Minneapolis City Council is Disbanding the Police Department, Time for Self-Defense

in Deep Dives4 years ago (edited)

Calls from the left to get rid of the Minneapolis Police Department have been heard. In an unprecedented move by the Minneapolis City Council, a police department will be disbanded/abolished.

They summarize their "veto-proof majority" plans to create a "police-free future":

  1. Decades of police reform efforts have proved that the Minneapolis Police Department cannot be reformed, and will never be accountable for its actions.
  2. We are here today to begin the process of ending the Minneapolis Police Department and creating new transformative model for cultivating safety in Minneapolis.
  3. We recognize that we don't have all the answers about what a police-free future looks like, but our community does. We're committing to engaging with every willing community member in the City of Minneapolis over the next year to identify what safety looks like for you.
  4. We'll be taking intermediate steps towards ending the MPD through the budget process and other policy and budget decisions over the coming weeks and months.

This comes shortly after protesters called out Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and asked him if he would defund the Minneapolis police department. He said no, and was booed out from the massive protest with protesters yelling "shame" and "go home".

This move has been met with derision and ridicule by the political right:

"I wish I had the U-Haul franchise in Minneapolis b/c all the same people will be bugging out to a place not run by loons and I could make a fortune renting one way trucks!" - AR Governor Mike Huckabee

"This is dangerous, counterproductive, and deeply irrational. “Defund the police” is not a call from the fringes of the far left anymore. It has gone from a radical slogan to actual policy in a major American city, within days." - Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw

Minneapolis City Council President Lisa Bender explained the failure of the police department which led to the decision in favor of protest sentiments:

"We are here today because George Floyd was killed by the Minneapolis Police Department. We are also here because, here in Minneapolis and in cities across the United States, it is clear that our existing system of policing and public safety isn’t working for so many of our neighbors. Our efforts at incremental reform have failed."

Council Member Jeremiah Ellison has hinted at this decision last week as he tweeted "We are going to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department."

We are going to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department.

And when we’re done, we’re not simply gonna glue it back together.

We are going to dramatically rethink how we approach public safety and emergency response.

This seems to be the end of one police department that has a track record of abuse of power. Council Member Steve Fletcher gave many examples of "decades-long history of violence and discrimination", saying they can "resolve confusion over a $20 grocery transaction without drawing a weapon or pulling out handcuffs".

Their announcement emphasized the failures of the PD:

MPD’s record for solving serious crimes in the city is consistently low. For example, in 2019, Minneapolis police only cleared 56 percent of cases in which a person was killed. For rapes, the police department’s solve rate is abysmally low. In 2018, their clearance rate for rape was just 22 percent. In other words, four out of every five rapes go unsolved in Minneapolis. Further casting doubt on the department’s commitment to solving sexual assaults, MPD announced last year the discovery of 1,700 untested rape kits spanning 30 years, which officials said had been misplaced.

What is this new approach to public safety? The money spend on the police department will likely go to education, affordable housing, and other social services. New York and Los Angeles, with a PD budget of $6 and $3 billion respectively, have officials signaling they will defund parts of the PD and pursue similar ends.

Law enforcement officers are not equipped to be experts in responding to mental health crises, often leading to tragic results—nationally, about half of police killings involve someone living with mental illness or disability. As a result, public health experts have long advocated for dispatching medical professionals and/or social workers, not armed police, to respond to calls related to substance use and mental health. Polling from Data for Progress indicates that more than two-thirds of voters—68 percent—support the creation of such programs, versions of which are already in place in other cities such as, Eugene, Oregon; Austin, Texas; and Denver, Colorado.

Minneapolis Council President Bender emphasized the goal to end the city's toxic MPD by ending policing as they know it and recreate a public safety system:

“Our commitment is to do what is necessary to keep every single member of our community safe and to tell the truth that the Minneapolis Police are not doing that,” Bender said Sunday. “Our commitment is to end our city’s toxic relationship with the Minneapolis Police Department, to end policing as we know it, and to recreate systems of public safety that actually keep us safe.”

I do support the end of public police who are unaccountable. I welcome a less violent approach to helping people resolve conflict. I am curious how it will work out in the end. One step that would be necessary is to promote the 2nd amendment and allow people to open carry.

Police were never a proper substitute for anyone being able to stop a crime as it happens. Depending on someone else to defend you only fosters weakness in people who depend on someone else to save them while they wait minutes for the alleged help. And many times people who call for help get treated like the criminal, and some end up getting killed.

