Comments
BakedBread65 t1_ixqpib0 wrote
For this article it seems like they just went to all the organizations that don’t like policing for a quote. If someone’s clearly on video doing a crime, what’s the problem?
drpvn t1_ixqqbv6 wrote
Donna Lieberman saying this “effectively deputizes” private citizens . . . . No, asking people to call in tips and making video clips available for police to look at is not “deputizing” anyone.
burnshimself t1_ixqv5wf wrote
Empowering people to report crimes and improve public safety… THE HORROR
thisisntmineIfoundit t1_ixrejhx wrote
The countries where citizens are too afraid or jaded to bother reporting a crime are...a bit different than here.
John_-_Galt t1_ixu8vxc wrote
I think they're saying the issue is over policing in black neighborhoods, and everything that goes with it. So these crimes will lead more convictions/policing/harsher penalties of criminals in black places because they they lack the financial resources to fight it.
So instead of solving the root cause of the issues of why crime is taking place in the black neighborhoods, the policies just put people on an endless loop of low wage and jail.
That's my take away at least.
BakedBread65 t1_ixw3fwt wrote
If mostly black people in mostly black neighborhoods voluntarily provide ring camera footage, that’s not over policing.
ripstep1 t1_ixvgt5g wrote
It’s not overpolicing if there is higher rates of crime.
BobanTheGiant t1_ixrbl4r wrote
Imagine reading the article and not critically comprehending what it's major points were. This was not one of the three to four major points. Do better searching for your own narrative
BakedBread65 t1_ixs1n8n wrote
Imagine criticizing someone about critical reading and not even knowing the difference between its and it’s.
c3p-bro t1_ixqyrur wrote
You know how leftists think right wingers believe that “if we stop talking about racism, it won’t exist anymore”?
Leftists feel that way about crime. Just ignore it long enough and it disappears
BobanTheGiant t1_ixrbpl1 wrote
You know that Fox News has reported on the issue of crime in America 50% less since the election? If crime was so so so bad, as you say, why then is Fox suddenly indifferent to it?
Dantheking94 t1_ixs429y wrote
Yeh because NY POST picked up the slack and focuses all of that crime information on NYC
JuliaMac65 t1_ixtw5qr wrote
NY Post is owned by Fox News.
karmapuhlease t1_ixslbla wrote
What's your source on that? Is there some metric by which it can be measured that FNC no longer covers crime? Or do you personally claim to watch enough of that channel to be sure of your own evaluation?
BobanTheGiant t1_ixsmbfb wrote
Hmm, if only there were people out there tabulating this and then sharing the results.
karmapuhlease t1_ixssa64 wrote
Are there? Does someone track the number of minutes each news topic or policy issue is mentioned by Fox News 24/7?
c3p-bro t1_ixrc2uz wrote
Never said crime was “so so so bad” and think Fox News is full of shit so get out of here with that strawman putting words in my mouth bullshit. But crime exists and we do need a police force to deal with. Abolishing the police won’t magically fix crime, just like banning CRT wont fix racism.
ZinnRider t1_ixrtg8h wrote
Problem is that almost the totality of police work does not prevent crime. They mostly react to crime.
And their responses are often the worst possible ones.
If you’re really seriously about reducing crime you have to grapple with poverty, communities without access to youth programs, exorbitant rents and cost of living, etc.
More cops is definitely not the answer. They’ve showed us over and over and over again what they’re about. Excessive violence, abuse of authority, immunity from “rule of law” and frankly, yes - being asked to respond to too much, makes them the wrong answer.
ripstep1 t1_ixvgz9s wrote
Lmao the threat of punishment absolutely deters criminal activity. If police didn’t exist you bet your ass I’d be stealing on a regular basis.
c3p-bro t1_ixrvwpz wrote
I agree for certain types of theft, vandalism, etc., that sort of crime. The second you start putting innocent peoples lives at risk you lose me.
Generational programs may reduce future crime but we still need protection from the violent criminals of today.
utamog t1_ixxc8qn wrote
The fact that this is downvoted is honestly so fucked
Gosia212 t1_ixtzkce wrote
Because you will never see it on tv when things go right.
drpvn t1_ixs1nvs wrote
We don’t need more police in NYC—we have a lot of officers—but we also don’t need many fewer.
“Police do not prevent crime” is midwit copypasta. Really dumb, really wrong, and contrary to both common sense and decades of research. But there are some people who will never stop cutting and pasting it.
Koboldsftw t1_ixsjab1 wrote
All the research I have seen directly contradicts what you claim the research shows.
drpvn t1_ixsldf1 wrote
I highly doubt that.
Koboldsftw t1_ixslxgp wrote
drpvn t1_ixw5vpg wrote
I don’t have anything from an advocacy group comparable to Vera, but here are a handful of research papers from academic journals. You need to understand that the idea that policing has no effect on crime is a fringe activist view that has been mainstreamed by dimwits copy-pasting on social media.
Aziai, Alberto. 2022. “What happens when the police go on strike? Analysing how a marked reduction in policing impacts upon homicides in Ceará, Brazil.” Global Crime, DOI: 10.1080/17440572.2022.2098121 (The [police] strike led to a statistically significant increase in homicides ranging between 110% and 250%…. Even in a violent context, the perception of a higher risk of apprehension induced by police presence acts as a powerful deterrent against homicides.)
