Applying Ethical Philosophies: Defund the Police?

Police officers have been under heavy scrutiny for years, arguably decades. Videos have emerged, trials have been won, and news had been broken showing the escalation of force from police officers that a decent size of the population feels was inappropriate. This has happened over and over to a point where an ever-increasing portion is calling for the defunding of the police entirely. Many more moderate activists think a reform would be enough. Applying the utilitarianism ethical philosophy, is defunding, reforming, or the status quo the aggregate good thing to do? 

First, the status quo. In the utilitarianism ethical philosophy, the status quo would be a 0-aggregate score. This is because doing nothing is neither a net positive nor negative impact on society. Some points of interest in the status quo include the following: Highest incarceration in the industrialized world, 1,100 people, including justly and unjustly, were killed by police use of lethal force in 2020, and $80.7 billion was spent on federal prisons by our federal government for 2020. Despite the points mentioned, it is important to note the aggregate score is still 0 due to it being the status quo. All other alternatives will be based and amounted off this status quo. 

Second, reform the police. Utilitarianism uses graphs to map out aggregate sums of positive or negative impact on society. My graph finding the aggregates for reforming the police is the following: 

Consequences Amount

($) Number Impacted % Chance, or % impacted Score

*( ) - Negative

Fewer Police Homicides 933,990 1,100 25 256,847,250

Improved Care 50 61,500,000 100 3,075,000,000

Higher Entry Req. 40,000 697,195 42 11,712,876,000

Cost 40,000 697,195 75 (20,915,850,000)

Aggregate Score: 

(6,102,289,275)

Aggregate is negative; therefore, this would be a worse decision than keeping the status quo. Fewer police homicide was calculated using the average salary of a U.S. citizen ($31,1331) multiplied by the difference in median age of police homicides (372). Most police homicides get labeled as justified so not all would be removed, but 1 out of 4 is my decision due to my assumption reform will be stressing de-escalation and the reform will improve public perception of police. These factors in tandem could realistically cut police homicides by a quarter. Improved care was calculated by saying it would be comparable to half of a therapy or counseling session once which comes out to a cost around $50 and there are around 61,500,000 police contacts a year. This improved care would happen every interaction in a reform; therefore, the percent chance is 100%. Higher entry requirements encompass a lot in my definition. Reform means improved education on de-escalation measures, increased barrier for police officers joining the force for the wrong reasons. This reformation also improves trust in the communities with their law enforcement and this impact, in my opinion, is far more reaching in a utilitarian argument than the actual problem of the police currently. How I calculated Higher Entry Requirements was by taking an estimate for the cost of a year at a specialized learning institution or university multiplied by the amount of police officers in 20193. The percentage was the percent of U.S. citizens with a 4-year degree. This number is higher than the score from fewer police homicides and improved care, but due to reasons aforementioned, I believe that it is fitting considering the average person in society will only be impacted in ways that include trust, public image, and perception. Cost was calculated with 4-year degree education and continued education in mind. I used 40,000 as an average cost of a year in specialized learning multiplied by the amount of officers in 2019 and assuming 3/4th would need this per year I arrived at my cost. This cost in a utilitarianism ethical philosophy would not be a better decision than the status quo. 

Third, defund the police. Graph finding the aggregates for defunding the police is the following:

Consequences Amount

Number Impacted % Chance, or % impacted Score

*( ) - Negative

Fewer Police Homicides 933,990 1,100 50 513,694,500

Less In Prison 27,500 1,800,000 50 24,750,000,000

Specialized Help 100 61,500,000 50 3,075,000,000

Expense 1,000,000,000 50 100 (50,000,000,000)

Response Time 10 61,500,000 5 (30,750,000)

Unforeseen Escalation 933,990 61.5 100 (57,440,385)

Aggregate Score:

(21,749,495,885)

Aggregate is negative; therefore, this is a worse option than the status quo; however, it is importantly, also worse than reformation. Fewer police homicides had similar numbers to reform except defunding the police entirely would realistically double the effectiveness of reform in regard to stopping police related homicides. Less in prison was calculated by the average cost per inmate, multiplied by the number of inmates. Defunding entirely along with decriminalization of a multitude of “victimless” crimes would cut prison populations roughly in half by my estimates that is where 50 in the % chance comes from. Specialized help was using the full cost of a therapy or counseling sessions of around $100 multiplied by total police encounters where half of the time it is important the specialized care was there. Expense was calculated assuming after defunding police departments entirely, there would be a 1 billion per state cost to get the necessary infrastructure for specialized care. 1 billion per state would most likely be allocated based on population rather than a solid amount per, but for a utilitarian argument aggregate harm or good will suffice for our calculations. 50 states with 1 billion per that is a guaranteed expense. Next is an impact on response time. Currently it’s 10 minutes with the first officer available attending a call. Waiting for specialists would most likely increase response time. I used the average now of 10 minutes per, multiplied by the number of calls and assumed a 5% impact rate of calls where minutes matter. The unforeseen escalation calculations are for those one in a million situations where a seemingly harmless call can turn violent and deadly. I calculated this assuming the average salary, age, and retirement age equation I mentioned earlier. Multiplied by total cost calls received divided by a million. This is because of the saying “one in a million,” to indicate insanely unpredictable events that happen. Since this calculation is accounting for the one in a million chances, and they always happen, it has a 100 % chance. 

In addition, when using these alternatives for the issue of defunding the police, utilitarian ethical philosophy would indicate the status quo is the correct decision. This is due to the nature of the underlying problem. Utilitarian arguments don’t account for the statistics that show discriminatory practices. More minorities being impacted by the prison and police system is not considered when finding the aggregate good or bad for society. One person being in prison is the same you, our children, or I being put in prison. This is important to understand, this is a utilitarian ethical philosophy approach. Racial injustice and discrimination are not adequately represented in a utilitarian argument. 

In conclusion, the ethical decision using this line of reasoning is maintaining the status quo. If a decision must be made, then reform is the better alternative. This is due to the status quo being the score of 0 and the two alternatives had a negative aggregate score.