DOES THIS | Reduce funding to police? | challenge the notion that police increase safety? | reduce tools / tactics / tech for cops? | reduce the scale of policing? |
---|---|---|---|---|
Suspend the use of paid administrative leave for cops under investigation | Yes: city spends money on anything but killer cops’ salaries | Yes: does not assume that leave pay is just the cost of doing business | Yes: access to paid leave presumes right to use violence. | Yes: less financial support for police under investigation, the less support for policing |
withhold pensions and don’t rehire cops involved in excessive force | Yes: city spends money on anything but killer cops’ salaries | If a cop kills someone, clearly its not worth all the “safety” | Yes: reduces ability of police to move around from dept to dept, re-engage in behavior + known violence | Yes |
require cops to be liable for misconduct settlements | Yes: city spends money on anything but killer cops’ salaries | all damages from police are not “essential” to safety, they are in fact a problem, should be dealth with | Yes: pressure to increase accountability, limits legitimacy of violence as inevitable | Yes |
cop overtime accrual + OT pay for military exercises | Yes: city spends money on anything but killer cops’ salaries | Yes: “counter terrorism” is not safety | Yes: Less weapon trainings leads to less planning to use them | Stops police from increasing legitimacy, capacity, skills to expand their reach into our daily lives and communities |
withdraw participation in police militarization programs | Yes: city spends money on anything but making war on regular folks | Yes: “counter terrorism” is not safety | Yes: Less weapon trainings leads to less planning to use them | Stops police from increasing legitimacy, capacity, skills to expand their reach into our daily lives and communities |
prioritize spending on community health, education, affordable housing | Yes: city spends money on anything but killer cops’ salaries | Yes: creates space to imagine, educate about, and create resources that actually create well-being | yes | decreases size scope and capacity of systems of policing |
reduce the size of the police force | yes | yes | yes | yes |
Last active
June 10, 2020 01:56
-
-
Save alexp1917/50178ea63d3b941541311039482a85ed to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Non Reformist Reforms towards Police Abolition
DOES THIS | REDUCE POLICE FUNDING | challenge the notion that police increase safety? | reduce tools / tactics / tech for cops? | reduce the scale of policing? |
---|---|---|---|---|
BODY CAMERAS | INCREASES. Equipping police officers with body cameras will require more money going towards police budgets. | NO. Body cameras are pitched as making police more accountable, increasing the idea that policing, done “right,” makes people safe. | INCREASES. Body cameras will provide police w/another tool, inc’ing police budgets to aquire more gadgets. | INCREASES. Body cams presume only “excessive” force is threatening. Can be turned off, footage usu doesn’t have desired impact. |
COMMUNITY POLICING | NO. Advocates of community policing argue that departments will have to hire more cops to be in neighborhoods and in the community. | No. This is based on the belief that policing is focused on keeping people safe, and the violence of policing is caused by a “breakdown of trust” with the community. | INCREASES. Cops are trained in additional tactics and approaches. | NO. More community police means the scale of policing will increase, particularly in Black, Brown, and poor neighborhoods, where there is perceived “mistrust” |
MORE TRAINING | NO. More training will require more funding and resources going to police to develop and run trainings. | No. This furthers the belief that we can rely on police for safety, and that instances of police harm and violence occur b/c of lack of training | INCREASES: all of these | No. This will increase the scope of policing, given the type of training. E.g. some say for mental health training, furthering that police are the go to for every problem. |
OVERSIGHT BOARDS | NO. In some cases increase, others no change. | NO, assumes that extra-judcial killing, lying, planting information are exceptions, rather than the norm | NO. Some argue CRB “with teeth” (bureaucratic powers) take away police tools. Such power not given to any board in 50 years. | NO. Further entrenches belief that police are a reformable system with a “community” mandate. Some boards become structurally invested in their existence. |
JAIL KILLER COPS / PROSECUTE POLICE WHO HAVE ABUSED CIVILIANS | NO. Prosecution does not impact future police resources. | NO. Individualizing police violence is false distinction “good cop” v “bad cop”, assumption is that policing creates safety, vs police as system violence | NO. Often media attention in high profile leads to more tech and training | NO. Reinforces idea that “bad apples”/corrupt/killer cops are exceptions, and the system can be just, not violent |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment