Minneapolis City Council Members Announce Intent To Disband The Police Department, Invest In Community-Led Public Safety

[Frau Holle]

Community led safety means bring back the mobs and pitchforks.

Why would you jump to that conclusion instead of social services, drug treatment, and healthcare, which is what polling supports.

Because you mentioned the “good crimes”. The ones where you look at the perpetrator and think how much help they need and how they can get it.

There are monsters out there. People who prey on children and rape people’s sisters and murder people’s mothers.
You think with a “community-led safety” program instead of police those people will be offered treatment and social services?
How do you think the community will decide to keep their families safe from those people if there are no police around?

[moviestar]

I know you are but what am I?

I agree. What finally brought you to this moment of self awareness?

There is ignorance and stupidity on this site is astonishing.

You are a prime example of my comment.

[jessilin0113]

Community led safety means bring back the mobs and pitchforks.

Why would you jump to that conclusion instead of social services, drug treatment, and healthcare, which is what polling supports.

Because you mentioned the “good crimes”. The ones where you look at the perpetrator and think how much help they need and how they can get it.

There are monsters out there. People who prey on children and rape people’s sisters and murder people’s mothers.
You think with a “community-led safety” program instead of police those people will be offered treatment and social services?
How do you think the community will decide to keep their families safe from those people if there are no police around?

Again, defunding the police does not entail abolishing the police altogether. It means redirecting much of their funding to the community. There will still be cops for violent crimes. Considering the pretty low closure rate for these, though, how much good are they actually doing? Aside from that, imagine if a police officer's time and talent could go toward actually solving these types of crimes rather than wasting time removing a homeless person from a bench.

[mcginnisc]

Why would you jump to that conclusion instead of social services, drug treatment, and healthcare, which is what polling supports.

Because you mentioned the “good crimes”. The ones where you look at the perpetrator and think how much help they need and how they can get it.

There are monsters out there. People who prey on children and rape people’s sisters and murder people’s mothers.
You think with a “community-led safety” program instead of police those people will be offered treatment and social services?
How do you think the community will decide to keep their families safe from those people if there are no police around?

Again, defunding the police does not entail abolishing the police altogether. It means redirecting much of their funding to the community. There will still be cops for violent crimes. Considering the pretty low closure rate for these, though, how much good are they actually doing? Aside from that, imagine if a police officer's time and talent could go toward actually solving these types of crimes rather than wasting time removing a homeless person from a bench.

True..however, they are disbanding it according to every article I have seen.. not defunding..there is a huge difference in wording.
Disbanding is dismantling it or getting rid of it. Period. Point blank. The article even states it is being disbanded..not defunded or re-allocating funding. That is why people are so freaked out by this.. I think the majority of people would agree that looking at funding and how it is allocated is best..not getting rid of it completely like the article states ( unless I am reading every article incorrectly).

[jessilin0113]

Because you mentioned the “good crimes”. The ones where you look at the perpetrator and think how much help they need and how they can get it.

There are monsters out there. People who prey on children and rape people’s sisters and murder people’s mothers.
You think with a “community-led safety” program instead of police those people will be offered treatment and social services?
How do you think the community will decide to keep their families safe from those people if there are no police around?

Again, defunding the police does not entail abolishing the police altogether. It means redirecting much of their funding to the community. There will still be cops for violent crimes. Considering the pretty low closure rate for these, though, how much good are they actually doing? Aside from that, imagine if a police officer's time and talent could go toward actually solving these types of crimes rather than wasting time removing a homeless person from a bench.

True..however, they are disbanding it according to every article I have seen.. not defunding..there is a huge difference in wording.
Disbanding is dismantling it or getting rid of it. Period. Point blank. The article even states it is being disbanded..not defunded or re-allocating funding. That is why people are so freaked out by this.. I think the majority of people would agree that looking at funding and how it is allocated is best..not getting rid of it completely like the article states ( unless I am reading every article incorrectly).

Sometimes they disband the city police and rehire them as county employees. I believe that's what Camden, NJ did, and they have had some success with it.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/01/ ... en/549542/

[mcginnisc]

Again, defunding the police does not entail abolishing the police altogether. It means redirecting much of their funding to the community. There will still be cops for violent crimes. Considering the pretty low closure rate for these, though, how much good are they actually doing? Aside from that, imagine if a police officer's time and talent could go toward actually solving these types of crimes rather than wasting time removing a homeless person from a bench.