Private policing may be an option, where accountability would lay in the people themselves choosing to defund a company that misbehaves or provides poor quality service. I wouldn't trust the funds to again be managed by politicians. A yearly or more frequent vote to abolish funding would be prudent. But nothing beats the right to personal self-defense where everyone is able to help defend themselves and others without depending on a centralized force.

Sort:  

It is about time we start standing up for personal responsibility. I saw a comment on self defense and that is great because that is taking personal responsibility for personal safety.
Ever see the movie Robot's? "See a need, fill a need". I see a ton of self defense people stepping up.
Defunding the police may also stop the traffic ticket fraud.

It is about time we start standing up for personal responsibility. I saw a comment on self defense and that is great because that is taking personal responsibility for personal safety.

You, get it! :D :D :D

 4 years ago (edited) 

This is a tough question for me.
While I'm completely against the violence of the state and the brutal tactics of the police force towards protestors, it does concern me that the solutions may also end up having some adverse impacts. As many are pointing out, hiring private security forces seems dubious at best and who will they be accountable to? Their shareholders? And a private police force, in my opinion, would be essentially profit driven and not accountable to the community - we see how private prisons are already filled to capacity...
It's a difficult question. I think there are alternatives to police and they should be explored thoroughly.
Maybe before disbanding the police outright, they should begin with DE-MILITARIZING the police, retraining police for conflict resolution instead of escalation and end the ridiculous failed War on Drugs which seems to be the justification for huge budgets, weaponry and cornerstone of imprisoning minorities.
I would also like to see the homeless and drug addicts actually treated humanely and treated for their ailments instead of criminalizing the self-destructive behavior. Punishing these people with fines, arrests, and imprisonment just doesn't work.
We need to start treating the underlying causes as well... and that's economic inequality and poverty. It's not a crime to be poor.

Thank you, for your compassion and balanced response.

Yeah that's why an armed population is the best solution. A private police force is another option, but not the ideal one. Who holds them accountable? People with guns lol. If they don't want to protect their own communities, they can hire other to do so, and keep them accountable. A population will always be larger than a hired force. There are always steps in a better direction, and non-militarized police is certainly in that direction. all the victimless "crimes" are just cash grabs and control schemes, they all need to go like you say.

Organized violence trumps unorganized violence any time. The idea that citizens should defend themselves without resorting to the help any organization is pure fantasy. If you want to know what happened in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union when all government security organizations got "defunded", you can read about it in Vadim Volkov's Violent Entrepreneurs.

What happened was that the mafia took over. In their hayday crime bosses ruled entire industries. The worst case was probably the city of Tambov and the Uralmash machine building combinate that fell into the hands of criminal organizations. In the 1990's, shootings and bombings in the middle of the day were commonplace. Many innocent bystanders were caught in the crossfire.

Private security companies may be able to keep random acts of violence at bay. But what about solving crimes? Minneapolis risks becoming a basket case that the FBI or the state of Minnesota will have to sort out.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1229632.Violent_Entrepreneurs

This is a very good point.
This can be seen on a smaller scale when a mafia/organized crime family is removed/eliminated from an area and there's a "power vacuum" and a violent turf war takes place between rival gangs in order to control the now vacated area.

It might be difficult for people to imagine but this sort of thing could certainly happen where police (authority with a license for violence) are displaced.

This can be seen on a smaller scale when a mafia/organized crime family is removed/eliminated from an area and there's a "power vacuum" and a violent turf war takes place between rival gangs in order to control the now vacated area.

Yes. Physical violence is the most primitive and primary form of power. We live in a physical universe.

It might be difficult for people to imagine but this sort of thing could certainly happen where police (authority with a license for violence) are displaced.

It is guaranteed to happen. What precise form it will take will be interesting to see but sooner or later other police departments in the state of Minnesota and the FBI will have to step in and sort out the mess.

A public professional police force authorized not only to maintain order but to solve crimes is simply the most cost effective way to keep the peace and solve crimes. No posse of armed civilians has the ability to do that. I doubt private security firms with the expertise to do criminal investigation can easily be found. Besides there is a serious risk of conflict of interest when the profit motive is introduced to police work.

Yeah, I can understand the motive to reduce massive budgets of some police departments that spend enormous sums on second hand military equipment - that actually makes a lot of sense.

What you're saying is also right on point. There's no incentive for armed civilians or private mercs to investigate crimes.

This idea is also echoed in my comments above about the fact that the profit driven private security forces will be concerned with making revenue. To me that would suggest locking more people up to justify their existence.

