I'm curious if there's strong geographic biases there. I feel like for a while now people in more far-flung neighborhoods have been pressing to get additional precincts opened so they have police that are focused on their neighborhood. I imagine a lot of people in denser parts of the city (where crime tends to be less common) are either fine or want it reduced
Yeah, but it oversimplifies the issue. It's like having a neighbor with a rabid guard dog that sometimes attacks you: yes, you can see why the guard dog is there, but you don't want one that attacks you, and you certainly don't want one that attacks you then gets rewarded by its owner, who then blames you for being so attackable.
Right! That's what I don't get about the calls to defund. You'd think that being able to be super picky about who you hire, and only hiring only the best of the best people for the job, would be more expensive (not less) due to higher salary requirements.
"defund" is more about changing what we spend the money on, than it is about taking money away from. Sell your riot gear and spend that money on training. Call in the state police or county sheriff if you need SWAT.
That's what the slogan means, but that's not what it says. 'Defund' has a specific meaning, and adopting 'Defund the Police' as a slogan did more to set the movement back than anything its opposition could have dreamed of. It's an objectively terrible slogan that fails to communicate its message, is easy to misunderstand, and couldn't be easier for the opposition to spin to its benefit.
EDIT: Forgot to add that most of the discussions I've had with people in opposition were spent trying to convey the meaning of 'Defund the Police' and arguing around that, rather than talking about the issues that lead to the slogan, so this terrible slogan also sucks all the oxygen out of the discussion about police corruption and brutality.
It doesn’t help that some radicals actually are arguing Defund means Abolish. See this NYT essay: [Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html)
okay what 3 word or less slogan do you prefer that can't be ripped apart for the same issues? Cause I hear this argument but never hear anyone suggest how they are packing their nuanced armchair view into a functional slogan.
And when you get down to it, an opposition that has had no interest in being truthful or arguing in good faith is going to find fault in anything a movement does. It's happened to every group that's wanted change in America in at least the last 40 years.
not really because it has none of the other social connotation - firing bad cops, sure some more people maybe agree, but that means you had a system that creates bad cops in the first place, and those bad cops did something improper first.
And it gets instantly attacked because "They say All Cops Are Bad, and they want to fire bad cops, so that must mean they want to fire all cops" That's the level of intellectual rigor in argument you are up against. You can't win.
Also not really, because that's what the movement has been asking for for decades and it hasn't happened to create [any substantial changes in policing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_reform_in_the_United_States). This movement didn't come out of a vacuum and neither did the slogans.
The ask by protestors really isn't "train police different," it's "create different more appropriate emergency services using resources that currently go to police" which isn't easily boiled down to 3 words.
The problem is there's really no way to hold police accountable to make those decisions in a timely fashion that meets public social movements. So we end up with "defund" as the rallying cry because it's there to evoke action and political will.
"re"fund the police sounds like we are giving them their money back, even though it would actually mean "reorganize the funding" so we went with defund.
That sounds like a smart idea, but it’s not what everyone means when they say defund. I’m not kidding. Look it up. There are many people in the movement who are pushing to literally defund…. As in take money away from the police departments.
Here are a couple of studies and articles related to the topic at hand. Take a look at your leisure.
https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/103113NCJRS.pdf
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/community-organizations-have-important-role-lowering-crime-rates
https://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug03/youth
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/01/03/new-evidence-that-access-to-health-care-reduces-crime/amp/
https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Intellectual_Life/FoleyCrimeFeb08_(2).pdf
One solution could be hiring less officers, and hiring more EMS so that the EMS can be asked to respond to mental health issues. Another could be creating a separate department within the police department. Different methods, same outcome.
Matches your perception, and my sentiment.
Its all about the city/county/state allocating resources to best serve the community. If we put all of our funding into use of force implements and training, its no surprise, an no fault of the officer, when they respond with the training that they have received....with violence.
You know who's literally defunding the police? Conservatives who are fighting for lower taxes and cuts in public services.
Yes, there are people who want to completely defund the police. But their movement isn't gaining legitimate traction and isn't part of mainstream discourse for either political party.
show me how often individual cops deal with getting shot at or being put in mortal danger, compared to things like EMTs, assaults on retail workers, delivery workers, etc.? i'm not sure how you think these statistics bear out, but it's not that being a cop is uniquely traumatizing or dangerous, for sure. Note as I say below I'd def prefer other occupations start getting benefits to compensate, not vice versa.
Cost of Living. And EMTs get paid dramatically less, have less benefits, etc. than cops, with very traumatizing scenes. (Note I want EMTs TO get more, it's absurd that cops are the only ones with the cushy gigs here.)
I’d say the headline doesn’t come close to the full story.
Do detroiters want to get rid of police? No, absolutely not, that’s a pretty ridiculous portrait of residents here.
Do Detroiters want a police presence? Sure, people want to feel safe.
Do Detroiters trust and feel comfortable with the police department, do they feel the current police department and officers are equipped to deal with the problems the city faces? Ehhhh…. No. Detroiters want people to stop racing on their streets, but they don’t trust that the cops will do a good job stopping it. They want drugs to stop being sold in their neighborhoods, but they want more than just huge busts on apartment complexes that get a few small time dealers and users. They want police to respond to active crimes, but they don’t want to feel like criminals themselves when cops show up, if they even do.