Blesse, Sebastian and André Diegmann. 2022. “The place-based effects of police stations on crime: Evidence from station closures.” Journal of Public Economics. Vol. 207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104605 (Many countries consolidate their police forces by closing down local police stations. Police stations represent an important and visible aspect of the organization of police forces. We provide novel evidence on the effect of centralizing police offices through the closure of local police stations on crime outcomes. Combining matching with a difference-in-differences specification, we find an increase in reported car theft and burglary in residential properties. Our results are consistent with a negative shift in perceived detection risks and are driven by heterogeneous station characteristics. We can rule out alternative explanations such as incapacitation, crime displacement, and changes in police employment or strategies at the regional level. We argue that criminals are less deterred due to a lower visibility of the local police.)
Braga, Anthony. 2017. “Editorial introduction. Impact of Police on CJ Reform. Arrests, Harm Reduction, and Police Crime Prevention Policy.” Criminology & Public Policy. Vol. 16(2): 369-373. (Communities expect the police to control violence. Ineffective strategies will undoubtedly undermine police legitimacy. Effective police crime prevention efforts are characterized by changing the perceptions of potential offenders of apprehension risk and by modifying criminal opportunities (Nagin, Solow, and Lum, 2015). Although arrests are inevitable, police should be oriented toward preventing crimes from happening in the first place.)
Braga A., Kennedy D., Pielh A and Waring E. 2001. “Measuring the Impact of Operation Ceasefire in Reducing Gun Violence: The Boston gun project’s operation ceasefire.” NIJ. (The time series shows a 63-percent reduction in the mean monthly number of youth homicide victims from a pretest mean of 3.5 youth homicides per month to a post test mean of 1.3 youth homicides per month. Analyses suggest that the Ceasefire intervention was associated with statistically significant reductions in all time series., including: A 63-percent decrease in the monthly number of youth homicides in Boston. A 32-percent decrease in the monthly number of citywide shots-fired calls. A 25-percent decrease in the monthly number of citywide all-age gun assault incidents.)
Braga, Anthony A., Andrew V. Papachristos & David M. Hureau (2012). “The Effects of Hot Spots Policing on Crime: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Justice Quarterly. Vol. 31(4): 633-663. (Abstract: Our research suggests that hot spots policing generates small but noteworthy crime reductions, and these crime control benefits diffuse into areas immediately surrounding targeted crime hot spots. Our analyses find that problem-oriented policing interventions generate larger mean effect sizes when compared to interventions that simply increase levels of traditional police actions in crime hot spots. We also find that only a small number of studies examine the impacts of hot spots policing on police-community relations. The extant research on this topic, however, suggests that community members have positive reactions to these focused policing actions. [See also: Braga et al, 2018, “An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence.”])
Braga A., Weisburd, D., Turchan, B. 2018. “An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence.” Criminology & Public Policy. Volume 17. Issue 1. (The results of our meta-analysis demonstrate that focused deterrence strategies are associated with an overall statistically significant, moderate crime reduction effect.)
Braga, A. A., D. L. Weisburd, E. J. Waring, L. G. Mazerolle, W. Spelman, & F. Gajewski. “Problem-Oriented Policing in Violent Crime Places: A Randomized Controlled Experiment.” Justice Quarterly. Vol 31(4): 633-663. (Many researchers believe that crime problems can be reduced more efficiently if officers systematically focus their attention on crime “hot spots.” Previously, the value of focused problem-oriented policing efforts in controlling violence was not known. This randomized controlled experiment […] concluded that the Jersey City Police Department’s pilot problem-oriented policing program was successful at reducing crime and disorder at violent places, with little evidence of displacement.)
Braga, Anthony A., Brandon C. Welsh, and Cory Schnell. 2015. “Can policing disorder reduce crime? A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. Vol. 52: 567–588. (Suggests that hot spots policing generates small but noteworthy crime reductions, and these crime control benefits diffuse into areas immediately surrounding targeted crime hot spots. Our analyses find that problem-oriented policing interventions generate larger mean effect sizes when compared to interventions that simply increase levels of traditional police actions in crime hot spots. [See also: Braga et al, 2018, “An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence.”])
Chalfin, Aaron, Michael LaForest, and Jacob Kaplan. 2021. “Can Precision Policing Reduce Gun Violence? Evidence from ‘Gang Takedowns’ in New York City.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. Vol 40(4), pp. 1047-1082. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pam.22323 (During the last decade, while national homicide rates have remained flat, New York City has experienced a second great crime decline, with gun violence declining by more than 50 percent since 2011. In this paper, we investigate one potential explanation for this dramatic and unexpected improvement in public safety—the New York Police Department’s shift to a more surgical form of “precision policing,” in which law enforcement focuses resources on a small number of individuals who are thought to be the primary drivers of violence. We study New York City’s campaign of “gang takedowns” in which suspected members of criminal gangs were arrested in highly coordinated raids and prosecuted on conspiracy charges. We show that gun violence in and around public housing communities fell by approximately one third in the first year after a gang takedown. Our estimates imply that gang takedowns explain nearly one quarter of the decline in gun violence in New York City’s public housing communities over the last eight years.)