As much as there's a real need for change in the current system, I think that ousting the entire police force is just going to create more problems and isn't really a longterm solution. It scores political points and is emotionally cathartic but it's short sighted and could make things much worse.

Speak of the devil, Looks like Chicago has just hired 3 private security firms to help control protestors.

chicagotrib.png

Yeah, I can understand the motive to reduce massive budgets of some police departments that spend enormous sums on second hand military equipment - that actually makes a lot of sense.

Militarizing the police is something I've heard has been taking place in the US. I don't really know the circumstances in which this has happened. But it seems strange as a police force exists to solve crimes first and foremost. All other roles it has can be performed by organizations like the National Guard in case of large-scale riots and private security firms when it comes to guarding private or public spaces. Investigating crime is a core task that cannot be outsourced to any other organization.

That Bolshevik Revolution sure showed how self-defense doesn't matter and you can depend on a centralized authority. USSR was such a great system of control from oppressors, how about Solschenizyn for a lessen on the tyranny of authority? Imagine if people organized to protect themselves and not let a gang of thugs called the mafia of government or non-government mafia or "revolutionaries" oppress them...

There are specialists and there are non-specialists in violence. It takes a special mentality to dedicate your life to violence. It takes preparedness to give up for your life at any moment. You must be able to sacrifice the lives of your loved ones as well. Not everyone is like that. Only a small minority of people have what it takes to be specialists in violence.

It's unrealistic to expect the average person to be a match for the kind of cold-blooded killers that the criminal underworld or the likes of the KGB breed. The ordinary person will not stand a chance anywhere. Not even in the land of the free. Forget about it.

The only way a modern state can function without turning into a police state is to have several professional organizations specializing in violence with partially conflicting jurisdictions. That guarantees that there won't be too much fraternizing between them. Then put civilians in control of the entire system. Dictatorships use the same system to keep the security apparatuses in check.

This sounds revolutionary. I wonder too what the alternative form of social security will look like? Right to bear your own arms and police yourself one individual at a time, with no support from any law enforcement sounds scary and leaves one feeling vulnerable, but here in South Africa our police also fail miserably to protect the people, especially those minorities, like us whites in a black land.

That being said, when I had an armed intruder enter my bedroom one early pre-dawn morning in the pitch dark and try to rob me at knife point, I had to fight him off bare handed and get stabbed in the process of chasing him out, But he returned a few minutes later and smashed in again. It was then that I HAD to have support and so called the cops who came and caught him. If we could carry arms here as easily as there it might help. The ideal is laudable but could get messy in the process of transformation. An armed militia or community patrol of volunteers is what we use here in some suburbs since the cops are not reliable sometimes. Private security firms are also very popular here.

with no support from any law enforcement sounds scary

In this alternative, do people live on islands alone? Are there not other people around you? A community should have people uniting to stand for morality against immorality.

Thanks for your kind response @krnel, I regularly read your posts, always something informative. Yes you are correct, small neighborhood watch patrols and teams here enable self-policing, staying in touch on whatsapp messenger app.

I am thinking a group like black water will be hired at a premium and then will be in a worse scenario. Hard to regulate contractors and who knows what they will and won’t do with evidence and footage. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds for sure.

Armed population are always the most secured to protect themselves and their rights. Hiring a private police force is only to not do the work yourself. If they get out of line, then the community stops them because they are armed and outnumber them.

Well yes of course we know that but there are large numbers of people who want to take away the civil right of owning a firearm. Citizens having their own arms is the best scenario for so many issues but there is such a stigma against it that I think they will take the lazy route and hire a private group like Blackwater or some other offshoot of the renaming or other force similar to it.

I say that America legalize many of the less harmful drugs, save for driving intoxicated. Divert mental health and drug issues to a different department entirely, treating it as a public health issue. Let speeding cameras do the revenue generation for the city. I mean, they already are. Lay off a lot of the police. The ones who remain should be radically retrained, and they should be refocused on crimes that leave victims in their wake instead of victimless crimes!

Sounds like a good step towards a better way ;)

There's a myriad of ways to go about this:

  1. NASA style, where they give licenses and certification to private companies.
  2. City council style where they authorize a handful of private (usually pet) companies to take over certain tasks.
  3. Congressional style, like when the US Postal Service was privatized, where an existing system is essentially swapped in with a commission that gets a monopoly.
  4. Complete abandonment of the task and allow the free market to grow on its own.

I'm sure there are many other ways to screw it all up, too.

Indeed there are hehe. Best defense is self-defense, and an armed people ensure no larger group gets away for long with corruption or tyranny. That's why regimes/governments like to take guns away from people and make them dependent on a centralized authority for all defense.

