“Defunding the Police” Needs to Happen.
By: Johnny Silvercloud
Tags: Defundthepolice, Defunding Police, Protest, Obama, Police

“Defunding the Police” Needs to Happen.

Because police don’t recognize when they are failures.

Empty Words from a former President

If you believe, as I do, that we should be able to reform the criminal-justice system so that it’s not biased and treats everybody fairly, I guess you can use a snappy slogan, like “defund the police.” But, you know, you lost a big audience the minute you say it, which makes it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done. ~ Barrack Obama, 44th President of the United States

Thank you for that unsolicited input President Obama.

Before we get started, I have to address the fact that it’s fascinating to watch former President Obama seek to share word towards what the protester should do versus what the police should do. Why are comments toward the underprivileged so swift to leave his tongue? Why does the same tongue sitting on perch does not possess word of advice to police officers? After all, it’s not like he has the political capital to lose. Obama has been president before. The only next thing possible is to sit on the Supreme Court (like William Howard Taft). It doesn’t seem like he aspires to do such. So why hold tongue? After all, it’s the police who are effectively engaging in criminal activity to the highest degree — murder — and getting away with it. Everything a protester does is a response to that part — especially the racial selectivity of the “misconduct.” Black people of America practically are second to third-class citizens due to the fact that police all over America know they can behave more aggressively towards Black people with no dire consequence.

A young Obama in his college years. There’s definitely a lack of understanding of systemic racism growing up in Hawaii, but by his college years you knew what racism is.

Before he was President Barrack Obama, he was Barry Obama. The selective anglicizing of his name — by his own choice for years, mind you — points to the fact that he tried to de-Africanize his presence in America’s white supremacist political atmosphere.

He knows what racism is; he spent much of his life hiding Barrack behind a Barry, ensuring no Karen will call police on him for minding his own business.

So, where is this tongue for police? Between Barrack and a hard place, I guess.

“Defund the Police” always existed

“Defund the police” was always known if you were ever on the ground observing these protests. To many white people, these police accountability protests started on May 31st, 2020. But to Black people, these protests began in 2012, when Trayvon Martin was murdered by an armed man presuming police authority. Defunding the police as a protest phrase is nothing new. It’s not novel. So if you’re critiquing this phrase as if it’s new, you’re already arriving late.

Demilitarize the Police

I’m not sure why this guy decided to raise is night stick, but it sure does look aggressive. | Oakland, 2010 | Photo Credit: Thomas Hawk

Should police suffer defunding? Yes. Technically if you were to ask me, my phrasing is demilitarize the police, and my words are explicit, being that I am a man of military experience. From the standpoint of serving in actual war zones, yes, our police forces need to be seriously demilitarized. They are not in war zones; they are not Soldiers or Marines.

While some police require special equipment due to possible terrorism threats (e.g., New York, D.C., Los Angeles), they genuinely do not need a constant influx of military-grade weapon systems and equipment. Police don’t need scores of mine-resistant gas-guzzler vehicles as there is no IED (improvised explosive device) threat in America. Police certainly don’t need any treaded vehicles (civilians call all treaded vehicles “tanks”) as they will tear up these already poorly maintained American streets. Police don’t need scores of shotguns, sniper rifles, and assault rifles; that’s what SWAT is for.

As a U.S. Army vet, I know the effective range of that weapon. He doesn’t need that in San Francisco. | Photo Credit: Thomas Hawk

Speaking of SWAT teams and other special weapon units, why in the hell are they used so much? SWAT units are supposed to be for special situations, not regular, low-end dealers and other low-level criminal deviants. SWAT stands for Special Weapons and Tactics. SWAT units shouldn’t even be used for low-level offenders. Ever. SWAT units are supposed to be near-elite. They are supposed to be highly trained, used sparingly, never miss, and more importantly, never shoot an innocent. Americans should be safe due to SWAT units existing, but instead of this, Breonna Taylor is murdered in her sleep. This is why we say “defund the police”; there’s a lot of money paid into their weapons and training, and they murder people while using the same tax dollars to exist immune to law.