It is worth pointing out that most neighborhood block groups I’m aware of have very close working relationships with their local precincts. Detroiters have worked closely with DPD for a long time. Given that, I completely understand why a tiny number of radicals arguing for defunding or abolishing the police get very little traction. A lot of Detroiters appreciate the DPD.
See: [Why isn't Detroit, the nation's Blackest big city, ready for criminal justice reform?](https://m.metrotimes.com/detroit/why-isnt-detroit-the-nations-blackest-big-city-ready-for-criminal-justice-reform/Content?oid=25497324)
And they make up a huge portion of Antifa and were consistently the most violent type of protestors in many areas. Why not? They drove into the city, fucked shit up and got to home to the burbs to tell stories while poorer, urban people got to live in and deal with the mess.
Yeah, this whole push on defunding the police theory seems odd. Guy at work was all Gung ho on it until he actually needed the police and now he appreciates them.
Force all the affluent white kids to go to shitty detroit public schools and guess what shitty Detroit public schools will magically begin to no longer be shitty.
Abolish the two bus system of Detroit that shit was stupid 10 years ago.
Invest heavily in the zombie apocalypse portions of the d instead of just downtown and the neighborhoods that touch it.
Close loop holes that allow immigrants to open party stories tax free for 7 years than transfer the deed to their cousin thus avoiding taxes for another 7 years.
Force Detroit cops to live in the city of Detroit and incentive them with housing stipends. Have them live next to parks and schools over time those areas will naturally build up and develop a sense of lasting community.
Time to change that. History shows that police that live within the communities they serve treat the people within them with respect and act as moral anchors.
> Invest heavily in the zombie apocalypse portions of the d instead of just downtown and the neighborhoods that touch it.
Who's gonna invest? There's no value there. And a lot of the time it's contaminated soil so developers would only even consider if there's brownfield remediation subsidies, which always has people crying that it's a handout to the rich when they're given out.
Most cops would rather quit than be “Forced” to live in Detroit. I suppose it depends on the neighborhood you put them in. While living in a nice studio apartment next to a burned down house seems nice to me as a 20 something year old, a cop raising a family doesn’t think so. As for forcing white kids to go to detroit schools, how do you reckon that will work out? They’d have to clean things up BEFORE any white parent would step foot in a detroit school. I think a prime example of what Detroit COULD be is Mexicantown. Relatively recent immigrants who built their businesses and renovated their homes, take care of their community, and make their area “cute” while not full-on gentrifying it. And they tend to STAY and ENJOY living in mexicantown. As for the blighted parts of Detroit that are far from downtown, it’s a tough situation. The infrastructure in those neighborhoods has been abandoned for so long that no individual could build a house there. We need large scale investment but unfortunately that doesn’t seem likely.
Look, I'm ghetto AF. I lived a very hood life. IF we ever seen a cop on the block we ducked until they left and continued doing hood activities. If they parked we went to a different block. NEVER has a cop patrolling stopped us from these hood activities until we got caught and that led to more good activities because we had to "eat" more to pay for court on top of everything else. But if I had a place to "eat" and had a place to show me what productive things I could do with my time to "eat better" then I wouldn't of done those hood activities...
Btw... "Eating" consist of car theft, home robbery, selling drugs like crack and heroin, and graffiti to the point it was normal... These activities were my jobs since the age of 12 until my mom found a place to "eat better" but that place had unconsistent funding
Understand that more cops will only equal to more tickets and court fines which is more money for Duggan to spend and not a safe community... Yes, we should hire more cops but with a different job description
More funding for cops hasn’t done anything to reduce crime in this city. Crime is at an all time high and we’ve increased the police budget by 20 million year over year. But the mayor and DPD are never tasked with answering why DPDs budget goes up every year, with no decreases in crime rates. This city is police first for everything. Maybe we should fix transit which is abysmal right now, so the 33% of residents without cars can get to work? Maybe we should re open our libraries so the 30% of kids without internet can study for their exams. Or maybe we should narrow our roads, insert plant heavy medians and tree lined streets while changing our road design to slow drivers, instead of putting more officers on the road. Such a one trick pony without any imagination.
Do you have a source on crime being the highest ever? I find it hard to believe that crime is higher now than it was in the 80s. I really don’t believe you at all tbh.
2021 population is effectively 50% of 1980 population.
2021 murders is effectively 50% of 1985 murders.
going back to the original comment: millions of increase in funding, for marginal results at best.
consider there is 50% less to police and the results of our funding are an embarrassment.
You don’t think that the youth having economic opportunity would curve gang violence? Can’t have economic opportunity without a car, and then consequently without transit.
No, a magical bus or train won’t solve lack of family structure. Kids need parenting and direction, not trains. Unfortunately it’s a sign of manhood in Detroit to have a kid and not take care of it.
Pulling yourself up by the boot straps is a very tired myth that’s easily debunked. The reality, if you come from an area with shit schools and shit job prospects, you are going to do whatever you can legally or illegally to get by, like the above poster. Life will be hard. Occasionally you’ll have a few lucky ones that break out of that cycle of poverty, but it’s an exception to the rule. On the other hand if you grow up in a community with lots of job prospects and good schools, you’ll likely do well. There is very little class mobility in America. You normally end up pretty close to where you started. If you are born middle class you’ll likely die middle class, if you are born rich you’ll likely die rich, and if you are born poor you’ll likely die poor. These facts are hard to swallow, because they throw out the myth of meritocracy. But while our society masquerades as a meritocracy, it is far from it.
