Defense for the incapable
A common tactic from those who want to at least appear to have an argument against abolishing the police is to either claim that they themselves are incapable of protecting their own life, liberty, or property, or to try to scapegoat someone else as being incapable.
Plus, when you try to blame others for your desire to keep "employing" the gang, it's rude!
I've seen enough examples of kids, small women, the elderly, and the disabled protecting themselves and others from archation (and so have you) that I don't buy that anyone who isn't completely helpless is incapable. It's a coward's lie.
Maybe some don't want to accept the responsibility, but they can.
It's not your job to coddle those who refuse, but you can if you want-- at your own expense. It doesn't give anyone the right to enslave everyone else for their imagined weaknesses.
Yes, there are some who are truly incapable of defending themselves, feeding themselves, or wiping their own butts. Nice people take care of this kind of person, sometimes for money-- but society doesn't revolve around their inability. That would be like living in a prison established to make certain that no one could be any more capable than the least capable among us. I'm not going to live that way.
Refusing to consider abolishing the police based on the lie that people who are otherwise capable can't protect themselves is antisocial, unethical, and statist (but I repeat myself).