I would suggest, however, that this is not an argument for less police but instead an argument for fewer laws that are only infrequently and inconsistently enforced. It is these laws that give police the opportunity to "issue fines so frequently" and to give affected populations (rightfully or not) the impression that they are singled out. (Laws against loitering or the consumption of alcohol in public come into mind, to a lesser degree probably also the criminalization of marijuana consumption.)
Right... but those laws only ever get revoked when they hit the rich with them. And for every one you revoke there's ten more wealthy/connected people with sob stories that could have been prevented if X were illegal who are contacting their elected representative.
I agree with you on principal but IMO society on Mars will be having this debate (I hope I'm wrong).
