Hacker News Reader

Comment by ljf | Hacker News Reader

That is wild - I'm not a 'defund the police' person, but at times like this, reading this story, that I fully understand the intent. It isn't about being unpoliced or lawless, it's about rejecting the system as it exists today and building something better and new.

If you have experience of behaviour like this, I understand that leaning.

View on HN

Given that Modesto is a Democratic Party stronghold since the 1990s, wouldn't defunding the Democrats be less destructive? If the government and their police are corrupt, are they going to stop terrorizing the community if there are no police at all? That's an absurdly ignorant position. Has CHAZ and Mexico taught us nothing?

The original comment talks about replacing it with something else. Forfeiture is something across law enforcement bodies, not something that one party does. Plus, I’m not exactly seeing police departments get staffing turned over every time a political party changes. I don’t know where you’re making that connection.

I understand that too.

But no matter what we do this is an unsolvable problem of policing/judicial system. There will always be people who are falsely accused/falsely convicted. Let's say less than 1%, as a hypothetical. Do we accept that due to that we might be reducing crime by a lot? That's a question society has to answer.

I think the best solution here is not focusing on policing/courts, but making sure that everyone in the society is content, so that they don't commit crimes. Happy people with resources a typical human wants probably don't commit many crimes.

Not to mention that a better paid public defender system (and courts) would help too. Cases are backlogged too much, and so on. Not to mention the abysmally low number of police per capita (compared to EU countries). Funding, funding, funding.

I'd be very happy with a happy/content society.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com