Rich Lowry of National Review Online explains why some American communities need more, not fewer, police officers.
New York City needs more arrests. More arrests in the subways. More arrests in housing projects. More drug arrests. More arrests of gang members.
And it isn’t alone.
If there’s one lesson from the unrest and anti-police agitation in the wake of the killing of George Floyd, it’s that poor minorities living in distressed neighborhoods pay the highest price — in fear and in blood — when the cops retreat and the worst elements feel emboldened.
The spikes in shootings in cities around the country haven’t taken place in high-end neighborhoods, not in Billionaire’s Row in Manhattan, not in Buckhead in Atlanta, not in Forest Glen in Chicago.
No, they blight the most marginal neighborhoods and make everyday life a hazard for people who have no option but to live in a tough place. The last couple of months should have made it obvious that what these people have to fear most is not the cops or white supremacy but the violent, vengeful, and heedless young men in their midst.
Stopping or discouraging the cops from disproportionately policing these neighborhoods isn’t a blow for justice. It’s an obstacle for upstanding, low-income citizens who are trying to lead decent lives and shouldn’t have to routinely hear gunshots or worry every day about their kids getting shot. …
… So what we’ve seen is a crude version of Black Lives Matter policing — a “defund the police” approach, in which many fewer African-American males are arrested. Has this made heavily African-American communities better or safer? Emphatically not.
The story is the same in cities around the country. The equation is simple: A less robust police presence equals more shootings. …
… What matters at the most basic level is that if there are fewer cops arresting fewer dangerous people, shootings go up.
