What you posted is not an "argument", just flamewar, and you've broken probably most of the site guidelines in just this thread alone. Please don't create accounts to do that with.

Plenty of users have posted substantive comments on both sides of this issue. The idea that "HN" is out to get you because of your views is puerile when you're violating the rules so flagrantly.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

You're making a mockery of the talking points about defunding the police, then asking people to actually spend time debating you. Please, reconsider the way you argue about things.

"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."

a.k.a. please don't feed the trolls

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

By reinvesting the excess of money invested in the police into improving society for people, so that less people need to steal.

You can both be wrong ;)

There are plenty of poorer cities where the police have been involuntarily "defunded" by NYC or SF funding standards and they don't have the rampant petty crime that many west coast cities seem to.

Defunding the police isn't the problem. IMO a stretched thin PD is a well behaved PD. The problem seems to be related to all the policy baggage that comes with the "defund the police" crowd.

> There are plenty of poorer cities where the police have been involuntarily "defunded" by NYC or SF funding standards and they don't have the rampant petty crime that many west coast cities seem to.

The thing is: where there are a lot of juicy targets (e.g. tourists), there will automatically be more petty crimes. As a robber you'll have more profit going around and snatching airpods or phones from a ride in the NYC subway than from walking around in some shoddy 'hood in a flyover state.

> Defunding the police isn't the problem. IMO a stretched thin PD is a well behaved PD.

Actually not, because a "stretched thin" force is more likely to shoot first or otherwise use excessive force to get a suspect under control and ask questions later than to use de-escalative tactics which require extensive training (in Germany cop training is a three year thing for exactly that reason vs. the average 21 weeks in the US). If you want police to approach sensitive stuff like domestic violence or rape in an appropriate manner, the officers will need to have both the training and the time for doing so.

> The problem seems to be related to all the policy baggage that comes with the "defund the police" crowd.

And what "policy baggage" is that? To require a social worker to come with and eventually be leading the response to a domestic violence call isn't baggage, it's the whole point of the thing.

Let me try to understand your point of view. Are you in favor of abolishing the police? Do you believe crime will go away if we go forward with that?

No, I'm not in favour of abolishing the police. Let me preface with saying that I'm not American, nor I live in the US, also, so this doesn't affect me.

Once again, I'm not in favour of abolishing the police. As I said in my previous message, I'm in favour of reducing the expense on police and instead investing it on social programs.

As I'm not in favour of abolishing, I won't argue your second point.