The police cannot continue to exist. They were created on irredeemable values and goals. Like reenslaving escaped slaves and enforcing unnecessary terror and violence within communities. Slaves no longer exist but the system of keeping people incarcerated with no autonomy is one the police continue to create and support through the prison system. Support for the police stems from the fear of crime. The belief is that when the police are present crime will decrease. But, the places with the highest police presence also have the highest crime rates. If supporters of the police support law enforcement believe that police presence decreases crime it is simply not true. When the police are present crime doesn’t cease to exist, where can we continue to find justification for their presence? Admitting that the police don’t prevent crime means we as a society must admit to ourselves there is a bigger reason we are so reluctant to let go of this branch of government that continues to abuse its citizens.
I love the bold thesis, QueenRandom. As a Rebuttal argument, it needs a Worthy Opponent. You can’t just lob up your own “what they say” claims and then serve them up with your own refutational spin. Find an authority to argue with. Refuting a respected someone earns you more credit with readers than arguing with yourself.
Did you know this:
That means one-and-a-half times as many Americans are in prison or in danger of returning to prison if they’re arrested again than there were slaves. That goes a long way toward supporting your analogy between the early police role of hunting and capturing escaped slaves to return them to confinement and their current role of locking up undesirables.
Regarding your claim that more crime will be found in neighborhoods with an elevated police presence, you could use a statistic there, too. You have to combat the logic of
So, can you find a neighborhood that has GOTTEN WORSE despite elevated police presence? Such an example will be more convincing than your bare assertion that “it is simply not true.”
I greatly admire your tactic of shifting the burden of proof: How can we justify the EXISTENCE of the police if they don’t reduce crime? You can use it very effectively as soon as you loosen up your reader’s firm grip on the idea that police are essential to maintain law and order.
Crime rate statistics are available with a simple Google search:
They should be easy to track over time, too, and correlate with any little story you can find about enhanced police presence in a particular neighborhood, or the introduction of “community policing” efforts in others. Do neighborhoods that get “extra police” in a given span of years enjoy a reduced crime rate?