4 ms·

This is clever and I agree with the comments regarding their heart being in the right place but this is a flawed approach. The customer service experience of c

This is clever and I agree with the comments regarding their heart being in the right place but this is a flawed approach. The customer service experience of criminals isn't the right thing to optimize and probably has nothing to do with outcomes if not inversely correlated with crime reduction. The very idea that we can view and treat police officers like we do customer service people at say the mall I would argue is causing issues between community and police. If you're ever talking to a police officer you're obligated to follow their lawful commands, and if you have any issue with them the forum to litigate that is court not with the police or through something like a net promoter score. If anything the experience of the people not interacting with the police aka the broader community IS the thing to optimize for. Maybe mail out surveys and ask people where the police are doing well and where they could be more helpful.

garyfirestorm 4y ago
the customer service experience of citizens - ummm the folks who actually pay for police salaries - to whom the police serve!
- tifik 4y ago
  > citizens - ummm the folks who actually pay for police salaries I was always curious about how true this statement actually is. I understand that the state runs primarily on money from taxes, but what part of that is actually coming from local citizens pockets? I imagine there are places where most money comes from tourism or goods exports.
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    You don't typically pay your money on a tour to the state. You pay it to a hotel, an amusement park, etc who then pays it to the state instead of employees.
    - tifik 4y ago
      Yes, but my point still stands. The money that ends up with the state didn't originate from a local.
- ticviking 4y ago
  He's talking about the perverse incentive LEOs will have to get good ratings, which will be hard when you spend much of your day bringing in guys for beating their spouse, who by the time you arrive has decided she just wanted you to make him stop hitting her, not take him away to spend the night in jail. Small town cops generally know all the regulars by name, I could see a QR code program working better in a larger city where there's more anonymity to the reports.
- bostonsre 4y ago
  I think their jobs are to serve AND protect, not just serve. If police officers optimize on not making anyone unhappy, it seems like the protection part won't be done as effectively (e.g. someone who drives dangerously but never gets a ticket won't have much incentive to drive more carefully so other drivers on the road are then put at risk). Like almost everything, there needs to be some balance. I'm not sure bad ratings due to "I was breaking the law and he gave me a ticket instead of a warning" would be best for society. But if the officer was cordial and courteous in that same interaction and they received good feedback, that would probably be a good reinforcement loop. A complete totalitarian police state wouldn't be good for society but going to the other end of the spectrum and having lax policing would also be bad for society, I think we need to try to strive for the least bad balance, which seems like it is incredibly hard to do and then of course no one will be completely happy and lots of people will complain. They have a very tough usually thankless job.
glitcher 4y ago
I mean, yeah this approach probably is flawed for various reasons, but oh boy: > The customer service experience of criminals isn't the right thing to optimize Not sure where to even begin with that statement. Police interact with tons of citizens, and many of them may end up with civil penalties or misdemeanors, but would you consider someone getting issued a speeding ticket for going 15mph over the posted limit to be a criminal? Also, are you worried that someone being arrested for armed robbery is going to use their phone in the back seat of a police vehicle to give a fake bad review? I think if this program helps encourage officers to interact with citizens more cordially it is a win. And of course this data could be gamed or misused, it's more about what we decide to do with the data. Imperfect data can still be useful though.
ajford 4y ago
I've always wanted something like license points for law enforcement officers. Every time they have a valid complaint/incident, the LEO looses a point of their national LEO "licence". Pair that with their dept. liability insurance bond, and once they drop below some threshold their insurance cost goes up or has to be self-funded. If it drops below another threshold they're uninsurable by any department and/or loose their national level credentials. If this licensing entity is external to the force it would hopefully be more likely to remain unbiased, and this kind of national level of oversight would prevent bad apples from just moving to some other area to dodge a bad reputation/incident.
jcrawfordor 4y ago
> The customer service experience of criminals isn't the right thing to optimize and probably has nothing to do with outcomes if not inversely correlated with crime reduction. The vast majority of contemporary approaches to policing, but dating back to e.g. Peel in the mid 19th century, run quite contrary to your ideas. The people that police interact with and "the broader community" should not be any different (this basic idea is called community policing), otherwise policing will inevitably fail to meet community needs, for several different reasons. It is fairly well established that a lack of contact between police and members of the community results in an increase in crime, for a few reasons but in particular because the community will stop reporting crimes to the police if they do not have positive interactions with them. This has been a widespread problem in most if not all US cities. In practice, the portion of people that police interact with who receive any sort of legal action (from citation to arrest) is very small. Around 2% in one field services division. The vast majority of police interactions are either addressed by policework (collecting information, brokering agreements, just telling people to knock it off) or were not even potentially criminal in nature to begin with (traffic accidents, medical emergencies, etc). These are all cases of officers acting as individuals to address a problem, with no criminal process involved. > If you're ever talking to a police officer you're obligated to follow their lawful commands, and if you have any issue with them the forum to litigate that is court not with the police or through something like a net promoter score. It sounds more like you're talking about a prosecutor. Police officers exercise a great deal of discretion and individual responsibility outside of the legal system, and are accountable to the police department for their work. Police departments have an entire command or division, usually more than one in practice, responsible for reviewing officer actions and conduct. Police departments are organized under city and state governments (and occasionally some other less common kinds of governments like improvement districts), and are accountable as a whole to the government they derive their authority from. That is, while courts do serve as an ultimate forum for complaints about police, courts generally only address specific violations of the law. Broader policing issues are heard out in the chambers of city councils and legislatures. > If anything the experience of the people not interacting with the police aka the broader community IS the thing to optimize for. Maybe mail out surveys and ask people where the police are doing well and where they could be more helpful. This is a standard practice in large police departments and is usually more formalized through e.g. commissions and councils of community members. Surveys themselves often originate from the city government in its role overseeing the police, e.g. conducted by the mayor or council members.