Chalfin and McCrary. 2012. “The Effect of Police on Crime: New Evidence from U.S. Cities, 1960-2010.” https://eml.berkeley.edu//~jmccrary/chalfin_mccrary2012.pdf
Cheng, Cheng, Wei Long, 2019. “Improving police services: Evidence from the French Quarter Task Force.” Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 164, pp. 1-18, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.05.002. (This study sheds light on the improvement of police services by examining the French Quarter Task Force (FQTF) – an anti-crime program in New Orleans’ French Quarter. First, we provide new evidence that increasing police presence is effective in crime prevention. Our difference-in-differences estimates suggest that the FQTF, which increased police visibility in the French Quarter, reduced robberies, aggravated assaults, and thefts by 37.4%, 16.9%, and 13%, respectively. Second, our findings imply that the proper use of monitoring and incentive strategies has the potential to further improve police services. Exploiting the program’s change in management, we find that providing officers with more monitoring and performance incentives led the FQTF to reduce robberies by 22.12 and aggravated assaults by 5.56 each quarter.)
utamog t1_ixxc24c wrote
This should be stickied somewhere
Koboldsftw t1_ixwzdmw wrote
What criteria are you using to identify these studies as respectable and the sources cited by Vera as not respectable
drpvn t1_ixx0iwq wrote
Sigh.
Edit: lol, you blocked me.
Koboldsftw t1_ixx1081 wrote
Answer the question
[deleted] t1_ixw5z1v wrote
[removed]
drpvn t1_ixw611v wrote
There is a mountain of additional research. This is not controversial among non-activists.
[deleted] t1_ixwz357 wrote
[deleted]
Makeyoownmoney t1_ixujgth wrote
Take that biased, left-wing, Soros funded BS and shove it. Chicago? Better than NY, but the outskirts and its mayor are rubbish. The Russian paper selling dude with a radio station that tried to get everyone out of Rikers more quickly in the 60's. He died in 1971. The original message is long gone. Chicago beats NYC by having more rats. The human type too.
Koboldsftw t1_ixuk3y7 wrote
What
Makeyoownmoney t1_ixukdg2 wrote
Exactly. Thank you.
Koboldsftw t1_ixuo4b4 wrote
Instead of spewing weird nonsense why don’t you provide a source
LibertyNachos t1_ixut1qw wrote
we need officers to actually do their jobs instead of playing candy crush and refusing to answer calls because their feelings were hurt by some politician. if they were actual heroes they wouldn’t be so influenced by a corrupt union leader.
ripstep1 t1_ixvh2y2 wrote
Why police communities that hate them?
LibertyNachos t1_ixvj28r wrote
because they’re being paid to to do their jobs. that’s what a job is. if you want to protest doing your job, then quit instead of draining taxpayer resources.
ripstep1 t1_ixw4jjb wrote
Silent quitting seems to be supported by the work reform subreddit
LibertyNachos t1_iy1exm6 wrote
when it comes to essential services such as firefighting and law enforcement silent quitting is not acceptable for the public good, especially as well paid as these professionals are. no one dies if a teacher calls out sick.
ripstep1 t1_iy3o1ip wrote
Seems unfair. Why do teachers get more workers rights in that respect than “essential workers “. Seems to me like you are playing rules for thee but not for me.
LibertyNachos t1_iy3o5ar wrote
I’m not a teacher.
ripstep1 t1_iy5mjsf wrote
I never said you were. I don’t see why teachers can silent quit but nurses cannot.
LibertyNachos t1_iy5q0v7 wrote
Honestly, I don’t believe most teachers and nurses would do the same kind of silent quitting the NYPD is notorious for. they seem to employ people of better morals who don’t put their paycheck above the public good.
BiblioPhil t1_ixw0bao wrote
The communities hate them for a good reason. Like the fact that those communities pay them six-figure pensions and they still won't do their job unless they have carte blanche to crack skulls with no repercussions.
ripstep1 t1_ixw4bhn wrote
Then they won’t police them lmao. Same thing would happen if communities hated doctors
drpvn t1_ixw87kr wrote
The communities actually don’t hate the police.
BiblioPhil t1_ixx92j0 wrote
Distrustful is a better term. And decidedly not aligned with conservatives on policies concerning police. Wanting more police presence isn't a mandate for stop and frisk and doesn't mean they don't support measures to increase police accountability.
Grass8989 t1_ixwblaf wrote
The communities don’t hate the police, or else they wouldn’t have voted for Eric Adams, a cop, in the Democratic Mayoral primary.
BiblioPhil t1_ixwr96q wrote
If those people wanted "tough on crime" candidates who promised to use scorched-earth police tactics to "clean up" the streets, they had plenty of Republican candidates they could have supported.
Adams might seem pro-police compared to the progressive Dem field, but on a national level he absolutely wasn't close. He wasn't even supported by the PBA, which regarded him as a police critic and thorn in their side.
In any GOP primary he would have instantly been branded "soft on crime." Reddit's perspective is so skewed on this topic.
Grass8989 t1_ixwrvp9 wrote
He literally ran on a “tougher on crime” platform. That was a major part of his message and campaign, so much so that most on this sub labels him a Republican.
BiblioPhil t1_ixx8wb7 wrote
It's like you missed my entire point about "tough on crime" being relative.
