The term “defund the police” has become a rallying cry for activists protesting the killing of George Floyd. Previously viewed as a radical concept, “defund the police” has gained steam across the country with some municipalities, in varying degrees, slashing police department budgets.
But what does it mean? The Times-News asked activists and police officials what defunding the police looks like and here is what they said:
Chief Jeffrey Smythe, Burlington Police Department
"I think a better option is to discuss how can we “re-imagine the police.” This comes from a place where we recognize that the police have become a one-stop shop for everything.
"We are called, literally, because the 3-year-old won’t take a bath, because the toilet is leaking at 3 a..m, because I have a flat tire and don’t want to or can’t change it, and just today because my neighbor cut a branch off my tree without my permission. So we certainly have a structure and staffing that has grown to deal with these hundreds of ancillary tasks that are not law enforcement, not public safety, and not community caretaking. Last week’s call of “are you kidding me” was for a skunk that had a yogurt cup stuck on his head.
"It is great to say that we want to remove all these extra burdens from the police, but those tasks have to land someplace. And this does not even scratch the surface of the mental health issues, marital strife, drug and alcohol addiction, and dysfunctional families. While the funding does not likely exist for this solution, I believe we must shore up and/or create robust social systems to take over this work. Once we have the counselors, treatment facilities, group homes, mediation services, then when the police are bored with nothing to do, then we can reduce the number of cops and reallocate that money to additional social sector programs.
"It is dangerous to debilitate the only functioning system that helps people (the police) before you have a plan to handle all the things they should not be doing."
Dawn Blagrove, executive director of Emancipate N.C.
"When I say defund the police, it means just that. I think the confusion comes in when people think of the term “defund” in extremes. Defunding the police is no different from defunding any other city or state agency.
"I believe we can get to a place where we do not need armed law enforcement roaming our streets to keep people safe. But that is a long-term goal and defunding the police is a step towards that. It is a step towards creating a society where we don’t need law enforcement. So defunding the police, in essence, is taking away money from law enforcement and reinvests that money into other parts of the community.
"Stop asking the police to be all things to all people. Reinvest the money that we put into the police departments because we are asking them to be all things to all people. The easiest place to start cutting is any funding that goes to the police department that responds to social needs because none of that belongs to the police department. For example, all the money that has been allocated from federal and local agencies to respond to the opioid crises and any money allocated to victim services.
"What I want to remind people is that everything revolutionary is scary, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it. What we are asking folks is not to flip a switch. Work with us while we reimagine something different. But we all just have to admit that what we have right now isn’t working."
Kennedy Boston, a sophomore and a student activist at Elon University
"I think that ‘defund’ isn’t exactly the best word. I think ‘reallocate’ funds from the police is because when you say defund people think you’re just saying take all their money away and that’s not the case. What we really want is a reallocation of these funds because I think when we say defund the police – yes at some level we want to take that money – but it’s really more about putting that money back into the community into better uses than just militarizing the police, giving them all these riot gears.
"It’s important that we ask community members that no matter which side of the issues you fall, that to at least recognize that some areas of our community are underfunded right now and so taking some of the money from places that are overfunded can really be beneficial to our community and even to the point where we will be bettering our communities as a whole. And that shouldn’t even be a partisan issue. We should all want to better our communities. I think we just disagree on how we go about that."
Lt. Daniel Sisk, Graham Police Department
“Defunding” the police, to us, means that money allocated for the police department is diverted to other areas within the community. This model could work if done properly. It would have to have a decent amount of oversight initially to make sure the money is being placed into resources that reduce the amount of work that is handled by police currently.
"Right now, officers are required to wear so many hats and are spread thin due to the high call volume. Police agencies have to ask for more money in most years due to this higher demand. This higher demand is mainly determined by call data. The most recent example I can think of is the “defunding” of mental health care.
"The responsibility of managing those in crisis has been diverted to police officers; whereas before there were accessible facilities that could provide those in need with care. Without those resources, those in crisis are managed through police services.
"The model would only work if it reduced the need for officers by reducing the demand for police services. The defunding, if done properly, would have to be gradual as well so agencies could prepare for reduced budgets. This would allow agencies to redistribute their personnel to better handle community needs."
This article originally appeared on Times-News: We asked activists and police officials what "defund the police" means. Here is what they said
