While this is an interesting article, I feel like in the current state of twitter Alt right accounts are promoted whatever you like. When I was on it I followed feminist type pages, local news, some left wing comedians, I was still frequently offered Andrew Tate and the like.

Awful woman

My local nextdoor has an issue with non white people in vans. Like normal builders eating their lunch and Sharon down the road is posting “Anyone know why this man is here? Stayed there for 45 minutes, very suspicious, might be stealing dogs”.

Of fucking course it is!!

So does anything happen from this or are we just pointing out the obvious?

Not really talking about brutality, although that varies from place to place, but more the occupying garrison for the ruling class comments. Police structure vary from country to country.

Also Scotland yard is a building, it doesn’t do anything.

These days, we know the police are not here to protect the public, rather to serve as an occupying garrison for the ownership class, and while this was always the case, the DEA and war on drugs and the 1033 program have made this role even more clear.

American police. Police in different countries are structured in very different ways.

Another vote for Photopea

I understand the concern here, but this isn’t his space, and I feel that how it works, he can’t take it.

Again, read the thread. It’s like you’re replying to individual messages without context. It means that your messages don’t make sense in context.

And lastly, the narrative of “some people just want to be criminals” is a right-wing narrative

Read my post. Not what I said whatsoever. The idea that everyone who takes drugs is just waiting to be ‘fixed’ comes from a place of extreme privilege. It’s very frustrating that you’re arguing against the points that you think might be happening rather than reading the thread or even my posts to you directly.

And again, I’ve asked you for your ‘alternative’ to policing and you don’t seem to have anything, outside of hiring different police from the community, but not calling them police, for reasons.

Nobody is talking about officers with guns. You seem to have a real america centric mind that’s unhelpful when discussing reform.

Now the scenarios I was speaking about you seem to be not reading the whole threads you’re replying to. So to recap, Alyaza said there are reasons that people commit crimes and those can be addressed without police, which I agreed with, but pointed out that some people don’t actually want their issues to be ‘fixed’ for various reasons, at which point crime will still exist.

Your reply is that we should treat the issues that lead to crime, which is just repeating Alyazas point not a reply to what I said.

What do you propose?

Your ideas just add way more questions. You suggest that you want to go back to a time before policing existed, what does that look like to you? We certainly had a form of policing for thousands of years, before that what? Tribal justice? Thats not as nice as you think.

You talk about trials but that requires something to happen first. Are you expecting these citizen helpers to do that? What qualifications are you offering here?

You state that you envision these citizen helpers as being compensated, that suggests that you want people employed to police… you know what those people are called?

The idea that one of your examples is hiring private security comes from a place of privilege.

You complain about police not turning up for 45 minutes, but want to replace them with what? What do you envision in these ‘community helpers’ who will turn up immediately and fight crime? I think you’re thinking of a superhero film.

You seem to have an odd idea of what a police force is.

Then you start going on about US police as if that’s the discussion here.

there are, for the vast majority of people, clear factors in why they commit crimes that don’t really have to do with Getting One Over on people and that can be socially addressed or disincentivized without any need for cops.

I agree, but can we deal with those issues? Like take drugs for example, can we fix all addicts? We can make treatment free but some addicts don’t want to be fixed, they have too much trauma, they’ve been through too much, they want to drug themselves to oblivion, and crime, theft specifically, will often be needed in that system. We can make drugs free and legal, but then they’ll be dead which is no win.

What about something more severe like domestic violence? If you take a man for example, who likes to control his partner through violence, there’s interventions that we can take to help, but they’re not perfect, we have better odds if we intervene with children, but that involves time travel.

There’s a lot of issues with this self policing thing that I don’t think is considered. If there’s nobody whose job is policing then you’re expecting people to put their lives on the line for strangers for free. What happens to isolated people? Who do they call? Who decides on what actually happens in justice? If someone killed your relative for example, and you were allowed to take that person and torture them, then would you? Many would.

There might be problems with current systems in different places, but the whole “get rid of the police” thing doesn’t make sense.

I mean, that is kinda true, they can’t stop it, but they can make it bloody difficult to continue, they can stop supporting it, just publicly saying “I implore the Israeli government to cease” would be good.

I’m in KBin and have the same thread but with the first comment that it seems you don’t have.

It reads “Indigenous land is a tough one. If you stick with that, Israel is just taking their land back, and right wing European politicians have the moral high ground.”

Adding that you want to bang children but only once a priest gives you ownership does not make it better no. Why on earth would you think it would? Gross.

So you agree with sexualising children as long as they’re being paired together??? But only 16 at which point it should be ‘normalised’?? This whole ‘opinion’ is disgusting.

Wanting to marry 13 year olds says more about you than about them.