4 ms·

I dont think it matters. What matters is that people are voting with their wallets. People need a solution to rampant crime. Take for example SA, where privat

I dont think it matters. What matters is that people are voting with their wallets. People need a solution to rampant crime. Take for example SA, where private security forces are widespread. The degree of deleriction of duty by public servants has been tremendous in the last 2 years. The NYC Major recently was on the record stating that "there is no security problem in NYC" meanwhile official City hall communication channels have implemented a buddy system where city hall employees can home in groups [1] If public servants can't provide security for people, there should not be a surprise that the private servicers would emerge. [1]https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/nyc-city-hall-employees-offered-subway-buddies-as-mayor-tries-to-calm-safety-concerns/3044688/ https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/nyc-city-hall-employee...

gowld 5y ago
That's not what happening here. The money is for the "true crime" entertainment and the fun of being part of a mob, not crime reduction. That's obvious from the substance and tone of the content published in the app.
kibwen 5y ago
Law enforcement does not solve the sort of low-level citizen-brigade crime that this app would address, it only treats the symptoms. The cause is people driven to desperation; put money into social programs to address the root of their desperation.
- courtf 5y ago
  Prevention is cheaper and results in a friendlier environment for everyone. The proliferation of expensive, reactive solutions that tend to aggravate the very problem they're ostensibly working on is great for shareholders though. Public health is boring by comparison, and no one gets rich when it works.
- 323454 5y ago
  This is a false dichotomy, but what's worse is that social programs are already heavily funded in all the major West coast cities. For example, LA spends over half a billion dollars (yes, billion with a B) on services for the homeless every year, to very little effect. It's not irrational for someone (even someone who advocates for those very programs and services) to look at the full situation and conclude that the best available option is to just throw in the towel and hire private security.
  - kibwen 5y ago
    > look at the full situation and conclude that the best available option is to just throw in the towel and hire private security Someone who is looking at the full situation would realize that hiring private security does not cause the homeless population to suddenly evaporate. An outsider might start to get the impression that the fundamental right of the upper-middle class is the right not to be reminded that people in poverty exist.
    - 323454 5y ago
      No one cares what outsiders think when they are being assaulted on their walk home from work. If you want justice you must first create order. In addition, it's not like these people don't have sympathy for the plight of the poor: they voted to spend vast sums on tax money trying to fix the root cause of the problem. It's not their fault that these efforts are failing.
  - anthony_romeo 5y ago
    Why is ~$500,000,000 a lot of money for the homeless? The CA budget is hundreds of billions of dollars, and there’s a lot of people who live in that state.
    - 323454 5y ago
      LA city budget, not California state. The amount spent is so high that you could just give every homeless person in LA $2000 every month and it would be less expensive.
      - lukeschlather 5y ago
        A large portion of that spending is spent on prevention - getting rental assistance and other things to people who are in danger of losing their housing. There are over 400,000 "severely cost burdened" households that are "extremely low income" which is to say making less than 30% of median income which in LA means less than $20k/year, and spending more than half their income on rent. You're looking at the most obvious symptom - people with no home - and saying "well if we just treated that symptom with all this money there would be no problem." But the root cause is an order of magnitude larger than that.
ceejayoz 5y ago
> People need a solution to rampant crime. Take for example SA, where private security forces are widespread. Has that solved crime in SA?
kelnos 5y ago
> Take for example SA, where private security forces are widespread. I don't think we want to use as a model a place where police services are only available to the wealthy.
- ebuchanan 5y ago
  Every new product starts out that way.

gowld 5y ago

That's not what happening here. The money is for the "true crime" entertainment and the fun of being part of a mob, not crime reduction. That's obvious from the substance and tone of the content published in the app.

kibwen 5y ago

Law enforcement does not solve the sort of low-level citizen-brigade crime that this app would address, it only treats the symptoms. The cause is people driven to desperation; put money into social programs to address the root of their desperation.

courtf 5y ago
Prevention is cheaper and results in a friendlier environment for everyone. The proliferation of expensive, reactive solutions that tend to aggravate the very problem they're ostensibly working on is great for shareholders though. Public health is boring by comparison, and no one gets rich when it works.
323454 5y ago
This is a false dichotomy, but what's worse is that social programs are already heavily funded in all the major West coast cities. For example, LA spends over half a billion dollars (yes, billion with a B) on services for the homeless every year, to very little effect. It's not irrational for someone (even someone who advocates for those very programs and services) to look at the full situation and conclude that the best available option is to just throw in the towel and hire private security.
- kibwen 5y ago
  > look at the full situation and conclude that the best available option is to just throw in the towel and hire private security Someone who is looking at the full situation would realize that hiring private security does not cause the homeless population to suddenly evaporate. An outsider might start to get the impression that the fundamental right of the upper-middle class is the right not to be reminded that people in poverty exist.
  - 323454 5y ago
    No one cares what outsiders think when they are being assaulted on their walk home from work. If you want justice you must first create order. In addition, it's not like these people don't have sympathy for the plight of the poor: they voted to spend vast sums on tax money trying to fix the root cause of the problem. It's not their fault that these efforts are failing.
- anthony_romeo 5y ago
  Why is ~$500,000,000 a lot of money for the homeless? The CA budget is hundreds of billions of dollars, and there’s a lot of people who live in that state.
  - 323454 5y ago
    LA city budget, not California state. The amount spent is so high that you could just give every homeless person in LA $2000 every month and it would be less expensive.
    - lukeschlather 5y ago
      A large portion of that spending is spent on prevention - getting rental assistance and other things to people who are in danger of losing their housing. There are over 400,000 "severely cost burdened" households that are "extremely low income" which is to say making less than 30% of median income which in LA means less than $20k/year, and spending more than half their income on rent. You're looking at the most obvious symptom - people with no home - and saying "well if we just treated that symptom with all this money there would be no problem." But the root cause is an order of magnitude larger than that.

ceejayoz 5y ago

> People need a solution to rampant crime. Take for example SA, where private security forces are widespread. Has that solved crime in SA?

kelnos 5y ago

> Take for example SA, where private security forces are widespread. I don't think we want to use as a model a place where police services are only available to the wealthy.

ebuchanan 5y ago
Every new product starts out that way.