Seattle Chief of Police resigns Due Budget Cuts

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Which is what the 9.something police are already responsible for, Sama.

Yep, but we don't need them, do we.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The 9 police would be responsible for 884.6666666666667 people, on average.

LOL, no they’re not. They’re responsible for catching criminals. Unless every single person in the SPD’s jurisdiction is either a criminal or the victim of a criminal, they’re only ‘responsible’ for a fraction of the number you cited. How many murders in Seattle in any given day? How many rapes, robberies and arsons?

Police don’t prevent crime, they respond to crimes already committed.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Here’s another one. The SPD covers about 143 square miles with about 1400 sworn officers. The proposed budget cuts will reduce that to about 1300.

This means that instead of a little less than ten cops per square mile, they’ll have a little more than nine.

Armageddon just waiting to happen.

Boru

The US seems to have infinite police. You are certainly much more heavly policed than a normal country.

Actually, we’re marginally more heavily policed here than in the US. We average just over ten cops per square mile. But we get more for our money.

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

It amazes the lengths cop apologists will go to justify their bloated budget and being senerio's better suited to other professions . Americans are odd .

[The Grand Nudger]

Which is what the 9.something police are already responsible for, Sama.

Yep, but we don't need them, do we.

The notion appears to be that they need the 9, but not the extra .something...which is hard to argue with when you look at their books.  

Since the proposal ties numbers of officers to spending, they could conceivably end up with more police on their then reduced budget if it weren't for the agreements currently in place - produced through collective bargaining.  

Personally, I think they could do with far less.  Other countries and states and counties and cities manage to address crime without a 1-800 ratio of armed law enforcement agents to people.  Perhaps, for the sake of the police officers and the people they serve, we should spread the responsibility for those 800 peoples needs out over other dedicated professions with the money recovered, and leave the armed man to do stuff you need an armed man to do, keeping armed men out of situations that they can only make worse.

At what point did we become so committed to licking the boot on the back of our necks that any of this became a radical or stupid idea? Do we really believe that this won't work...or...what? What, exactly, is the problem?

[The Architect Of Fate]

Yep, but we don't need them, do we.

The notion appears to be that they need the 9, but not the extra .something...which is hard to argue with when you look at their books.  

Since the proposal ties numbers of officers to spending, they could conceivably end up with more police on their then reduced budget if it weren't for the agreements currently in place - produced through collective bargaining.  

Personally, I think they could do with far less.  Other countries and states and counties and cities manage to address crime without a 1-800 ratio of armed law enforcement agents to people.  Perhaps, for the sake of the police officers and the people they serve, we should spread the responsibility for those 800 peoples needs out over other dedicated professions with the money recovered, and leave the armed man to do stuff you need an armed man to do, keeping armed men out of situations that they can only make worse.

At what point did we become so committed to licking the boot on the back of our necks that any of this became a radical or stupid idea?  Do we really believe that this won't work...or...what?  What, exactly, is the problem?

Frankly it sounds like fear is the problem

[The Grand Nudger]

Doubt it. I strongly doubt that the people who wring their hands over this stuff live in the constant existential fear of anything. I don't think that there's any reason at all, I think that it's an impressive example of social conditioning.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The 9 police would be responsible for 884.6666666666667 people, on average.

LOL, no they’re not. They’re responsible for catching criminals. Unless every single person in the SPD’s jurisdiction is either a criminal or the victim of a criminal, they’re only ‘responsible’ for a fraction of the number you cited. How many murders in Seattle in any given day? How many rapes, robberies and arsons?

Police don’t prevent crime, they respond to crimes already committed.

Boru

LOL, no they don't.

---

Personally, I think they could do with far less. 

You do have an ... amazing ... grasp of the issues.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

LOL, no they’re not. They’re responsible for catching criminals. Unless every single person in the SPD’s jurisdiction is either a criminal or the victim of a criminal, they’re only ‘responsible’ for a fraction of the number you cited. How many murders in Seattle in any given day? How many rapes, robberies and arsons?

Police don’t prevent crime, they respond to crimes already committed.

Boru

LOL, no they don't.

---

Personally, I think they could do with far less. 

You do have an ... amazing ... grasp of the issues.

Well, if cops don’t prevent crime, and they don’t respond to crimes already committed, what’s the point of having them at all?

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

Oh idk Sama, it doesn't take a planet sized brain to realize that a mismanaged police department using a bloated budget to kill black men, gas protestors, and pad officers paychecks might be able to accomplish more policing with less money and fewer grifters posing as cops.

Might end up with fewer dead bodies, too..but sometimes I wonder if that's just optional. As I mentioned previously, it's the money angle that heads will roll for, like Bests head did. iIf it cost us just a little less, and we got a little more out of it, we might not bat an eye at a summary execution, or a little violent suppression of our constitutional rights.