Take the UK for example. The UK also has a history of importing slaves, it also has minorities living in poor neighborhoods, it has a similar degree of income inequality as the US, but the rate at which UK police kill civilians is orders of magnitude lower. The UK has as many police killings in a quarter century as the US has in a month, despite having a fifth of the population.
The US police system’s approach seems to be to fight fire with fire, not prevent the fires in the first place. Hence the call to defund the police and invest in prevention. But I think defunding is only part, the police need to be retrained to prevent and deescalate, not to respond to all resistance with deadly force.
He has been pulled over many times in the area so is cautious, but it turns out that is a problem too. https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/h0xxva/comment/ftq6...
I bet you didn’t intend it to be but your argument basically blames the victim, when it’s the oppressor who is guilty of a crime - not the oppressed.
It’s the fault of the oppressor for oppressing, that is the blocker to progress, not the response of the oppressed.
The police are what need to change because they were and are a core part of the problem.
Your other points may also have relevance, but are irrelevant until the root cause - which I describe above - is addressed.
If your point was that because of America’s history of racial violence and terror, we need to defund (as opposed to reform with Peelian principles) the police since they were a key component of that system, or something along those lines, then please forgive my mis-understanding :).
Edit: for reference, the list of principles that were issued to each new police officer in London from 1829 onward.
1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder
2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions
3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public
4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force
5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by pandering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law
6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient
7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence
8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary
9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it
I find much wisdom there, and as I go down that list I find it hard not to think for each item of counter-anecdotes from the news about US policing in recent years.