Brazilian President - "I Want Everyone Armed"

Privatization, then? They're going to hire mercenary companies to deal with violent thugs, mentally ill people on the rampage, terrorism, etc? Or just call in the Feds every time?
This isn't necessarily a good thing.

Yeah, that's the "right" direction... they are talking about social programs "education, affordable housing, and other social services" and your conclusion is that any security force would be mercs (with big guns?) to replace police? Private security firms exist, and are used by people who hire them. How are they held accountable? Would they be more or less accountable than police who have a do anything and get away with it badge, where the blue code protects the brothers//sisters in blue from facing any consequences for their immoral behavior? The best accountability is an armed populace with the responsibility to do whats needed when its needed. But we don't have that even now, or else police would have been held accountable previously.

It actually lessens the police power in the states. I am not for any police or militant power.

Yup, arm the people, and let them unite together to protect each other in their communities.

It is interesting to note that the "reforms" carried out, the hiring of police management, and the discipline of officers in Minneapolis has been under the political control of democrats since Christ was a corporal.

I will further note that Chauvin had 16 complaints against him, and two or three OIS (officer involved shootings) under his belt. it is normal in American police departments to release officers after two shootings for insurance liablity reasons. The last of these shootings was questionable, and democrat senator kobluchar, who was the AG for the county at the time, refused to prosecute.

Lastly, I will note that the correlation between incidents of police brutality, black arrest rates, black educational failure, black unemployment, etc; and years that a polity was controlled by the democong closely approach 100%

it's almost like the democrat party sabotages the black community in order to maintain a 85% voting block intact.

Finally, for the folks that understand that both parties are corrupt, that is understood. but that doesnt mean we shouldnt underscore the severity of this problem in it's specifics

Yeah they just do shit to appease minorities in order to get votes. Much of their policies are not helping them either. Two-party politics is a roundabout con-game.

ALL politics is a roundabout con-game ;>

Most people dont want to get involved (or worse, want the state to nanny-state them, or others); so the corruptocrats are given a free hand.

those who stand up are usually destroyed by the neighbors (the sjw internet lynch mob), not even by the corrupt

How many lives will be lost if Minneapolis City Council disbands their police department? One of the city council members was asked what someone living in Minneapolis should do when someone broke into their home in the middle of the night with no police department to call. Her answer was, people just have to get used to it.

You arm yourself, and you defend yourself, not "get used to it". That response is a typical brainwashed government stooge who doesn't want people defending themselves, just wants to leave them helpless, if that's what they said.

When there are people with guns at a crime, they respond in the present. When you have to call someone to come save you because you can't do it yourself, a lot can happen and you have to use bare hands or submit to the criminal so as to avoid being hurt. Look into open carry states and how many crimes have been stopped by people getting involved rather than calling the police and waiting.

This is an interesting move, because whilst the police are disbanded and no other security option is already to use, then the military will fill the gap temporarily? Im not following it much but would be surprised if its not sounding to good to be true, the private security/police could potentially be worse than the police we have now

I don't doubt the government will fuck shit up more. People need to be armed to defend themselves. Responsibility to moral truth and reciprocal assistance to stop immorality. A private firm could be paid to do it as a full time job if people don't want to get involved, and hold them accountable with their guns and actions if they become corrupt or tyrannical. It always comes back down the individuals in a community being armed and ready to set things rights in any case.

Yes, thats one thing Im happy that it didnt get fully accomplished to take the American peoples weapons away from all these mostly faked school shootings ect and other false flags. If I was born in America, I'd be happy I was in a country with arms unlike most other countrys in the world.. Think of Europe, people dont even have hunting rifles in the cultures ☹️

So if the Minneapolis police is disbanded, how will crime be dealt with in Minneapolis? I think that's not the way to go, emotions are running high but I think it's gonna be better to just resolve the George Floyd's issues and people can let it go

I guess it was the police and military in colonial America that dealt with the tyranny of British rule? Oh right, that was people who fought to create a better way of life. People need to be armed to fend off tyranny in any form.

Brazilian President - "I Want Everyone Armed"

What happens when you disband the police? The secret police are introduced, welcome to socialism..

Curated for #informationwar (by @thoughts-in-time)


Our purpose on the HIVE blockchain is to encourage posts discussing information war, propaganda, disinformation, and liberty. We are a peaceful group of truth-oriented individuals. The topics we write about are those that the controlled social and mainstream media actively suppress. You can learn more about our mission, various websites, and community benefits by clicking here!

Ways you can help the @informationwar!