4 ms·

I think it's because policing in general is not at the standard it once was. Currently police are only rewarded for "big busts", but it's the smaller crimes tha

by bArray 2y ago

I think it's because policing in general is not at the standard it once was. Currently police are only rewarded for "big busts", but it's the smaller crimes that make all the difference to the individual. In the UK for example, only something like 4% of burglaries get investigated at all. We're talking about the police not turning up at all. A neighbour down the street had a car stolen from their drive, under no less than four very high resolution cameras, and the police refused to even watch it or receive a link to it. At best now, you can get a 'crime reference number', which then automatically times out when they fail to investigate it. The general response from police with theft is "claim it on your insurance" or "speak to the seller". It has never been a better time to commit a crime. Having your items stolen after buying them with your highly taxed income is like a new tax being applied. I think we are edging towards societal collapse in the West. Nothing works correctly any more, and we still pay high taxes for the service.

WillPostForFood 2y ago
In the US it is because District Attorneys have an explicit, open policy of not prosecuting petty crime. That has led to police not investigating or arresting, because there is no point. https://crownschool.uchicago.edu/news-events/magazine/leading-way-advancing-decarceration https://crownschool.uchicago.edu/news-events/magazine/leadin...
- bhj 2y ago
  The linked article says: > He [Epperson] is currently conducting a multisite study in Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Louis that examines the development and implementation of deferred prosecution programs, a prosecutor-led innovation to divert people with nonviolent charges from traditional criminal justice processing. Seems reasonable to me, and a far cry from "an explicit, open policy of not prosecuting petty crime" that is somehow country-wide.
jonhohle 2y ago
Wasn’t this the broken windows philosophy that may or may not have reduced crime in NYC in the mid 90s? It seems like cracking down on low level crime should reduce bigger crimes, but the research seems to become politicized based on who instituted the policy.
- skeeter2020 2y ago
  The cost of punishment has also skyrocketed. Keeping someone in jail "a few years to cool off" costs a fortune.
  - bko 2y ago
    Having some one punch random women on the subway a few times a year also costs a fortune
  - black6 2y ago
    I've said it before: we need the Starship Troopers style public floggings for all crime. Eliminate expensive jails, and corporeally punish the offenders immediately and publically.
    - wetpaws 2y ago
      [dead]
VancouverMan 2y ago
[flagged]
- emilamlom 2y ago
  Are you really making a thinly-veiled argument for ethnostates? Careful, your racism is showing. Society isn't an algorithm that should be optimized for max efficiency/productivity anyways. A completely unregulated market like you allude to is like an ouroboros. It will consume itself because unchecked growth is unsustainable.
  - joquarky 2y ago
    As I approach 50, I'm gradually realizing that efficiency was a red herring. It turns out that I meant to strive for all my life is called "wu wei", but it's not well known in our culture, so "efficiency" seemed like the closest match to what I was seeking.
- rangerelf 2y ago
  What a unfettered load of bullshit. Steal from "normal people" and nothing happens; steal from the owner class and _then_ see what happens. The pettiness of the crime doesn't matter, what matters is the class the victim belongs to. That's a feature of capitalism. "Corruption" is not an exclusive feature of socialism.
- cocojumbo123 2y ago
  No offence but you are mixing socialist policies, socialism and communism - very different things; I'm unaware of any communist country which goes soft on crime. I also fail to see how premise leads to conclusion. If you want another wacky theory here's mine: imho capitalism unleashed (extract every single penny) leads to less time to be active in a community because people have to work more. On another hand loss of religion leads to hedonism - satisfy the immediate needs. Combine the two and you get what we have today.
- Wytwwww 2y ago
  What do you mean by "socialist policies" exactly? Ignoring petty crime is somehow a socialist policy? You say all of those things and the mention the Soviet Union etc. Which makes very little sense because if modern Western countries have enacted socialist policies then the USSR couldn't have been "socialist" (or the other way around). Also what do you mean by "productivity"? Because by almost any measure it has been going up by quite a lot over the last few decades.
creer 2y ago
> because policing in general is not at the standard it once was. Currently police are only rewarded for "big busts" Sure. The point is this is a matter of policy. Someone's policy. Some people in there (1) choose to prioritize this or that, (2) choose to reward doing nothing, (3) choose to promote those who do that, etc, (all the way to) actively protect cops who are active nuisances themselves. This does not "just happen" except in the sense of "it has become acceptable". Accepted by whom? Voters at some point? But not always. In the US, most cops are extremely well insulated from the voters. And they haven't had to care about your standards for a long time. If ever really.