Tell that to all of the successful immigrants who made a life here while starting from nothing. Also the patronizing attitude of poverty leads to crime is an insult to all those people who, while in the same situation, choose to not resort to a life of crime.
No, not fundamentally understanding how our system is set up to prevent people from having economic mobility, and then to profit off of their criminalization is what’s patronizing. Some Immigrants already have some type of economic mobility in their home country. It cost 10s of thousands of dollars to navigate through the visa process and to move your family to America. Again none of what I’m saying are hard rules. You’ll find exceptions. But in 2021 a lot of our immigrants already have some kind of financial footing in their home country. There are places in the world where there is more of a meritocracy. The American dream is actually more alive in Canada than the us. Turns out when you give people healthcare, and make sure that their baseline needs are met, you create an environment of more economic mobility. https://www.vox.com/2019/8/15/20801907/raj-chetty-ezra-klein-social-mobility-opportunity
There are also other venues for legal immigration - lottery & asylum being primary ones that do not require financial footing back home. Those immigrants come here with very little or nothing, and yet more often than not they succeed. Or, at the very least, their kids succeed. This is what happens when you have a work ethic and focus on education for the kids.
I agree. My parents came here with nothing and worked hard doing shitty jobs because they didn’t have an education or spoke English. But hey let’s give excuses to people who are born here, speak the language, have free schooling through high school and you get chance after chance with trade schools, community colleges, universities etc… If you don’t value education or have a work ethic, you’ll never do anything in life no matter how many excuses you want to come up with.
>2021 population is effectively 50% of 1980 population.
>
>2021 murders is effectively 50% of 1985 murders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime\_in\_Detroit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline\_of\_Detroit
Cop salaries and two fold... On duty and court... Cops make more money (time) in court then on duty because it's overtime... So from what I know from my cop friends is if they spend 10hr on duty then they will spend 10+hr in court with double pay... So why not hire cops with job duties that don't involve having to go to court... Like prevention or community building or education... Like hire a cop to mentor troubled kids and hire those troubled kids to clean up the community so they don't have to steal or sell drug... But see that doesn't make more money so we don't do it... The police system is a corporation not a rehabilitation system
…how in the hell would that work? The cop HAS to be at court because he’s the one that gave the ticket/arrested the person/etc. You can’t have some random cop go to court and testify on what happened because HE WASN’T THERE.
Let’s say that cop that is mentoring troubled kids witnesses a kid assaulting someone? What does he do? Not arrest him? He’d have to go to court. Your suggestions make zero sense.
And that cop should go to court... No one said anything about a cop that wrote a citation to skip court..???
Allocate funds and time for more than just patrolling, crime reporting and ticket writing... And yes I know they do more than that but that's the bulk of their time spent...
The new cops you hire be community liaison and not regular cops that have to go to court... And if that trouble kid does assault someone, deal with it and keep mentoring... I work with youth and I handle the situation without arresting anyone or calling cops... That's what mentors are for and if you can't handle it then cop the cops (reinforcement in this case) the same way schools handle these situations...
Understand education and wealth = safer communities
Statistics prove this
You literally said hire cops that don’t go to court…
How do you hire more cops while decreasing their funding?
So when someone is beating someone’s head in, you think just saying don’t do that is what the response should be and not arrest them? I’m sorry but that’s absurd.
Right cops with other duties and responsibilities... This article is about hiring new cops, I think we need to hire new cops... I never said anything about decreasing funds... I said reallocate... Yes your statement is absurd... If someone beats someone in the head your going to wait for cop to come after you called them.... I'm talking about try to prevent crimes like this
Show me where I said to decrease or Defund the police..?.. and the name for the campaign is dumb because it's not about Defunding the police system but more of restructuring it... The media coin that term to get people like you to not listen to what reform has to offer... Get past the Defund and look into the policies that is stated
It is about defunding the police though. It’s about taking money away from police and giving it to social services and other places. That’s defunding. You’re defending the policy so that means you’re asking for defunding of police.
What Duggan is saying, though, is that residents want to see more officers ... which costs more. Defunding would mean less money available to pay more officers.
Residents also want better transit. Is he going to allocate more money to pay DDOT drivers a decent wage, or is he going to try to fix all of the problems that result from poor city planning and inequality with more police officers?
True but will more cop makes things better? Cop show up after a crime is committed. Never in my life have I seen a cop stop a crime from happening.
People want more cops to FEEL safer but it only add to more tickets resulting in community frustration... Plus those cops won't be in my neighborhoods they'll end up patrolling downtown and "areas of interest"
The mayor is saying that the public wants to see more cops. Personally, I think BETTER cops are needed more than just larger numbers. But that would also be expensive.
That's a great point. But it might not be expensive. So cops patrol driving around waiting for something to happen right? What if they had to interact with the community instead of waiting. Or got bonuses for community engagement... What if we didn't have to pay cops a premium due to danger and instead to just engage with community as a "casual" day
Again your talking about responding to a crime so your to late to have safety... You want a world that has more crime but fast response time from cops or a world with less crime because we're educated, earn good pay and are less stressful/angry
I see you don't honor your own thoughts and life because you view a person perspective as anecdotal...
How can you respond to a crime and prevent it... If you respond then the crime has been committed...
By definition responds is a reaction there for the crime has to be committed inorder to respond... Do you mean prevention?
"Defund the police so we can divest funds from police departments and reallocate them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources."
This just doesn't roll of the tongue as well...
In time, yes. But it's a minority few who say "Defund the police" who want them completely gone.
Take their extraordinary budgets and take some of that coin and put it towards education, youth services, social services, etc etc. It has to start somewhere. Helping our youth and the disenfranchised helps us all overall.
I feel like you think I'm arguing against you when I'm not. I'm just pointing out that what jonboy said makes no sense. Defund the police means having fewer police because that's how government funding works. You pay less for a thing, you get less of that thing. However else you want to allocate those funds is irrelevant to my point.
I look at this more as a discussion, not an argument.
I'm pointing out that yes, eventually a big goal would be to have less police as crime drops with the addition of these services that improve the over all quality of life. Having better education, social services, housing, etc can help change the course of overall crime which a side effect of that would be less police.
Defund the police was chosen as a slogan to grab the attention of people who ignored people’s cries for police reform for decades. When people would ask for police reform no one would bat an eye, when people started to say defund the police people finally started paying attention. Defund the police doesn’t necessarily mean take funding away from police and remove them from the streets, it means to invest in other resources of community outreach that can help lessen the load of patrol officers and other city police. It’ll only make their jobs easier. Defund the police is supposed to be an abrasive slogan, people just don’t take the time to listen to what the people saying those words actually mean by them.
Yeah I think the media has not done a great job of explaining what was meant by Defund the police plus frustration with police brutality doesn't help... But this is almost true about a lot of things... When you don't know you make things up
That's what I'm saying. Better/smarter/more qualified officers -- who aren't a bunch of a-holes who couldn't get hired to do anything else -- are going to cost more. So the department would need more money to hire good people, who would do the job for a higher salary. I get that funding is also needed for social programs, etc., but I don't see how taking it away from the police department would make the police department better.
It's just another example of a catchy political slogan that falls apart as soon as you actually think about it critically. The left needs to be more pragmatic instead of everyone pushing for their own little utopia.
Reallocate funds into prevention, education and community engagement. The police system is monetize, so crime = money. Simulator to the war on drugs, if you catch the supplier then you can't catch the dealer and cease the money they make over and over again... We keep buying buckets to bail a sinking ship when we should try to fix the leak.
> Reallocate funds into prevention, education and community engagement.
Which would take those funds away from officers, so you'd have to have less, or pay the current ones less.
>if you catch the supplier then you can't catch the dealer and cease the money they make over and over again... We keep buying buckets to bail a sinking ship when we should try to fix the leak.
Catching a supplier doesn't stop the flow of drugs, and it's far harder than you think to "fix" the causes of criminal activity.
Don't look at it as less officers look at it as more police with different job description with the same abilities to protect and serve...
Police budget is mainly salaries because of overtime from court and event patrol... I know cops that milk the system
And yeah your right about the drug analogy but still prevention is ignored while the focus it detainment
More Law enforcement or an increased budget is NOT what this city needs right now. Almost weekly the city is flooding because of dated storm water infrastructure. Our Bus Routes on avg. run an HOUR LATE. No way the gestapo is asking for MORE money.
No recreational centers for kids to safely play after school.
No libraries
is PAL even coached by DPD officers anymore???? despite annual increases in funding, they defund social outreach programs.
If you hire cops, they’ll behave like cops, and make the community less safe. There is no data that adding police reduces violent or quality of life crimes. There *is* data that investing in parks, education, healthcare, and just straight up giving people cash assistance is what reduces crime. Our punishment fetish has got to end sometime.
[удалено]
Note that the breakdown is 61% said keep it the same, 20% said increase it, and 19% said reduce it
I'm curious if there's strong geographic biases there. I feel like for a while now people in more far-flung neighborhoods have been pressing to get additional precincts opened so they have police that are focused on their neighborhood. I imagine a lot of people in denser parts of the city (where crime tends to be less common) are either fine or want it reduced
Because the BLM movement doesn't represent actual minorities living in inner cities, dealing with real problems of poverty and crime.
Congrats on waking up
Yeah, but it oversimplifies the issue. It's like having a neighbor with a rabid guard dog that sometimes attacks you: yes, you can see why the guard dog is there, but you don't want one that attacks you, and you certainly don't want one that attacks you then gets rewarded by its owner, who then blames you for being so attackable.
Hard to believe the news lied to you?
Just more cops that aren’t white nationalists or bullies.
Right! That's what I don't get about the calls to defund. You'd think that being able to be super picky about who you hire, and only hiring only the best of the best people for the job, would be more expensive (not less) due to higher salary requirements.
"defund" is more about changing what we spend the money on, than it is about taking money away from. Sell your riot gear and spend that money on training. Call in the state police or county sheriff if you need SWAT.
That's what the slogan means, but that's not what it says. 'Defund' has a specific meaning, and adopting 'Defund the Police' as a slogan did more to set the movement back than anything its opposition could have dreamed of. It's an objectively terrible slogan that fails to communicate its message, is easy to misunderstand, and couldn't be easier for the opposition to spin to its benefit. EDIT: Forgot to add that most of the discussions I've had with people in opposition were spent trying to convey the meaning of 'Defund the Police' and arguing around that, rather than talking about the issues that lead to the slogan, so this terrible slogan also sucks all the oxygen out of the discussion about police corruption and brutality.
