Police are entirely unnecessary in a society of civilized people.
Then the government decided to throw open the doors to uncivilized people. Then the bleeding hearts decided to throw open the doors of insane asylums. Then hollywood decided to program people to believe lies about diversity.
Congrats, now we "need" police. Now that we have the "required" police, they're here to stamp their boots on civilized and uncivilized people both. The only modern change is that their masters have discouraged them from dealing with the uncivilized which was the whole point of their existence in the first place.
I do not think it is possible for humanity to achieve a civilization so civilized that police are not needed. rather, police in a hyper-civilized society would not need to be armed and their job would not be considered life-risking. however, they would be necessary in order to protect the local community from outside threats and to clarify minor disputes over property.
Sheriffs are elected by the local people. That is a far cry from the modern police state with standing police forces that rival most countries' armies.
Mexico is a place where many people exercise their right to bear arms, despite the fact that doing so is heavily illegal in the country. I do not consider that a safe place.
Being heavily illegal in the country is the problem. This means only criminals are exercising their right to bear arms while the law abiding are discouraged from doing so.
Your scenario only works for small towns where everyone knows each other. In a large enough city even among civilized folk there will always be disputes and you can't always be sure who is wandering through, and normal people are too busy with work to police the city themselves.
For large cities with peaceful residents (not the kinds of cities we have today), I sometimes wonder if the best setup would be a massive smart camera network - not run by a government, just a publicly accessible network - and voluntary police/militia groups. Or maybe those voluntary police would end up like jannies and moderate everyone to an annoying degree.
No, that's too far. Look, I'm all for an armed populace, but I still want a standing peacetime military to mobilize against a fast aggressor. Especially with modern weapons and technology.
Same thing goes for crime. When shit goes well and truly sideways, I want someone with Bearcats, helicopters, and automatic weapons to defeat whatever enemy has appeared. I can't really rely on the militia to have that. Unless, of course, you have some kind of permanently standing militia, which would effect the same idea as police.
Police are entirely unnecessary in a society of civilized people.
Then the government decided to throw open the doors to uncivilized people. Then the bleeding hearts decided to throw open the doors of insane asylums. Then hollywood decided to program people to believe lies about diversity.
Congrats, now we "need" police. Now that we have the "required" police, they're here to stamp their boots on civilized and uncivilized people both. The only modern change is that their masters have discouraged them from dealing with the uncivilized which was the whole point of their existence in the first place.
I do not think it is possible for humanity to achieve a civilization so civilized that police are not needed. rather, police in a hyper-civilized society would not need to be armed and their job would not be considered life-risking. however, they would be necessary in order to protect the local community from outside threats and to clarify minor disputes over property.
If everyone exercised their right to bear arms, police would not be needed.
Sheriffs are elected by the local people. That is a far cry from the modern police state with standing police forces that rival most countries' armies.
Mexico is a place where many people exercise their right to bear arms, despite the fact that doing so is heavily illegal in the country. I do not consider that a safe place.
Being heavily illegal in the country is the problem. This means only criminals are exercising their right to bear arms while the law abiding are discouraged from doing so.
Your scenario only works for small towns where everyone knows each other. In a large enough city even among civilized folk there will always be disputes and you can't always be sure who is wandering through, and normal people are too busy with work to police the city themselves.
For large cities with peaceful residents (not the kinds of cities we have today), I sometimes wonder if the best setup would be a massive smart camera network - not run by a government, just a publicly accessible network - and voluntary police/militia groups. Or maybe those voluntary police would end up like jannies and moderate everyone to an annoying degree.
No, that's too far. Look, I'm all for an armed populace, but I still want a standing peacetime military to mobilize against a fast aggressor. Especially with modern weapons and technology.
Same thing goes for crime. When shit goes well and truly sideways, I want someone with Bearcats, helicopters, and automatic weapons to defeat whatever enemy has appeared. I can't really rely on the militia to have that. Unless, of course, you have some kind of permanently standing militia, which would effect the same idea as police.