5 ms·

>Baltimore police does need a mass surveillance program - for it's own officers. Baltimore is #11 on a list of most violent cities in the world[1]. There are c

>Baltimore police does need a mass surveillance program - for it's own officers. Baltimore is #11 on a list of most violent cities in the world[1]. There are children and good people trying to live in those crime-ridden neighborhoods. The police is not the problem. I feel for the cops there because you can't take one of the most violent cities in the world and expect to police it like Sweden. As such, I wish they maintained their surveillance program because it works and it would result in more perps being taken out of that victimized community. Victim-rights trump criminal-rights. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate

alistairSH 6y ago
And what about the victims of false imprisonment due to a wholly corrupt police department? Sorry, working a tough beat does not excuse the malfeasance endemic to the Baltimore PD.
- macspoofing 6y ago
  >And what about the victims of false imprisonment due to a wholly corrupt police department? What about them? False imprisonment is a problem, but not at the scale of the crime in that city. Baltimore had 350 homicides and 2000+ robberies/assaults/rapes, and thousands more thefts and property crimes [1]. Let me pose a question to you: At what point do we start focusing on victims of crime again? All I hear is about police reform, and about criminal rights. Who stands up for the good people living in the violent neighborhoods of St. Louis, Chicago, Baltimore etc.? When will the focus be set on the victims in those neighborhoods? Do the people there have a right to not be victimized? Who enforces those rights? A 7 year old girl was killed by a stray bullet in Atlanta recently[2]? What is the ACLU doing for her, her family, and other such families? >working a tough beat does not excuse the malfeasance endemic to the Baltimore PD. Maybe the fact that Baltimore cops are forced to deal with the worst of humanity in one of the most violent cities in the world plays a role here? Maybe you need to lower the crime rate before you can expect policing to improve? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Baltimore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Baltimore [2] https://www.ajc.com/news/crime/latest-loss-from-atlantas-rise-in-deadly-violence-a-7-year-old-girl/QBIZT7KZFBABRCGZQOHNGK5OUM/ https://www.ajc.com/news/crime/latest-loss-from-atlantas-ris...
  - birdyrooster 6y ago
    The only thing the police provide victims is a deterrence for criminals and for some, perhaps, a sense of justice and closure. Beyond that, there is nothing more the police can do for victims. Victims need laws passed to help their communities from turning to crime in the first place or laws that decriminalize so called victimless crimes. Part of those changes means funding schools and small businesses and tax abatement for those in most need. So now, while we are talking about funding we look at the city budget. Lo and behold, police departments take a lot (in some cases a plurality) of total tax revenue that could be used to help victims in ways beyond deterrence. That is why we talk about defunding police. That is the context in which we are focusing on victims. The police create many victims on their own and currently have no internal way to fix that problem.
    - macspoofing 6y ago
      >When talking about policing, the only thing it provides victims is deterrence for criminals. Beyond that, there is nothing more the police can do for victims. What about taking criminals out of the community and locking them away in prison? Would that not help? Because that's what this surveillance program would do. It allows the police to view footage after the crime occurred and track down the perp. It wouldn't help that victim, but it would prevent the next one. >Lo and behold, police departments take a lot of tax money that could be used to help victims in ways beyond deterrence and so that is why we talk about defunding police. False choice. You don't need to defund the police to fund whatever program you want. And you make it seem like there is some magic social program just waiting to be funded that would solve criminality but the evil police budget is what prevents it from being implemented. As if!
      - birdyrooster 6y ago
        I never said it was the only way. You made it a false choice in your mind. Locking people up is a deterrence but it creates many criminals by putting them in depraved conditions for extended periods of time, then depriving them of employability and then as an insult, charging monthly fees for probation or other post-incarceration monitoring. The last thing I want to point out is how often the police victimize people and create new victims. It's incredibly common.
valuearb 6y ago
Allowing cops to commit crimes doesn’t help victim-rights, it creates more victims and more citizens unwilling to assist police. Did you read the article? Prosecutors didn’t make up the charges against this officer, they have documented video proof. There is no reason to arrest and assault bystanders, none. I believe the vast majority of cops are doing their jobs legally and honestly. But you have to punish and root out those cops who aren’t, or you will never get the public trust necessary to really make a dent in high crime areas.
- macspoofing 6y ago
  >Did you read the article? I did. ACLU is trying to prevent this program from restarting after a trial run. >or you will never get the public trust necessary to really make a dent in high crime areas. Where is the evidence that 'public trust' is the reason for the high crime rate? What if the causality is reversed ... what if high crime rate is what breeds tougher policing because you know, police are human, and it has to mess you up being exposed to the worst of humanity, every.single.day, working in one of the most crime filled city in the world. > But you have to punish and root out those cops who aren’t Sure, nobody disagrees with that, but to be clear, that won't fix the crime rate in Baltimore.
  - valuearb 6y ago
    I was referring to this article about the Baltimore cop arrested for 32 counts of false arrest and imprisonment. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2019/12/12/an-officer-was-charged-with-assault-bystander-then-prosecutors-took-closer-look-his-past/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2019/12/12/an-office... Every bystander he harassed or assaulted is going to dislike the police even more, and help them even less. When police detectives go to them for help solving a crime, how often will they refuse to testify because of their distrust of the cops? It’s a fantasy that the solution to high crime areas is tougher policing. You can try to bust all the low level drug sellers on street corners to stop consentual drug use, but some will run. So you violently arrest anyone who runs, but done if those don’t have drugs or are just scared kids. Now those kids and their families hate you. Soon dealers get smarter and only hold cash in their person. So you start frisking everyone out on the street or driving in these neighborhoods and take their cash, using civil forfeiture. But some of those people are honest citizens and you stole their paycheck, or the cash they were going to buy a car with, and they and their families now hate you. You start getting warrants to enter homes of people you are told are dealing dope. Sometimes it’s true, sometimes you find something else to justify it, sometimes they were just regular folks it’s just a mistake. But they all end up hating you for it. Sometimes the drug dealers flush the drugs while you politely wait at the door so you start getting no knock warrants and just burst in the door screaming at them, and shooting their dogs (you know, for safety). Sometimes it’s the wrong address or a false top, and the family now hates you even more, as you killed their dog man. Sometimes the residents are armed and in the shock and confusion think it’s a home invasion and shoot back and you shoot them. If they survive, they hate you. Then one day one of your brother officers is gunned down on the street, during the middle of the day, in that tough crime neighborhood you are “pacifying”. When you roll up there are a hundred residents standing there staring at his corpse, but when you ask all you get is hard looks and “no-one saw nothing”.
vmception 6y ago
Then it needs to secede from Maryland and the whole union so they can use their holistic solutions to policing. Our constitution does not support the way the police act.
thereisnospork 6y ago
> Baltimore is #11 on a list of most violent cities in the world[1]. If the police were better at their job I imagine more people would be willing to look the other way. You don't get to violate people's rights and fail to keep them safe.

