What a 'defund the police' plan in Seattle might look like

[HoverBoarder]

Originally Posted by Brainster

Here's some news from Minneapolis on one of the unintended consequences there:


I can't imagine how that's going to improve race relations in the city.

I talked to my best friend from college yesterday who grew up in Minneapolis, and just moved away from there last year for a job.

He said" everything around my whole house is burned down, there's not a food store or gas station within 5 miles."

"Oh I said, that's terrible. Are they going to rebuild?"

"No," he replied "they're all poor man."

"Oh," I said, "that's sad."

[HoverBoarder]

So when we talk about defunding SPD, there are a number of areas that the Council is looking at eliminating in addition to firing officers.

The programs that they have talked about sending the money to have no real experience or plan to deal with any of the services being cut, except to help people navigate their way through getting a lawyer.

In short, the plan is to reduce services to those people who are victims of crime, with a large amount of money going to help those who are perpetrators of crime with programs given huge amounts of money with no plan or accountability on how they will spend it.


Here are some of the cuts that Seattle is looking at. Note that the department investigating sexual assaults has also been reported to be cut as well.

https://westseattleblog.com/2020/07/...nge-on-police/

Quote:

Cuts could come from many places in SPD’s budget, and should include the following actions:
• Freeze hiring. Any planned hiring, including for individuals in the training pipeline, should be cancelled.
• Eliminate funds for recruitment and retention, including bonuses for new hires.
• Remove the Office of Collaborative Policing, including Navigation Team. While some programs of this office, along with their administrative infrastructure, should be eliminated altogether, others could be moved to a civilian-controlled city agency.
o Eliminate: Navigation Team, Community Outreach Administration [homeless outreach services]
• Transfer out of SPD control: Crisis Intervention Response, Community Service Officers
• Eliminate spending on new equipment
• Eliminate Data-driven policing
• Eliminate spending on North Precinct Capital Project
• Eliminate Professional Services -Including:
§ Photo Enforcement
§ Sworn Hiring in HR
§ Recruitment and Retention
§ Community Outreach
§ Implicit Bias Training
§ Communications
• Cut SPD’s spending on Homeland Security (a misnamed unit that is mostly assigned to large events like Bumbershoot)
• Eliminate SWAT Team funding
• End contracts with private firms that defend SPD and the City against police misconduct lawsuits
• Eliminate SPD’s travel and training budget
• End overtime pay, including for Emphasis Patrols
• Reduce patrol staffing, with corresponding reduction in administrative staffing

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by uke2se

However, there are times that a crazy person is acting out without being armed. Maybe armed police isn't necessary then. That's what "defund the police" means.

I'm pretty sure that the problem isn't whether they are armed or not, but rather a lack of training in how to handle mentally unhinged and unstable individuals. Cutting police budgets does not exactly sound like something that will result in more well trained and experienced police that are better at handling delicate situations like this.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Arcade22

I'm pretty sure that the problem isn't whether they are armed or not, but rather a lack of training in how to handle mentally unhinged and unstable individuals. Cutting police budgets does not exactly sound like something that will result in more well trained and experienced police that are better at handling delicate situations like this.

The point is not that existing police be trained to handle delicate situations like this, the point is that delicate situations like this should not be handled by police at all.

[HoverBoarder]

Originally Posted by Arcade22

I'm pretty sure that the problem isn't whether they are armed or not, but rather a lack of training in how to handle mentally unhinged and unstable individuals. Cutting police budgets does not exactly sound like something that will result in more well trained and experienced police that are better at handling delicate situations like this.

You are correct. For Seattle in fact training is one of the things on the Council members elimination list in their 50% reduction plan.

Including eliminating deescalation training, anti bias training, and community outreach programs.

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

The point is not that existing police be trained to handle delicate situations like this, the point is that delicate situations like this should not be handled by police at all.

