4 ms·
> Seems pretty inefficient to me Police surveillance should be inefficient. People do not exist to be arbitrarily inspected at scale; it should be an expensiv
by nmeagent 2y ago
> Seems pretty inefficient to me
Police surveillance should be inefficient. People do not exist to be arbitrarily inspected at scale; it should be an expensive, manual process and you should be forced to choose carefully whom you target, by necessity keeping that list small and limited to those for whom you can articulate cause.
- swarnie 2y agoI'm sorry but i strongly disagree. If you're taking money from the public and spending it you should be legally bound to use it in the most efficient and effective way possible.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- pixxel 2y ago[flagged]
- swarnie 2y agoThis one officer.
- johnnyanmac 2y agoThe most efficient way to survey is to not survey. Nothing more efficient than 0 runtime overhead. Snark aside, surveys are quite literally the least efficient means of gathering a sample. Scanning random people on the street when a known criminal is likely to lay low and stay inside. I can't imagine expensive surveillance cameras is cheaper than paying an investigator to track down a suspect.