Well no actually. No one was insinuating that black people are incapable of nuance or that moving funds from police depts to social workers etc is impossible or bad. Of course people are down with alternatives to policing when given the option, but the efficacy of promoting that through the phrase "abolish the police" is in question. If people have immediate material public safety concerns in their neighborhood how are abolitionists going to convince them that security personnel aren't going to be as brutal as cops but just as effective? How would you convince them that this isn't just reforming the existing police depts? If people are desperate how are you going to convince them to not cede any power to cops and begin a drawn out process that might make their already dangerous neighborhoods even worse before they get better? No one is saying that our current model isn't racist and doesn't suck, but the rhetoric from abolitionists is unconvincing for many people as it stands. There are a multitude of approaches to decreasing police presence and violence that don't have to contend with the phrase "abolish the police" just like how marxists will advocate for socialism before they advocate for communism. Also one of Amber's main points is that "abolish the police" is as nebulous a movement as BLM in that it isn't highly organized and is more of a label for many different organizations with different goals and tactics. If you were involved in Occupy like she was I can see why you'd be skeptical. Reformist began coopting "abolish the police" just like they coopted "abolish ice" and M4A, so it is actually really unclear what someone actually means when they say they're supportive of police abolition. I've not just armchair posting warrioring this topic. Try talking to people who are just tired of their neighborhoods being unsafe first about disarmament and come back and tell me how well the word abolition tracks. Also I see you editing "bitch" to "bootlicker" u fucking coward fuck you.