So exactly in which country does the police not respond to mentally disturbed and unhinged individuals who cause public alarm? From what I've seen on a Australian "real cops" show i seriously doubt the police would not be the first instance to respond to those kind of things.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by Arcade22

I'm pretty sure that the problem isn't whether they are armed or not, but rather a lack of training in how to handle mentally unhinged and unstable individuals. Cutting police budgets does not exactly sound like something that will result in more well trained and experienced police that are better at handling delicate situations like this.

The problem is that there is no disincentive for the cops to just use violence in these situations. They won't be prosecuted, they won't be fired, they won't be jailed, they won't personally be sued.

Why try to thread the needle of trying to calm down someone during a mental crisis when you can just grab a taser or gun and wrap things up quickly?

[HoverBoarder]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

The problem is that there is no disincentive for the cops to just use violence in these situations. They won't be prosecuted, they won't be fired, they won't be jailed, they won't personally be sued.

Why try to thread the needle of trying to calm down someone during a mental crisis when you can just grab a taser or gun and wrap things up quickly?

That's not a serious comment, or even close to reality.

Which is unfortunate, because it is an important issue that you are referencing.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by HoverBoarder

That's not a serious comment, or even close to reality.

Which is unfortunate, because it is an important issue that you are referencing.

Cops shot an autistic man's caregiver because they missed when trying to hit the disabled man who was playing with toy cars in the street.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooti...Charles_Kinsey

Who's being unserious here?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Cops shot an autistic man's caregiver because they missed when trying to hit the disabled man who was playing with toy cars in the street.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooti...Charles_Kinsey

Who's being unserious here?

Well it is natural for cops to just shoot the black guy. That is also why they refused to give him medical treatment and tried to arrest him for messing up their shot.

Next people will question why cops need to sick a dog on some possibly suicidal teen. That is proper treatment for mental illness in copland.

http://watchdogsarasota.heraldtribun...e-get-ur-bite/

[SuburbanTurkey]

Police attitudes in the US is that they quickly and firmly assert authority, and noncompliance results in escalating force until the subject submits.

This may work for someone with a rational mind that acts out of a sense of self-preservation, but people experiencing episodes of mental illness often do not respond rationally. Which is why so many mentally ill people end up getting shot by the police.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Police attitudes in the US is that they quickly and firmly assert authority, and noncompliance results in escalating force until the subject submits.

This may work for someone with a rational mind that acts out of a sense of self-preservation, but people experiencing episodes of mental illness often do not respond rationally. Which is why so many mentally ill people end up getting shot by the police.

Plus setting dogs on teens is damn funny. Always good for a laugh.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

What business is going to want to set up shop in a place where their store can be demolished at any time by an angry mob and the police can't or won't do anything about it?

That is anyone who has the nerve to question any action by any cop.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...y-won-n1235166

You want police to respond to such things you have to accept that black lives don't matter.

[deadrose]

Originally Posted by HoverBoarder

You are correct. For Seattle in fact training is one of the things on the Council members elimination list in their 50% reduction plan.

Including eliminating deescalation training, anti bias training, and community outreach programs.

Of course the police are claiming they'll eliminate the stuff that matters most to the public. That's how they do business around here. It's as if the schools said they'd eliminate math & reading if there were program cuts.

They do this sort of thing all the time, like over the consent decree with the feds. A number of cops tried to sue over having to be less violent, and when that didn't work, they quit responding to crimes like burglaries & robberies, or slow-walked them.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Arcade22

So exactly in which country does the police not respond to mentally disturbed and unhinged individuals who cause public alarm? From what I've seen on a Australian "real cops" show i seriously doubt the police would not be the first instance to respond to those kind of things.

Just because a situation is, doesn't mean that situation should be. I happen to know a person who has provided training to Australian police on mental health issues, and I can say that this training is woefully inadequate.

Thing is, police are called upon to provide assistance in too many wildly different situations. You don't take forty subjects in school, yet police are expected to maintain their skills and knowledge in so many different areas simultaneously.

