Property and violent crime disproportionately affects poor and disadvantaged people. Not just because they might be forced to live in "bad" neighborhoods, but because they have less money for home security measures, they may have to walk, cycle, or take public transport more frequently, they may have to work nights and odd hours and in public facing service jobs. And because the relative cost and difficulty of replacing and repairing their home and belongings, or getting physical or mental health care for the damage to themselves and time off work to heal, is far far higher.
The idea that police services to poor people and less advantaged neighborhoods should be cut, is one of the most out of touch, limousine-liberal notions that I have heard in a long time. The fact that it's an overwhelmingly popular idea on places like this with no discussion or concept of any potential downsides, shows how out of touch the crowd is when it comes to the problems people face.
Just because you've had to walk past some homeless people on the way to a restaurant in the city, or been occasionally offered drugs, or had your car broken into, or hear gunshots and sirens sometimes, or driven through a place where people don't stop at red lights, or read things on the internet, does not make an expert... My point after that long rant is, don't be surprised or upset by people pontificating on this subject with no idea what they're talking about.
An honest evaluation and critique of your response: acting in a defensive and offended manner at someone making a subjectively funny (though low-effort) joke about a subject very serious to you is a natural reaction. However it would help your cause to suppress this reaction and come back in a few minutes before writing your reply. The one you wrote hurts you more than helps you by making you appear unreasonable and emotional.
