5 ms·

> Police are a public good. Without a public police force the wealthy would happily fund their own security, and most already do. There are neighborhoods in San

> Police are a public good. Without a public police force the wealthy would happily fund their own security, and most already do. There are neighborhoods in San francisco with private security teams who simply bypass the shortcomings of SFPD. I'm not sure I follow why police inherently exist to serve only the interests of the wealthy. I agree with most everything else you said. I agree police are a public good that society should maintain. The alternative is just a pile of bad ideas. That being said, we, as in America, do a terrible job of maintaining our police force as a public good. You talk about being "heroic" and "risking their lives", and that's technically true, but only for a very tiny subset, a larger subset is abusing their power and authority, and more crucially, never being held accountable. Preventing all crimes is functionally impossible, although the incidence can be reduced in certain ways, but what we need is the criminals to be prosecuted. And a lot of police who commit crimes are not.

repeekad 7d ago
My counter example is Sam Francisco, where window smashings almost reached 3 figures PER DAY because they wouldn't be enforced. It was more police resources that finally curbed the problem, police started taking window smashing seriously and actually going after criminals, and to no surprise the numbers plummeted. That tiny subset of heroics is not trivial just because it's a small number. Police are in danger every day and even if they draw a weapon .1% of the time that 1/1000 is everything, if they're not respected for putting their lives on the line then why would anyone take on the job. SF already can't hire enough police in part because of the anti police culture and overtime rates are a huge drain on the budget. Preventing all crimes is impossible, but the culture that forms around taking them seriously or not absolutely contributes to local crime rates. In SF gangs and like minded criminals all talk to each other, they know whether they will get away with crimes, and it's why young children feel brazen enough to commit violent crime knowing the system will protect them. Ivory tower academics can analyze police all they want from their already safe neighborhoods, the rest of us have no patience for it. I said this topic was a wedge, and even if I'm wrong it absolutely represents the sentiment of a huge portion of regular people who vote, and will vote red on this issue alone.

repeekad 7d ago

My counter example is Sam Francisco, where window smashings almost reached 3 figures PER DAY because they wouldn't be enforced. It was more police resources that finally curbed the problem, police started taking window smashing seriously and actually going after criminals, and to no surprise the numbers plummeted. That tiny subset of heroics is not trivial just because it's a small number. Police are in danger every day and even if they draw a weapon .1% of the time that 1/1000 is everything, if they're not respected for putting their lives on the line then why would anyone take on the job. SF already can't hire enough police in part because of the anti police culture and overtime rates are a huge drain on the budget. Preventing all crimes is impossible, but the culture that forms around taking them seriously or not absolutely contributes to local crime rates. In SF gangs and like minded criminals all talk to each other, they know whether they will get away with crimes, and it's why young children feel brazen enough to commit violent crime knowing the system will protect them. Ivory tower academics can analyze police all they want from their already safe neighborhoods, the rest of us have no patience for it. I said this topic was a wedge, and even if I'm wrong it absolutely represents the sentiment of a huge portion of regular people who vote, and will vote red on this issue alone.