The more I think of it, Breonna Taylor wasn’t even murdered by SWAT officers. Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Hankison, and Myles Cosgrove — officers who murdered Breonna Taylor in her sleep — were plainclothes officers. This means they were in regular civilian clothes. Not SWAT.

So why are these plainclothes police officers conducting no-knock SWAT activities? Looking for low-level offenders? In the wrong house, murdering harmless civilians in their sleep? Why are plainclothes officers this aggressive, shooting people in their sleep? Defund the police, please.

Follow the Money

The fact that regular police units are engaging in no-knock raids — something more fitting for highly trained near-elite police units — makes civilians wonder what is going on with their tax money being spent. One thing I know about government spending is that funding exists based on what was spent the prior fiscal year. If a government entity cannot argue for the same or higher funding, cuts are made. “Cuts,” as in, “you’re getting less money.” Defunding occurs.

If a police force is enjoying, let’s say, this exuberant amount of funding on submachine guns, close-quarters combat assault rifles, combat shotguns, and paid vacations to Israel to be trained by Israeli special forces, they might get defunded by not justifying the same spending the following year. Therefore, like all other forms of government spending, police must justify expenses. Police forces across America must justify their funding.

They justify their funding the same way that the general maintenance, public schooling, and even the military does — by using their equipment more.

How do the police use their equipment more, you may ask? They use their equipment more by authorizing no-knock raids in instances where they shouldn’t exist; using SWAT units frivolously on low-level offenders; militarizing the vehicles and police clothing; giving SWAT weapons to plainclothes police officers, who probably are not trained on those weapon systems as SWAT units are. They also boost usage of their equipment by boosting interactions with the public:

More arrests where anyone with good judgement would just give a warning. Aggressively trolling harmless civilians. Provoking encounters. Aggravating situations where de-escalation procedures would be better choices, the list goes on. Defund the police, please.

Many American Cops are Trained by Israeli Death Squads

I mentioned American police being trained by Israeli forces prior. Let’s examine this part.

In the days following George Floyd’s killing, pictures of Israeli authorities taking similar positions over the necks of Palestinians have begun appearing across social media. This is why there are so many “Palestinians for Black Lives” signs and shirts in protests in America. They know. | Photo Credit: Reuters

While I’ll agree that the term “death squads” might be a bit of hyperbole, there is a measure of truth in the description. From the Israeli point of view, they are a nation that’s surrounded by enemies, with many of them having announced wanted to erase Israel off the map.

We can argue the validity of their standpoint another time, but one thing that cannot be argued is the fact that Israeli police and military forces function as if their whole nation can be killed out of existence. Israeli professions of arms operate as if there whole existence is on the line as a people.

America does not suffer a existential threat, so by extension, neither does her police forces suffer such. Americans will never be “wiped off the map”. America will never cease existing as a people. There’s no competent argument to suggest Americans suffer an existential threat.

America doesn’t need cops to act like the whole America would die if they didn’t get their knee off the neck of George Floyd. America doesn’t need cops to act like the whole America would die if they didn’t murder Tamir Rice. America doesn’t need cops to act like the totality of America would die if cops didn’t murder Breonna Taylor in her sleep.

George Floyd isn’t a national security threat. Breonna Taylor isn’t a national security threat.

Black people, are NOT a national security threat, not even by the smallest measure possible in any competent critical threat analysis.

(But do you know what is the biggest domestic terror threat in America? It rhymes with Slight Supremacy)

So yes, those plane trips to Israel or the trips bringing Israeli death squads over to America to train American police? That can stop. Defund, the police.

David Grossman inculcates a murderous mindset in police

David Grossman wrote two books, On Killing and On Combat. I have them both. Not bad books. But I’m a Soldier, not a cop.

The problem with this guy is that his training, beyond these those two books, inculcates police to function as twitch-finger-reflex murderers. Grossman’s warrior-cop classes, right beside foreign influences like Israeli special force squads, are the worst thing happening to cops, and it’s telling being that there’s a different shared mentality cops have now that they never had prior.

