Crime versus inconvenience

If there is no crime, then there is no need for police.  One of the principles of the rabid left’s “Defund the Police” argument is that America should redefine crime as inconvenience.  Thus social workers with sociology degrees can replace police or, if the inconvenience is minimal, there isn’t a need for any authoritarian action at all.  Let’s take a look at a couple of examples:

In a number of large Democrat managed cities, public urination and defecation have been decriminalized.  When a homeless bum uses the entrance of a store as a latrine, the police don’t arrest the perpetrator because the law to do so has been eliminated.   Under these new sociopathic rules, the shop keeper has merely  been inconvenienced – losing customers who are offended by the mess and employees who don’t want to clean up and dispose of the mess is of no concern.

Recently, in NYC, a man walking down a subway platform accosted a woman sitting on a bench.  He rubbed human excrement on her face and in her hair.  He was arrested for criminal assault but almost immediately released thanks to NYC’s idiotic bail reform laws.  What is the likelihood that he will experience jail time?  The woman was not physically harmed just embarrassed and suffered the inconvenience of having to clean herself up.  (By the way, the guy’s response when asked why he did this was “shit happens”.)

What about the crime of indecent exposure?  Is there even such a thing anymore with the Transgender craze.  Now a guy who is transitioning has “in the nude” access to the girl’s locker rooms. If the girls don’t like it, then tough – they must suffer the inconvenience in silence as any defense is looked at as a social injustice directed at a minority.  Essentially, nothing can be, or even should be, done to protect a girl’s privacy.  Radical leftist wokeness has to be protected at all cost.  

There have been numerous in store snatch and grab robberies.  The thieves steal such things as luxury goods from high end establishments and drugs from pharmacies.  Under the current sociopathic rules of governance, the theft of items under a certain dollar amount does not trigger arrest.  The store owner is expected to get compensation from insurance.  Said store owner is even prevented from having a hired security employee physically protect his property.   The assumption is that property theft is less injurious to society than the possibility that somebody might be injured or killed during an altercation.  Once again, inconvenience is a substitute for crime.  (Largely and conveniently ignored is that constant theft results in the loss of insurance and the eventual closure of a business.  Some drug store chains have shutdown pharmacies in areas where theft destroys profit.)

Even mass murder or serial killing can be looked at as an inconvenience.  The victims, of course, are dead so they can no longer be inconvenienced.   Families and friends can be compensated with sympathy and maybe some monetary compensation.  The death penalty or life in prison becomes unnecessary.  Just remember that the real victim is the sociopathic or psychopathic killer, not the men, women and children tortured and slaughtered.  (There are levels of evil that only the use of the death penalty can address, yet the death penalty has been eliminated as cruel and unusual.  In most states, the American citizenry suffer the inconvenience of paying for life long imprisonment even.  Some radical leftists don’t even like to be inconvenienced by paying for long sentences.  Apparently, they are only inconvenienced when the killer knocks at their door.)

When you hear “defund the police” think inconvenience not crime.  You will be a better Democrat, aka socialist, if you do.