4 ms·

Living there, it definitely feels as if there's a low key lawlessness about town. I haven't developed a hatred for the cops here yet, but there's an outspoken c

Living there, it definitely feels as if there's a low key lawlessness about town. I haven't developed a hatred for the cops here yet, but there's an outspoken critique to the point of being a meme that they enforce very little of these everyday things and beyond (like muggings)

bobthepanda 4y ago
Particularly in the realm of traffic, they tend to flout the law as well; go to nearly any police station and there will be both police and personal cars parked on the sidewalk, or illegally parked in spots. What makes it particularly galling is that they also oppose automated enforcement of traffic laws. Officially it is because it would take away jobs (that they are not doing, since traffic enforcement in NYC leaves a lot to be desired), and unofficially because the police themselves benefit from the discretion exercised by fellow officers refusing to enforce laws on their colleagues.
- konschubert 4y ago
  Why is “this would take away jobs” an argument that can be made in any non-communist country?
  - quickthrower2 4y ago
    Mostly it isn’t unless it is one of those jobs that isn’t needed most of the time but sometimes like for example a soldier or rural fire service and some bean counter thinks yeah we can slash that. Getting rid of the job gets rid of the people with experience, so it can be a one way switch. Normally solving a problem with a robot creates more jobs. There are speed cameras, but still you have hidden manually operated speed traps and it frees up resources for drug and alcohol testing.
  - ivanbakel 4y ago
    > Why is “this would take away jobs” an argument that can be made in any non-communist country? Because a capitalist economy is rooted in self-interest. Labour bodies have power to shape the economy, and they represent the interests of their members, who don't want to lose their jobs. Plus, people are not perfect market actors with such little empathy that they are willing to abandon their colleagues for a bit more workplace efficiency. So if you know that Bob in your office will be fired due to automation, and you like Bob (and worry you are next), you're going to oppose automation.
  - dahfizz 4y ago
    In a democracy, people vote for things. People also want a job. People are not going to vote for things which will lose them their job.
    - jokethrowaway 4y ago
      And when you're the government you don't want to lose employees. Propaganda will make sure this won't even reach the average citizen.
      - bobthepanda 4y ago
        Police is an interesting edge case, where at least in 2022 the people who want to reduce police are firmly on the left, and those firmly on the right want to cut everything except police. There was an attempt to defund police, and that went down with the electorate like a lead balloon.
        throwaway0a5e 4y ago
        There are broad swaths of the left and right that want as little to do with law enforcement as possible. It's the moralizing religious right and the jackbooted ivory tower left types (both of whom think they know exactly how other people should live) that want lots of policing.
        bobthepanda 4y ago
        Not to get too far into the weeds here, but Eric Adams, the black mayor of NYC who was formerly a police officer, was certainly not voted in by either the religious right or the ivory tower left.
  - jokethrowaway 4y ago
    Because all countries have an element of socialism and it's fairly significant.
- wjnc 4y ago
  Oh my. My city recently got a few of those vehicles doing automatic parking fines. They were so good the number of fines was national news. There is something to be said for 100% enforcement of these rules. NYC is a boon for AI powered enforcement in that respect. Imagine all video enforceable traffic violations being automatically and instantaneously ticketed. It would change the city (and the cops).
mellavora 4y ago
> it definitely feels as if there's a low key lawlessness about town. history of police: the NY police force stared when one politician got his street gang made official. So the police have a cultural heritage. And on the other side,the city isn't a bunch of people who basically agree (or think they basically agree) on what is right and wrong, then use the law to enforce this. Counter-example, Sweden from circa 1000 to 2000 AD. (Sweden still thinks it is this, but has growing issues with immigrants from non-nordic cultures)
hbarka 4y ago
San Francisco would like a word about low-key lawlessness. Actually beyond low-key. Watch an open-air market for stolen goods. Watch the impunity. See how City Hall and SFPD respond. https://youtu.be/dykaJjegDEY https://youtu.be/dykaJjegDEY
- b112 4y ago
  Just watched. There is no suitable excuse for this, at all, full stop.
- lupire 4y ago
  Wow. The city commisioner says "No, yes, No. The police have not been aggressive enough with enforcement, because we don't want them to."
  - mehphp 4y ago
    Unreal. People are getting robbed in traffic at gun point and there are "bigger" "more violent" issues for the police to deal with?
- mschuster91 4y ago
  Jesus f..ing christ. It's one thing to not crack down on victimless crimes aka people dealing small-time drugs on the street, but that here is a travesty of justice. I mean... what the fuck is that "yeah we have so many leads to follow up". Dude. Take a hundred officers, cordon off the area and fleece everyone. It isn't that hard. And what the fuck was that "we want police to focus on bigger things"?! Like, camera crews get robbed on highway heists? At gunpoint? Doesn't get much bigger than that!