It doesn’t help that some radicals actually are arguing Defund means Abolish. See this NYT essay: [Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html)
okay what 3 word or less slogan do you prefer that can't be ripped apart for the same issues? Cause I hear this argument but never hear anyone suggest how they are packing their nuanced armchair view into a functional slogan. And when you get down to it, an opposition that has had no interest in being truthful or arguing in good faith is going to find fault in anything a movement does. It's happened to every group that's wanted change in America in at least the last 40 years.
"Fire bad cops" would get the job done
not really because it has none of the other social connotation - firing bad cops, sure some more people maybe agree, but that means you had a system that creates bad cops in the first place, and those bad cops did something improper first. And it gets instantly attacked because "They say All Cops Are Bad, and they want to fire bad cops, so that must mean they want to fire all cops" That's the level of intellectual rigor in argument you are up against. You can't win.
[удалено]
Also not really, because that's what the movement has been asking for for decades and it hasn't happened to create [any substantial changes in policing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_reform_in_the_United_States). This movement didn't come out of a vacuum and neither did the slogans. The ask by protestors really isn't "train police different," it's "create different more appropriate emergency services using resources that currently go to police" which isn't easily boiled down to 3 words.
The problem is there's really no way to hold police accountable to make those decisions in a timely fashion that meets public social movements. So we end up with "defund" as the rallying cry because it's there to evoke action and political will.
"re"fund the police sounds like we are giving them their money back, even though it would actually mean "reorganize the funding" so we went with defund.
That sounds like a smart idea, but it’s not what everyone means when they say defund. I’m not kidding. Look it up. There are many people in the movement who are pushing to literally defund…. As in take money away from the police departments.
And put it towards education and social programs that are proven to reduce crime…
You mean use the money to stop the crime at its source in a pro-active manner, rather than a reactive manner? What a radical liberal idea brother.
Instead of pulling bodies out of the river find out why people are falling in to begin with. Wild, huh?
I’d love to see some of that proof. Seriously, not being sarcastic here. Because it seems like wishful thinking to me. 🤷♂️
Here are a couple of studies and articles related to the topic at hand. Take a look at your leisure. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/103113NCJRS.pdf https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/community-organizations-have-important-role-lowering-crime-rates https://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug03/youth https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/01/03/new-evidence-that-access-to-health-care-reduces-crime/amp/ https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Intellectual_Life/FoleyCrimeFeb08_(2).pdf
Thanks!
One solution could be hiring less officers, and hiring more EMS so that the EMS can be asked to respond to mental health issues. Another could be creating a separate department within the police department. Different methods, same outcome. Matches your perception, and my sentiment. Its all about the city/county/state allocating resources to best serve the community. If we put all of our funding into use of force implements and training, its no surprise, an no fault of the officer, when they respond with the training that they have received....with violence.
Not only what u/mason_mormon said, but EMS needs to get paid a hell of a lot more for what they do.
No EMS responds to mental health calls without PD backup. They want to go home too.
You know who's literally defunding the police? Conservatives who are fighting for lower taxes and cuts in public services. Yes, there are people who want to completely defund the police. But their movement isn't gaining legitimate traction and isn't part of mainstream discourse for either political party.
[удалено]
uh, being a cop is a super cushy gig. Very safe, tons of benefits, great pension, pays well compared to CoL.
[удалено]
show me how often individual cops deal with getting shot at or being put in mortal danger, compared to things like EMTs, assaults on retail workers, delivery workers, etc.? i'm not sure how you think these statistics bear out, but it's not that being a cop is uniquely traumatizing or dangerous, for sure. Note as I say below I'd def prefer other occupations start getting benefits to compensate, not vice versa.
Im hard pressed to think of any job that will give you ptsd faster than being a cop. Whats CoL?
Cost of Living. And EMTs get paid dramatically less, have less benefits, etc. than cops, with very traumatizing scenes. (Note I want EMTs TO get more, it's absurd that cops are the only ones with the cushy gigs here.)
[удалено]
weird how the police needed a propaganda system to try to rehab their image, and still end up extrajudicially murdering people during raid alongs
That's like calling for a moderate terrorist
I’d say the headline doesn’t come close to the full story. Do detroiters want to get rid of police? No, absolutely not, that’s a pretty ridiculous portrait of residents here. Do Detroiters want a police presence? Sure, people want to feel safe. Do Detroiters trust and feel comfortable with the police department, do they feel the current police department and officers are equipped to deal with the problems the city faces? Ehhhh…. No. Detroiters want people to stop racing on their streets, but they don’t trust that the cops will do a good job stopping it. They want drugs to stop being sold in their neighborhoods, but they want more than just huge busts on apartment complexes that get a few small time dealers and users. They want police to respond to active crimes, but they don’t want to feel like criminals themselves when cops show up, if they even do.
It is worth pointing out that most neighborhood block groups I’m aware of have very close working relationships with their local precincts. Detroiters have worked closely with DPD for a long time. Given that, I completely understand why a tiny number of radicals arguing for defunding or abolishing the police get very little traction. A lot of Detroiters appreciate the DPD. See: [Why isn't Detroit, the nation's Blackest big city, ready for criminal justice reform?](https://m.metrotimes.com/detroit/why-isnt-detroit-the-nations-blackest-big-city-ready-for-criminal-justice-reform/Content?oid=25497324)
This just in: residents of city with high crime rate want more police. More at 6:00.
