Violence: the course of true Summer of Love never did run smooth
Seattle sees a steep rise in crime:
Durkan’s emergency order booting protesters from the six-block cop-free zone makes mention of the “narcotics use and violent crime, including rape, robbery, assault, and increased gang activity” within the CHOP since it first emerged in early June.
June 2 to June 30 saw the 525 percent jump in crime compared to the same period last year.
It includes “22 additional incidents, in person-related crime in the area, to include two additional homicides, 6 additional robberies, and 16 additional aggravated assaults (to include 2 additional non-fatal shootings),” Durkan’s order on Tuesday says.
Seriously, though – how would they even know what the crime rates in CHOP were? After all, without the police, all they would have to go on are anecdotal reports and 911 calls, but it’s hard to believe that most crime victims would call the police if police had been banished from the area and the caller didn’t expect them to be able to come in response to a call.
The idea to defund the police and insult, demoralize, and banish them seems incredibly stupid, particularly if it’s coupled with the idea that crime won’t soar as a result. But anarchists have long had an agenda that includes getting rid of police, who are considered instruments of state oppression, and that was even before the all-important racial angle was added to give the idea a special attraction for those suffused with racial guilt. If you want to read a more recent anarchist article on the subject of police abolition, try wading through this.
How many people are buying the proposal? Recent polls don’t show a ton of support – and it’s hard to know how people interpret the phrase “defund the police” in terms of the extremity of the policies it represents. Also, the polls were taken a couple of weeks ago, before publicity about the murders in CHAZ and the murder spikes in cities such as Chicago.
I said that the polls don’t show “a lot” of support. Anything over low single digits would be way too much, however, and the levels shown in the polls are much higher than that, varying from a quarter to a third of those polled. What’s more, in some groups it’s higher:
In the two polls where results were broken down by race, Black respondents said they supported defunding the police by an average of 45 percent to 28 percent…Similarly, in the three polls with breakdowns by party, Democrats on average supported the “defund the police” movement 50 percent to 34 percent, and Republicans on average opposed it 84 percent to 11 percent. Granted, only about a quarter of Democrats “strongly” supported it, per Morning Consult/Politico and Reuters/Ipsos, but three-quarters of Republicans “strongly” opposed it.
To me, the idea that social workers can somehow replace police is both absurd and dangerous. There actually are some social work family interventions that have been demonstrated to reduce crime if begun when acting-out kids are still underage, but it’s not an either/or thing. If a city or state wants to raise money to expand those programs that have been found to be effective, that’s well and good. But at the same time, police are needed and without them things fall apart – which is so obvious it should hardly need saying.
We have fallen down the rabbit hole of irrationality.
[NOTE: Also please read Heather McDonald’s new article.]
I suggest tea and scones to tame antifa and BLM. Works everytime.
To me, the idea that social workers can somehow replace police is both absurd and dangerous.
Much of what cops do today reduces to being social workers with guns. Or so I have observed police in my HOA. From what I have seen, local cops do an excellent job of mediating disputes. Unfortunately, not all disputes can be mediated. There are times that the “social workers with guns” need to use guns- or need to make it obvious to someone that if there is not compliance PDQ, the gun may come out.
A further point about replacing cops with social workers is that the threat of arrest often makes people decide to comply. Such as a cop being called in to arbitrate a dispute- happens more than one thinks- and agreeing or not with the decision of the cop. A social worker doesn’t have that power.
I am empathetic of the police and the work they do, however, reform in departments may very well be warranted. Few police officers enjoy domestic dispute calls, or trying to convince mentally ill and/or drug addled individuals to seek shelter and treatment.
I doubt cities can afford better targeted distribution of experts available 24/7 to handle disputes, that’s why these tasks have fallen to the police, at least as a front line, first responders. But if a city can do it better, the Police will not mind giving up these tasks.
Here is how its going to play out EXACTLY…
‘How to get an extra billion out of taxpayers pockets’
1) First take a billion away from the police under the reason of BLM
2) This money will not be given back to the taxpayers
3) This money will be shared in social programs and other areas which ‘found’ money can be disbursed
4) The crime will go up and then up more till the people squeal and howl
5) They will say they will have to raise taxes to replace the money that was taken
@parker and those cucumber finger sandwiches too?
@Gringo “A social worker doesn’t have that power.” — YET
Rufus T. Firefly:
Many years ago I recall being told that one of the most dangerous situations for a police officer is a domestic dispute call. I don’t know if that’s still the case. But if it is, I doubt that sending social workers into a crisis situation that carries an inherent threat of violence is going to be a good idea.
Gringo; Rufus T.:
As I wrote in my previous comment, a lot of these seeming social worker situations that the police are called to involve a possible powder keg that can end up involving violence. Social workers are not capable of handling that sort of thing.
I also don’t think most social workers are particularly good at crisis situations in general. Most of them work in agencies where people come in when the immediate crisis has passed, and are there to work on the ongoing problems. Or, for home-based therapy, they are used to coming to the home at a certain pre-appointed time, to work on a certain problem, not to defuse the sort of crisis that would make a person call 911 and ask for police assistance.
It’s apples and oranges. There are some social workers who deal with crises, but it’s not the bulk of them at all – at least, it didn’t used to be. Where are these people going to come from? What will their training be, in order to be a quasi-police or substitute police officer? I know a lot of social workers (or at least, I used to) and they could not possibly do that kind of work, nor would they want to.
What’s really galling about “defund the police” is that it allows the city governments, run for decades by Democrats, to duck questions about how all this racism and police brutality flourished on their watch.
1. “There shall be social workers” is just classic bait and switch.
2. The polls can no longer be trusted on any question at any time. It’s past time we woke up to that. The “woke” have and they use them to simply run more of their demoralization campaign.
So, was Seattle on the right side of history or just a footnote?
https://babylonbee.com/news/tourists-flock-from-around-country-to-view-ancient-ruins-of-chaz
neo,
I agree with you here, I don’t think social workers will work in this situation, but it’s also not ideal for Police. A drug addled homeless person may be receptive to help, or he may become violent when approached. A domestic spat may be helped by a counselor at the door, or there may be violence. My main point is, I don’t think many police officers would be against a municipality trying to alleviate some of their workload.
Take the situation where the guy was passed out in the Wendy’s drive through. He was reasonable until placed under arrest. In that situation that’s the only option the police have. Or the situation where the guy was selling individual cigarettes in New York. Both crimes clearly don’t warrant a death sentence, but the police don’t have many tools to work with. In some situations their presence provokes offenders to desperation and violence.
As I wrote, I don’t think these cities can afford to do it much differently, that’s why all these disparate duties fall to the police, but maybe some community will develop more effective methods. Unfortunately, it will probably lead to some social workers being harmed, but there is certainly room for improvement.
To be clear, I think the “Defund the Police” movement is a canard. But I also believe we need reform in policing. We ask policemen and women to do too much and our system could do a better job of rehabilitating drug addicts and helping the mentally ill.
Can anyone think of a better way to lessen the number of sociology, social work, and psychology graduates than sending them as first responders?
Just wait until a social worker successfully mediates a domestic dispute, calms everyone down, writes up a report, only to wake up the next morning a news story about a beating … or worse. Then the mantra will be “where were the police?”
If you turn “defund police” on its head, it might very well work.
Part of the problem with our current electorate is that so many people have simply outsourced all their responsibilities as citizens to various technocrats – including the police. For a republic to work, everyone has to understand they, themselves, are responsible for law-making, law-enforcement. And, of course, not just police work, but all the aspects of governing.
But, if the people take that back – taking responsibility for their own safety, the orderly running of their own small communities, even taking on the jobs (e.g., running for office) in those communities – then the police will be much less necessary.
When Aunt Rosa down the block goes out and confronts the jack-a-knapes idling their cars and playing their music incredibly loudly, then no cops need to get involved. Especially when she knows she or her neighbors will take any necessary steps if they decide to push back. A community that governs itself.
But, when there is no cultural confidence to take care of things yourselves, then the citizens cower in their homes and call for the police. And when the police are “the only thing that stands between us and chaos” you’ve already lost. At least as a republic. You can still get on fine as a feudal kingdom, or a technocracy, or some other form of class structure with ruled and rulers, but you can’t ever be a republic again unless the concept of “civic virtue” and civic empowerment is once again regained.
Rufus, in general I agree that police are asked to have too many and too disparate skills, and to deploy the exactly correct skill at the exact moment necessary. And I think there’s wide agreement that the mentally ill and addicted are not being ideally served But you speak of “our system” and that, I think, is the rub: it’s not *A* system we’d have to deal with, it’s a bunch of them that are at present not very interconnected.
Figuring out a reform plan that would integrate a bunch of systems so that the correct resource is available at the needed moment is not something for which political will exists, I think. It’s not reducible to a slogan; it doesn’t sufficiently indict “the system”; it smacks of too much interference for us on the right and not enough for those on the left (even if, in the end, it might be possible to thread that needle, it can too easily be “explained” by opposite sides in the worst possible light). So I dunno.
Rufus, there may be a need for “reform in policing”. But that is not what is going on now and I think you know this. An ugly incident was exploited by far leftists for the purposes of violence and societal disruption and that is what we are up against. None of them except possibly for a few naive demonstrators are actually interested in improving the way policing is done in America.
I wonder if the people who actually want to replace police with “social workers” have any idea what kind of danger that would put social workers in. And how ineffective they would be against people who are violent or refuse to cooperate with authorities in general. Unless social workers are going to be authorized to kick down doors and carry guns?
If there’s no police, who’s the local government going to send to collect my taxes?
If there’s no police, who’s the local government going to send to collect my taxes?
who ya going to call?
GhostBusters (the originals not the new women replace men remake)
How do social workers (or psychologists) handle belligerent drunks? There is very often going to be alcohol involved in such disputes.
miklos – the point is that they won’t “handle” anything.
Anyone who can’t be talked out of the behavior that led someone around them to call 911 will be shrugged off as having the “dignity to make their own choices” (something the Left will never allow for law-abiding conservatives), and their victims can fend for themselves.
The “not cops” might issue some kind of citation and possibly do a follow-up afterwards, but doubtful, considering the real police are releasing perps of clearly illegal acts to walk without bail (does anyone seriously think they will all came back to their hearing dates?); and if they DO actually send someone around to “counsel” with the drunk when he/she sobers up, then we are well on our way to Big Nanny is Watching You.
Pingback:Strange Daze : “Death to this massive maelstrom of lies” Edition