And you're literally using this sub's views of Eric Adams to rebut my point about why this sub is wrong about Eric Adams.
longknives t1_ixut9se wrote
“Police do not prevent crime” is factual and not contrary to research or common sense. When was the last time you experienced cops preventing a crime? The only thing it’s contrary to is the vague idea people have that cops are probably out there preventing some crimes that are probably happening somewhere.
drpvn t1_ixw7jto wrote
People have been researching this for 50 years. The copypasta you see in your instagram and Twitter feeds is not research.
ripstep1 t1_ixvh8rx wrote
It prevents crime all the time. Many people choose not to shoplift because of the threat of consequences. I would be commiting WAY more crimes if the police disappeared. Etc.
drpvn t1_ixw7l6w wrote
These people are just brain dead.
Lucid108 t1_ixrb9gp wrote
Less that and "put the resources into solving crime at the root, as opposed to giving everything to cops and expecting things will be any different."
drpvn t1_ixrbx7n wrote
NYC spends a lot on police, but I don’t think 10% is the budget is unreasonable, and it’s certainly not “everything.”
Lucid108 t1_ixredgz wrote
Given how many other necessary public services are gutted as cops get near-constant increases to their budget, it seems to me that we are not allocating the resources into preventing crime, so much as creating it via societal negligence and then throwing cops at the problem.
drpvn t1_ixrepa9 wrote
If you want to see near-constant increases, look at the education budget. It is almost 40% of the entire budget.
Lucid108 t1_ixrhltt wrote
Education is among the most consistently underfunded social services. Teachers are certainly not nearly as well-paid/well-compensated as cops and they serve a variety of critically necessary roles.
drpvn t1_ixrhqjw wrote
The education budget is $38 billion this year. It’s not underfunded.
Koboldsftw t1_ixsjeog wrote
What part of the city budget do you think we should use to fund schools instead?
drpvn t1_ixslalb wrote
There’s no magic number but there is no way that ~$35 billion is “underfunding.” People talk about it as if it’s draconian austerity. That’s ridiculous.
Koboldsftw t1_ixsll3e wrote
Do you know how many students there are in New York City? It’s like super easy for $35 billion to be underfunding.
drpvn t1_ixt82cz wrote
Yes, approximately a million if you include charter school students (which you should because charter school costs are included). So that’s approximately $35,000 per student. If that’s under-funding, I’d like to know how much is enough. $100,000 per student?
c3p-bro t1_ixrbuk2 wrote
Remind me the profession of the guy who got beat to death
Lucid108 t1_ixrdelo wrote
That has nothing to do with getting to the root of the problem of crime. You don't deal with a weed by chopping up the leaves, you deal with it by the root. Same thing with criminality. Cops get billions of dollars of taxpayer money every year, with the budget ballooning for them all the time, while other necessary services which would prevent crime entirely are severely underfunded, at best (bc as it turns out most people don't do crime for fun, but out of desperation).
It's a tragedy when people are killed, but adding more cops does not solve the underlying problems even a little and worthwhile to stop pretending otherwise.
drpvn t1_ixre1y7 wrote
It’s a sad thing but some people are effectively bad down to their roots.
Lucid108 t1_ixrjzhx wrote
Respectfully, I think that essentializing people to "bad down to their roots" a cop-out to avoid having to ask the questions that it would take to legitimately address questions concerning justice and the treatment of criminals in general (even down to the non-violent offenders bc lets be honest when ppl think criminal, they think the "bad to the root" kind of person).
Like, I'm not about to say that people aren't capable of brutal and heinous things, given the wrong situation, I'm sure everyone can be. That said, basing foundational building blocks of our society on just punishing the worst people we can think of leaves the imagination blank for providing help for victims and, again, just preventing these tragedies from occurring in the first place. When all you have is a hammer (cops and prisons) every problem looks like a nail (criminal).
drpvn t1_ixrlmz5 wrote
Cops and prisons are not all we have and have never been all we have.
Thinking you’re going to eradicate crime by any means—whether by aggressive policing or by “addressing root causes”—is as foolish as thinking you’re going to eradicate any social problem. There has always been crime and there will always be crime. We have to manage it as best we can by using all society’s tools, which include policing, to strike the best balance we can.
thisisntmineIfoundit t1_ixrfjux wrote
Has it occurred to you that when a young man or woman are being encouraged to contribute to a crime (shoplifting / raiding a store) or joining a gang, you know, before they have ever committed a crime aka the "root", if the message is "you will be caught and go to jail" and not "people don't care, won't report the crime, and the cops won't arrest you and the judge won't prosecute" that mayyyyybe that could be, oh I don't know, discouraging people to ever get into that kind of crowd???
Or are you one of those insisting folks raiding Rite Aid need bread for their family?
Lucid108 t1_ixrhbgp wrote
>Has it occurred to you that when a young man or woman are being encouraged to contribute to a crime (shoplifting / raiding a store) or joining a gang, you know, before they have ever committed a crime aka the "root", if the message is "you will be caught and go to jail" and not "people don't care, won't report the crime, and the cops won't arrest you and the judge won't prosecute" that mayyyyybe that could be, oh I don't know, discouraging people to ever get into that kind of crowd???
This looks to me like a very good example of circular logic. This isn't hard. If people are committing crimes, it's literally scientifically supported, that they do so due to lack of resources/legitimate avenues to meet their needs. Take care of people's most basic needs and you'd see a huge reduction in crime, abuse victims could leave abusers safely, etc. etc. Just having the looming threat of prison hasn't solved crime in the several hundred years we've been doing it, what makes you think it'll magically work with a few extra billion dollars?
drpvn t1_ixrmpv6 wrote
TIL that “it’s literally scientifically supported” that rapists rape “due to lack of resources/legitimate avenues to meet their needs.”