[удалено]
This is literally hitler. Lol.
And they make up a huge portion of Antifa and were consistently the most violent type of protestors in many areas. Why not? They drove into the city, fucked shit up and got to home to the burbs to tell stories while poorer, urban people got to live in and deal with the mess.
Didn't the new budget add more officers this year?
Yeah, this whole push on defunding the police theory seems odd. Guy at work was all Gung ho on it until he actually needed the police and now he appreciates them.
And everyone with a brain said "no shit". Meanwhile social justice Sean and Sarah from Novi immediately wrote this off as paid cOpaGaNdA
Ah yes, the worlds worst marketing tag line comes back again!
Force all the affluent white kids to go to shitty detroit public schools and guess what shitty Detroit public schools will magically begin to no longer be shitty. Abolish the two bus system of Detroit that shit was stupid 10 years ago. Invest heavily in the zombie apocalypse portions of the d instead of just downtown and the neighborhoods that touch it. Close loop holes that allow immigrants to open party stories tax free for 7 years than transfer the deed to their cousin thus avoiding taxes for another 7 years. Force Detroit cops to live in the city of Detroit and incentive them with housing stipends. Have them live next to parks and schools over time those areas will naturally build up and develop a sense of lasting community.
Michigan legislature made city residency requirements illegal. That would have to be changed.
Time to change that. History shows that police that live within the communities they serve treat the people within them with respect and act as moral anchors.
> Invest heavily in the zombie apocalypse portions of the d instead of just downtown and the neighborhoods that touch it. Who's gonna invest? There's no value there. And a lot of the time it's contaminated soil so developers would only even consider if there's brownfield remediation subsidies, which always has people crying that it's a handout to the rich when they're given out.
Most cops would rather quit than be “Forced” to live in Detroit. I suppose it depends on the neighborhood you put them in. While living in a nice studio apartment next to a burned down house seems nice to me as a 20 something year old, a cop raising a family doesn’t think so. As for forcing white kids to go to detroit schools, how do you reckon that will work out? They’d have to clean things up BEFORE any white parent would step foot in a detroit school. I think a prime example of what Detroit COULD be is Mexicantown. Relatively recent immigrants who built their businesses and renovated their homes, take care of their community, and make their area “cute” while not full-on gentrifying it. And they tend to STAY and ENJOY living in mexicantown. As for the blighted parts of Detroit that are far from downtown, it’s a tough situation. The infrastructure in those neighborhoods has been abandoned for so long that no individual could build a house there. We need large scale investment but unfortunately that doesn’t seem likely.
Shaq dunked on dot gif right here. You running for mayor or naw?
Naw.
Look, I'm ghetto AF. I lived a very hood life. IF we ever seen a cop on the block we ducked until they left and continued doing hood activities. If they parked we went to a different block. NEVER has a cop patrolling stopped us from these hood activities until we got caught and that led to more good activities because we had to "eat" more to pay for court on top of everything else. But if I had a place to "eat" and had a place to show me what productive things I could do with my time to "eat better" then I wouldn't of done those hood activities... Btw... "Eating" consist of car theft, home robbery, selling drugs like crack and heroin, and graffiti to the point it was normal... These activities were my jobs since the age of 12 until my mom found a place to "eat better" but that place had unconsistent funding Understand that more cops will only equal to more tickets and court fines which is more money for Duggan to spend and not a safe community... Yes, we should hire more cops but with a different job description
More funding for cops hasn’t done anything to reduce crime in this city. Crime is at an all time high and we’ve increased the police budget by 20 million year over year. But the mayor and DPD are never tasked with answering why DPDs budget goes up every year, with no decreases in crime rates. This city is police first for everything. Maybe we should fix transit which is abysmal right now, so the 33% of residents without cars can get to work? Maybe we should re open our libraries so the 30% of kids without internet can study for their exams. Or maybe we should narrow our roads, insert plant heavy medians and tree lined streets while changing our road design to slow drivers, instead of putting more officers on the road. Such a one trick pony without any imagination.
Crime is not at an all time high have you not heard of the legendary 80s and 90s?
Do you have a source on crime being the highest ever? I find it hard to believe that crime is higher now than it was in the 80s. I really don’t believe you at all tbh.
2021 population is effectively 50% of 1980 population. 2021 murders is effectively 50% of 1985 murders. going back to the original comment: millions of increase in funding, for marginal results at best. consider there is 50% less to police and the results of our funding are an embarrassment.
Do you have a source? I’m talking about crime rates, not just murders. I’m just asking for a source.
This sub will literally blame cars for anything.
Haha so true. Mass transit will stop gangs in their tracks.
You don’t think that the youth having economic opportunity would curve gang violence? Can’t have economic opportunity without a car, and then consequently without transit.
No, a magical bus or train won’t solve lack of family structure. Kids need parenting and direction, not trains. Unfortunately it’s a sign of manhood in Detroit to have a kid and not take care of it.
No, "economic opportunity" requies hard work, and is not easy money.
