3 ms·
I’m talking about high crime areas in big cities. Here’s a data point from Chicago: in May 2021, up to that time in the year 108 children were shot, 16 of them
by Jun8 3y ago
I’m talking about high crime areas in big cities. Here’s a data point from Chicago: in May 2021, up to that time in the year 108 children were shot, 16 of them died: https://abc7chicago.com/amp/chicago-shootings-child-shot-teen-kid/10663331/ https://abc7chicago.com/amp/chicago-shootings-child-shot-tee...
It’s not the “heat of the crisis”, this has been going on for years now here. See this WaPo article from 2013, from when Michelle Obama attended the funeral of a 15 year-old girl: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/michelle-obama-heads-to-chicago-for-slain-teenagers-funeral/2013/02/09/418a9ea4-716e-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/michelle-obama-heads...
- lolinder 3y agoYou're advocating creating policy based on emotion, not numbers. That is what I mean by creating policy in the heat of the crisis—the argument goes that it's better to do something than nothing, so we just throw surveillance at the wall and hope it reduces the number of tragedies. I'm not advocating doing nothing, but I am advocating against arguments in favor of surveillance that lean heavily into emotions surrounding anecdotes and ignore questions of actual incidence rates, causality, and efficacy of the proposed solutions.