Police abuse

oftenreading said:

show previous quotes

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

I wasn't suggesting the police were solely responsible for the reduction of crime. Of course the reduction is multifaceted.

Are you suggesting enhanced policing tactics have nothing to do with it?

Yes, actually, I am suggesting exactly that. Policing tactics are all over the map in the areas that have seen a reduction in crime rates. Even within the US policing tactics varied widely among cities that saw the same reductions in crime.

An excerpt from a larger article talking about various theories:

Roman, however, is unsure if policing impacts crime rates as much as its proponents argue. He points out that three cities that experienced large crime declines—Washington, D.C., New York City, and San Diego—pursued vastly different policing strategies. In New York, the size of the police force quadrupled in the 1990s and the use of stop, question, and frisk created an “oppositional” relationship between neighborhoods and officers, Roman says. In San Diego, crime declined without a significant increase in the number of police on the beat. Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., police chief Cathy Lanier has critiqued hot spot policing and stop, question, and frisk and has focused on community-oriented policing, even speaking about the need to hire officers who display “empathy.”

Well then I'd humbly suggest you are wrong.

I mean... gas emissions might very well be the determining factor, but others, such as the writer of the piece PJHawks submitted, would suggest otherwise:

"This crime decrease is the result of a policing revolution that began in New York and spread nationally. Police now fanatically gather and analyze up-to-the-minute crime data and devise tactics accordingly. Top brass holds commanders accountable for crime on their watch. For decades, the rap against the police was that they ignored crime in minority neighborhoods. The policing revolution now keeps departments focused like a laser beam on where people are most being victimized, and that is in minority communities."

Even Roman, who you quoted above is 'unsure' of the impact revised policing strategies have had on the astronomical drop in crime rates.

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

show previous quotes

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

I wasn't suggesting the police were solely responsible for the reduction of crime. Of course the reduction is multifaceted.

Are you suggesting enhanced policing tactics have nothing to do with it?

Yes, actually, I am suggesting exactly that. Policing tactics are all over the map in the areas that have seen a reduction in crime rates. Even within the US policing tactics varied widely among cities that saw the same reductions in crime.

An excerpt from a larger article talking about various theories:

Roman, however, is unsure if policing impacts crime rates as much as its proponents argue. He points out that three cities that experienced large crime declines—Washington, D.C., New York City, and San Diego—pursued vastly different policing strategies. In New York, the size of the police force quadrupled in the 1990s and the use of stop, question, and frisk created an “oppositional” relationship between neighborhoods and officers, Roman says. In San Diego, crime declined without a significant increase in the number of police on the beat. Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., police chief Cathy Lanier has critiqued hot spot policing and stop, question, and frisk and has focused on community-oriented policing, even speaking about the need to hire officers who display “empathy.”

Well then I'd humbly suggest you are wrong.

I mean... gas emissions might very well be the determining factor, but others, such as the writer of the piece PJHawks submitted, would suggest otherwise:

"This crime decrease is the result of a policing revolution that began in New York and spread nationally. Police now fanatically gather and analyze up-to-the-minute crime data and devise tactics accordingly. Top brass holds commanders accountable for crime on their watch. For decades, the rap against the police was that they ignored crime in minority neighborhoods. The policing revolution now keeps departments focused like a laser beam on where people are most being victimized, and that is in minority communities."

Even Roman, who you quoted above is 'unsure' of the impact revised policing strategies have had on the astronomical drop in crime rates.

I find it difficult to credit that anyone can believe that an international decline in crime that includes countries with policing strategies as diverse as the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia, Estonia, Poland and Japan can be traced to a change in policing in New York. I'm certainly in favour of good policing that's "accountable for crime on their watch". And okay, I'll accept that technological and training improvement have likely improved the efficacy of police, particularly in larger cities, but that's icing on the cake, not the cake itself. I did not see that the author of the article PJHawks submitted included any evidence for that her assertion, and it's an assertion that's largely been proven incorrect.

oftenreading said:

show previous quotes

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

^^^

Well you've reversed direction somewhat- reluctantly conceding that 'technological and training improvement have likely improved the efficacy of police'.

Outside of opinion, do you have any backing that lends support for your denial of the assertion that advanced police work is largely responsible for the significant drop in crime the US has experienced? You stated it's 'an assertion that's largely been proven incorrect'.

How has this been proven?

Edit: and who's taking any credit for international decline in crime rates? The article referenced the US only.

Yes, exactly.

My point is that the decline in US crime rates mirrors the international decline in crime rates; thus, no theory that proposes a purely American (or even North American) reason for this decline can be correct. Articles that write about this as if the decline in crime rate is solely an American achievement are missing the international context. Specific changes in police practice can only be a factor if those same changes were made in all the nations in which declining crime rates have been seen, and this is not the case.