Lucid108 t1_ixrpdam wrote
Your glibness aside, rape is absolutely about power and is usually perpetrated against people who do not have the necessary support structures to leave the situation. Speaking of which, you ever look up the stats on how many sex crimes cops have solved and how often people who go to them for protection against these sorts of things are dismissed by the people who are supposedly there to protect and serve? How 'bout that 40% statistic about cops, since we're on the subject?
drpvn t1_ixrr27g wrote
Trying to give women support structures to help them leave violent relationships is good but it will not eradicate rape.
No I haven’t looked into the “40%” thing. I do know it’s copypasta so I assume there are massive caveats that need to be added to it.
NashvilleHot t1_ixsi6ju wrote
You just posted up thread about striking a balance as best we can. And here you’re saying it’s good but not worth doing because it won’t eradicate rape. 🤷♂️
drpvn t1_ixsljet wrote
You’re misreading me. I’m saying nothing can eradicate crime. That’s why we need policing. To deal with, you know, rapists, for example.
[deleted] t1_iy68ir2 wrote
[deleted]
utamog t1_ixxct7d wrote
Crime apologists like you are literally what made me switch to being a republicans (Still voted Adams however). I believe in body autonomy, and separation of church and state but this violence apologist shit is by far the most deranged danger to society I can think of.
Lucid108 t1_iy5suqb wrote
If you're gonna make an example out of me, at least try to understand my point.
thisisntmineIfoundit t1_ixroww9 wrote
>Take care of people's most basic needs and you'd see a huge reduction in crime
This looks to me like a very good example of logic from someone who does not live in the real world.
We have a huge safety net and it's getting bigger. It would take too long to explain how bloated and unaudited our social benefit systems are and list the examples of people who don't need it receiving help and sitting on their ass. Not to mention in cities like SF where you are definitely fully taken care of if you're in bad shape, crime is worse than ever.
What's really funny about this is you claim cracking down on crime doesn't change things at all when NYC is the way it is today versus 10/20/30 years ago because of drastically different policies from different administrations having an effect.
Lucid108 t1_ixrq4lj wrote
Yeah, not like there are systemic barriers to a lot of the aid people need or anything
longknives t1_ixutqlj wrote
Absolute LOL that you think we have a remotely adequate safety net. Talk about not living in the real world.
c3p-bro t1_ixrjpt9 wrote
Yea that’s a lot of words to avoid answering a question with a one word response. What was his profession?
Lucid108 t1_ixrkcnf wrote
What does his profession have to do specifically with my original post?
c3p-bro t1_ixrne1f wrote
I’d ask why you’re avoiding the question but I already know the answer
Lucid108 t1_ixrppmm wrote
Right back at ya
c3p-bro t1_ixrq6jx wrote
He was a social worker that was supposed to replace the police once they are abolished. It’s extremely relevant to your original comment since that’s the future you want. See? Two can play the strawman game.
Lucid108 t1_ixrre0b wrote
So the fact that this occurred the way that it did is meant to invalidate the idea that police need to be defunded and other programs need the resources to combat the social problems that lead to violent outcomes?
c3p-bro t1_ixrslb0 wrote
Yes I think the fact that the social workers meant to replace the defunded police are being beat to death in street somewhat invalidates the argument.
You’re not riding around on expensive toys beating people who cross you to death out of desperation or poverty. You’re doing it because you’re garbage who has no place in society.
Defunding the police does not fix these types - they are beyond help. If you think otherwise we fundamentally disagree on this.
I just hope you never find yourself in the same situation he did.
user_joined_just_now t1_ixrmdl4 wrote
> most people don't do crime for fun, but out of desperation
When you beat a guy to death with 30 of your friends while riding ATVs that cost thousands of dollars "out of desperation". Progressive moment.
The vast majority of poor people manage to get by without committing violent crimes.
Let us suppose that as part of an inquiry into the needs of NYC's most desperate, the city sent out a few hundred people with credit cards to walk around with at night as robbery bait. Where do you think these credit cards would be swiped after being taken? Do you genuinely think that most of them would be used to buy groceries and pay rent?
raifikii t1_ixrewkb wrote
I’d rather they solve the crime now then get to the root. I’m not holding my breath for City, local, or federal government to make effective changes at the grassroots level whose benefits we may not see for a generation+ in the future. If we can do a better job at stopping crime and violence now, why wouldn’t we? These two strategies aren’t mutually exclusive.
Lucid108 t1_ixrifpg wrote
I'd argue that the two are mutually exclusive bc cops are fiercely protective of the power that they have (ex. The time the police went on strike bc greater oversight was on the table) and a lot of what it would take to prevent crime would mean, at the very least, a large-scale reallocation of resources from police to a variety of other needed public services (like housing, mental health, education/extra cirricular activities for kids). At least, if the goal is prevention of crime and rehabilitation after the fact, as opposed to just outright punishment, which the cops are quite well-equipped to do
NashvilleHot t1_ixsicwt wrote
Might want to take a look at crime clearance rates. Not holding my breath on cops solving crimes now either.
user_joined_just_now t1_ixrvbdn wrote
Those 30 individuals beat that guy to death because of socioeconomic factors. What we need to do is address those factors by increasing their access to employment, education, housing, and public pools. Maybe throw in a blowie or two. Effectively tackling crime requires addressing its root causes, not simply taking a punitive approach that continues to perpetuate both mass incarceration and the cycle of crime.
