4 ms·

I actually have no idea what you are talking about, how would one address the problem directly and constitutionally? There is very little the constitution allow

I actually have no idea what you are talking about, how would one address the problem directly and constitutionally? There is very little the constitution allows to do by race and I dont know enough about what you are referring to that would prevent a random reckless discharge of firearms. Can you elaborate?

xyzzyz 5y ago
For example, we could enforce our existing gun control laws — those about straw purchases, posession by felons, illegal concealed carry etc. The places with gun crime problem, which overwhelmingly are big cities which have been controlled entirely by a single political party for many decades, don’t want to enforce the law, though — instead, their narrative recently have been in the opposite direction, to defund the police and reduce incarceration. The only big city that attempted to enforce the law, New York City, has been overwhelmingly successful in reducing its crime problem. The method they used was pretty simple: they caught people doin relatively petty crime, and jailed them, reducing the criminal population, while at the same time sending signal to the remaining people with criminal tendencies that the city cares about it, and will go after you. Unfortunately, the activist lawfare made them stop using their highly successful method, and these days crime there is not only on the rise, but also the authorities becoming more lenient toward serious crime, including gun crime: > Prosecutors were also instructed to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors in certain cases. For instance, suspects initially charged with armed robbery of a store would get hit with petit larceny instead, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there was no “genuine risk of physical harm,” the memo states. So, if you rob a store with a gun in your hand in NYC, you’re looking for less than a year in jail, and no pretrial detention either. Basically, they’ll arrest you, get your data and address, maybe confiscate your gun if you have it on you, and let you go hit like that, with a court date many months in advance (courts are swamped by Covid induced inefficiency). How is this supposed to be a significant crime deterrent?
- vmception 5y ago
  Thanks for elaborating, my initial thoughts: 1) You should focus on Atlanta or Brookhaven where this happened. Not New York City. Is Brookhaven having the same lack of enforcement, or did someone just randomly shoot a gun because thats something anybody can do? 2) The Broken Windows theory has been debunked over and over again. I'm surprised you walked right into that one but I can see how relying on that antiquated idea of policing gets you or similar discussions called racist as aspects and implementation of that policy has been criticized as such too. The vestigial aspects of the Broken Windows policy was randomly stopping and frisking people overwhelmingly of specific races and that was called unconstitutional specifically for its racial component and lack of efficacy in fulfilling a potentially overriding potentially valid government interest, it was not appealed so it is a done deal. Basically they rarely found guns, but did find people with existing warrants, or weed, or on parole, or just wound up harassing the same people over and over again until an arrestable outcome was created. All while an even proportion of the population across races said they use the same drugs and simply weren't being stopped. The reduction in crime during that time period has been attributed to the waning of the crack epidemic, reduction in lead poisoning, and even simply mean reversion. I would agree that the further attempts at tweaking society - such as simply not enforcing laws - disrupts a balance when there is no replacement proposed to restore balance, but "broken windows" is just a "broken family" policy.
  - xyzzyz 5y ago
    > 1) You should focus on Atlanta or Brookhaven where this happened. Not New York City. Is Brookhaven having the same lack of enforcement, (...) Yes, Atlanta very much joined the "defund the police" bandwagon, with the Mayor calling for it, and saying that they are already "ahead of the curve on"[1]. When the totally predictable crime surge happened as a result, the city (unlike, sadly, many activists, understood the idea of cause and effect, and reversed the policy[2]. As it turns out, people actually affected by crime do want more police presence, and more law enforcement. > or did someone just randomly shoot a gun because thats something anybody can do? People "randomly shooting a gun" is not the reason people get shot in cities. It happens because some people are purposefully, not randomly, shooting at other people, and in the process, those people, and also bystanders, get shot. These people consciously decide to commit heinous crime, and comments like above reduce their agency to minimize their responsibility. > The Broken Windows theory has been debunked over and over again. And you can say it again here, but it will not make it any more true. > The reduction in crime during that time period has been attributed to the waning of the crack epidemic, reduction in lead poisoning, and even simply mean reversion. At exactly the same time, the country as a whole became much more serious about fighting crime, culminating in the Biden Crime Law of 1994. Why exactly did the crack epidemic wane, pray tell? I'm sure it didn't have anything to do with removal and jailing of drug dealers and users, so what did it? And how is "mean reversion" even supposed to work as explanatory mechanism? Without fancy terminology, it equates to saying "it went down because things often go down after being up", which is completely useless as an explanation. [1] - https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/protests/atlanta-mayor-bottoms-on-defunding-police/85-bd8370a6-2a9b-48c5-a1ca-7d4cd85f37b4 https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/protests/atlanta-... [2] - https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2021/0706/In-Atlanta-a-glimpse-of-why-defund-the-police-has-faltered https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2021/0706/In-Atlanta-a-glimpse...

