Ho Phuong Thao – N01443578

Option 2: Defunding the police

In recent times, protests are being held in many parts of the world because of the police’s use of

brutal force and discrimination in law enforcement. Several incidents of brutality towards black

and indigenous residents in Canada are clear examples of systematic racism in the police force of

the country, with Toronto being the hotspot. Therefore, many abolitionists argue that it would be

better to defund the police, reallocating funds to other issues that are the root of crimes. This is

hoped to resolve not only criminal activities caused by poverty and mental illness, but also the

misused power of the police. On the contrary, there is a common belief that more funding should

be invested in providing the police with special skills to avoid racism because despite their flaws,

they still play a pivotal role in maintaining public safety. As the Ethics Advisor to the Toronto

Mayor, from a utilitarian perspective, I would suggest that more budgets should be given to the

police. This is because the police force can bring more benefits for the common than other

departments and the downsides can be improved over time. This essay will analyze the grounds

for both views as well as evidence for my view.

As a utilitarian, I believe that general happiness is the sole criteria in judging whether an action is

right or wrong. This is particularly true for law and policy makers as they should always take the

public welfare into consideration. Utilitarianism is a philosophical view that matters should be

judged based on their consequences rather than the process. This makes utilitarianism a branch

of consequentialism. It rests on the idea that an action is morally right if it can maximize the

overall outcome: more benefits and fewer drawbacks. “An act is right, and so ought to be

performed, if it secures the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people (taking into

consideration the agent’s own happiness along with everyone else’s).” (Chaparian, 2020, Lesson
Ho Phuong Thao – N01443578

7). However, it is still unclear whether we should consider the benefits for individuals or for

groups, for humans only or for all beings on Earth. Another uncertainty is that we cannot be sure

what outcomes can actually occur but can only base on predictions which can vary between each

person. In the end, this is also considered a pursuit of happiness as happiness is the sole pivotal

factor of whethere something is ultimately good or bad. If a law is enacted without accounting

the good for the whole population but only to a group of the privileged, then it would become the

onset of chaos, thereby unethical. Therefore, by comparing the number of merits with the

number of possible negative impacts of an act, the governments can make sure that it is doing its

best to do good to the country. This is why an advisor to the mayor should take the view of a

utilitarian.

For example, if police were allowed to fire without bearing any consequences, it would be easier

for them to do their job, catching dangerous criminals. However, this law would make the

majority of the citizens feel unsecured because they would fear the police, not knowing when

they could get shot for any reason. This would result in an over-policed society where the

general public would live in constant fear even though there might be no more ciminals. As a

utilitarian, the advisor to the mayor can foresee such scenarios so that he/she can evaluate the

possible outcomes to avoid introducing ineffective laws.

However, the effects of a policy can only be predicted in a limited foreseeable future while its

ripple impacts may occur in the long run. Sometimes, what the lawmakers anticipate to be

beneficial will turn out to be disastrous years later, which makes it no longer ethical. For

instance, if the fund for police were channeled to universal basic income, how could we be sure

whether it would improve the citizens’ living conditions or it would lead to an irrivocable

economic recession because workers would not go to work anymore? How could we be sure
Ho Phuong Thao – N01443578

whether people who work in the sectors that might receive funding from the police are not racist?

In this case, the effects of defunding the police must be analyze thoroughly in short term as well

as long term.

Resource allocation has always been a topic of controversy since the dawn of time. This section

will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of defunding the police force to shift the focus to

other priorities. It is no denying that people of color in Canada are subject to suppression by a

considerable portion of police officers, leading to rallies all over the country. Racism by police is

such an imperative real issue in western countries that people are demanding the government to

defund this force. It is believed that by channeling the budget for law enforcement to social

services, all the problems that require police will be mitigated. For example, because most

people commit petty crimes out of institution, social security programs, such as food stamps or

universal basic income, should receive more funding to provide for those people so that they will

not steal for food. According to Sensus 2016, the average poverty rate for black children is

surprisingly high in Canada, with 17% (Sarangi, 2020, p. 3). From a police perspective, there is a

high chance that they are more likely to offend than other children, which is a threat to law-

abiding citizens. Therefore, children in black communities are over policed. If those children

could receive proper care and education just like their white counterparts, there would be no

reason for them to break the law, thereby not being supervised by the police. While this is true to

some extent, I still think that racism has become a systemic problem not only occuring in the law

enforcement but in every corner of society at the core. Even if the police is defunded and the

black communities’ crime rate is low, the colored are still going to be discriminated and

assaulted by their coworkers, neighbors, employers or friends. Black children are bullied by the
Ho Phuong Thao – N01443578

schoolmates. Non white applicants are accepted not for their ability but only because of the

company’s “cultural diversity” image. Without the hand of law enforcement, who can protect

them from those behaviors? Another reason why closing the wealth gap to eliminate crimes is a

naive notion is that the most serious crimes are not caused by poverty. Mafia, drug smugglers

and cartels, and poachers are all millionnaires and they will not stop breaking the laws due to

greed. Murders and harrassments can be committed by anyone regardless of wealth or status.

What social services can eradicate greed, jealousy, or anger? At this point, if social services such

as mental health experts receive extra budgets, what can guarantee their efficiency? How can we

know whether there will be an increase in their usefulness or there will be diminishing returns?

On the other hand, strengthening the police force has its own indispensable benefits and there are

some feasible solutions to tackle the systemic racism in this department to answer to the

objections of this idea. First and foremost, the dominant merit of investing more in the police is

that they can receive more training for their public behaviors. In other words, thanks to those

courses, they can know how to treat people from different cultures equally and how not to make

them feel oppressed. For example, in China or Korea, police officers are under the same training

procedure of hospitality and catering service, which could result in helpful, friendly and smiley

officers. They can even have the skills to consult any mental or physical breakdown on sites

before calling for support from doctors. Even if these trainings cannot change the officers’

mindet on racism towards the black, they can still carry out their job professionally without

concentration on one particular race because they could learn that it will ruin their image and

career. Furthermore, cameras can be mounted to every policeman’s shoulder or head to record

their actions, preventing them from making a decision out of personal urges like hatred or
Ho Phuong Thao – N01443578

discrimination. An AI system can be integrated inside the camera to analyse the situation and

report to the headquarter. This can act as a deterrent for officers who abuse their power.

Therefore, law abididng citizens of all races can enjoy the protection of the police. Another

reason that we need to equip police with more arms and skills is that crime operations are more

and more complex, putting the whole society at risk. Human trafficking, organ harvesting, or

drug smuggling have never been this intensive. Therefore, a huge budget must be allocated to

CCTVs, drones and “eagle-eye” sattelites to detect those activities while the police should be

better armed to protect themselves. What we actually need to do is invest in more educational

initiatives and supervising programs to change the whole system’s perspective on the black and

prevent any possible discrimination before it happens.

In conclusion, although the police’ image has become rotten in the eye of the public due to their

aggressiveness, overpower and racism, I sill strongly disapprove the idea of defunding them.

While I think that other social services do need more fundings to help improve our living

standards, thus mitigating a part of our social problems, I believe this solely cannot change the

current situation of crimes and discrimination. Only by enhancing the police, can we uphold the

law and maintain public safety for everyone from all walks of life.
Ho Phuong Thao – N01443578

Reference list:

1. Prof. Chaparian, 2020, Blackboard lesson 7.

2. Leila Sarangi, National Coordinator, 2020, https://www.newswire.ca/news-

releases/exceptionally-high-child-poverty-rates-in-black-indigenous-communities-

indicator-of-systemic-violence-in-canada-845089842.html