alistairSH 6y ago

And what about the victims of false imprisonment due to a wholly corrupt police department? Sorry, working a tough beat does not excuse the malfeasance endemic to the Baltimore PD.

macspoofing 6y ago
>And what about the victims of false imprisonment due to a wholly corrupt police department? What about them? False imprisonment is a problem, but not at the scale of the crime in that city. Baltimore had 350 homicides and 2000+ robberies/assaults/rapes, and thousands more thefts and property crimes [1]. Let me pose a question to you: At what point do we start focusing on victims of crime again? All I hear is about police reform, and about criminal rights. Who stands up for the good people living in the violent neighborhoods of St. Louis, Chicago, Baltimore etc.? When will the focus be set on the victims in those neighborhoods? Do the people there have a right to not be victimized? Who enforces those rights? A 7 year old girl was killed by a stray bullet in Atlanta recently[2]? What is the ACLU doing for her, her family, and other such families? >working a tough beat does not excuse the malfeasance endemic to the Baltimore PD. Maybe the fact that Baltimore cops are forced to deal with the worst of humanity in one of the most violent cities in the world plays a role here? Maybe you need to lower the crime rate before you can expect policing to improve? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Baltimore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Baltimore [2] https://www.ajc.com/news/crime/latest-loss-from-atlantas-rise-in-deadly-violence-a-7-year-old-girl/QBIZT7KZFBABRCGZQOHNGK5OUM/ https://www.ajc.com/news/crime/latest-loss-from-atlantas-ris...
- birdyrooster 6y ago
  The only thing the police provide victims is a deterrence for criminals and for some, perhaps, a sense of justice and closure. Beyond that, there is nothing more the police can do for victims. Victims need laws passed to help their communities from turning to crime in the first place or laws that decriminalize so called victimless crimes. Part of those changes means funding schools and small businesses and tax abatement for those in most need. So now, while we are talking about funding we look at the city budget. Lo and behold, police departments take a lot (in some cases a plurality) of total tax revenue that could be used to help victims in ways beyond deterrence. That is why we talk about defunding police. That is the context in which we are focusing on victims. The police create many victims on their own and currently have no internal way to fix that problem.
  - macspoofing 6y ago
    >When talking about policing, the only thing it provides victims is deterrence for criminals. Beyond that, there is nothing more the police can do for victims. What about taking criminals out of the community and locking them away in prison? Would that not help? Because that's what this surveillance program would do. It allows the police to view footage after the crime occurred and track down the perp. It wouldn't help that victim, but it would prevent the next one. >Lo and behold, police departments take a lot of tax money that could be used to help victims in ways beyond deterrence and so that is why we talk about defunding police. False choice. You don't need to defund the police to fund whatever program you want. And you make it seem like there is some magic social program just waiting to be funded that would solve criminality but the evil police budget is what prevents it from being implemented. As if!
    - birdyrooster 6y ago
      I never said it was the only way. You made it a false choice in your mind. Locking people up is a deterrence but it creates many criminals by putting them in depraved conditions for extended periods of time, then depriving them of employability and then as an insult, charging monthly fees for probation or other post-incarceration monitoring. The last thing I want to point out is how often the police victimize people and create new victims. It's incredibly common.