Take some of those situations and hand them over to another group - a specialist group - and the police can concentrate on being good police without having to also simultaneously concentrate on being good social workers, and good mental health crisis intervention agents, and good housing providers, and good security guards... and so on.

And if you're really worried that the person having a mental health crisis may become a danger to themselves and others, send your mental health professional with police backup, but make sure the police are there only as backup in case an emergency happens.

[HoverBoarder]

Originally Posted by deadrose

Of course the police are claiming they'll eliminate the stuff that matters most to the public. That's how they do business around here. It's as if the schools said they'd eliminate math & reading if there were program cuts.

They do this sort of thing all the time, like over the consent decree with the feds. A number of cops tried to sue over having to be less violent, and when that didn't work, they quit responding to crimes like burglaries & robberies, or slow-walked them.

No, that pledge to remove all training including deescalation training, anti-bias training, and community training is a quote from Council Member Lisa Herbold during the 7/15 budget meeting.

She is the one claiming to eliminate what you termed "the stuff that matters most to the public."

If that bothers you, you could send her a message, and she will make sure not to listen to you, like she does not listen to all of the rest of her constituents.

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

Just because a situation is, doesn't mean that situation should be.

Of course i know that.

Quote:

I happen to know a person who has provided training to Australian police on mental health issues, and I can say that this training is woefully inadequate.

And presumably you are calling for the police budget to be cut by 50% as a response? Because that's how you improve the quality of training?

Quote:

Thing is, police are called upon to provide assistance in too many wildly different situations. You don't take forty subjects in school, yet police are expected to maintain their skills and knowledge in so many different areas simultaneously.

Take some of those situations and hand them over to another group - a specialist group - and the police can concentrate on being good police without having to also simultaneously concentrate on being good social workers, and good mental health crisis intervention agents, and good housing providers, and good security guards... and so on.

There's nothing preventing police having specialist training in how to handle situations like this. Obviously every police officer should have some degree of training, but there's no need for them to be a expert on everything. Police are supposed to be a jack of all trades and be able to respond to emergencies.

Quote:

And if you're really worried that the person having a mental health crisis may become a danger to themselves and others, send your mental health professional with police backup, but make sure the police are there only as backup in case an emergency happens.

Given that they are cutting police funding I'm expecting it go like this: the "mental health crisis response" people are not going to risk their lives while responding to incidents and they will wait for police unless they are certain there's no need for police support. Since the police has suffered devastating loss of funding there are less police around leading to increased response times, meaning that they would be forced to wait for a long time for police to show up.

Notably this also applies to other emergency response like ambulances and fire fighters who won't do anything without police backup if there's any indication of potential threats to them.

[Brainster]

Meanwhile, Minneapolis has moved ahead with its proposed defund the police plan.

We've already seen what the response will be--hiring of private security guards. But in a particularly delicious bit of hypocrisy, three of the city councilmembers who voted in favor of defunding are currently being protected by private security guards:

Quote:

The City of Minneapolis is spending $4,500 a day for private security for three council members who have received threats following the police killing of George Floyd, FOX 9 has learned.

A city spokesperson said the private security details have cost taxpayers $63,000 over the past three weeks.

Yeah, it's probably right-wingers (or maybe just property owners) making the threats, but guess what? Cops are there to protect you from right-wing goons and everyday criminals and left-wing anarchists.

I keep thinking about Baltimore and the immediate (and persistent) roughly 50% increase in homicides that followed the Freddie Gray riots. When we think of homicides usually, the cops are only there in the aftermath--to collect evidence from the crime scene and to try to nab the perp. But it turns out that cops prevent a lot of homicides as well, and not in the sense that they shoot the gun out of the killer's hand. Their presence in the community is a constant warning to those who would break the law, that you might have to suffer the consequences of your action. If society diminishes that possibility, isn't it likely that criminals reassess the risk/reward tradeoff?

