The difference is that people who commit crimes like robbery do so out of economic need. Locking people up for crimes that arise out of poverty isn't going to address crime, because the environment those people were living in will continue to exist and will cause more criminals to come into existence. The threat of punishment self-evidently does not prevent crime; after all, people commit crime in spite of the fact that it's illegal. The solution isn't to punish criminals and continue to perpetuate the tragedy that is our vengeance-fueled justice system, it's to provide these people with educational and employment opportunities.

On the other hand, someone who covers their license plate has demonstrated their depraved indifference to human life and is irredeemable as a result. You can't reform someone who does things like that. It makes sense that people would get a lot angrier over it.

Here's a more detailed map broken down by election district: https://projects.thecity.nyc/zeldin-hochul-election-voter-turnout-nyc/

I, the excerpt I quoted, and the comment I replied to didn't say anything about paying them more.

I'm sure it's a huge issue, but like you said, we need to address the root causes of cops committing crime by providing them with more social services and housing.

After all, punitive justice is NOT the solution to crime!

> Cops? Cops dont reduce crime.

FACT CHECK: False.

In an article from the Washington Post about alternatives to policing, even they acknowledge that this is false:

> Those who argue that the police have no role in maintaining safe streets are arguing against lots of strong evidence. One of the most robust, most uncomfortable findings in criminology is that putting more officers on the street leads to less violent crime. We know this from randomized experiments involving “hot spots policing” and natural experiments in which more officers were brought to the streets because of something other than crime — a shift in the terror alert level or the timing of a federal grant — and violent crime fell. After the unrest around the deaths of Freddie Gray in Baltimore and Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., police officers stepped back from their duty to protect and serve; arrests for all kinds of low-level offenses dropped, and violence rose. This shouldn’t be interpreted to mean that protests against violent policing lead to more violence; rather, it means that when police don’t do their jobs, violence often results.

Here's another article from Vox regarding the same thing.

> I don't obsess over conservative states/cities because they don't line up with my values. Just weird.

Yeah, I guess it's incredibly weird to be concerned about other states restricting abortion rights. Why would anyone care? So weird.

> the city they couldn't make it in

What does that even mean? Do you think you're a badass for living here?

After a certain point, defunding was promoted as a way to redirect certain things that fell under police enforcement to other specialized agencies, not as a punitive measure against corruption. At least, that's what was claimed.

That's crazy, especially considering the fact that the New York metro area and Ukraine have similar costs of living.

Seriously, like oof. I can't even.