Quote Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays View Post
Isn't that the crux of the issue though? The phrase wasn't "Reform the Police" or "Revamp the Police" but defund them. I would think that lots of people would look at George Floyd's last moments and think that US policing is a distortion of what they want.

But most of those people still want the comfort that there is a a force of law and order to protect them in dangerous times. Defund the Police as a political slogan offers them the opposite. If you think different then that's another issue on which we vary.
The slogan covers a vast range of views - especially in the wider BLM movement. It invites misrepresentation. However, in a time of economic crisis and defunding of many critical social programmes, the police budgets across the USA have mainly been protected. I do agree with redirecting a proportion of police funding. I am not an advocate of a state without police!

The Guardian article made the point effectively that the police in the USA often act in a way that increases crime. They are the iron fist when in many circumstances a velvet glove would be more effective and cheaper (especially when the target is drug misuse, homelessness and peaceful protest). The example of the New York police work to rule is also powerful. They tried to demonstrate that crime would escalate out of control if they worked fewer hours - following the Rudy G playbook - but crime went down!

One of the underlying arguments behind 'Defund The Police' is that American police are incapable of reform. I do not believe that - I have seen many examples of good, community policing in TV reports and documentaries. It is the exception rather than the rule, but it can and has been done.

That leaves me in a position where I want to see major police reform and a reduction in their protected budgets - but in most cases I don't yet see the USA as ready to maintain law and order or to 'protect and serve' without police. I can agree with James Clyburn that the Defund The Police slogan scared many people and probably cost votes, whilst still agreeing with a lot of what the slogan was intended to convey:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...emocrats-polls