4 ms·

Ok so let's say we take the best possible actions to fix "the systems" that are the cause of illegal and violent activity. What do we do in the meantime with t

Ok so let's say we take the best possible actions to fix "the systems" that are the cause of illegal and violent activity. What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Your proposal creates a model where there are now two problems. It sounds like you're saying only one should be allowed to be worked on.

mulmen 5y ago
> What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Yes. American policing has a long, clear, consistent, and violent history of racially and politically motivated abuses of power. “Predictive policing” is a license to continue those practices.
- meatsauce 5y ago
turndown 5y ago
I think you're oversimplifying the argument a bit. Nobody is arguing with your second point, the other poster simply said that increasing police strength isn't a long term solution(or even much of a short term one.) I also don't think the person you're responding to is really casting arresting criminals in a negative light itself, just that it is trying to fix a problem by only solving the second order problem, criminals committing crimes, and not the first order problem, eg economic racism/inequality, gerrymandering in every state of this country, etc, that causes people that face the worst problems of any people in our country to not have any advocates in government because their voices are designed to be drowned out politically and economically.
alistairSH 5y ago
What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Given police propensity to massively overreach, especially with preventative surveillance programs, I'd prefer we further regulate their ability to rollout and operate such programs. Not eliminate them completely. In this specific case, the program was nominally created to maintain peace during the Chauvin trial. That's over, the program should have died, or failing that, at least undergone external/public review to validate it was legal, fit-for-purpose, etc.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  We would best prevent more such crime by preventing the police from committing crimes that provoke them. Such prevention would be cheap and would raise no constitutional or other issues. It is a disgrace that cities and states are unable to police their own. It needs systemic change until they are doing it. Eric Adams is uniquely in a position to do that for New York City, and is utterly failing at it.
  - meatsauce 5y ago
    It is best we ban all foods that aren't healthy because you can't control your eating habits. Police don't cause crime. Police exist because of crime. If crime didn't exist, we wouldn't need police.
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      And when the police are the criminals, do we need more of them then, too? Chicago police, in particular, are no different from mafia.
    - alistairSH 5y ago
      Police don't cause crime. There are plenty of corrupt and criminal police. Planting evidence in Baltimore, tickets and forfeitures for revenue in Brookside AL, excess civil forfeiture all over the place, black sites in Chicago. The list goes on and on. Police may exist to battle crime, but they are no angels and it takes vigilance on the part of the public to ensure the police protect the interests of the public instead of their own.

mulmen 5y ago

> What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Yes. American policing has a long, clear, consistent, and violent history of racially and politically motivated abuses of power. “Predictive policing” is a license to continue those practices.

meatsauce 5y ago

turndown 5y ago

I think you're oversimplifying the argument a bit. Nobody is arguing with your second point, the other poster simply said that increasing police strength isn't a long term solution(or even much of a short term one.) I also don't think the person you're responding to is really casting arresting criminals in a negative light itself, just that it is trying to fix a problem by only solving the second order problem, criminals committing crimes, and not the first order problem, eg economic racism/inequality, gerrymandering in every state of this country, etc, that causes people that face the worst problems of any people in our country to not have any advocates in government because their voices are designed to be drowned out politically and economically.

alistairSH 5y ago

What do we do in the meantime with the illegal and violent activity? Ask the police not to take actions to predict it or otherwise manage it? Given police propensity to massively overreach, especially with preventative surveillance programs, I'd prefer we further regulate their ability to rollout and operate such programs. Not eliminate them completely. In this specific case, the program was nominally created to maintain peace during the Chauvin trial. That's over, the program should have died, or failing that, at least undergone external/public review to validate it was legal, fit-for-purpose, etc.

ncmncm 5y ago
We would best prevent more such crime by preventing the police from committing crimes that provoke them. Such prevention would be cheap and would raise no constitutional or other issues. It is a disgrace that cities and states are unable to police their own. It needs systemic change until they are doing it. Eric Adams is uniquely in a position to do that for New York City, and is utterly failing at it.
- meatsauce 5y ago
  It is best we ban all foods that aren't healthy because you can't control your eating habits. Police don't cause crime. Police exist because of crime. If crime didn't exist, we wouldn't need police.
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    And when the police are the criminals, do we need more of them then, too? Chicago police, in particular, are no different from mafia.
  - alistairSH 5y ago
    Police don't cause crime. There are plenty of corrupt and criminal police. Planting evidence in Baltimore, tickets and forfeitures for revenue in Brookside AL, excess civil forfeiture all over the place, black sites in Chicago. The list goes on and on. Police may exist to battle crime, but they are no angels and it takes vigilance on the part of the public to ensure the police protect the interests of the public instead of their own.