[deleted] t1_ixxcger wrote
[removed]
utamog t1_ixxbvfi wrote
Based as all fuck my man
D1ckChowder t1_ixr4tb8 wrote
You’re missing nothing. This is article could have just been two lines: Police are users on the App. Some organizations don’t like it and are making a puff about their misunderstanding.
BeachBulliesOfficial t1_ixqobn7 wrote
Yeah, we've already seen how some video evidence doesnt change the way the cops act anyway 🤣
Tsui_Brooklyn t1_ixqu00y wrote
My guess is they don’t want the type of same stuff that the some people in Asian community are currently feeling
drpvn t1_ixquenm wrote
What stuff?
Tsui_Brooklyn t1_ixqumnv wrote
You must be new to the sub lol or really want me to say it…
Video evidence of crimes can lead to stereotyping of a group by some bc of the frequency of which “other” group they think is committing crimes against “them”. it’s that simple
burnshimself t1_ixqv9gq wrote
I mean I think that bias is already very ingrained without videos. Don’t think having video evidence moves the needle.
drpvn t1_ixr09ud wrote
I just can’t imagine giving a shit what the race or ethnicity of the asshole who stole my package is.
MattJFarrell t1_ixs862u wrote
I can't imagine the NYPD actually responding to a package theft
drpvn t1_ixsb4zk wrote
There’s that, too. As if NYPD is going to be flooding the zone in response to “suspicious behavior” reports.
BiblioPhil t1_ixw0xpp wrote
I can...if the perp is black. Which brings us back to the main point.
World_Chaos t1_ixs6c8t wrote
Statistics are racist
RedditWibel t1_ixszeii wrote
No, people misrepresenting statistics purposefully are racist.
Now most of the time people aren’t doing as such purposefully. They just innocently don’t know what they are doing.
Koboldsftw t1_ixsj161 wrote
People can also post clips of things that are not crimes but might look like crimes. They are more likely to give people that they do not think look like criminals the benefit of the doubt here, and withhold it from people that they do think look like criminals. This is profiling. Often it happens on racial lines.
drpvn t1_ixslgr3 wrote
What’s not a crime that looks like a crime?
Koboldsftw t1_ixsm74m wrote
You can’t actually be serious
drpvn t1_ixt2sj8 wrote
Thx good talk
stevethezissou t1_ixqydwh wrote
NYTs coverage agenda, that’s what you’re missing. This is just another conduit through which to get evidence to PD.
[deleted] t1_ixqymtr wrote
[deleted]
asma729 t1_ixu9dhk wrote
you know why
julsey414 t1_ixs3h83 wrote
Just as Giuliani era policies like broken windows policing and stop and frisk disproportionately affected communities of color, easy access to reporting “suspicious characters” will likely lead to an increase in racial profiling from citizens afraid of black people in hoodies.
drpvn t1_ixs3ue4 wrote
Like I said, it’s just a higher tech version of “don’t call 911 because policing disproportionately affects POC.” Unfortunately, most of the 911 calls are probably coming from POC.
Danjour t1_ixr9kxt wrote
Not sure about NYT, but it makes sense to me. cops will use whatever they can get their hands on to make the arrests that they want to make. More data for cops means more opportunities to profile.
Similar but not the same, never talk to the police.
drpvn t1_ixraxkb wrote
Should I report crimes? That’s giving more data to cops. It’s also talking to the police.
Danjour t1_ixrb86f wrote
Watch that video if you haven’t. If you do feel compelled, do it entirely anonymously. If the cops come to your door to ask questions, ignore them entirely.
I don’t interact with police officers, you shouldn’t ether. I used to think this type of stance was absurd, but after watching that video I completely changed my mind.
drpvn t1_ixrbk73 wrote
45 minutes, no way.
Danjour t1_ixrcj2c wrote
I find it entertaining. The lawyer and the cop that speak to the class are pretty well spoken and kind of funny.
The tl;dr of it is anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. If it ever comes down to your word against theirs, you will lose. All you can do is help them, you can never help yourself by talking to the police so there is zero reason to do so.
Another Redditor TLDR’d the video as this.
“The first part by the professor states there is literally no circumstance where talking to the police helps you. If you say something that helps them make a case against you, they use it. If you say something that would save yourself, they ignore it. He gives several examples where seeming less and less talking to police would seemingly not get you convicted but then shows real life examples where even the tiniest "i was never in tuscon in february" statement can be used to get a conviction against you.
The second part is from a detective who states everything the professor said is true, hes legally allowed to lie to suspects to get them to confess, and gives a few details on the tricks he uses to get people to talk and get themselves prosecuted”
Yeah, don’t talk to the cops, they’re not your friends.
drpvn t1_ixrd5j7 wrote
I agree if we’re talking about a situation where there is a chance that you will conceivably be or become the target. And doubly so if you are stopped or arrested by the police.
But if people are victims of crime, they absolutely should report it—assuming, of course, that they themselves are not engaging in criminal conduct that police would find as interesting as or more interesting than the crime you’re reporting. Apart from that circumstance, telling people not to report crimes because you can’t trust the police is paranoid and harmful.
Danjour t1_ixrg75h wrote
That’s the thing, every situation with the cops can escalate to an arrest. You just don’t know.
I’m not saying don’t report any crimes, I’m saying don’t interact with the police. Call 911 if you have to, they aren’t the police.