This would mean that all significant variables among the said countries are homogeneous.

We know this is far from the truth; therefore, we can look intrinsically for explanations without discrediting or dismissing them so eagerly.

gimmesometruth27 said:

I quickly shifted my head to the right so you never actually got me.

rr165892 said:

Thanks for posting PJHawks.That article is on the money and has mirrored my whole stance on the BLM movement.I couldn't be in more agreement.

That community needs to look deep in the mirror and start to fix from within.First and foremost.

This is what Dan- o has been saying for months here,but he gets called a racist and a dirty cop.Its not rascist if you look at the numbers and data and try to find solutions based on fact not emotion over media sensationalized hyperbole.Time for a little less PC and more common sense

It's not Black on Black crime. It's poor and uneducated crime against poor and uneducated.

Shit schools, discrimination, loss of manufacturing jobs, etc etc.

We are all products of our environment. We aren't special. Just lucky.

callen said:

show previous quotes

rr165892 said:

Thanks for posting PJHawks.That article is on the money and has mirrored my whole stance on the BLM movement.I couldn't be in more agreement.

That community needs to look deep in the mirror and start to fix from within.First and foremost.

This is what Dan- o has been saying for months here,but he gets called a racist and a dirty cop.Its not rascist if you look at the numbers and data and try to find solutions based on fact not emotion over media sensationalized hyperbole.Time for a little less PC and more common sense

It's not Black on Black crime. It's poor and uneducated crime against poor and uneducated.

Shit schools, discrimination, loss of manufacturing jobs, etc etc.

We are all products of our environment. We aren't special. Just lucky.

that's too easy of an excuse and not fair to the people who do grow up poor and uneducated who aren't criminals and achieve to change their environment for the good of themselves and their families. the stats are the stats.

callen said:

show previous quotes

pjhawks said:

callen said:

rr165892 said:

Thanks for posting PJHawks.That article is on the money and has mirrored my whole stance on the BLM movement.I couldn't be in more agreement.

That community needs to look deep in the mirror and start to fix from within.First and foremost.

This is what Dan- o has been saying for months here,but he gets called a racist and a dirty cop.Its not rascist if you look at the numbers and data and try to find solutions based on fact not emotion over media sensationalized hyperbole.Time for a little less PC and more common sense

It's not Black on Black crime. It's poor and uneducated crime against poor and uneducated.

Shit schools, discrimination, loss of manufacturing jobs, etc etc.

We are all products of our environment. We aren't special. Just lucky.

that's too easy of an excuse and not fair to the people who do grow up poor and uneducated who aren't criminals and achieve to change their environment for the good of themselves and their families. the stats are the stats.

It's not an excuse. Think it's a coincidence that humans growing up in affluent areas do better than those who grow up in the projects? I say your position is an excuse to hate AND elevate yourself to a position of being better when you had nothing to do with your success or lack of.

how is providing an article and said stats considered hate? it's this type of rhetoric why the problem can't be discussed rationally. you don't know me at all and yet you've labeled me as a 'hater' because i posted an article with actual verified crime statistics. as if telling the truth is somehow hateful..

do i think it is a coincidence that humans growing up in affluent areas do better? - no i do not BUT that doesn't mean that those in less affluent areas can't achieve. Having an attitude that those in those less affluent areas are destined to fail helps perpetuate the myth of helplessness. many in those same situations have achieved albeit under much harder circumstances than many others.

callen said:

Think it's a cop out to say "hey if they just tried harder", Then feel free to bash the folks that have shit environment. Realize it makes one feel all warm and fuzzy but it's shit. The whole black on black crime rant is racism. We're all humans. We are all products of our environment.

you really don't have to work very hard NOT to murder someone or commit a violent crime. not everyone in 'shit environments' as you label them does those things. We are all humans...some of us just treat other humans better than others.

callen said:

show previous quotes

pjhawks said:

callen said:

Think it's a cop out to say "hey if they just tried harder", Then feel free to bash the folks that have shit environment. Realize it makes one feel all warm and fuzzy but it's shit. The whole black on black crime rant is racism. We're all humans. We are all products of our environment.

you really don't have to work very hard NOT to murder someone or commit a violent crime. not everyone in 'shit environments' as you label them does those things. We are all humans...some of us just treat other humans better than others.

The haves have not a fkn clue.

You aren't special. If you were born in that environment you would react the same.

they how do you explain those born in that environment that don't act the same? please enlighten us.

and I am special.