xyzzyz 5y ago

For example, we could enforce our existing gun control laws — those about straw purchases, posession by felons, illegal concealed carry etc. The places with gun crime problem, which overwhelmingly are big cities which have been controlled entirely by a single political party for many decades, don’t want to enforce the law, though — instead, their narrative recently have been in the opposite direction, to defund the police and reduce incarceration. The only big city that attempted to enforce the law, New York City, has been overwhelmingly successful in reducing its crime problem. The method they used was pretty simple: they caught people doin relatively petty crime, and jailed them, reducing the criminal population, while at the same time sending signal to the remaining people with criminal tendencies that the city cares about it, and will go after you. Unfortunately, the activist lawfare made them stop using their highly successful method, and these days crime there is not only on the rise, but also the authorities becoming more lenient toward serious crime, including gun crime: > Prosecutors were also instructed to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors in certain cases. For instance, suspects initially charged with armed robbery of a store would get hit with petit larceny instead, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there was no “genuine risk of physical harm,” the memo states. So, if you rob a store with a gun in your hand in NYC, you’re looking for less than a year in jail, and no pretrial detention either. Basically, they’ll arrest you, get your data and address, maybe confiscate your gun if you have it on you, and let you go hit like that, with a court date many months in advance (courts are swamped by Covid induced inefficiency). How is this supposed to be a significant crime deterrent?

vmception 5y ago
Thanks for elaborating, my initial thoughts: 1) You should focus on Atlanta or Brookhaven where this happened. Not New York City. Is Brookhaven having the same lack of enforcement, or did someone just randomly shoot a gun because thats something anybody can do? 2) The Broken Windows theory has been debunked over and over again. I'm surprised you walked right into that one but I can see how relying on that antiquated idea of policing gets you or similar discussions called racist as aspects and implementation of that policy has been criticized as such too. The vestigial aspects of the Broken Windows policy was randomly stopping and frisking people overwhelmingly of specific races and that was called unconstitutional specifically for its racial component and lack of efficacy in fulfilling a potentially overriding potentially valid government interest, it was not appealed so it is a done deal. Basically they rarely found guns, but did find people with existing warrants, or weed, or on parole, or just wound up harassing the same people over and over again until an arrestable outcome was created. All while an even proportion of the population across races said they use the same drugs and simply weren't being stopped. The reduction in crime during that time period has been attributed to the waning of the crack epidemic, reduction in lead poisoning, and even simply mean reversion. I would agree that the further attempts at tweaking society - such as simply not enforcing laws - disrupts a balance when there is no replacement proposed to restore balance, but "broken windows" is just a "broken family" policy.
- xyzzyz 5y ago
  > 1) You should focus on Atlanta or Brookhaven where this happened. Not New York City. Is Brookhaven having the same lack of enforcement, (...) Yes, Atlanta very much joined the "defund the police" bandwagon, with the Mayor calling for it, and saying that they are already "ahead of the curve on"[1]. When the totally predictable crime surge happened as a result, the city (unlike, sadly, many activists, understood the idea of cause and effect, and reversed the policy[2]. As it turns out, people actually affected by crime do want more police presence, and more law enforcement. > or did someone just randomly shoot a gun because thats something anybody can do? People "randomly shooting a gun" is not the reason people get shot in cities. It happens because some people are purposefully, not randomly, shooting at other people, and in the process, those people, and also bystanders, get shot. These people consciously decide to commit heinous crime, and comments like above reduce their agency to minimize their responsibility. > The Broken Windows theory has been debunked over and over again. And you can say it again here, but it will not make it any more true. > The reduction in crime during that time period has been attributed to the waning of the crack epidemic, reduction in lead poisoning, and even simply mean reversion. At exactly the same time, the country as a whole became much more serious about fighting crime, culminating in the Biden Crime Law of 1994. Why exactly did the crack epidemic wane, pray tell? I'm sure it didn't have anything to do with removal and jailing of drug dealers and users, so what did it? And how is "mean reversion" even supposed to work as explanatory mechanism? Without fancy terminology, it equates to saying "it went down because things often go down after being up", which is completely useless as an explanation. [1] - https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/protests/atlanta-mayor-bottoms-on-defunding-police/85-bd8370a6-2a9b-48c5-a1ca-7d4cd85f37b4 https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/protests/atlanta-... [2] - https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2021/0706/In-Atlanta-a-glimpse-of-why-defund-the-police-has-faltered https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2021/0706/In-Atlanta-a-glimpse...