5 ms·

Isn't it the police's responsibility to prevent violent crime? Perhaps they just need more policing. How does a shop prevent a person from shooting somebody els

Isn't it the police's responsibility to prevent violent crime? Perhaps they just need more policing. How does a shop prevent a person from shooting somebody else in its carpark? Even then, won't they just shoot each other in the street outside the carpark instead? Without the shop, won't they shoot each other at home? It's hard to see that it's causing crime rather than just being the place where inevitable crime happens more often.

chii 6y ago
> prevent violent crime? well, i don't think that's ever the mandate of the police - they are there to punish after the fact, not prevent before the event.
- lordnacho 6y ago
  This is like saying the health authorities have no interest in what you eat, they just treat you after you show up with a heart attack.
- ARandomerDude 6y ago
  This is an overly simplistic view. If law enforcement isn't a deterrent, even in principle, why do it?
  - baddox 6y ago
    The fact that the view leads you to ask “why do it?” does not mean that it is an overly simplistic view.
- cheesecracker 6y ago
  What a nonsensical belief.
  - donw 6y ago
    A belief upheld by the supreme court: Warren v. District of Columbia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzale...
    - aliante 6y ago
      Nope. Just that police are not liable for failing to prevent crime.
      - donw 6y ago
        How are those different in practice? (Genuine question, no snark intended)
        aliante 6y ago
        If I blow up a production system through an error, my employer can fire me. They generally cannot sue me for the costs of their losses. There can still be consequences, just not compensation for losses.
      - baddox 6y ago
        If you are not liable for failing to do some thing then by definition you are not responsible for doing that thing.
        aliante 6y ago
        No. I cannot be reasonably sued for blowing up my company's software systems for a failure on my part as an employee. It doesn't mean I am not responsible for keeping them up and running. You can fire me. You cannot successfully sue me for the costs of my failure.
        baddox 6y ago
dpeck 6y ago
| Isn't it the police's responsibility to prevent violent crime? There have been several Supreme Court cases that have answered that question with a hard “No”
- ReptileMan 6y ago
  While it may not be job of the police, it is definitely in the mandate of the local government. How they achieve it is their own problem. You are owed security in the streets not by the PD, but by the mayor.
  - dpeck 6y ago
    Through what means?
    - hedora 6y ago
      Community outreach, mental health care and drug rehabilitation programs have all been proven effective at reducing violent crime. However, education is even more effective on a per-dollar and quality of life basis. Ohio used to have one of the best public school systems in the region. Now, there’s a saying in Ohio: “We cut our schools so much, our neighbors are making fun of us, and out neighbors include Kentucky and West Virginia!” The saying popped up when both those states started beating Ohio on standardized tests, if I remember right. It was partly because those states improved their schools, but largely because Ohio slashed funding.
- aliante 6y ago
  > There have been several Supreme Court cases that have answered that question with a hard “No” No, they cannot be sued for failing to prevent crime. You are not guaranteed a crime free life by the presence of or even reports to the police force.
CaptainZapp 6y ago
> Isn't it the police's responsibility to prevent violent crime? It seems that Walmart is of the opinion that all crime, no matter how lowly, should be handled by Police[1] [1] https://projects.tampabay.com/projects/2016/public-safety/walmart-police/ https://projects.tampabay.com/projects/2016/public-safety/wa...

chii 6y ago

> prevent violent crime? well, i don't think that's ever the mandate of the police - they are there to punish after the fact, not prevent before the event.

lordnacho 6y ago
This is like saying the health authorities have no interest in what you eat, they just treat you after you show up with a heart attack.
ARandomerDude 6y ago
This is an overly simplistic view. If law enforcement isn't a deterrent, even in principle, why do it?
- baddox 6y ago
  The fact that the view leads you to ask “why do it?” does not mean that it is an overly simplistic view.
cheesecracker 6y ago
What a nonsensical belief.
- donw 6y ago
  A belief upheld by the supreme court: Warren v. District of Columbia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzale...
  - aliante 6y ago
    Nope. Just that police are not liable for failing to prevent crime.
    - donw 6y ago
      How are those different in practice? (Genuine question, no snark intended)
      - aliante 6y ago
        If I blow up a production system through an error, my employer can fire me. They generally cannot sue me for the costs of their losses. There can still be consequences, just not compensation for losses.
    - baddox 6y ago
      If you are not liable for failing to do some thing then by definition you are not responsible for doing that thing.
      - aliante 6y ago
        No. I cannot be reasonably sued for blowing up my company's software systems for a failure on my part as an employee. It doesn't mean I am not responsible for keeping them up and running. You can fire me. You cannot successfully sue me for the costs of my failure.
        baddox 6y ago

dpeck 6y ago

| Isn't it the police's responsibility to prevent violent crime? There have been several Supreme Court cases that have answered that question with a hard “No”

ReptileMan 6y ago
While it may not be job of the police, it is definitely in the mandate of the local government. How they achieve it is their own problem. You are owed security in the streets not by the PD, but by the mayor.
- dpeck 6y ago
  Through what means?
  - hedora 6y ago
    Community outreach, mental health care and drug rehabilitation programs have all been proven effective at reducing violent crime. However, education is even more effective on a per-dollar and quality of life basis. Ohio used to have one of the best public school systems in the region. Now, there’s a saying in Ohio: “We cut our schools so much, our neighbors are making fun of us, and out neighbors include Kentucky and West Virginia!” The saying popped up when both those states started beating Ohio on standardized tests, if I remember right. It was partly because those states improved their schools, but largely because Ohio slashed funding.
aliante 6y ago
> There have been several Supreme Court cases that have answered that question with a hard “No” No, they cannot be sued for failing to prevent crime. You are not guaranteed a crime free life by the presence of or even reports to the police force.

CaptainZapp 6y ago

> Isn't it the police's responsibility to prevent violent crime? It seems that Walmart is of the opinion that all crime, no matter how lowly, should be handled by Police[1] [1] https://projects.tampabay.com/projects/2016/public-safety/walmart-police/ https://projects.tampabay.com/projects/2016/public-safety/wa...