Discussion about policing should center on how do we do it better

logo Latest in a series of posts about the Bethlehem Police logo

ref: Defunding the Police won’t work

Gadfly,

I read this interesting analysis in the Morning Call. How will the remaining 4 officials treat the game of football as they are under-staffed and the game is fast-paced and unpredictable at times? Can they handle the demands with winning and losing at stake in a professional sport where athletes strive to be successful? This leads me to the below pondering.

Let’s look at policing from a different perspective, and imagine that you’re a cop. There used to be 155 of you and now there are 125. Instead of your municipality springing for body armor, now you must buy it. You receive a clothing allowance instead of that municipality picking up the tab for uniforms, shoes, rain gear, etc. Office supplies aren’t as plentiful. Technology? Repairs are infrequent, yet the standards for reporting remain the same. Is training cut back? Repairs to motorcycles and cruisers takes longer. How many added responsibilities have you been assigned because there are less of you? Is there enough time in the day to get everything done?

Now, imagine showing up at a domestic situation (one of the most dangerous for an officer to be in), and you’ve had it, because nothing else seems to be going right. You’re under-resourced, you’re over-worked and under-staffed, and you’re expected to cross your tees and dot your eyes, referee a husband and wife at war with each other, and maybe things aren’t going well at home because your attitude about law enforcement has changed due to the aforementioned conditions. It’s already a stressful job made that much more stressful by things out of your control.

Who will benefit, who will pay the price as a result? How many will decide this is the career for them?

There’s an old saying, “Be careful of what you wish for?” In my opinion the discussion about policing should center on how do we do it better? Morale is almost non existent in city hall already. It is in many places of employment. Do you want to build morale or resentment?

Just food for thought because the solutions to issues are built by analyzing each side, not just one perspective, one that is dominating the talk these days.

Anonymous

Gadfly knows the identity of the poster, who prefers to remain anonymous.

3 thoughts on “Discussion about policing should center on how do we do it better

  1. Just an fyi, calls to defund & reinvest have been around since Rodney King (1991). Framing it as something that is “the loudest voice right now” is inaccurate.

  2. When everything is reduced to points & to winning and losing, making sure every point is correct and nobody is ignoring infractions is obviously essential to diehard fans and to those who bet on the results. Doing what’s right, not so much.

    In real life, where ‘doing what’s right’ is or should be more important than scores or statistics, any premise of reducing funding to police must also involve reducing the number of incidents to which police have to be dispatched — a combination of prevention AND of providing qualified professional response [such as specially trained MH paramedics for certain types of non-violent situations] — that’s why such efforts in Eugene OR and Austin TX have been so successful.

    IMO, creating ‘the sky is falling’ scenarios like the one above keep us stuck in the status quo instead of looking for possible alternatives.

    BTW, one of your previous posts referred to the number of unarmed Blacks shot by police. Apparently that statistic was incomplete. I’m not sure what their definition of ‘unarmed’ meant, or whether it included women — but I’m pretty sure it didn’t include non-shooting deaths. (In other words, a murder such as George Floyd wouldn’t have been counted at all.)

  3. Again, another analysis from some anonymous person who does not understand defunding and is on the “keep the police as they are or give them more money” side.

Leave a Reply