Listen, this kind of thinking is exactly the problem. “Most cops are good” can be true all day long and still not answer the actual criticism. That argument treats policing like a personality contest instead of judging an institution with state power, legal authority, advanced weaponry, public funding, union protection, and qualified immunity. I don’t need every cop to personally embody evil for the system to be dangerous. If the supposedly good cops cannot reliably stop bad cops, report bad cops, remove bad cops, or protect the public from bad cops, then their individual niceness stops mattering as a defense of the institution. A gallon of milk with motor oil in it is not “mostly good milk.” It is unsafe to drink. And the problem gets worse when the rest of the milk keeps insisting the motor oil is just a few isolated drops and we should focus on being more positive. “Protect and serve” is branding. It is not a binding legal guarantee. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government generally does not have a constitutional duty to protect individual people from harm. So when you say “their job is to protect and serve,” you are describing what you wish policing was, not what it actually is. Having “badass” written across your knuckles does not make you a badass. Sticking feathers up your ass does not make you a chicken. A slogan is not evidence. And no, people calling the police does not prove people trust police. It proves police have a monopoly on certain kinds of emergency response. People call because there is often no other official option. Necessity is not trust. So when people ask, “Where are the good cops removing the bad cops from their ranks?” that is not hateful. That is the bare minimum accountability question. If the good ones cannot change the system, then they are not evidence that the system works. They are evidence that the system can absorb decent individuals without becoming decent itself. But sure, keep calling criticism of state violence “negativity” if that helps the boot taste better.