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Arcade22

And presumably you are calling for the police budget to be cut by 50% as a response? Because that's how you improve the quality of training?

No, I improve the quality of training by simply not training them in what they don't need to be trained in. Don't spend the money training the police, spend the money on mental health crisis services instead.

Services which, I should add, are pretty badly underfunded in most places.

Originally Posted by Arcade22

There's nothing preventing police having specialist training in how to handle situations like this. Obviously every police officer should have some degree of training, but there's no need for them to be a expert on everything. Police are supposed to be a jack of all trades and be able to respond to emergencies.

Jack of all trades, master of none. Why not make them master of one trade, and other people masters of the other trades?

Originally Posted by Arcade22

Given that they are cutting police funding I'm expecting it go like this: the "mental health crisis response" people are not going to risk their lives while responding to incidents and they will wait for police unless they are certain there's no need for police support. Since the police has suffered devastating loss of funding there are less police around leading to increased response times, meaning that they would be forced to wait for a long time for police to show up.

Notably this also applies to other emergency response like ambulances and fire fighters who won't do anything without police backup if there's any indication of potential threats to them.

In a majority of cases, there is no risk to those responders. You're talking like every person undergoing a mental health crisis is necessarily a danger to themselves or to others. Most people requiring mental health crisis services are a danger to no-one and do not require an armed response by someone poorly trained in mental health who is sure to misinterpret the situation and assume, the way you do, that someone undergoing a mental health crisis is necessarily dangerous. In that case, the "when all you have is a hammer" analogy applies and someone dies.

Also, ambulances and fire fighters attend situations without police backup all the time.

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

No, I improve the quality of training by simply not training them in what they don't need to be trained in. Don't spend the money training the police, spend the money on mental health crisis services instead.

Services which, I should add, are pretty badly underfunded in most places.

After watching the documentary, Seattle is Dying, my immediate reaction was that SPD spends way, way, too much time and manpower dealing with mentally ill people. There was one clip of a homeless guy raging with a bicycle as 5-7 cops try to negotiate with him. And they were reduced to being mental health professionals, as it appears they were not permitted to use physical force to restrain him. According to the video, the confrontation went on for hours.

Now, would I rather have mental health pros handling the situation? Yes, obviously, but given the violent and threatening behavior the homeless guy displayed, I think at least a few cops needed to be there.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Brainster

After watching the documentary, Seattle is Dying, my immediate reaction was that SPD spends way, way, too much time and manpower dealing with mentally ill people. There was one clip of a homeless guy raging with a bicycle as 5-7 cops try to negotiate with him. And they were reduced to being mental health professionals, as it appears they were not permitted to use physical force to restrain him. According to the video, the confrontation went on for hours.

Now, would I rather have mental health pros handling the situation? Yes, obviously, but given the violent and threatening behavior the homeless guy displayed, I think at least a few cops needed to be there.

Quite possibly. How representative of the average person having a mental health crisis do you think that was?

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

Quite possibly. How representative of the average person having a mental health crisis do you think that was?

Oh, I am quite certain it was an extreme event. But this guy has been arrested dozens of times; Seattle surely has a caseworker assigned to him, so the idea there's a magic bullet that a sociology major can provide seems unlikely.

And again, I'm not saying some functions of the police can't be handed off to social workers. I just think that you're going to find that reducing the size of the force will increase crime, particularly coming on the heels of nightly protests against them.

[uke2se]

The point being argued is to defund the police AND redistribute the funds to various other social programs that would provide aid to those in need. Not to defund the police and use the money for a huge kegger.

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by uke2se

The point being argued is to defund the police AND redistribute the funds to various other social programs that would provide aid to those in need. Not to defund the police and use the money for a huge kegger.

Thanks for clearing that up for us. I still say the crime rate is going to soar, but the citizens will no doubt feel better knowing that at least there are well-funded social programs to help them cope with the increased violence and theft in the city.