Obviously if you get in a car crash and you need a report for insurance, you’re going to need to do that. If cops are going door to door asking for information about a string of robberies, fuck no. I’m not answering the door. I’m not asking cops for help, if i get pulled over I’m giving the least amount of information possible.
If i witness a murder or a rape, I’ll call 911 but no, I will not stick around to be questioned.
drpvn t1_ixrgu9t wrote
So you wouldn’t help the police identify a suspect in a rape you witnessed?
GnomeChomski t1_ixrlm41 wrote
That's exactly what he means.
Danjour t1_ixrkz72 wrote
Only if compelled by a subpoena-
GnomeChomski t1_ixrleo4 wrote
Cops are apes. If you report a crime, don't identify yourself.
doubledipinyou t1_ixrcqw6 wrote
It's a ten year old video that doesn't even specifically mention NYPD. Strange counter point from op
Danjour t1_ixrgk52 wrote
It doesn’t need to, these are universal concepts for the USA.
Unable-Ad3852 t1_ixqo895 wrote
I thought they could request records straight from Amazon w/o a warrant.
Refreshingpudding t1_ixspgck wrote
It's very rarely approved
>Users can ignore or even block these inquiries from their feed. But the police can still obtain private footage through a court order or directly through Ring. Such requests to the company are for life-threatening emergencies and are regularly denied, a Ring spokeswoman, Mai Nguyen, said.
>Ring has provided footage to law enforcement in at least 11 instances through July of this year, according to Amazon.
michaelmvm t1_ixqi5al wrote
paywall, anyone got the article?
k1lk1 OP t1_ixqno1a wrote
I posted the whole thing in a comment here. That's what we usually do for NYT articles.
drpvn t1_ixqnzqe wrote
This comment?
Mustard_on_tap t1_ixr4xcn wrote
thisisntmineIfoundit t1_ixre8h9 wrote
Paste any article address into archive.is to go around it.
[deleted] t1_ixqjedx wrote
[removed]
NYY657545 t1_ixqjmn6 wrote
What concerns have activists raised about racial profiling and police surveillance?
Three years ago, Vice news spent two months tracking the content of the app within a five-mile area covering Lower Manhattan, most of Brooklyn, and parts of Queens and Hoboken, N.J., and found that people of color made up the majority of posts tagged as “suspicious activity.”
It echoed a pattern of concerning behavior that had plagued other neighborhood watch platforms, like Nextdoor and Citizen, which civil liberty groups had warned could give a false impression of rising crime and lead to racial profiling and wrongful arrests.
“The N.Y.P.D. is effectively deputizing app users,” Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said about Neighbors. “Crowdsourced surveillance and suspicion, like the kind that takes place on Ring’s Neighbors app, is influenced by users’ racial biases and other prejudices.”
The city Police Department, which developed one of the country’s most sophisticated surveillance apparatuses after 9/11, has a well-documented history of surveilling minority communities. .
In 2018, the Police Department settled a lawsuit over the surveillance of Muslims in New Jersey through a decade-long spying program in which officers eavesdropped on conversations in cafes and designated mosques as potential terrorist organizations. According to the suit, police officers collected license plates and took video and photographs at mosques as part of their covert surveillance.
And in a 2021 report, Amnesty International detailed the police’s capacity to view footage from over 15,000 CCTV cameras installed across Bronx, Manhattan and Brooklyn alone, with a disproportionate number of those cameras located in communities of color.
The Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, a privacy and civil rights group based in New York, has condemned the police’s partnership with Neighbors.
“This sort of crowdsourced surveillance will only lead to more wrongful arrests, racial profiling and police violence,” Albert Fox Cahn, the organization’s executive director, said in a press statement. “Most New Yorkers would second guess installing these home surveillance tools if they understood how easily these systems could be used against them and their families by police.”
michaelmvm t1_ixqn0sn wrote
thank you
[deleted] t1_ixqjktc wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_ixrj51v wrote
[removed]
pitufette t1_ixu95vl wrote
Click on browser bar, click on reader option from drop down menu
[deleted] t1_ixr5oz1 wrote
[deleted]
LouisSeize t1_ixrwh2w wrote
How dare they charge money.
seejordan3 t1_ixsounl wrote
I don't disagree, but also fuck the NYT for "both sides" garbage.
drpvn t1_ixqlexk wrote
Google “how to bypass paywall” and you’ll never need to ask that question again.
michaelmvm t1_ixqmu73 wrote
12ft.io doesn't work for the NYT and neither does incognito nor this one other browser extension i have. NYT and WaPo paywalls are on another level.
CollinHell t1_ixqrsdo wrote
Disabling JavaScript in uBlock Origin works for NYTimes.
drpvn t1_ixqnf7u wrote
Ah. I subscribe to both so I wasn’t aware.
[deleted] t1_ixqmumz wrote
miamor_Jada t1_ixr1gb8 wrote
Nassau County already do this. They post on ring to alert neighbors about potential theft and crime in the area.
I'm sure they also have access to the videos posted on the app.
As for racial profiling, unless the NYPD will specifically be going after persons of interests of a specific race group, then, they'll be destroying their trust with the public and their promise to figh crime.
In the past, NYPD's Stop & Frisk program appears to target a large group of people who were black, basically kickstarting the racial profiling claim and community members not trusting them.
