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.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
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.