garyfirestorm 4y ago

the customer service experience of citizens - ummm the folks who actually pay for police salaries - to whom the police serve!

tifik 4y ago
> citizens - ummm the folks who actually pay for police salaries I was always curious about how true this statement actually is. I understand that the state runs primarily on money from taxes, but what part of that is actually coming from local citizens pockets? I imagine there are places where most money comes from tourism or goods exports.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  You don't typically pay your money on a tour to the state. You pay it to a hotel, an amusement park, etc who then pays it to the state instead of employees.
  - tifik 4y ago
    Yes, but my point still stands. The money that ends up with the state didn't originate from a local.
ticviking 4y ago
He's talking about the perverse incentive LEOs will have to get good ratings, which will be hard when you spend much of your day bringing in guys for beating their spouse, who by the time you arrive has decided she just wanted you to make him stop hitting her, not take him away to spend the night in jail. Small town cops generally know all the regulars by name, I could see a QR code program working better in a larger city where there's more anonymity to the reports.
bostonsre 4y ago
I think their jobs are to serve AND protect, not just serve. If police officers optimize on not making anyone unhappy, it seems like the protection part won't be done as effectively (e.g. someone who drives dangerously but never gets a ticket won't have much incentive to drive more carefully so other drivers on the road are then put at risk). Like almost everything, there needs to be some balance. I'm not sure bad ratings due to "I was breaking the law and he gave me a ticket instead of a warning" would be best for society. But if the officer was cordial and courteous in that same interaction and they received good feedback, that would probably be a good reinforcement loop. A complete totalitarian police state wouldn't be good for society but going to the other end of the spectrum and having lax policing would also be bad for society, I think we need to try to strive for the least bad balance, which seems like it is incredibly hard to do and then of course no one will be completely happy and lots of people will complain. They have a very tough usually thankless job.

glitcher 4y ago

I mean, yeah this approach probably is flawed for various reasons, but oh boy: > The customer service experience of criminals isn't the right thing to optimize Not sure where to even begin with that statement. Police interact with tons of citizens, and many of them may end up with civil penalties or misdemeanors, but would you consider someone getting issued a speeding ticket for going 15mph over the posted limit to be a criminal? Also, are you worried that someone being arrested for armed robbery is going to use their phone in the back seat of a police vehicle to give a fake bad review? I think if this program helps encourage officers to interact with citizens more cordially it is a win. And of course this data could be gamed or misused, it's more about what we decide to do with the data. Imperfect data can still be useful though.

ajford 4y ago

I've always wanted something like license points for law enforcement officers. Every time they have a valid complaint/incident, the LEO looses a point of their national LEO "licence". Pair that with their dept. liability insurance bond, and once they drop below some threshold their insurance cost goes up or has to be self-funded. If it drops below another threshold they're uninsurable by any department and/or loose their national level credentials. If this licensing entity is external to the force it would hopefully be more likely to remain unbiased, and this kind of national level of oversight would prevent bad apples from just moving to some other area to dodge a bad reputation/incident.

jcrawfordor 4y ago

> The customer service experience of criminals isn't the right thing to optimize and probably has nothing to do with outcomes if not inversely correlated with crime reduction. The vast majority of contemporary approaches to policing, but dating back to e.g. Peel in the mid 19th century, run quite contrary to your ideas. The people that police interact with and "the broader community" should not be any different (this basic idea is called community policing), otherwise policing will inevitably fail to meet community needs, for several different reasons. It is fairly well established that a lack of contact between police and members of the community results in an increase in crime, for a few reasons but in particular because the community will stop reporting crimes to the police if they do not have positive interactions with them. This has been a widespread problem in most if not all US cities. In practice, the portion of people that police interact with who receive any sort of legal action (from citation to arrest) is very small. Around 2% in one field services division. The vast majority of police interactions are either addressed by policework (collecting information, brokering agreements, just telling people to knock it off) or were not even potentially criminal in nature to begin with (traffic accidents, medical emergencies, etc). These are all cases of officers acting as individuals to address a problem, with no criminal process involved. > If you're ever talking to a police officer you're obligated to follow their lawful commands, and if you have any issue with them the forum to litigate that is court not with the police or through something like a net promoter score. It sounds more like you're talking about a prosecutor. Police officers exercise a great deal of discretion and individual responsibility outside of the legal system, and are accountable to the police department for their work. Police departments have an entire command or division, usually more than one in practice, responsible for reviewing officer actions and conduct. Police departments are organized under city and state governments (and occasionally some other less common kinds of governments like improvement districts), and are accountable as a whole to the government they derive their authority from. That is, while courts do serve as an ultimate forum for complaints about police, courts generally only address specific violations of the law. Broader policing issues are heard out in the chambers of city councils and legislatures. > If anything the experience of the people not interacting with the police aka the broader community IS the thing to optimize for. Maybe mail out surveys and ask people where the police are doing well and where they could be more helpful. This is a standard practice in large police departments and is usually more formalized through e.g. commissions and councils of community members. Surveys themselves often originate from the city government in its role overseeing the police, e.g. conducted by the mayor or council members.