Indeed, defunding the police means the poor will be even less protected. The rich will always have their private security. And now they'll have a larger/cheaper labor force, with ex-police officers looking for a new job?
Police funding is now more often used to to acquire military weapons/hardware.
"Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces" is a highly recommended study of this problem.
https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Ameri...
The differences are quite interesting: The soldier swears to always act in ways creditable to the service and the nation, recognizing it as a honored profession not to be disgraced.
While for the warrior the mission always comes first. Honor, credibility, disgrace? Not even in the vocabulary, replaced with "deploy, engage and destroy the enemies of the US, in close combat".
Are you just saying that because weed is being legalized?
Economic inequality sure isn't in decline, and there are a lot of 18-24 year old uneducated men out there with nothing to lose. The turmoil in places like Venezuela and Colombia leaves power voids that cartels step in to fill.
Look at the southern border.
"Oh, somebody broke into your car and stole stuff? You shouldn't leave things lying around. We'll never catch the guy. Oh, you have video of the incident and know exactly who it is? Yeah, we can't really do anything with this. Oh you need to file a report for the insurance company? Fill this out and check back with us next month."
I'm very much NOT surprised that people who've actually needed the police for something have decided to there needs to be a private alternative.
The poor get rid of the police in their neighborhoods and the folks who want more policing get it?
We've had a fair bit of retail closing as the police are pulling back out of some areas.
In the 90s when the NYPD started firing lazy/corrupt police commanders and cracking down on street crime, evicting families of drug dealers from public housing, and putting down pit bulls.. poor communities were very much in favor of what was happening.
The tide shifted when the cops went all in on stupid metrics.
The intent behind that movement is to take money spent on policing where it fails and move it to where it might be more effective.
How many lawsuits are there for wrongful deaths where the police showed up for a mental health crisis? Since funding is finite and the police get a lion's share of it (community wise), why not shift some of that money into personnel who are better equipped to handle it?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/06/12/minneapoli...
Also, "Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police": https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol...
Only in your mind. You cite an opinion piece as fact, when it's, like, an opinion, man.
You're projecting Motte and Bailey now by suggesting that is the intent of the movement, and therefore the movement is "bad".
Policing in America needs to be revisited. The word "reform" has been used in the past and has been found wanting. We could make up a brand new word but its still just a word -- the concept itself is worthy of pursuit.