So, what’s the actual proposal for moving “from grief to action” here? The authors lay out the usual grab-bag of SPD misconduct, with no mention of how to stop it. The only clues seem to be their defensiveness about abolition (‘People often argue that abolitionists or left organizers “don’t care about public safety” or that we “don’t care about victims and survivors.”‘) followed by some unspecified claim about how, “our communities have been creating safety with each other outside of policing for a very long time”, followed by zero examples of community policing work. Then it veers into an attack upon two of the Stranger’s most recent hate-objects: the new drug law, and City Attorney Davison.

It appears the Stranger has finally understood the term “defund” has become toxic, so it requested an essay which essentially argues for defund without using the term. Such dishonesty would mark another new low in the Stranger’s degradation of Seattle’s civic discourse.

Reforming police means reforming police culture, and as humans tend strongly towards deeply resist changing their cultures, police reform will require a huge amount of chronic, arduous labor. There is no easy solution, whether it is “defund,” defund by another name, or anything other than communities nationwide working together to re-imagine and re-invent police work.

Quite incredible - an officer rushing to an overdose call accidentally strikes someone visible for half a second due to construction blocking the beginning of the crosswalk, and this means we have to elect Democrats to all positions and implement all their policies and do whatever they say.

Odd how many seemingly unrelated cases seem to require this as a remedy?

It's also sad how often the John T. Williams death, an incident of actual misconduct, is bundled in with Charleena Lyles and Manuel Ellis, people who died 100% as a result of their own actions.

@4 I can assure you the folks behind this letter are not advocating for democrats (they’re more in the vein of Socialist Alternative - D’s are indistinguishable from R’s for these folks).

These folks are not far practically from those of the far right in their distrust / dislike of government (they just get there from a very different perspective).

In an otherwise correct and good opinion piece it is unfortunate to read the claim that the proper response to recent revelations of SPD abuse should reject "more guidance and training for officers, funds to expand the police accountability system, increased cultural competency training, expanded powers for prosecutors, or hiring and recruitment drives meant to put a friendly face behind a deadly uniform."

One of these things is profoundly different from the others: ACCOUNTABILITY. Seattle remains one of very few cities that has failed to pass an initiative for community control of police investigations and discipline. Regardless of what else we do, accountability is necessary for harm reduction while alternatives to cops are developed and we address social needs and disparities. Real accountability will help inform the public as to the nature and persistence of police abuse and get them on our side, since right now well less than 10% of Seattle believes what these authors believe.

Let's stop the false choices and confusing police reform with real police accountability. Cops greatest fear is real accountability: https://southseattleemerald.com/2023/06/02/opinion-in-the-fight-to-end-police-abuse-false-choices-help-the-people-in-power-stay-in-power/

It is also a little disturbing to read "Will you maintain your outrage after the press around Jaahnavi’s killing has quieted down and the media moves on to something else? Will you still show up when there aren’t people in the streets, or when the victim of police violence isn’t a part of the South Asian community?" Where were folks when Iosia Faletogo, Danny Rodriguez, Ryan Smith, Shaun Lee Fuhr, Terry Caver, Derek Hayden, & the still unnamed man on Beacon Hill last year were all killed by SPD while in mental health crisis? This is all in less than 5 years. What about the Black teen nearly killed on Capitol Hill this year when SPD rushed him with spotlights glaring and assault rifles pointed at him? Because of the actions of community members on the street he avoided severe bodily harm or death. In all these cases the media and the Seattle Community Police Commission mostly ignored these horrifying cases of police abuse. And so did the rest of us. Our moral outrage cannot be determined by what the local press decides is or isn't newsworthy.

"The truth is, our communities have been creating safety with each other outside of policing for a very long time"

Can you provide even one example of this? These people seem to disagree with your assertion (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/groups-demand-more-resources-as-robberies-put-south-seattle-on-edge/).

There is not one community in the world that is immune from crime and pretending if we can just reach some utopia where everyone's needs are fully met will result in a harmonious society runs completely counter to all recorded human history. What this editorial is advocating for would result in more BIPOC community members being assaulted and killed.

@7, just for fun, I went through every example of yours. In order:

Iosia Faletogo - shot while actively trying to shoot police.
Danny Rodriguez - shot after cutting his girlfriend's fucking head off and trying to stab police.
Ryan Smith - shot after getting drunk, threatening to stab his girlfriend, and rushing police with a knife.
Shaun Lee Fuhr - shot after shooting at his girlfriend.
Terry Caver - shot after rushing police with a knife.
Derek Hayden - shot after rushing police with a knife.

"Folks" aren't obligated to allow people in "mental health crises" to murder them. It's sad if people are mentally ill, but in every single example you provided, Seattle police acted lawfully and appropriately to defend themselves and others from an armed, murderous nutcase. Now you learned something!

@10: “…the four authors of this piece hold that bit of humanity completely blameless.”

Yep, the authors of this post made that pretty clear: “… unhoused community members who often have to use outside.”

They just have to! Unlike the rest of us, all of whom use meth, heroin, and fentanyl inside, every day. Wait, we don’t? There’s some connection between living outside and using drugs?!?

