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.
Yes. Nancy Pelosi and other Dems live in exactly such private, gated enclaves. So do many of the Hollywood celebrities advocating defunding and abolishing police departments. They don't care what happens to the little people who are already victims of disproportionately high crime rates, i.e., Blacks and Hispanics.
I didn't word it properly, I should have said middle class people. Could I move to a private city and take the tax money I'm paying now along with other charges and would it work? No one get's in without approval and a back ground check and can be voted out if they slip up. Of course everyone would have to sign a waiver.
This would be my thinking too if I wasn't in fear of it affecting me tbh. As in, me as a law abiding citizen, not me as white or whatev. If this happens for real -abolish police forces- can you even imagine the wild behavior of criminal types? The law abiding working class black people who LIVE in the ghettos will be victims even more than they are now, do you think the criminals will just go after whites? No way.
I cannot believe this is really a thing...??
Authority won’t go away. It will just be the toughest, most violent strongman in each neighborhood who takes over and provides “security.”
Authority won’t go away. It will just be the toughest, most violent strongman in each neighborhood who takes over and provides “security.”
I dunno. Crime in bad sections be they white trash populated trailer parks or black populated ghettoes is already so bad, and no citizen security happening, I don't see it happening then. This is the first time in my life -I'm aged 56- I've actually been worried about society falling apart as in a true civil war, or worse, total anarchy.
I'm not advocating this, but to be fair, it sounds like the police would no longer be used for non-potentially violent situations for mental issues or drug dependencies but there would still be armed police of some sort.
The current model is more efficient in that you can call one number, one agency, and they can be the first on any type of scene which is highly unpredictable. The same people that talk people off the ledge are the same people who surround violent criminals, guns drawn.
Not an enviable job.
We live in a ridiculous, extremist society in which we can't seem to separate the two necessary modes used by the same patrol officer.
I want to like the idea on some level, but the randomness of what could happen in any given situation would prove to be too cumbersome to figure who to send out to what kind of call that comes in.
At that point, we might as well be policed by screaming out-of-work baristas holding up signs, which is what feels like is going on now.
And if a social worker is called out to a high-crime part of town? Will the police come with them anyway?
"Social workers or medics could respond to situations once handled by police, she said."
Someone please explain to me how this will work?
They are not advocating replacing all police officers with social workers.
They are wanting to spend money on programs to try and remove the problems that end up in needing more policemen
It's not a bad idea and will require a nuanced approach to balancing immediate needs for law enforcement and not continually solving community problems with the band aid of more law enforcement.
They are not advocating replacing all police officers with social workers.
They are wanting to spend money on programs to try and remove the problems that end up in needing more policemen
It's not a bad idea and will require a nuanced approach to balancing immediate needs for law enforcement and not continually solving community problems with the band aid of more law enforcement.
If this is the case then awesome. Calling it "dismantling" is a misnomer then. It really would make total sense if they're not talking about abolishing police altogether.
I am totally in favor of police handling crime and social workers handling the non-criminal calls that police now handle. Though given how overburdened social workers now are, as we always are told when a child dies after CPS not doing their job, I doubt any city's ability to build an adequate work force of social workers to do this thankless, emotionally burdensome job.
Is that what they are actually intending to do, though? I feel dumb now.
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.
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.
