Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

jsled t1_jdc49iq wrote

> after defunding the police

Lol.

> in decades

Yes, nothing else confounding happened in the last few years, not at all. whistles past the graveyard full of millions It certainly wasn't a national trend, thus establishing that there's no correlation with "defunding the police".

(Which, BTW, basically did not happen anywhere.)

34

eddie_smokestacks t1_jdc4fdv wrote

defunding the police is just as stupid as defunding the fire department. that’s like taking a child’s parents away because a few parents around the country were bad people. There’s hundreds of millions of people in the United States… some are going to be idiots/assholes. Some of those people are going to be cops therefore some cops will be assholes/idiots, but that doesn’t mean we abolish the position completely. Policing doesn’t stem from slavery, police positions have predated American slavery by hundreds and hundreds of years so that’s also not an argument. There should be either more funding/training or stricter financial transparency on spending with us the tax payers. Education on civil rights should be the main focus at the end of the day. Not pulling over people for going 5 over trying to collect as much revenue as possible (then they are just meter maids with bigger engines). They pull over so many people because all of those stops are recorded.. so if they ever move departments they can see how “valuable” of an asset each officer is. I believe this leads to over policing instead of “protecting and serving” considering I see cops speeding all over and texting more than anyone else

−9

0fficerGeorgeGreen t1_jdc4kt5 wrote

I personally think this is way more nuanced than your one paragraph post implies. Also, if you're inserting your opinion in the post while asking a question ("No surprise at all. Thank God it was reversed"), you probably aren't looking for answers or a conversation, you're most likely looking for a fight.

But I'll bite. Many things factors can contribute to a rising murder rate. Less police force can absolutely do that, like you say. But also the declining condition for the average American (such as rising costs and inflation), less social support, and the police throwing a fit at defunding to name a few.

I don't necessarily want the police defunded. But I do think they still need better and long training like a degree, more sensitivity training, and less military grade equipment to use against their communities.

29

BreadTruckToast t1_jdc4ly3 wrote

What Burlington did was purely reactionary with no forethought or oversight put into their measure. Whether you support “defunding” or not pushing a measure through that hastily that has such a large impact on public health, safety or any large program is going to be a bad idea.

2

Average-RedditUser1 t1_jdc7zis wrote

My god, you liberals truly hate when statistics are brought into play, don’t you? Because the instant they’re used, your entire argument becomes dismantled. Please, use some logic and reasoning, don’t be so controlled by your emotions.

−11

Wesley__Willis t1_jdc8q0i wrote

Who got defunded? Their budget was still nearly $20 million dollars annually. Teachers and other municipal workers are forever told to do more with less, so why wasn’t that good enough for police?

Irrespective, I’d double their their budget if most of that money went to continuing education/training and they gave up qualified immunity.

9

Bologna1127 t1_jdc9urb wrote

Nationally, crime has decreased over those decades you mention. However, murders have increased (nationally) since the beginning of the Covid pandemic.

Since these trends also hold in Burlington, I’m inclined to believe “defunding the police” wasn’t as involved as you seem to suggest.

As another commenter suggested, you might find better luck attempting to foster a discussion instead of starting a fight: “I’m concerned about the number of homicides in Burlington over [time period you didn’t include]. This is a notable increase compared to previous years. Is there evidence that the “defund the police” movement caused this?”

11

Average-RedditUser1 t1_jdcaoya wrote

It blows my mind how many people on here saying, the homicide rate increase, had nothing to do with defunding the police. That’s just like if people suddenly started becoming deathly Ill, after the FDA allowed a new ingredient to be added into our foods, and after seeing all the adverse, deathly reactions, they decide to remove said ingredient. After a while, no one’s becoming sick, and all returns to normal. Then saying something along the lines of, “ The deadly ingredient had nothing to do with people becoming insanely sick, people were already sick before with the food they were eating”.

2

timberwolf0122 t1_jdcaviq wrote

Defend the police in general (like from a national stand point) yes, absolutely. However we need to do all the steps, ie if we take funds from the police then they need to go to other services and the amount cut needs to be worked out carefully.

Define the police never meant “boom, budget cut” and that’s it.

3

blackdogpepper t1_jdcc47n wrote

In my opinion I don’t think police have much of an impact on crime. Sure, the fact that you might get arrested might deter some criminals. But by and large people who commit crimes do so out of desperation because they are out of options and I don’t mean to suggest you have to murder someone to feed your family but the I would say most murders probably have a long history of smaller crimes leading to up to murder. Having good jobs, social programs, and housing for the population will keep crime rates down.

I live in pretty heavily populated area with a high cost of living. Joblessness is near zero and there is little to no crime considering the population. My doors are unlocked and keys left in the ignition of my truck.

My point is if people have opportunity to provide for themselves they would choose that over crime 9 out of 10 times. So the message of defund the police was clouded, all people want was more money spent on community programs instead of out fitting militarized police forces to keep the poors in line.

13

Jazzhandsfolkfeet t1_jdccrzl wrote

Replying to Average-RedditUser1 (#2,315,485)

Advanced degree holder here with concentrations in finance and economics. What you are presenting is a singular stat with no context or controlling for variables. You need to take a course on statistics and understand the difference between correlation and causation.

10

Dear_Replacement_221 t1_jdcdyl0 wrote

Replying to Average-RedditUser1 (#2,315,726)

No, it's would be like if the FDA added an ingredient to food at the SAME TIME that a deadly disease was going around. Was it the extra ingredient or the deadly disease!? I guess we'll never know.

Was it defending the police (which never actually happened, sorry) or was it poverty and desperation that led to the increase in crime!? I guess we'll never know.

1

dropkickninja t1_jdcfnli wrote

it would have been nice if it had happened and they hired the other people they were supposed to. also it was great that the police chief intentionally fucked up patrols. so yeah. it would have been great.

1

greenmountaingyal t1_jdcisx7 wrote

I think it would be a great idea if you knew what “defunding” the police actually means. But you don’t. You just rally around whatever your hooded friends tell you to do.

Also it would be swell if they did their jobs.

1

jsled t1_jde4boi wrote

Replying to Average-RedditUser1 (#2,315,361)

What else was in co-incidence in those years? Massive economic inequality? Drastic unemployment? Pervasive stay-at-home-ism? Drastic deaths and disability due to covid? Economic headwinds leading to the largest amount of inflation in a generation? &c.?

There are /tons/ of confounding factors.

It's not "defunding the police", tho, because that wasn't a thing that actually happened.

1

jsled t1_jde4hos wrote

Replying to Average-RedditUser1 (#2,315,344)

The reference was to the graveyards full of millions of dead due to COVID, a national tragedy, and a serious impact on the economy (both the deaths and our response to the pandemic).

It's quite relevant.

1

Average-RedditUser1 t1_jdehaas wrote

Replying to jsled (#2,323,460)

I’m sorry but that’s simply not accurate. During the peak of Covid, hospitals around the country were caught tampering with death certificates. For example, patient comes in March 1st to a hospital, tests positive for Covid. Two weeks later, said patient gets in an awful car wreck, get rushed to hospital, and dies. What does cause of death say on death certificate? Covid-19. This is not an an unusual occurrence, this has been happening at hospitals around the country, at an alarming rate, all the way from construction accidents, to drug overdoses, and the one thing they all have in common? Death certificate says cause of death, is Covid-19.

0