bobthepanda 4y ago

Particularly in the realm of traffic, they tend to flout the law as well; go to nearly any police station and there will be both police and personal cars parked on the sidewalk, or illegally parked in spots. What makes it particularly galling is that they also oppose automated enforcement of traffic laws. Officially it is because it would take away jobs (that they are not doing, since traffic enforcement in NYC leaves a lot to be desired), and unofficially because the police themselves benefit from the discretion exercised by fellow officers refusing to enforce laws on their colleagues.

konschubert 4y ago
Why is “this would take away jobs” an argument that can be made in any non-communist country?
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  Mostly it isn’t unless it is one of those jobs that isn’t needed most of the time but sometimes like for example a soldier or rural fire service and some bean counter thinks yeah we can slash that. Getting rid of the job gets rid of the people with experience, so it can be a one way switch. Normally solving a problem with a robot creates more jobs. There are speed cameras, but still you have hidden manually operated speed traps and it frees up resources for drug and alcohol testing.
- ivanbakel 4y ago
  > Why is “this would take away jobs” an argument that can be made in any non-communist country? Because a capitalist economy is rooted in self-interest. Labour bodies have power to shape the economy, and they represent the interests of their members, who don't want to lose their jobs. Plus, people are not perfect market actors with such little empathy that they are willing to abandon their colleagues for a bit more workplace efficiency. So if you know that Bob in your office will be fired due to automation, and you like Bob (and worry you are next), you're going to oppose automation.
- dahfizz 4y ago
  In a democracy, people vote for things. People also want a job. People are not going to vote for things which will lose them their job.
  - jokethrowaway 4y ago
    And when you're the government you don't want to lose employees. Propaganda will make sure this won't even reach the average citizen.
    - bobthepanda 4y ago
      Police is an interesting edge case, where at least in 2022 the people who want to reduce police are firmly on the left, and those firmly on the right want to cut everything except police. There was an attempt to defund police, and that went down with the electorate like a lead balloon.
      - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
        There are broad swaths of the left and right that want as little to do with law enforcement as possible. It's the moralizing religious right and the jackbooted ivory tower left types (both of whom think they know exactly how other people should live) that want lots of policing.
        bobthepanda 4y ago
        Not to get too far into the weeds here, but Eric Adams, the black mayor of NYC who was formerly a police officer, was certainly not voted in by either the religious right or the ivory tower left.
- jokethrowaway 4y ago
  Because all countries have an element of socialism and it's fairly significant.
wjnc 4y ago
Oh my. My city recently got a few of those vehicles doing automatic parking fines. They were so good the number of fines was national news. There is something to be said for 100% enforcement of these rules. NYC is a boon for AI powered enforcement in that respect. Imagine all video enforceable traffic violations being automatically and instantaneously ticketed. It would change the city (and the cops).

mellavora 4y ago

> it definitely feels as if there's a low key lawlessness about town. history of police: the NY police force stared when one politician got his street gang made official. So the police have a cultural heritage. And on the other side,the city isn't a bunch of people who basically agree (or think they basically agree) on what is right and wrong, then use the law to enforce this. Counter-example, Sweden from circa 1000 to 2000 AD. (Sweden still thinks it is this, but has growing issues with immigrants from non-nordic cultures)

hbarka 4y ago

San Francisco would like a word about low-key lawlessness. Actually beyond low-key. Watch an open-air market for stolen goods. Watch the impunity. See how City Hall and SFPD respond. https://youtu.be/dykaJjegDEY https://youtu.be/dykaJjegDEY

b112 4y ago
Just watched. There is no suitable excuse for this, at all, full stop.
lupire 4y ago
Wow. The city commisioner says "No, yes, No. The police have not been aggressive enough with enforcement, because we don't want them to."
- mehphp 4y ago
  Unreal. People are getting robbed in traffic at gun point and there are "bigger" "more violent" issues for the police to deal with?
mschuster91 4y ago
Jesus f..ing christ. It's one thing to not crack down on victimless crimes aka people dealing small-time drugs on the street, but that here is a travesty of justice. I mean... what the fuck is that "yeah we have so many leads to follow up". Dude. Take a hundred officers, cordon off the area and fleece everyone. It isn't that hard. And what the fuck was that "we want police to focus on bigger things"?! Like, camera crews get robbed on highway heists? At gunpoint? Doesn't get much bigger than that!