In the immediate aftermath of the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, widespread protests broke out across the US. People marching for equality and an end to police brutality are calling for change. The voices of a community long bullied and targeted by police are rising up to say “enough.” Many have asked what could possibly change to end the systematic inequality of current police departments.
One answer comes by way of a popular protest mantra: Defund the police. While some alarmist elements have latched onto this phrase as evidence that the protesters want lawlessness, this viewpoint is highly reductive. Today, let’s take a critical look at what it means to defund the police.
Many reformists note that this is a huge issue. People expect police to be a one-size-fits-all answer to very complex problems. “Broken window” policies, which hold that even minor crimes should be treated as major offenses, exacerbate this issue.
Similarly, these issues lead into further problems. Police departments have huge budgets. They often spend this money on stores of military-style equipment. Many police departments own war-grade weapons. This is despite their role, ostensibly, as peacekeepers.
In their inventory system, you would find tank-like armored vehicles, body armor, flashbang grenades and countless automatic weapons.
Psychologists note that this heavy equipment combines with warlike rhetoric to put the average officer on edge. Meanwhile, police training often includes “predator and prey” language that can lead to the normalization of excessive use of force.
All of this is not to say that there is not a legitimate need for police in a civil society. However, they can’t function as a single solution to all of a community’s problems.
Calls to defund the police are asking for cities to roll back massive police budgets. They’re asking for cities to take the military equipment away from police departments.
Meanwhile, protesters want the money reinvested in their communities. Affordable housing, mental health centers and community outreach programs will likely do more good than even more uniformed officers toting guns. Likewise, more social programs aimed at keeping people safe would go a long way to addressing systematic inequality.
