conix, Less money toward militarization of police forces could mean more money toward hiring more police to walk the beat. Money saved by reorganization, including some city police forces being incorporated into county police forces, could mean money saved which could be put toward more police walking the beat and actually more police talking with people as to improved ways of policing communities.
i haven't seen it as such but am guessing your
"Different definitions but all mean less police on the streets."
has become a conservative talking point to cover your laziness and ignorance about what "defunding" actually means.
You should have considered the question more before now but being a surface swimmer you haven't. It's never too late
Movement to defund police gains 'unprecedented' support across US "Growing calls to “defund the police,” explained" Surely the "defund" movement is simply about a move against the spending involved in militarization of the police. About taking some of that spending to creating more social housing and other measures to help rather than police the poor. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=156105348
Also, of course, there are probably communities where regressive police methods and policies such as not charging officers guilty of police brutality has built mistrust and anger toward police and where fewer police could very well, even over the long term, result in less crime.
Your penchant for all or nothings and one shoe fits all slogans doesn't do anyone any favors.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