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by uke2se

The point being argued is to defund the police AND redistribute the funds to various other social programs that would provide aid to those in need. Not to defund the police and use the money for a huge kegger.

Would be an incredibly dim thing to do in my humble opinion, but may be worth it for entertainment value when it all goes tits up.

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by Brainster

Thanks for clearing that up for us. I still say the crime rate is going to soar, but the citizens will no doubt feel better knowing that at least there are well-funded social programs to help them cope with the increased violence and theft in the city.

Might cause crime to soar, but it doesn't have to. Data suggests it wouldn't. Here's an article from ACLU that discusses it: https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-l...make-us-safer/

One major point to consider is that even if you feel safer with lots of police around, there are others who feel less safe. The police in the US is built on racist foundations, and even if we are to assume that they as an institution are needed in society (I say this as an LEO), the rotten core of US policing makes their intended role very difficult. For me, this isn't just a question of defunding the police. That's a start, but more is needed. I'd argue for a phazed disbandment of all existing police units and a reformation with new leadership (and overall lineup), new mandates and a new vision of their role.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by uke2se

Might cause crime to soar, but it doesn't have to. Data suggests it wouldn't. Here's an article from ACLU that discusses it: https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-l...make-us-safer/

That's... not data. That's opinion. None of the data presented in that link actually address the claim that defunding would improve crime stats.

Quote:

One major point to consider is that even if you feel safer with lots of police around, there are others who feel less safe. The police in the US is built on racist foundations

Apparently it's massively racist in favor of Asians. Who knew?

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

No, I improve the quality of training by simply not training them in what they don't need to be trained in. Don't spend the money training the police, spend the money on mental health crisis services instead.

So that they would become even worse at handling people undergoing a mental health crisis? Even-though they are invariably going to deal with such people? I'm not sure exactly how you can consider that a good idea.

Quote:

Services which, I should add, are pretty badly underfunded in most places.

I'm pretty sure you can have well funded police and well funded mental health care.

Quote:

Jack of all trades, master of none. Why not make them master of one trade, and other people masters of the other trades?

Again there's no reason why you can't have specialists working at the police. Not every police officer needs to be an expert at handling mentally ill or unhinged individuals, but they all ought to have at least a little bit of training in doing so.

Quote:

In a majority of cases, there is no risk to those responders. You're talking like every person undergoing a mental health crisis is necessarily a danger to themselves or to others. Most people requiring mental health crisis services are a danger to no-one and do not require an armed response by someone poorly trained in mental health who is sure to misinterpret the situation and assume, the way you do, that someone undergoing a mental health crisis is necessarily dangerous. In that case, the "when all you have is a hammer" analogy applies and someone dies.

I'm sure the unions would love to argue with you about the safety of first responders once one or two people end up dead or critically wounded and when their ambulances get trashed by bored youth after they leave them unattended for a couple of minutes.

Quote:

Also, ambulances and fire fighters attend situations without police backup all the time.

Even in the bad neighborhoods?

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by uke2se

Might cause crime to soar, but it doesn't have to. Data suggests it wouldn't. Here's an article from ACLU that discusses it: https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-l...make-us-safer/

That article is short on data and long on assertions. I am always amused that people care that the initial police in America were slave-catchers. It's an interesting bit of trivia, but just because a tool was once used for evil purposes doesn't mean the tool itself is evil. Every civilized society has some form of police, for the simple reason that it's a good idea.

Quote:

One major point to consider is that even if you feel safer with lots of police around, there are others who feel less safe. The police in the US is built on racist foundations, and even if we are to assume that they as an institution are needed in society (I say this as an LEO), the rotten core of US policing makes their intended role very difficult. For me, this isn't just a question of defunding the police. That's a start, but more is needed. I'd argue for a phazed disbandment of all existing police units and a reformation with new leadership (and overall lineup), new mandates and a new vision of their role.