The officer who killed Philando Castile had taken a Bulletproof class with Grossman just two years before the shooting. ~ Kelly McLaughlin, Insider

As the federal government is pushing military-grade equipment to police across America which exists in the physical world, what Grossman does is militarize the mind and souls of these police officers. The “Killology”, “warrior-cop” brain-washing has to stop in order to demilitarize the police.

Enclothed Cognition

One great point to bring up is the concept of enclothed cognition. Enclothed cognition describes the systematic influence that clothes have on the wearer’s psychological processes and performance-related effects. This is the reason why when we wear suits, or other particular types of clothing, we feel a certain way. Perhaps, we feel more confident wearing suits. Feel professional. Feel playful. The possibilities are endless. Sometimes merely the difference of colors worn can shift psychological processes and performance related effects.

Metro PD, 1980s. What ever happened to police wearing light blue? Why are they all now wearing midnight blue? | Photo Credit: Manny Ceneta / Getty Images

If these things are true when it comes to enclothed cognition, what do you think happens when police go from wearing sky blue like they did in the 1980’s, to wearing near-black midnight blue? What about riot gear?

As a Soldier and a gentleman I’d go farther and suggest to add not just the color of clothing as a factor in their attitudes, but also other equipment to the theory of enclothed cognition, such as night sticks, pistol, multiple magazines of bullets, etc.

If a gun in the pocket of a concealed-carry permit having fellow give a man confidence and jollies, then various gear given to police officers can shift their attitudes too, correct? What happens when you give police assault rifles and submachine guns unnecessarily, just to patrol with?

Enclothed cognition is a thing, and from this understanding we have an idea why and how police have gotten more aggressive and less likely to de-escalate situations. We have a psychological reason why police choose violence over nonviolent means. Defund the police, stop spending on hyper-aggressive clothing and gear.

Force versus Service

It’s funny how police are called the police force versus “the police service.” In light of that fact, you don’t join “the military force,” you join military service. Why is it that those who literally fight wars are called a “service” while those with the civilian job dealing with fellow Americans are called a “force”? Why is there this need to serve foreign countries but force our own?

Is this force necessary?

What (and who) are we serving in the military, and what are we forcing upon our own civilian populace as cops? Do cops actually serve anyone? If so, whom do they actually serve? Defund the police until they cease being a force and finally become a service.

Life after the military, we say you served. Life after the police force says the same thing: you served as an officer of the law. Based on all evidence covered, this is categorically false and largely incongruent with police work’s conventional title. You didn’t serve as an officer of the law; you forced as an officer of the law. It’s called a police force for a reason. Let’s keep it real.

I do know how the police can become a service, though: Defund the police.

Toy Soldiers

I always found it interesting that police and those who engage in propaganda for them tend to shroud their existence and mission around a military-like appeal. Police — no matter what’s going on — are not in war zones. They are not Soldiers. They are not troops. Soldiers function with the Uniform Code of Military Justice which is the bedrock of military law. Articles 77 through 134 are punitive articles. While it seems impossible for police to go to prison for murdering unarmed civilians, it is very possible to go to a federal prison as a U.S. military professional. you can be a Private working in a mail room in the military, and end up in prison.

Police, as I stated before, do not have to worry about roadside bombs. Most police don’t even ever use their service weapon. Most people, including criminals — the designated adversaries to police — don’t want to shoot and kill police officers. For those who are a part of a criminal enterprise, shooting a cop is technically, bad for business and will effect their bottom-line. Police is a pretty safe job, considering the job is more reactionary than proactive. When you see a person who have lost their arms or legs in combat in a wheelchair making their way around in a Walmart, nine times out of ten that person probably lost their limbs in the military, not in police work. The very fact that people conflate police work into warfare is categorically profane and disrespectful to troops as a whole.

