I honestly don't think there's a benevolent case for *not* abolishing the police. Whatever lofty beliefs you might hold about their origins or purpose, you have to admit that as an institution that serves the public good they have failed.
In militarizing themselves and conceiving of their work as being a "war" with elements of the public they ostensibly serve, the police have made their own continued existence an act of aggression against whole communities.
In elevating their own importance to the point that, rather than risking their lives in defense of the community, they shoot those they term "civilians" with little provocation at the slightest apprehension of a threat to their own lives... what need have we of such "protectors"?
The police kill when they are "in fear of their life". We don't need that. Anybody alive may do that and be within their rights, so why do we arm these people, armor these people, train these people, and send them out on the streets to shoot in defense of themselves only?
We give the police extraordinary powers of life and death and then rather than saddle them with any additional responsibility, we just give them even more power. They must be allowed to operate with impunity "because they put their life on the line"...
...but then we grant them even more impunity because "you can't expect them to put their life on the line." They are the noble servant and protector of the community and upholder of the law when they plead for more powers, but when held accountable, they plead...
...that they cannot be expected to serve, must not be expected to protect, and need not have any knowledge of or respect for the law to do their job.
So what is their job?
They say, and the courts affirm, they need not serve. They need not protect. They need not uphold the law.
So what is their job?
They say, and the courts affirm, they need not serve. They need not protect. They need not uphold the law.
If we have the words of the courts and the police themselves that police cannot be compelled to serve, to protect, or to uphold the law, then what is their job? For what reason do they exist? Why are they allowed to make war on our streets?
If you would argue for the police's continued existence as an institution, you have to argue in favor of some purpose that is not service, is not protection, and is not the upholding of the law, for the police themselves only say these things are their business when it suits them