Of course, many of those same persons “have to” commit assault and theft to obtain drugs, or “have to” trade stolen property for drugs, but the authors admitting those connections would invalidate their cop-free fantasy utopia described earlier in their post, so again down the Stranger’s well-used Memory Hole goes the obvious connection between drug addiction, homelessness, and crime.

And since you can’t solve a problem without first accurately describing said problem, the Stranger again wastes everyone’s time with a fantasy solution, where cops are the problem, and public drug users are their victims. Seattle residents must simply continue absorbing theft and assault (including an occasional daylight murder) until these fantasy non-plans Solve Homelessness, Solve Addiction, and Solve Crime.

And here I thought cops not caring about BIPOC pedestrians and going 50 mph faster than the speed limit and having zero accountability was the problem.

So abolish the police. And the alternative is that people will take their own protection of life, limb and property into their own hands. Do you really think that will turn out better?

@9 nekrasova, Watch the SPD video: Faletogo was not holding the gun after he was brought down by 6 SPD officers & was then executed without holding the gun when there were 4 cops standing around that could have secured the gun and/or secured his hands. Shaun Lee Fuhr did shoot at his girlfriend, but when police made contact with him he had NO weapon & was shot & killed while holding his baby. Rodriguz, Caver, & Hyden had knives, but virtually no one brandishing edged weapons (knives, swords, katanas, machetes, bottles, etc.) -- except in rare cases of terrorism -- has been killed by police in the UK or Japan (see: https://southseattleemerald.com/2022/06/22/opinion-a-simple-change-could-save-lives-our-police-reform-system-ignores-it/).

So, is it that you believe Americans are incompetent? Or, maybe Americans must resort to extreme violence because that is who we are? Or, perhaps you just believe democracy and the law are unnecessary for folks you deem criminal/bad/unnecessary? Certainly you don't care about facts.

@17: Edged weapons are strictly controlled in both the UK and Japan; in the latter, even carrying a simple Swiss Army knife can be a serious offense. The opportunities for police to interact with knife-wielding civilians is therefore far lower, but why bother with details like laws, history, and culture when you have an axe to grind against the SPD?

@18 I get it: when there aren't facts to support your kneejerk unattached to reality arguments/beliefs just make shit up. Your claims are absurd for anyone with a passing familiarity with UK or Japanese culture. Even more twisted is the fact that you don't know the continuing history of Black folk getting jacked by US cops for carrying folding pocket knives: https://www.cityandstateny.com/opinion/2016/12/minorities-hit-the-hardest-by-knife-law/182323/, https://www.villagevoice.com/how-a-50s-era-new-york-knife-law-has-landed-thousands-in-jail/. But hey, why let facts or reality get in the way of an argument for hurting & killing people.

@18 Despite knowing you are immune to facts, for the rest of the readers here: for 2018 "there were 76 homicides attributed to cutting or stabbing in New York — the exact same number as in London, according to data from Murdermap. But New York’s rate is slightly higher, at 0.9 compared to 0.8 in London. It means the Big Apple is still deadlier for knife attacks, but the pattern of recent years suggests that could be reversed very soon." https://www.euronews.com/2019/06/18/deadly-knife-crime-how-does-london-compare-to-new-york

@20: So, your claim implying a valid comparison between Seattle and Japan rests upon statistics from London and New York? Yeah, that makes sense. For you.

When you’re not feigning concern for facts and context, you can really let your freak flag fly. For example, @17 you oh-so-modestly cited a post of yours at the Emerald, which relied upon this beautifully false equivalence:

“From March 27, 2004, to March 26, 2013, the SPD caused the deaths of 21 people, whereas during the nine-year period after the CPC started meeting that number was 29, a 38% increase from the prior nine years.”

The latter period saw Seattle’s largest and most rapid population increase ever. Not only that, but the homeless population grew rapidly during this period as well, and they are disproportionately likely both to go into mental crisis, and otherwise interact with the police. In this context, a whopping EIGHT additional fatalities is unlikely to have statistical significance — and it was incumbent upon you to show that it did. (You, of course, didn’t even try.)

You have some good ideas about police accountability. Couching them in false equivalency — not to mention, hugely stated overconcern for knife-wielding crazies — may well do more to retard police reform than to advance it.

@22 — you’ve identified the logical inconsistency with this editorial and The Stranger’s broader recent editorial shift. Their editorial position is that there should be no accountability whatsoever for those who commit crimes in Seattle, and in particular there should be no consequences through regulation for homeless people who may not be committing crimes but are otherwise negatively impacting their surrounding communities in any number of different ways. At the same time, there should be dramatically heightened accountability for law enforcement officers. If your opinion is that heightened accountability for law enforcement paired with some degree of accountability for the broader community at large is appropriate, you are attacked by The Stranger as a Republican.

One would think that it might be worth pondering whether an editorial stance of “no one should be held accountable for anything ever” may have some broader implications to, say, women who are disproportionately victims of sexual assaults or domestic violence, or minority communities who are disproportionately victims of violent crime. Or perhaps whether that stance may have some detrimental consequences to the regulatory system essential to achieving important liberal policy goals that The Stranger claims to believe are essential.

If you’re looking for that sort of introspection, you won’t find it in The Stranger. Not when they’ve established a narrative that has to be maintained at all costs.