Defunding is the only way for police reform

In war, especially these unconventional wars we fight these days (which more so parallel police work than conventional wars) it is possible to lose. It is possible for the military — regardless of what branch of service — to lose objectives, lose battles, and lose wars. Because of the possibility of failure, there are things that military professionals would highlight that police professionals don’t even care about. Here’s an example of an document from Gen. (Ret.) McChrystal concerning operational awareness in Afghanistan (circa 2009):

The second threat, of a very different kind, is the crisis of popular confidence that springs from the weakness of GIRoA (gov. of Islamic Republic of Afghan.) institutions, the unpunished abuse of power by corrupt officials and power brokers, a widespread sense of political disenfranchisement, and a longstanding lack of economic opportunity. ~ General McChrystal’s Strategic Assessment Evaluating the Operating Environment in Afghanistan in the Summer of 2009

Defund the police, F*** Trump. | Photo Credit: Johnny Silvercloud

This assessment documents the understanding a military general has of his battlespace; unpunished abuses of power by corrupt officials and power brokers and wide-spread sense of political disenfranchisement, plus a lack of economic opportunity effects the battlespace. All of those things are bad for everyone involved. how come police routinely fail to have this profound understanding of the land-space they occupy? After all, it’s all the same problems. Maybe this is the distinction between service and force? A service seeks to identify all problems to solve to permanent effect, while a force doesn’t take such efforts and only seek to make arrest quotas and kill random innocent black people and get away with it?

The second threat in Afghanistan as stated by the now retired General is the primary threat to “operations” in America. Police operating with a license-to-murder-innocents is that unpunished abuse of power. American police have military intelligence collection assets and capabilities yet still don’t care nor have the will to actually solve real socio-economic problems that fuel crime and disdain for their own police force. Defund the police.

Strategic Failure

Police don’t know loss. They do not know failure. If crime is on the decline (which it is), all they will do is hassle and lock people up over frivolous issues. There is no such thing as police going home in shame due to a lost objective, battle, or war. In actual warfare, Soldiers must also win hearts and minds. The police of America totally does not care to win hearts and minds. The irony of the COIN (counterinsurgency) fundamentals that were so unpopular in the military is that they are a better fit for the police force at home. Police do not care about earning the trust and confidence of the populace they patrol.

“End Police Brutality” | Photo Credit: Johnny Silvercloud

These lack of concerns are strategic failures. It doesn’t matter if they recognize it or not. If the local populace understands that the local police don’t prioritize their safety, that alone is a strategic failure. Police should lose sleep over this, but they do not. The problem is that cops are so used to being bullies, they can’t recognize the problem.

Due to the constant lionizing of police in America where they are infinitely held as heroes, even when they murder innocent civilians and shamelessly try to evade justice, never admitting wrong in all dishonor is very difficult for police to realize they failed somewhere.

The only thing they can feel is a loss of funding. The only thing they can understand is defunding. Because the police cannot grasp how they have failed their cities and towns, defunding is the only way to redemption.

Where to put this defund-the-police money?

The money from defunding the police — usually the most considerable portion of local city/state funding — can be reallocated to many public institutions.

First, it can go to schools. A world where public school teachers do not have to buy their own school supplies and hallway decorations would be great. Better books, the list goes on. You can probably diminish crime by providing better education venues to the public. The money can be reallocated into public transportation. As a developed super-power of a country, it’s a shame how places like Germany have better trains and buses, with trains that go 186mph, between cities. That will affect job/career opportunities, which would drop crime rates. One can also allocate this funding into public defender offices, because why are they so under-funded in the first place? At the very least, the public defender office should be just as well funded as the prosecution office. The imbalance in funding between the two legal teams tips the scales of justice in the most literal sense. So why not?

Conclusion

Defund the police. Police departments all over the nation would reform once over-time pay runs out, or the expenses for paying families for damages comes out of their retirement. Defund the police isn’t supposed to be a catchy phrase, it’s a literal policy position.

Police need to know what failure taste like. That is only done by defunding. Only then will they promise and execute meaningful reform.