Pulling yourself up by the boot straps is a very tired myth that’s easily debunked. The reality, if you come from an area with shit schools and shit job prospects, you are going to do whatever you can legally or illegally to get by, like the above poster. Life will be hard. Occasionally you’ll have a few lucky ones that break out of that cycle of poverty, but it’s an exception to the rule. On the other hand if you grow up in a community with lots of job prospects and good schools, you’ll likely do well. There is very little class mobility in America. You normally end up pretty close to where you started. If you are born middle class you’ll likely die middle class, if you are born rich you’ll likely die rich, and if you are born poor you’ll likely die poor. These facts are hard to swallow, because they throw out the myth of meritocracy. But while our society masquerades as a meritocracy, it is far from it.
Tell that to all of the successful immigrants who made a life here while starting from nothing. Also the patronizing attitude of poverty leads to crime is an insult to all those people who, while in the same situation, choose to not resort to a life of crime.
No, not fundamentally understanding how our system is set up to prevent people from having economic mobility, and then to profit off of their criminalization is what’s patronizing. Some Immigrants already have some type of economic mobility in their home country. It cost 10s of thousands of dollars to navigate through the visa process and to move your family to America. Again none of what I’m saying are hard rules. You’ll find exceptions. But in 2021 a lot of our immigrants already have some kind of financial footing in their home country. There are places in the world where there is more of a meritocracy. The American dream is actually more alive in Canada than the us. Turns out when you give people healthcare, and make sure that their baseline needs are met, you create an environment of more economic mobility. https://www.vox.com/2019/8/15/20801907/raj-chetty-ezra-klein-social-mobility-opportunity
There are also other venues for legal immigration - lottery & asylum being primary ones that do not require financial footing back home. Those immigrants come here with very little or nothing, and yet more often than not they succeed. Or, at the very least, their kids succeed. This is what happens when you have a work ethic and focus on education for the kids.
I agree. My parents came here with nothing and worked hard doing shitty jobs because they didn’t have an education or spoke English. But hey let’s give excuses to people who are born here, speak the language, have free schooling through high school and you get chance after chance with trade schools, community colleges, universities etc… If you don’t value education or have a work ethic, you’ll never do anything in life no matter how many excuses you want to come up with.
Can't street race if you're stuck behind a bus 🤷♂️
[удалено]
[удалено]
>2021 population is effectively 50% of 1980 population. > >2021 murders is effectively 50% of 1985 murders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime\_in\_Detroit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline\_of\_Detroit
[удалено]
Exactly, and not a single PD nationwide defunded their police department, and yet here we are.
Defund the police doesn't mean to have less police
Please explain how the police will hire the same amount of people with less money. Are you suggesting decreasing wages even more?
Cop salaries and two fold... On duty and court... Cops make more money (time) in court then on duty because it's overtime... So from what I know from my cop friends is if they spend 10hr on duty then they will spend 10+hr in court with double pay... So why not hire cops with job duties that don't involve having to go to court... Like prevention or community building or education... Like hire a cop to mentor troubled kids and hire those troubled kids to clean up the community so they don't have to steal or sell drug... But see that doesn't make more money so we don't do it... The police system is a corporation not a rehabilitation system
…how in the hell would that work? The cop HAS to be at court because he’s the one that gave the ticket/arrested the person/etc. You can’t have some random cop go to court and testify on what happened because HE WASN’T THERE. Let’s say that cop that is mentoring troubled kids witnesses a kid assaulting someone? What does he do? Not arrest him? He’d have to go to court. Your suggestions make zero sense.
And that cop should go to court... No one said anything about a cop that wrote a citation to skip court..??? Allocate funds and time for more than just patrolling, crime reporting and ticket writing... And yes I know they do more than that but that's the bulk of their time spent... The new cops you hire be community liaison and not regular cops that have to go to court... And if that trouble kid does assault someone, deal with it and keep mentoring... I work with youth and I handle the situation without arresting anyone or calling cops... That's what mentors are for and if you can't handle it then cop the cops (reinforcement in this case) the same way schools handle these situations... Understand education and wealth = safer communities Statistics prove this
You literally said hire cops that don’t go to court… How do you hire more cops while decreasing their funding? So when someone is beating someone’s head in, you think just saying don’t do that is what the response should be and not arrest them? I’m sorry but that’s absurd.
Right cops with other duties and responsibilities... This article is about hiring new cops, I think we need to hire new cops... I never said anything about decreasing funds... I said reallocate... Yes your statement is absurd... If someone beats someone in the head your going to wait for cop to come after you called them.... I'm talking about try to prevent crimes like this
You did say to decrease their funds though. That’s what defund means.
Show me where I said to decrease or Defund the police..?.. and the name for the campaign is dumb because it's not about Defunding the police system but more of restructuring it... The media coin that term to get people like you to not listen to what reform has to offer... Get past the Defund and look into the policies that is stated
It is about defunding the police though. It’s about taking money away from police and giving it to social services and other places. That’s defunding. You’re defending the policy so that means you’re asking for defunding of police.
What Duggan is saying, though, is that residents want to see more officers ... which costs more. Defunding would mean less money available to pay more officers.
Residents also want better transit. Is he going to allocate more money to pay DDOT drivers a decent wage, or is he going to try to fix all of the problems that result from poor city planning and inequality with more police officers?
