Tengrain put up a post about Democrats' trouble with branding- in this case, the 'Defund the Police' movement. The police defunding movement is a subtle subject, one readily misinterpreted by dunderheads, by which I mean conservatives. They believe that the movement equates disbanding the police, while it really means cutting police budgets (the NYPD's budget is $6 billion annually) and allocating those savings to mental health treatment, education, and housing. In the course of the 'War on Terror', police departments have received surplus military gear, SWAT teams and tactics have been deployed in non-emergency situations (Breonna Taylor was shot by police serving a no-knock warrant). 'Warrior' police training developed by a grifter fosters a combative stance against the public, a 'shoot first, assess the situation later' mentality.
Judging from the sheer amount of ordnance deployed by police nationwide, police defunding would largely mean a cutback on 'riot gear', leading to a judicious deployment of such. I mean, how the hell much did this blanket of gas in Seattle cost? Impact projectiles and irritants should be like bird missiles, only used in extremis after obtaining Dr Nambu's permission. They aren't toys to be indiscriminately used by naughty boys with a limitless budget.
Perhaps a better term should be used in order to counter the simplistic semantic games being played by right-wingers. 'Demilitarize the Police' is simple and clear... I, myself like 'Defang the Police'.
After living in Britain for many years, I was shocked to see the amount of weaponry *Australian* police carry now. What the cops can call upon, and do, in America is simply insane.
ReplyDeleteI know you have many, many more armed civilians over there, but the correct answer is never more and bigger guns. Or tanks. Or rocket launchers. JFC.
Yeah, our whole society is just awash in weaponry, it's no mystery why our homicide rate is so high.
ReplyDelete