 12:06 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,531 posts, read 11,005,010 times
Reputation: 5480
Quote:
Originally Posted by eliza61nyc View Post
but the problem is they will never do that. I always hear the "it's just a few bad cops", well no, it's a lot of good cops that say nothing and do nothing that allows them to do whatever they please.

I don't want the police to be totally defunded but we definitely need a better system.
Even if they partially defund the police in Philly, how would that improve anything?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2020, 12:11 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,531 posts, read 11,005,010 times
Reputation: 5480
I think Mayor Kenney's heart is in the right place but as of now he has proven that he is very naive on his strategy of decreasing police brutality in the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2020, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,531 posts, read 11,005,010 times
Reputation: 5480
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoNgFooCj View Post
I think Philly is a city where more police aren't necessarily going to make the city safer.
That's debatable but what's not debatable is that having less cops in the city will definitely make the city less safe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top