True..however, they are disbanding it according to every article I have seen.. not defunding..there is a huge difference in wording.
Disbanding is dismantling it or getting rid of it. Period. Point blank. The article even states it is being disbanded..not defunded or re-allocating funding. That is why people are so freaked out by this.. I think the majority of people would agree that looking at funding and how it is allocated is best..not getting rid of it completely like the article states ( unless I am reading every article incorrectly).

Sometimes they disband the city police and rehire them as county employees. I believe that's what Camden, NJ did, and they have had some success with it.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/01/ ... en/549542/

I think if people knew what it meant, they would feel more comfortable with the concept. However, just saying disbanding with no other information is going to cause an issue...especially for people that have loved ones employed in Minneapolis. I know someone that works for the Minneapolis PD and he is a great guy. This whole situation has weighed heavily on him and his family- the death of Mr. Floyd, the acts of those officers, the riots ( he has been at every riot which has terrified his kids).
People keep saying this is defunding and it is not.. this is an actual disbanding of the MPD with no other information available. I straddle the line of cops need way more oversight and that not all cops are bad cops. KWIM? I do feel that society needs cops as there are some bad folks out there, but they have got to be held accountable. Period.

[jessilin0113]

True..however, they are disbanding it according to every article I have seen.. not defunding..there is a huge difference in wording.
Disbanding is dismantling it or getting rid of it. Period. Point blank. The article even states it is being disbanded..not defunded or re-allocating funding. That is why people are so freaked out by this.. I think the majority of people would agree that looking at funding and how it is allocated is best..not getting rid of it completely like the article states ( unless I am reading every article incorrectly).

Sometimes they disband the city police and rehire them as county employees. I believe that's what Camden, NJ did, and they have had some success with it.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/01/ ... en/549542/

I think if people knew what it meant, they would feel more comfortable with the concept. However, just saying disbanding with no other information is going to cause an issue...especially for people that have loved ones employed in Minneapolis. I know someone that works for the Minneapolis PD and he is a great guy. This whole situation has weighed heavily on him and his family- the death of Mr. Floyd, the acts of those officers, the riots ( he has been at every riot which has terrified his kids).
People keep saying this is defunding and it is not.. this is an actual disbanding of the MPD with no other information available. I straddle the line of cops need way more oversight and that not all cops are bad cops. KWIM? I do feel that society needs cops as there are some bad folks out there, but they have got to be held accountable. Period.

I don't necessarily disagree. And I struggle because I know cops are under a tremendous amount of pressure, but part of the defund movement would take so much of that pressure off of them and assign it to people actually equipped to deal with it. And it is unfair to good cops, but part of the "few bad apples" argument is that the rest of that idiom is "spoils the bunch". Bad cops are protected and there is a culture surrounding not ratting them out, I think. I really recommend watching the John Oliver show about this, linked above. He really dives in to some of the systemic problems with the police.

[Mommamia]

I know you are but what am I?

I agree. What finally brought you to this moment of self awareness?

You are a prime example of my comment.

Go the f**k away. You're not going to drag me into another one of your senseless, inane games.

[moviestar]

Make me

I know you are but what am I?

You are a prime example of my comment.

Go the f**k away. You're not going to drag me into another one of your senseless, inane games.

[29again]

Why would you jump to that conclusion instead of social services, drug treatment, and healthcare, which is what polling supports.

Because you mentioned the “good crimes”. The ones where you look at the perpetrator and think how much help they need and how they can get it.

There are monsters out there. People who prey on children and rape people’s sisters and murder people’s mothers.
You think with a “community-led safety” program instead of police those people will be offered treatment and social services?
How do you think the community will decide to keep their families safe from those people if there are no police around?

Again, defunding the police does not entail abolishing the police altogether. It means redirecting much of their funding to the community. There will still be cops for violent crimes. Considering the pretty low closure rate for these, though, how much good are they actually doing? Aside from that, imagine if a police officer's time and talent could go toward actually solving these types of crimes rather than wasting time removing a homeless person from a bench.

Why is being homeless a crime? And then, why is it the cops job to deal with it?

I think that part of reforming a police department should ALSO involve looking at all the regulations that city has on it's books and possible doing away with some of them. If you are making so many things "against" the law, how can you reasonably expect the police to deal with all of those little things?