Interesting ideas and they may actually get put into practice in some of the cities we are talking about. That's one of the benefits of having a large nation; the rest of us get to observe what Portland and Seattle experiences before deciding whether it's worth emulating. My guess is that there will be large increases in crime and not just property crime, but homicides. Granted, these cities aren't Baltimore, so they start from a lower base, and this being the year of covid, crime actually had been down quite a bit in the spring. But my guess is that this year's homicides in both cites come in 20% higher or more than last year's, and that next year's will be higher still.

[deadrose]

Wow, Seattle has a lot of work to do in the rest of this year to even tie last year's crime numbers. Crime seems to have been dropping since March. Wonder why that is.

Here's a useful resource Seattle Crime Dashboard, as reported by the police department.

It's possible figures will go up for recent weeks, what with all those charges of felony graffiti and aggressive loitering.

Also "Seattle is Dying?" was a conservative hit piece put out by the local Sinclair Media station. That's the conglomerate who forces their affiliates to run their op-eds, and sometimes makes the local air personalities record scripts to make it seem local, like this

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

. They are very biased.

[Safe-Keeper]

Originally Posted by Brainster

I know I shouldn't point this out but somebody should tell Vox that if you have a young journalist with a squeaky little-girl voice, having her use kids' toy blocks as props might undercut the notion that this is a serious presentation on an adult topic.

So I take it you had no issues with the actual statements in the video, since all you're commenting on is the journalist's voice ?

[Safe-Keeper]

This reminds me of an old thread where the OP was terribly offended after a killing had taken place and someone somewhere had dared imply that the crime rate in the area was partly to do with a lack of activities for kids and teens, leaving them to hang around street corners or throw parties with drugs and/or alcohol, and commit petty crimes.

This was apparently "making excuses for vile criminals", because you weren't supposed to ask why crime occurred, or work on preventive measures, it's as simple as people just needing to decide not to be criminals. People who kill other people are just bad people, period, and trying to prevent them from deciding to do crime is like trying to prevent Mondays from happening.

Implying that it might just be a bad thing if the police force is overfunded, and that social services, health, etc. are underfunded, and that drawing funds from the overfunded police to underfunded services, seems to be similarily verboten among certain people here for some reason.

[Safe-Keeper]

Originally Posted by Brainster

That article is short on data and long on assertions. I am always amused that people care that the initial police in America were slave-catchers. It's an interesting bit of trivia, but just because a tool was once used for evil purposes doesn't mean the tool itself is evil.

My, oh my. If it isn't squeaky girl's voices, it's irrelevant trivia. If only they didn't make these mistakes so that you'd have time to actually comment on their actual arguments.

[HoverBoarder]

Originally Posted by deadrose

Wow, Seattle has a lot of work to do in the rest of this year to even tie last year's crime numbers. Crime seems to have been dropping since March. Wonder why that is.

Here's a useful resource Seattle Crime Dashboard, as reported by the police department.

Pandemic are not a good or long term crime prevention tool.

There is a lot of disinformation getting pushed by the radical left in Seattle right now.

Unfortunately with pretty deadly consequences.

[HoverBoarder]

Originally Posted by Brainster

Meanwhile, Minneapolis has moved ahead with its proposed defund the police plan.

We've already seen what the response will be--hiring of private security guards. But in a particularly delicious bit of hypocrisy, three of the city councilmembers who voted in favor of defunding are currently being protected by private security guards:

Yeah, it's probably right-wingers (or maybe just property owners) making the threats, but guess what? Cops are there to protect you from right-wing goons and everyday criminals and left-wing anarchists.

I keep thinking about Baltimore and the immediate (and persistent) roughly 50% increase in homicides that followed the Freddie Gray riots. When we think of homicides usually, the cops are only there in the aftermath--to collect evidence from the crime scene and to try to nab the perp. But it turns out that cops prevent a lot of homicides as well, and not in the sense that they shoot the gun out of the killer's hand. Their presence in the community is a constant warning to those who would break the law, that you might have to suffer the consequences of your action. If society diminishes that possibility, isn't it likely that criminals reassess the risk/reward tradeoff?

