blog writing #black lives matters

Recently, the debate “Defund the Police” has been a widespread reconvening public outcry in the whole of United States. This slogan originated from the “Black Lives Matter” activists and the police reform advocates, and it appears to be becoming more rampant among the politicians, mayors, and municipal councils. Instead of funding the police who are using excesive force on Blacks and mistreating civilians, we should defund the police since defunding the police will provide room for resources to be utilized in other important programes such as education and health care. Currently, a debate is ongoing on whether we should defund the police or not. "Defund the police" is a term used to mean reallocating or redirecting funding that is found in the police department to other organizations that are funded by the municipalities. Therefore, defunding is not abolishing policing as many might think. Many people want to see the rotten acts of policing being chopped down and other roots replanted. Defunding the police is used in reducing the violence and crime taking place in the police. The current paper makes arguments based on a given debate “American Police Reform” on the motion to defund the police. The debaters are Paul Butler who is on the side of yes, we should defund the police, Jason Johnson who is on the side of no, Rafael Mangual who is against the motion that we should not defund the police, Sue Rahr who argues that it depends on what does “Defund the police” implies, and Vikrant Reddy who is against the motion. This paper presents a debate on why should defund the police.