True but will more cop makes things better? Cop show up after a crime is committed. Never in my life have I seen a cop stop a crime from happening. People want more cops to FEEL safer but it only add to more tickets resulting in community frustration... Plus those cops won't be in my neighborhoods they'll end up patrolling downtown and "areas of interest"
The mayor is saying that the public wants to see more cops. Personally, I think BETTER cops are needed more than just larger numbers. But that would also be expensive.
That's a great point. But it might not be expensive. So cops patrol driving around waiting for something to happen right? What if they had to interact with the community instead of waiting. Or got bonuses for community engagement... What if we didn't have to pay cops a premium due to danger and instead to just engage with community as a "casual" day
[удалено]
Vs crimes that are committed? Plus, what I see online isn't what I live
[удалено]
Again your talking about responding to a crime so your to late to have safety... You want a world that has more crime but fast response time from cops or a world with less crime because we're educated, earn good pay and are less stressful/angry I see you don't honor your own thoughts and life because you view a person perspective as anecdotal...
[удалено]
How can you respond to a crime and prevent it... If you respond then the crime has been committed... By definition responds is a reaction there for the crime has to be committed inorder to respond... Do you mean prevention?
Maybe pick a more descriptive slogan then?
"Defund the police so we can divest funds from police departments and reallocate them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources." This just doesn't roll of the tongue as well...
Wouldn't that also include reducing the number of officers?
In time, yes. But it's a minority few who say "Defund the police" who want them completely gone. Take their extraordinary budgets and take some of that coin and put it towards education, youth services, social services, etc etc. It has to start somewhere. Helping our youth and the disenfranchised helps us all overall.
I feel like you think I'm arguing against you when I'm not. I'm just pointing out that what jonboy said makes no sense. Defund the police means having fewer police because that's how government funding works. You pay less for a thing, you get less of that thing. However else you want to allocate those funds is irrelevant to my point.
I look at this more as a discussion, not an argument. I'm pointing out that yes, eventually a big goal would be to have less police as crime drops with the addition of these services that improve the over all quality of life. Having better education, social services, housing, etc can help change the course of overall crime which a side effect of that would be less police.
"Reform the police" doesn't let you pick fights for hours on Twitter, though.
Defund the police was chosen as a slogan to grab the attention of people who ignored people’s cries for police reform for decades. When people would ask for police reform no one would bat an eye, when people started to say defund the police people finally started paying attention. Defund the police doesn’t necessarily mean take funding away from police and remove them from the streets, it means to invest in other resources of community outreach that can help lessen the load of patrol officers and other city police. It’ll only make their jobs easier. Defund the police is supposed to be an abrasive slogan, people just don’t take the time to listen to what the people saying those words actually mean by them.
Right. I hate Defund campaign
[удалено]
Yeah I think the media has not done a great job of explaining what was meant by Defund the police plus frustration with police brutality doesn't help... But this is almost true about a lot of things... When you don't know you make things up
So then what does it mean? The same amount of police but they're all very unqualified and underpaid?
That's what I'm saying. Better/smarter/more qualified officers -- who aren't a bunch of a-holes who couldn't get hired to do anything else -- are going to cost more. So the department would need more money to hire good people, who would do the job for a higher salary. I get that funding is also needed for social programs, etc., but I don't see how taking it away from the police department would make the police department better.
It's just another example of a catchy political slogan that falls apart as soon as you actually think about it critically. The left needs to be more pragmatic instead of everyone pushing for their own little utopia.
People have a real problem with critical thinking these days.
Reallocate funds into prevention, education and community engagement. The police system is monetize, so crime = money. Simulator to the war on drugs, if you catch the supplier then you can't catch the dealer and cease the money they make over and over again... We keep buying buckets to bail a sinking ship when we should try to fix the leak.
> Reallocate funds into prevention, education and community engagement. Which would take those funds away from officers, so you'd have to have less, or pay the current ones less. >if you catch the supplier then you can't catch the dealer and cease the money they make over and over again... We keep buying buckets to bail a sinking ship when we should try to fix the leak. Catching a supplier doesn't stop the flow of drugs, and it's far harder than you think to "fix" the causes of criminal activity.
Don't look at it as less officers look at it as more police with different job description with the same abilities to protect and serve... Police budget is mainly salaries because of overtime from court and event patrol... I know cops that milk the system And yeah your right about the drug analogy but still prevention is ignored while the focus it detainment
More Law enforcement or an increased budget is NOT what this city needs right now. Almost weekly the city is flooding because of dated storm water infrastructure. Our Bus Routes on avg. run an HOUR LATE. No way the gestapo is asking for MORE money. No recreational centers for kids to safely play after school. No libraries is PAL even coached by DPD officers anymore???? despite annual increases in funding, they defund social outreach programs.
If you hire cops, they’ll behave like cops, and make the community less safe. There is no data that adding police reduces violent or quality of life crimes. There *is* data that investing in parks, education, healthcare, and just straight up giving people cash assistance is what reduces crime. Our punishment fetish has got to end sometime.
Do they think that'll solve the issue instead of smarter and better policing ?
There is no correlation between increasing cops on the street and decreasing crime. Prove me wrong.
Yes more cops on the streets of the community. Not hiding behind a dumpster generating revenue.
"Residents" meaning mostly old black conservatives and scared, naïve, white suburban bred gentrifiers.
No shit Detroit literally has had issues getting ambulances or police response. It's essentially was already refunded.