Wait, what?? 👀 Where??

I tried to answer it with examples of what I think are, and are not, police. I’m interested in hearing what your alternatives are. I did find an article I read a while back that helped shape my opinions here, that I posted if you’d like to go have a read and continue this discussion there: https://threadiverse.link/lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/31917406

Because honestly it just seems like you think law enforcement I like=not police

You’ve talked here about how police are the ones investigating workplace safety issues. Which doesn’t really sound correct for the US, OSHA exists, but I don’t live there. I do know for certain that police aren’t involved in that process at all in Australia, it falls under WorkSafe. To me, that is an example of how investigative services can be provided by other bodies than the police. WorkSafe still has teeth, and could work directly with the judiciary when violations reach a criminal level. You could do things like funding/empowering the fire department to investigate all arson cases, not just provide some investigative services to the police.

The entire issue with policing is that it’s one homogenous, corrupt organisation. Breaking it down, separating out its powers into other services or bodies, limits the possibility of corruption. Perhaps you’ve heard the term “we investigated ourselves and found that we did nothing wrong”? If whatever direct crime response organisation you had, wasn’t in charge of investigation, that would be much harder.

Same with traffic enforcement. If they aren’t pulling you over and lying about “smelling marijuana” then less corruption is going to occur. Have their only job be traffic enforcement. Roadside drug and alcohol testing is important, people shouldn’t drive under the influence, but having weed in your glovebox doesn’t affect your ability to drive. I’ve actually joked to a number of friends that we should get a bunch of grandmas doing traffic enforcement. I think having an older woman tut and fuss at you like “come on now sweetheart, you know it’s not nice to run through a red light, you might hurt yourself or others” and give you the look would honestly be pretty effective in my opinion. (This last part is mostly a joke by the way.)

😐

Non-violent offenders don’t generally need to be arrested though. A summons to court is enough. You discussed workplace safety for example, where I don’t think direct arrests are needed. However, where they are, the judiciary could deploy deputies to bring offenders to their appearances. There is still no reason that an investigator must be a cop.

A safety authority that can’t arrest is toothless and worthless.

I don’t understand this fetish for authoritarian arrests. Can you explain why they would be needed by a safety authority? Or why a traffic safety service would necessarily be police?

You need to have investigatory forces for safety standards, both in the work place and on the roads

Where I live, both of these are already done by seperate, independent commissions.

When investigating potentially dangerous suspects or areas, it’s important to have people trained to deal with that.

There is absolutely nothing stopping them from acquiring backup during those situations.

🤖

Women got the right to vote in 1920 in the US…

Nice try, I’m Sicilian 😂

I’m Australian so… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

All racism is systemic, that’s an oxymoron. Next.

There’s no practical reason that investigative services would need to be provided by the police, and many good reasons it shouldn’t be. As well, would a rapid response service still be the police if their other functions have been stripped away? Would an independent investigative service or traffic enforcement still also be the police?

As well, focussing on the small minority that are convicted of heinous violent crimes is a distraction from the actual issues in my opinion. I like to believe we can come together as a society and brainstorm a better system.

Which part? I’m happy to have an honest discussion with you if you have an argument worth refuting.

Well, to start with, violent crimes against people are statistically greater in places with higher wealth inequality and lower social safety nets, so addressing those issues is going to have a huge impact. Mental health services also make an impact. Secondly, police actually rarely directly prevent violent crime. Their main function in that respect is as an investigation service after the fact. That role would be better suited to an investigative body made up of other professionals, e.g. social workers, forensic scientists, doctors and sociologists. Thirdly, when intervention in response to ongoing violent crime is required, you could have a specialised rapid response service that doesn’t waste the billions to trillions of dollars that current, ineffective police forces cost the public purse yearly. Another option would be community prevention groups. This was part of the function the Black Panthers sought to take up alongside their other social programs, discouraging violent crime by acting as a neighbourhood watch.

Bestie, whatever possible reason you have for thinking “racism against white people” is an erosion of white people’s civil rights, it is categorically, hilariously wrong. But you have a great day now alright! 💜

That still means ACAB is true. They either quit (no longer a cop) or they become a bastard. “Good” cops that haven’t reached either of those outcomes yet are just Schrödinger’s Cop.

Not gonna lie, you had me in the first half!

Yes, I believe that ACAB is true, I thought as much was obvious. Have a good day though! 💜

Boneless wings aren’t made from literal wings with the bones removed, they’re made from breast meat cut in the shape of wings. Have you ever heard of someone finding bones in their chicken breasts bought from a supermarket? When supermarkets always use factory suppliers as well.

About the only thing I’d agree to is that it’s not the restaurant’s fault. They should have been able to declare their supplier to the court and then peace out of the whole affair.