I do think NYPD on ring will help decrease pirate thieves by a lot. Why? The faces are VERY clear on camera. A lot of people would be caught.
k1lk1 OP t1_ixr4fd3 wrote
There's basically no consequences to getting caught though.
doubledipinyou t1_ixrd0rg wrote
Yes 100% but that's on our DAs and politic system. The cops can still do their jobs and we should expect that of them yet hold political positions accountable
mowotlarx t1_ixrxmes wrote
No, that's on cops. Cases are built by cops and now they collect evidence (or don't). The DA can't do anything when presented with the corrupt garbage NYPD presents them, before they send their best to lie on the stand only to lead to cases being thrown anyway.
Koboldsftw t1_ixsjmnc wrote
The trust is destroyed, you said it yourself
dingadangdang t1_ixt2bwy wrote
Ring as a company, and the CEO or inventor, is full on pro police having access to your account-it was this way before Amazon bought it and I don't really care, but some of you may want to Google it and get more info. I read an in depth article, and have no idea where it was, but if you're concerned about your civil liberties I wouldn't use Ring. They can't get me for shit so doesn't matter to me. I'm too old to care anymore. No one is coming for your guns Toby. I'm a leftwing liberal in a Red State and I just don't give a shit. You can buy guns, fireworks, weed in most states and ride your motorcycle.
My concern is oppression of minorities and voting rights. I'll be dead in 25 years. The environment is f'd and God bless the rest of you cuz we all are gonna need it to get thru the shit storm a brewing.
KidAstoria t1_ixsfzkx wrote
Woman gets assaulted and raped.
Police takes report and lets public know to search for suspect.
Anti-police haters call them liars and seeks to protect the suspect.
NetQuarterLatte t1_ixr7vko wrote
>“This sort of crowdsourced surveillance will only lead to more wrongful arrests, racial profiling and police violence,” Albert Fox Cahn, the organization’s executive director
Albert Fox Cahn made that claim without providing any evidence to support it. Why is Hurubie Meko from the NYT printing such things?
Is there any editor worth the salt working in the NYT these days?
​
>“The NYPD has never been a good neighbor to most New Yorkers, and this move will only put more people at risk,”
Albert Fox Cahn is just the typical propagandist who shares responsibility for spreading and amplifying harmful distrust in the NYPD. The NYT should not be giving air to such narratives that disproportionately harm the most vulnerable segments of our population.
thisisntmineIfoundit t1_ixrhm52 wrote
I passed out candy on Halloween in bk this year. I saw not one, not two, but three little kids that belonged to black/brown parents dressed as cops. One was specifically NYPD. But yeah they're just cowering in fear every day and hate NYPD /s
Grass8989 t1_ixrku45 wrote
The vast majority of working class PoC don’t hate the police as much as the media likes to portray. If that was the case low income PoC wouldn’t have overwhelmingly voted for Eric Adams (a cop) in the Democratic primary for Mayor.
Silver-Hat175 t1_ixy1tsm wrote
why find out trust in police polling and similar research when you can make up a fact nobody can verify to prove your feelings are factual. the deep thoughts of right wingers who troll the internet in groups every hour of the day.
ultrab1ue t1_ixtv5mf wrote
Ye. F the nyt.
KaiDaiz t1_ixrxwue wrote
No different NYPD or any police agency posting on twitter or any other social media app asking for tips, be on look out for x wanted individual OR viewing videos & doing their own sub analysis of criminal activity posted by users on said apps.
fizzymynizzy t1_ixsjxsj wrote
Police state. Like it or not.
[deleted] t1_ixqh51r wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_ixqla8v wrote
[deleted]
LouisSeize t1_ixry36g wrote
>Users can ignore or even block these inquiries from their feed. But the police can still obtain private footage through a court order or directly through Ring. Such requests to the company are for life-threatening emergencies and are regularly denied, a Ring spokeswoman, Mai Nguyen, said. [emphasis added]
What?! There's a life-threatening emergency and you deny the video?
bttrflyr t1_ixucezw wrote
Don’t trust the police, they are not here to serve and protect you.
ripstep1 t1_ixvhnyz wrote
Yeah I’m harassed by police all the time. Can barely make it ten feet from my front door.
Silver-Hat175 t1_ixy1pej wrote
the internet has too many conservative cult members posting the same predictable comments every day. find another hobby
ripstep1 t1_ixz20yk wrote
Like the one above mine?
SnooTomatoes4307 t1_ixqxb1m wrote
yes, that's why Ring is always outward facing and never in your home. We have other Alexa devices for that.
Loxodontox t1_ixrdcnl wrote
I simply don’t want the NYPD on my Ring, if I had it. I’d want a private company that is an intermediary. I am not comfortable with the cops having constant access to all
drpvn t1_ixrm1u2 wrote
So don’t make it publicly available.
Loxodontox t1_ixrq9xm wrote
Got it
josiahscribes64 t1_ixs7ua3 wrote
NYPD supporters are 🤡
drpvn t1_ixqmgao wrote
I don't understand the racial profiling concern. Users can post clips of crimes and NYPD can access those. What's the problem with that? How does video evidence of a crime cause racial profiling? If I take video of someone stealing a package, and I give that to the police, is that causing racial profiling?
And NYPD can ask for footage and tips on the app. They already do that today. How does police asking for tips cause racial profiling? What am I missing?
To me this just sounds like a higher-tech version of the argument that people shouldn't call 911 because it increases policing.