What Would a Nation Without Police Look Like?

            The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday concerns the Black Lives Matter demand that police departments and prisons be eliminated. Yes, you read that sentence correct. All those people who are standing with the Black Lives Matter movement need to understand that they are calling for the defunding of police department and prisons. They may get their wish in some parts of the country.


            Jack Brewster on the Forbes Staff reported that Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said on Wednesday, June 3, 2020, that “he is throwing out plans for a massive police budget hike as support for slashing police department funds grows among activists in the wake of George Floyd’s death.” 


            Isaac Scher reported today that “several members of the Minneapolis City Council are seeking to get rid of the police department – permanently.” They are exploring the idea of disbanding the police department and using “a community-oriented, non-violent public safety and outreach capacity.”


            Alice Speri reported that people in New York City want to cut the police department. Alex Vitale, who runs the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College, asked the following question: “Why are we plowing money into policing when what we need is public health? … Every dime spent on the NYPD is a dime that we can’t have to actually build stronger and healthier communities.” 


            Thomas Lifson posted an article about the results of two cities who decreased police action.  The first one is current history. After the riots that followed the Freddie Gray incident, “the police stopped aggressively engaging in minority neighborhoods.” Even progressive leaders said it was a “tragedy.” Lifson quotes the following from the https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/magazine/baltimore-tragedy-crime.html New York Times and Pro Publica.

[I]n the years that followed, Baltimore, by most standards, became a worse place. In 2017, it recorded 342 murders – its highest per-capita rate ever, more than double Chicago’s, far higher than any other city of 500,000 or more residents and astonishingly, a larger absolute number of killings than in New York City, a city 14 times as populous. Other elected officials, from the governor to the mayor to the state’s attorney, struggled to respond to the rise in disorder, leaving residents with the unsettling feeling that there was no one in charge. With every passing year, it was getting harder to see what gains, exactly, were delivered by the uprising.

            The Baltimore rioters and looters demanded less police aggression, so the police backed off in their dealings with minorities. The rioters, looters, and murders must have been happy to see less “police brutality,” but how did the law-abiding citizens feel about it? They felt that there was no one in control of the situation. The increase in murders happened without the police department being eliminated or defunded. The police merely responded to the demands made by those who were demanding justice. Lifson’s second example took place 100 years ago when there were no police in Boston.


            It seems that the Boston Police want to form a union affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, but Edwin Curtis, police commissioner, and Calvin Coolidge, Governor of Massachusetts opposed the demand. Compromises were attempted but failed, and “the cops walked off the job at 5:45 PM.”

In the language of the day, “hooliganism” broke out, with widespread looting. The following day, the mayor of Boston asked Governor Coolidge to supply the force of the state militia, and he agreed. But in the time it took to raise a force that eventually numbered 5,000, about three times the size of the Boston Police, looting increased on September 10, and continued for 9 days until the militia was able to quell it.

Coolidge took a hard line and built a national reputation. His words, “There is no right to strike against the public safety, anywhere, anytime,” propelled him to the vice-presidential nomination of the Republicans in 1920 and eventually to the White House….

These facts are well documented. See A City in Terror: Calvin Coolidge and the 1919 Boston Police Strike and A City in Terror: The 1919 Boston Police Strike.

            It seems that the unlawful activity community reacts the same in whatever age. The riots in Boston took place in 1919, the riots in Baltimore took place in 2015, and the current riots happened in 2020. It was the same type of behavior but different years.


            If the people in a community were moral and law abiding, there would be little need for a police department except to help during an emergency. The most important duty of any government – city, state, nation – is to keep its citizens and residents safe. If there was no criminal element in the community, I believe that all police brutality would disappear. Here are some famous quotes that we can apply to the current discussion.

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. (John Adams)

Government’s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives (Ronald Reagan)

If men were angels, no government would be necessary. (James Madison)

Governments at all levels have the responsibility to protect the people. If the people are “moral and religious,” there is little need for enforcement of basic laws because “moral and religious” people govern themselves. If we were all angels, we would not need police.


            Police departments continue to get bigger and bigger and costing more and more money because people continue to break the law. If there were more law-abiding citizens, some of the police funds could be used for social issues. It is the criminal element, not the police, that determines the budget for the police department. We can have fewer police if we are willing to obey the laws.   To answer my own question, a nation without police would look like either heaven or hell – depending on the people of the nation.