That is just amazing. The Defund idea is such a poorly thought out plan, and it is really unfortunate that it will take a huge pile of dead bodies for many people to figure that out.

$63,000 for three week of private security protection for these pro defund council members. There are certainly not a lot of residents who will be able to afford that. Not to mention that some of the major employers in the area had their buildings burned down in the riots, and are not likely to come back.

What a self made mess.

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by deadrose

Wow, Seattle has a lot of work to do in the rest of this year to even tie last year's crime numbers. Crime seems to have been dropping since March. Wonder why that is.

Here's a useful resource Seattle Crime Dashboard, as reported by the police department.

Yes indeed, that is an excellent resource. While it is true that crimes like Robbery and Aggravated Assault (two "social" crimes in the sense that we would expect them to decline this year) are off, homicide is slightly ahead of pace while arson and burglaries are way, way up.

Quote:

It's possible figures will go up for recent weeks, what with all those charges of felony graffiti and aggressive loitering.

Hmmm, wondering where those would fit in the crime dashboard. I'm guessing nowhere (they only seem to be tracking serious crime), so good news! The crime rate will not be soaring because of felony graffiti and aggressive loitering.

Quote:

Also "Seattle is Dying?" was a conservative hit piece put out by the local Sinclair Media station. That's the conglomerate who forces their affiliates to run their op-eds, and sometimes makes the local air personalities record scripts to make it seem local, like this

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

. They are very biased.

The piece was obviously agenda journalism and I am familiar with Sinclair. That said, it did make a pretty persuasive case that Seattle police are forced to deal with the same core group of homeless and mentally ill people repeatedly due to the revolving door of arrest and release.

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

Implying that it might just be a bad thing if the police force is overfunded, and that social services, health, etc. are underfunded, and that drawing funds from the overfunded police to underfunded services, seems to be similarily verboten among certain people here for some reason.

Well for one thing they probably should do it a little bit more gradually. Or do you think people will immediately cut back on committing crimes proportionally to the 50% budget cut just because?

[Brainster]

The SS Portland is steaming full speed ahead towards the iceberg:

Quote:

Portland police are scrambling to respond to 15 homicides in the city so far in July. That’s the most killings in one month in more than three decades, they said.

So far this year, 24 people have died in homicides in Portland.

Check out the graph on shootings--up every month compared to last year with the sole exception of March (for obvious reasons).

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by Brainster

The SS Portland is steaming full speed ahead towards the iceberg:



Check out the graph on shootings--up every month compared to last year with the sole exception of March (for obvious reasons).

The police haven't been defunded. Seattle PD is operating as it had before the protests and there's still a spike in murders. Likewise for Portland.

I'm not sure what the point is in citing these murders in cities that have stated an intent to defund or heavily reform their police departments in the future.

Murder is up in all major cities, including those that haven't promised to dismantle their police departments. This increase in murders is occurring despite bloated police budgets.

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

The police haven't been defunded. Seattle PD is operating as it had before the protests and there's still a spike in murders. Likewise for Portland.

Not true. Portland disbanded its gun violence reduction team:

Quote:

He noted that the bureau was forced to cut its Gun Violence Reduction Team at the direction of the City Council. The 34-member team was disbanded July 1 as a result of budget cuts to police units that have targeted a disproportionate number of black people in traffic stops.

So the gun violence reduction team gets disbanded at the beginning of July, and gun violence soars during July. It is seldom that data is that clear.

Quote:

I'm not sure what the point is in citing these murders in cities that have stated an intent to defund or heavily reform their police departments in the future.

Because the level of policing appears to be inversely related to the homicide rate.

Quote:

Murder is up in all major cities, including those that haven't promised to dismantle their police departments. This increase in murders is occurring despite bloated police budgets.

You're right about murder being up across the board and so maybe Portland's blip in July will just turn out to be a statistical oddity. I'm betting it's not.