As I understand it, in the United States, policing was performed originally by an elected Sheriff. You would need to go back to the medieval period, I guess, or somewhere other than the western world, to find community patrols as a common form of policing practiced in anything like the modern world.
There is some argument to be made that police have evolved alongside the concept of property, in that the role of police has historically been defense of property (where property often included people), and that doesn't always coincide with concern for human lives.
But, I'd rather not get too distracted by what policing looked like hundreds of years ago. What does it look like today? And, is that the best way to protect people from those dangerous groups you speak of (mobs, gangs, etc.)? I honestly don't believe it is. The budgets of major city police forces are absurd, compared to budgets for mental health, rehabilitation, addiction recovery, education, poverty reduction, etc. And, those budgets are padded to the tune of millions of dollars a year from federal sources, including heavily subsidized military equipment (which is a major contributor to the militarization of police forces).
So, how would it affect your opinion on this issue for police to have started as community patrols but turned into something else? Do you assume that because someone (in a pre-democratic era) decided that community patrols were not as effective as appointed police that we should continue to do it the way it's been done for all those years? Is history the right source of inspiration when it comes to use of force?
Don't get me wrong. I've got no answers. But I think it's a bit naïve to believe that no one, criminal or otherwise, would fill the power void should an organized and powerful police force cease to exist. In countries with corrupt or minimal police force, we see rampant corruption and gangs/terrorist groups in control. It's not like there aren't examples to draw from here.
There is some argument to be made that police have evolved alongside the concept of property, in that the role of police has historically been defense of property (where property often included people), and that doesn't always coincide with concern for human lives.
But, I'd rather not get too distracted by what policing looked like hundreds of years ago. What does it look like today? And, is that the best way to protect people from those dangerous groups you speak of (mobs, gangs, etc.)? I honestly don't believe it is. The budgets of major city police forces are absurd, compared to budgets for mental health, rehabilitation, addiction recovery, education, poverty reduction, etc. And, those budgets are padded to the tune of millions of dollars a year from federal sources, including heavily subsidized military equipment (which is a major contributor to the militarization of police forces).
So, how would it affect your opinion on this issue for police to have started as community patrols but turned into something else? Do you assume that because someone (in a pre-democratic era) decided that community patrols were not as effective as appointed police that we should continue to do it the way it's been done for all those years? Is history the right source of inspiration when it comes to use of force?