by bArray 2y ago

WillPostForFood 2y ago

In the US it is because District Attorneys have an explicit, open policy of not prosecuting petty crime. That has led to police not investigating or arresting, because there is no point. https://crownschool.uchicago.edu/news-events/magazine/leading-way-advancing-decarceration https://crownschool.uchicago.edu/news-events/magazine/leadin...

bhj 2y ago
The linked article says: > He [Epperson] is currently conducting a multisite study in Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Louis that examines the development and implementation of deferred prosecution programs, a prosecutor-led innovation to divert people with nonviolent charges from traditional criminal justice processing. Seems reasonable to me, and a far cry from "an explicit, open policy of not prosecuting petty crime" that is somehow country-wide.

jonhohle 2y ago

Wasn’t this the broken windows philosophy that may or may not have reduced crime in NYC in the mid 90s? It seems like cracking down on low level crime should reduce bigger crimes, but the research seems to become politicized based on who instituted the policy.

skeeter2020 2y ago
The cost of punishment has also skyrocketed. Keeping someone in jail "a few years to cool off" costs a fortune.
- bko 2y ago
  Having some one punch random women on the subway a few times a year also costs a fortune
- black6 2y ago
  I've said it before: we need the Starship Troopers style public floggings for all crime. Eliminate expensive jails, and corporeally punish the offenders immediately and publically.
  - wetpaws 2y ago
    [dead]

VancouverMan 2y ago

[flagged]

emilamlom 2y ago
Are you really making a thinly-veiled argument for ethnostates? Careful, your racism is showing. Society isn't an algorithm that should be optimized for max efficiency/productivity anyways. A completely unregulated market like you allude to is like an ouroboros. It will consume itself because unchecked growth is unsustainable.
- joquarky 2y ago
  As I approach 50, I'm gradually realizing that efficiency was a red herring. It turns out that I meant to strive for all my life is called "wu wei", but it's not well known in our culture, so "efficiency" seemed like the closest match to what I was seeking.
rangerelf 2y ago
What a unfettered load of bullshit. Steal from "normal people" and nothing happens; steal from the owner class and _then_ see what happens. The pettiness of the crime doesn't matter, what matters is the class the victim belongs to. That's a feature of capitalism. "Corruption" is not an exclusive feature of socialism.
cocojumbo123 2y ago
No offence but you are mixing socialist policies, socialism and communism - very different things; I'm unaware of any communist country which goes soft on crime. I also fail to see how premise leads to conclusion. If you want another wacky theory here's mine: imho capitalism unleashed (extract every single penny) leads to less time to be active in a community because people have to work more. On another hand loss of religion leads to hedonism - satisfy the immediate needs. Combine the two and you get what we have today.
Wytwwww 2y ago
What do you mean by "socialist policies" exactly? Ignoring petty crime is somehow a socialist policy? You say all of those things and the mention the Soviet Union etc. Which makes very little sense because if modern Western countries have enacted socialist policies then the USSR couldn't have been "socialist" (or the other way around). Also what do you mean by "productivity"? Because by almost any measure it has been going up by quite a lot over the last few decades.

creer 2y ago

> because policing in general is not at the standard it once was. Currently police are only rewarded for "big busts" Sure. The point is this is a matter of policy. Someone's policy. Some people in there (1) choose to prioritize this or that, (2) choose to reward doing nothing, (3) choose to promote those who do that, etc, (all the way to) actively protect cops who are active nuisances themselves. This does not "just happen" except in the sense of "it has become acceptable". Accepted by whom? Voters at some point? But not always. In the US, most cops are extremely well insulated from the voters. And they haven't had to care about your standards for a long time. If ever really.