valuearb 6y ago

Allowing cops to commit crimes doesn’t help victim-rights, it creates more victims and more citizens unwilling to assist police. Did you read the article? Prosecutors didn’t make up the charges against this officer, they have documented video proof. There is no reason to arrest and assault bystanders, none. I believe the vast majority of cops are doing their jobs legally and honestly. But you have to punish and root out those cops who aren’t, or you will never get the public trust necessary to really make a dent in high crime areas.

macspoofing 6y ago
>Did you read the article? I did. ACLU is trying to prevent this program from restarting after a trial run. >or you will never get the public trust necessary to really make a dent in high crime areas. Where is the evidence that 'public trust' is the reason for the high crime rate? What if the causality is reversed ... what if high crime rate is what breeds tougher policing because you know, police are human, and it has to mess you up being exposed to the worst of humanity, every.single.day, working in one of the most crime filled city in the world. > But you have to punish and root out those cops who aren’t Sure, nobody disagrees with that, but to be clear, that won't fix the crime rate in Baltimore.
- valuearb 6y ago
  I was referring to this article about the Baltimore cop arrested for 32 counts of false arrest and imprisonment. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2019/12/12/an-officer-was-charged-with-assault-bystander-then-prosecutors-took-closer-look-his-past/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2019/12/12/an-office... Every bystander he harassed or assaulted is going to dislike the police even more, and help them even less. When police detectives go to them for help solving a crime, how often will they refuse to testify because of their distrust of the cops? It’s a fantasy that the solution to high crime areas is tougher policing. You can try to bust all the low level drug sellers on street corners to stop consentual drug use, but some will run. So you violently arrest anyone who runs, but done if those don’t have drugs or are just scared kids. Now those kids and their families hate you. Soon dealers get smarter and only hold cash in their person. So you start frisking everyone out on the street or driving in these neighborhoods and take their cash, using civil forfeiture. But some of those people are honest citizens and you stole their paycheck, or the cash they were going to buy a car with, and they and their families now hate you. You start getting warrants to enter homes of people you are told are dealing dope. Sometimes it’s true, sometimes you find something else to justify it, sometimes they were just regular folks it’s just a mistake. But they all end up hating you for it. Sometimes the drug dealers flush the drugs while you politely wait at the door so you start getting no knock warrants and just burst in the door screaming at them, and shooting their dogs (you know, for safety). Sometimes it’s the wrong address or a false top, and the family now hates you even more, as you killed their dog man. Sometimes the residents are armed and in the shock and confusion think it’s a home invasion and shoot back and you shoot them. If they survive, they hate you. Then one day one of your brother officers is gunned down on the street, during the middle of the day, in that tough crime neighborhood you are “pacifying”. When you roll up there are a hundred residents standing there staring at his corpse, but when you ask all you get is hard looks and “no-one saw nothing”.

vmception 6y ago

Then it needs to secede from Maryland and the whole union so they can use their holistic solutions to policing. Our constitution does not support the way the police act.

thereisnospork 6y ago

> Baltimore is #11 on a list of most violent cities in the world[1]. If the police were better at their job I imagine more people would be willing to look the other way. You don't get to violate people's rights and fail to keep them safe.