4 ms·
Its a stereotypical urban vs suburban vs rural thing. Its only new in the sense of it being hip to live in urban areas. Always been this way. There has alway
by VLM 12y ago
Its a stereotypical urban vs suburban vs rural thing. Its only new in the sense of it being hip to live in urban areas. Always been this way.
There has always been a different social contract between the cops and each social class. The cops have no idea why an urban person is calling them because if they're upper class they are rich so they don't care and a normal personal assistant isn't going to go all batman and hunt down thieves, and if they're poor then they have their own ethnic / gang type of ways to fix this in addition to deep seated victim shaming (she was asking for it, what kind of idiot leaves her purse in a car in an urban area, etc). The urban cops just don't know what to think about middle class people, or middle class outlooks on policing.
In the burbs they'd do exactly what the author was expecting, dispatch a squad, take care of business. In a rural area they wouldn't have a crime like this, but something similar would be handled like the burb example. There's a social contract and developed protocols and expectations and it would all be OK.
Not saying its right or wrong, just saying its a fact that pioneers skeletons always end up having arrows sticking outta their backs.
- enobrev 12y agoI agree with your point that that's the way things go in the city. I've lived in 4 major US cities in my life, and the cops respond to some things and don't respond to others. It's generally a numbers game. I also agree that in the suburbs and rural areas, the numbers work in the favor of the local police. I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean in regards to the the ethnic / gang type way of fixing things in poor neighborhoods. Also, I'm not sure if you've been to Seattle. I lived there for two years, recently. I wouldn't really call Seattle ethnic, gang-type, or poor.