Focused deterrence may not be the panacea that is suggested.
Meta studies have shown that the level of effectiveness demonstrated in previous studies have been likely overstated. Beyond the questionable effect sizes and the collateral impacts in impacted communities, there are cities and counties where focused deterrence shows no evidence of efficacy, such as Ocala, Florida, Newark, New Jersey, and Montgomery County, Maryland.
In many cases, the social services parts of deterrence programs are dropped. The result goes back to mass incarceration.
As for “Liberals have no solutions”, again an except from the Slate article
The House of Umoja in Philadelphia is one case of a community-led effort that received a fraction of the attention and financial support as focused deterrence-based programs. As political scientist Vesla M. Weaver noted, a decade after its implementation in 1968 “Umoja was serving 400 boys from 73 different gangs, and gang-related deaths had fallen from 40 a year to just one in 1978.” But government funding streams largely bypassed Black-led community groups like House of Umoja for law enforcement efforts and organizations. The House of Umoja is still engaged in anti-violence work, but the scope and possibilities of care-centered, community based initiatives like it have been greatly hamstrung by the increasing reliance on, and investments in, policing and prisons.
The problem is that government funding in the 60's did *not* bypass "black-led community groups," but whether for reasons of incompetence or corruption, the money usually went to grifters, con-artists, or wild-eyed radicals. At Mayor Lindsay's invitation, the Ford Foundation funded "black-led community groups" which morphed and coalesced into things like the brutish and racist "African-American Teachers Association," engendering wide-spread violence by black "activists" and undisciplined students against white students, teachers, and administrators in the NYC public school system, and against whites generally in neighborhoods which black radicals assumed to be "theirs."
Similarly, in the most recent racial contretemps (2014-present) there has been a truly massive amount of money - at least a hundred billion dollars in 2020 alone - from governments, corporations, foundations, and private donors sloshing around and trying to find pro-black things to do. Yet once again, it has overwhelmingly either disappeared into the pockets of "community activists" and their families, gone to radical and counterproductive causes (e.g. bail funds for violent criminals and rioters), or otherwise failed to make a noticeable positive impact.
There are many black people who are honest and sincere in their desire to help their co-ethnics. Some of them may even be effective in working towards those goals. But there is no reason to think that current progressive discourse is able to reliably identify and drive attention and money towards such people. Instead, what is selected for is reliably (1) media-savvy, (2) the ability to reflect the prejudices and self-hatreds of progressive whites themselves, and (3) conformance to a 60's-inflected ideal of what a "radical black" should look and sound like which has a half-century's track-record of being wrong about nearly everything, and ruining everything it touches.
Focused deterrence may not be the panacea that is suggested.
Meta studies have shown that the level of effectiveness demonstrated in previous studies have been likely overstated. Beyond the questionable effect sizes and the collateral impacts in impacted communities, there are cities and counties where focused deterrence shows no evidence of efficacy, such as Ocala, Florida, Newark, New Jersey, and Montgomery County, Maryland.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/11/focused-deterrence-police-strategy-just-like-mass-incarceration.html
In many cases, the social services parts of deterrence programs are dropped. The result goes back to mass incarceration.
As for “Liberals have no solutions”, again an except from the Slate article
The House of Umoja in Philadelphia is one case of a community-led effort that received a fraction of the attention and financial support as focused deterrence-based programs. As political scientist Vesla M. Weaver noted, a decade after its implementation in 1968 “Umoja was serving 400 boys from 73 different gangs, and gang-related deaths had fallen from 40 a year to just one in 1978.” But government funding streams largely bypassed Black-led community groups like House of Umoja for law enforcement efforts and organizations. The House of Umoja is still engaged in anti-violence work, but the scope and possibilities of care-centered, community based initiatives like it have been greatly hamstrung by the increasing reliance on, and investments in, policing and prisons.
The problem is that government funding in the 60's did *not* bypass "black-led community groups," but whether for reasons of incompetence or corruption, the money usually went to grifters, con-artists, or wild-eyed radicals. At Mayor Lindsay's invitation, the Ford Foundation funded "black-led community groups" which morphed and coalesced into things like the brutish and racist "African-American Teachers Association," engendering wide-spread violence by black "activists" and undisciplined students against white students, teachers, and administrators in the NYC public school system, and against whites generally in neighborhoods which black radicals assumed to be "theirs."
Similarly, in the most recent racial contretemps (2014-present) there has been a truly massive amount of money - at least a hundred billion dollars in 2020 alone - from governments, corporations, foundations, and private donors sloshing around and trying to find pro-black things to do. Yet once again, it has overwhelmingly either disappeared into the pockets of "community activists" and their families, gone to radical and counterproductive causes (e.g. bail funds for violent criminals and rioters), or otherwise failed to make a noticeable positive impact.
There are many black people who are honest and sincere in their desire to help their co-ethnics. Some of them may even be effective in working towards those goals. But there is no reason to think that current progressive discourse is able to reliably identify and drive attention and money towards such people. Instead, what is selected for is reliably (1) media-savvy, (2) the ability to reflect the prejudices and self-hatreds of progressive whites themselves, and (3) conformance to a 60's-inflected ideal of what a "radical black" should look and sound like which has a half-century's track-record of being wrong about nearly everything, and ruining everything it touches.
Do you have a source for the $100 B figure
I know $50 B was pledged by corporations, but many corporations will not release what was actually spent
Funds devoted to Black home ownership wound up in white hands because of the way banks wrote the rules
Most of the pledged funds hasn’t materialized
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2021/george-floyd-corporate-america-racial-justice/