Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n
1. I do not want to improve policing. I want to abolish it.
Good luck on enforcing the law with no sorts of policing.
The KKK activates itself once again? Sorry African Americans, you are on your own.
Do you want to tax people to pay for social programs? Tax law isn't enforced anymore since policing has been abolished, too bad for you if you are poor.
Foreign powers meddle in your communist island in the Caribbean? Ooops, too bad, the police can't engage in counterespionage because it has been abolished too (oh wait, I assume this only applies to the US, right? Nevermind if Cuban police routinely arrest and fry dissidents' balls with electricity while doing their thing).
Pants-of-dog wrote:2. Your belief that this study is relevant is entirely speculative.
The relevance of a study suggesting police presence deters crime when wondering if policing helps to stop crime is "entirely speculative"?
Pants-of-dog wrote:3. Please clarify your argument. If your argument is that more cops equals less crime, we have seen that the evidence for that is weak.
My argument is that defunding the police is a bad idea, among other reasons, because investment is required to improve on it. Also, increasing funding for the police is not the same as having more cops in the streets. Staffing consultants are not cheap.
Do you have any cases where defunding the police was preceded by decreases in crime rather than the other way around? Just to know if you have any facts to possibly stand on here.