Chicago Community activist says we need to abolish the police.

[Jimusmc]

Few years ago there was talks about having the National Guard police the streets in the more violent areas of Chicago that have multiple daily shootings.

I bet shootings would go way down.. they won't arrest they'll just shoot them instead.

[PC2]

In my county we just have a Sheriffs department, all good people. I say let the cities decide for themselves within city limits.

[boberino]

They're not even evil. For every bad cop that makes the news, there are many more good cops that don't.

Any good cop that protects a bad cop is a bad cop.

[buck008]

In my county we just have a Sheriff department, all good people. I say let the cities decide for themselves within city limits.

That doesn't really work either. City limits aren't magical. If you are next to a town with no police, you inherit their problems.

[Deleted]

I can't believe any logical person would agree.

I don't think any logical person would.

[PC2]

City limits aren't magical. If you are next to a town with no police, you inherit their problems.

True, that's why you want a buffer zone between you and the baddies.

[Stormspellz]

There's police in Chicago at all? That's news to me.

There are plenty of police downtown and all the tourist areas, south side other then the hospital and the ball park(white sox)...not so much

[Auxora]

In 99% of areas I'd say it's a terrible idea, but what she's saying also has to be kept in context for bad parts of Chicago (which is what she's referring to). The worst areas of Chicago aren't like most areas. There is a long long history there of police abuses, the 60s riots, abuses since then too long to mention but can easily be googled. Police in those areas really have failed and aren't working. There's massive distrust of police, and arguably for good reason. So in those worst of the worst areas it's probably worth discussing new creative alternatives. It doesn't mean not enforce the laws or have anarchy, but maybe there is a different system for those areas that is a better solution. These are areas where in some cases even police are scared to go, calling 9-11 will lead to long long delays before any police show up, Chicago routinely has 40+ shootings a weekend (and often over 60), scandals where people have been arrested and detained without attorney or anyone knowing where they are at in secret for days like a war zone, etc. So when the topic comes up you can't really compare the discussion for the bad areas of Chicago to getting rid of police in most other neighborhoods or cities, where it would be laughed off as ridiculous.

[Symphonic]

What's wrong with anarchy?

Did you ever watch Twitch Plays Pokemon? That's what's wrong with Anarchy. Sure, democracy took more time, but it was really the only way through certain parts.

[Gemini Soul]

There are plenty of police downtown and all the tourist areas, south side other then the hospital and the ball park(white sox)...not so much

Go SOXS!!!! Cubs stink, Sox RULE!!!!!


I'm glad i live in the burbs and not that area any more, i use to live about 15 min drive from Midway.

[buck008]

True, that's why you want a buffer zone between you and the baddies.

I take it that you don't live in a populated area?

[Fenixdown]

evil.

And with that right there, you're no better than the person in the column you linked. Good job!

[boberino]

By protect you mean don't actively put a target on their back by snitching on bad cops? There's really not a whole lot a cop can do if he knows a higher ranking cop is dirty unless he has some real hard evidence and that's usually not the case. It's a bit more complicated than in 5th grade when you told on your classmate for pinching someone.

This does not invalidate the point.

[PC2]

I take it that you don't live in a populated area?

Small town, average of about 40 people per square mile.

Of course I want them to have cops, but I also think each state, county, and city should have a good amount of decentralized control over their region.

[Gemini Soul]

In 99% of areas I'd say it's a terrible idea, but what she's saying also has to be kept in context for bad parts of Chicago (which is what she's referring to). The worst areas of Chicago aren't like most areas. There is a long long history there of police abuses, the 60s riots, abuses since then too long to mention but can easily be googled. Police in those areas really have failed and aren't working. There's massive distrust of police, and arguably for good reason. So in those worst of the worst areas it's probably worth discussing new creative alternatives. It doesn't mean not enforce the laws or have anarchy, but maybe there is a different system for those areas that is a better solution. These are areas where in some cases even police are scared to go, calling 9-11 will lead to long long delays before any police show up, Chicago routinely has 40+ shootings a weekend (and often over 60), scandals where people have been arrested and detained without attorney or anyone knowing where they are at in secret for days like a war zone, etc. So when the topic comes up you can't really compare the discussion for the bad areas of Chicago to getting rid of police in most other neighborhoods or cities, where it would be laughed off as ridiculous.

There reasons why some cops are afraid to go in some areas of Chicago...

[buck008]

Small town, average of about 40 people per square mile.

Of course I want them to have cops, but I also think each state, county, and city should have a good amount of decentralized control over their region.

That's fine from a "libertarianism in a vacuum" perspective. I'm sure it sounds great in those terms. In real life, there is no practical alternative to some incarnation of a police force. They can call it something else and give their version slightly different rules, but it's still the police. So you either give people the illusion that they get to self determine by picking their preferred flavor of police force or you let them choose anarchy which would affect people in other regions that did not make that choice. Neither of those are particularly good options. I guess the first one keeps the masses happy.

[zenkai]

And with that right there, you're no better than the person in the column you linked. Good job!

How so? Because I admit people in power will missuse that power? Doesn't mean I believe all are evil, but " "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

[Aucald]

The police need to be demilitarized in general, there's a lot of retraining that needs to happen from community outreach, deescalation tactics for domestic and lower risk situations, and most of all they need to purge their ranks of corruption on every level of the organization from the top down. But out and out abolishing the police? I don't think that would work, I don't think it's even possible in a civilized society. No matter what model you intend you're always going to have agents whose responsibility is enforcement of the laws, and corruption is always going to be a possibility when you give a person the implicit power or authority to carry out that responsibility. Modern law enforcement, in my view, isn't so broken that it can't be fixed with application of serious effort.

[Dextroden]

That's fine from a "libertarianism in a vacuum" perspective. I'm sure it sounds great in those terms. In real life, there is no practical alternative to some incarnation of a police force. They can call it something else and give their version slightly different rules, but it's still the police. So you either give people the illusion that they get to self determine by picking their preferred flavor of police force or you let them choose anarchy which would affect people in other regions that did not make that choice. Neither of those are particularly good options. I guess the first one keeps the masses happy.

That's why you go with option 2b. You barricade/section off the people who want the rule of crime from the people who want order. And ignore them when they want out.

I definitely wouldn't want to be in an area with zero cops. But I'd love to study how fast things degrade.

[zenkai]

The police need to be demilitarized in general, there's a lot of retraining that needs to happen from community outreach, deescalation tactics for domestic and lower risk situations, and most of all they need to purge their ranks of corruption on every level of the organization from the top down. But out and out abolishing the police? I don't think that would work, I don't think it's even possible in a civilized society. No matter what model you intend you're always going to have agents whose responsibility is enforcement of the laws, and corruption is always going to be a possibility when you give a person the implicit power or authority to carry out that responsibility. Modern law enforcement, in my view, isn't so broken that it can't be fixed with application of serious effort.

You can thank 9/11 and things like this for modern police militarization. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout