Who needs cops anyway?
Who needs cops anyway?
102 comments
-
Everybody just getting along and cooperating and not fucking with each other sounds dope too. So go ahead, make that happen and we won't need cops. While you're at it, lack of fires and accidental injuries would be super dope too. Got an ETA on those?
If that makes me sound like a hardline law-and-order type, guess again meme-brain, I'm just intelligent enough to know that seriously thinking we don't need cops is idiotic.
-
Do you have evidence? A controlled study?
Also firefighters may be racist magas, but they provide a universal good with no downsides. I've never personally witnessed three firefighters gang up on a homeless person chilling on the sidewalk, for example. Very unaware of any firefighters trying to charge you a fee for not knowing your tail light was out.
-
A controlled study that proves crimes happen? LOL nope you got me there.
-
No, a controlled study where for example a small town decided to eliminate a majority of policing. No patrols, no presence except for 911 response, etc. crimes would still be reported (if someone breaks into your house you'll still call) but without any of the active policing that this thread is about. How do the numbers compare?
-
A neighborhood in Seattle pretty much did what you're talking about a few years ago, on a rudimentary zero-budget level. In fact I've been friends for years with one of the people who were deeply involved in it. But it wasn't a "study" and I'm pretty sure nobody collected any statistics. And it only lasted a few months. I actually have no objection to it, what my comment said was that people aren't going to do it. And look around you - the model is right there. But in a culture where fewer and fewer people even cook their own meals anymore, even fewer are willing to personally devote their valuable time to DIY law enforcement.
-
-
-
-
OP: [proposes alternatives]
You: "So you're basically suggesting Mad Max"
-
Well, what are you doing right now? Feel free to organize your own DIY law enforcement. But doing social media is so much easier isn't it? That's EXACTLY why OP's proposed alternative isn't practical. That's not a criticism against you or anyone else here, it's just facing the truth. We could make OP's vision a reality, but we won't. Getting off your ass and doing it would prove me wrong, but a downvote just proves me right.
-
"You are using social media" isn't the gotcha you think it is. I'm literally taking a dump at work right now.
Either a reply or a downvote proves you wrong.
-
Okay, but at some point you won't be working or taking a dump, so you'll be organizing that whole law enforcement thing and we don't need cops, right? Good for you! Let me know how it works out!
-
Yes? I can't emphasize enough how much this isn't a gotcha. No offense but I won't remember you for that long.
-
My point is that people could be doing the DIY law enforcement thing right now, and they aren't. Reality speaks for itself. So either get off your ass and do it or STFU. What are you, 13? Blocking you dude.
-
Well now I'm sad he'll never hear that people are, in fact, doing the things OP listed.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Your post makes it look like a binary choice between cop-filled reality and cop-free fantasy. But there are marked differences between how many cops (many = often more stupid, untrained, poorly selected, corrupt) a society needs and what activity is expected of them.
Existing societies also demonstrate a vastly different need for imprisoning people.
Myself, I think that prisoners per capita is a better indicator than cops per capita. The latter gives weird results heavily tilted towards microstates (lead by Vatican, Pitcairn Islands and Motserrat).
- Maximum of prisoners per capita: North Korea (undisclosed but estimated), El Salvador (1600 per 100K), Cuba (794), Rwanda (637), Turkmenistan (576), United States (541).
- Minimum of prisoners per capita: go and have a look, it's interesting. The leading 5 have a trend towards microstates and very poor developing countries, but if one filters them out and chooses sizable countries with functioning economies, the first that comes across is Japan - with an incarceration rate of 33 per 100K. That's 48 times less than El Salvador and 16 times less than the United States. The first European country on the list is Finland with 52 per 100K, indicating approximately what a "western style" society can achieve. The EU average seems to be around 100 per 100K. The highest rated EU country seems to be Poland with 194 per 100K.
Notably, the first somewhat sizable European country and western-type society on both lists is Finland. It has the lowest prisoners per capita in Europe (at 52 per 100K) and the lowest cops per capita in Europe at 132 per 100K. It is not a known haven of rampant crime - it has really low crime rates too. Apparently in some conditions, you can have few cops, few prisoners and limited crime.
My guess - I could be wrong - is that the quality and coverage of social security, education and health care are what actually make the difference. Most people don't start criminal activity for fun. Contributing factors include desperate poverty, poor parenting, lacking education, mental illness and exposure to trauma, damage from disease and substance abuse, etc, etc. Lots of full prisons are probably a factor that contributes to criminality, by making a "higher education in crime" accessible to more people.
-
Very thoughtful, but your comment really should be addressed to OP and not to me. My comment was specifically a rely to, "Who needs cops anyway?" Not needing cops is the fantasy, needing cops is the reality. Sorry if you translated the word "cops" to "a cop-filled reality" but that wasn't what I said or meant. Misinterpreting simple terms as an extreme version that would be easy to argue with seems very popular. I think we need the number of cops we need, not a regimented "cop-filled" (or prison-filled) world at all.
-
102 comments