Tiberius Posted April 25, 2023 Posted April 25, 2023 16 hours ago, LeviF said: Re: some posts upthread, solving the crime problem is trivially easy. You don’t even need 20th or 21st century tech. Progressives simply object to any measure that effectively controls and eliminates criminal behavior. Like?
LeviF Posted April 25, 2023 Posted April 25, 2023 16 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Like? Mayors Giuliani and Bloomberg-era stop-and-frisk, for one. That was actually one of the most successful "gun control" programs ever implemented. Firearm homicides in NYC fell through the floor between 1991 and 2013. There are fair criticisms of how it was implemented during Bloomberg's tenure but progressives have no interest in nuanced takes and flatly disapproved of it. Same with CompStat-driven "hot spot" policing, more funding and more officers for PDs, zero tolerance, etc. 3
Tiberius Posted April 25, 2023 Posted April 25, 2023 13 minutes ago, LeviF said: Mayors Giuliani and Bloomberg-era stop-and-frisk, for one. That was actually one of the most successful "gun control" programs ever implemented. Firearm homicides in NYC fell through the floor between 1991 and 2013. There are fair criticisms of how it was implemented during Bloomberg's tenure but progressives have no interest in nuanced takes and flatly disapproved of it. Same with CompStat-driven "hot spot" policing, more funding and more officers for PDs, zero tolerance, etc. Totally disagree on first part and totally agree on second part. Stop and frisk does not seem to have reduced crime, but is clearly unconstitutional. If it clearly worked and did help beyond doubt, then it could be made an exception as a public safety necessity. Blame progressives all you want but the fourth amendment is part of the constitution. The hot spot thing is a great idea. Malcom Gladwell wrote about that in one of his books but as far as I understand it the police were the one resistant to that reform. 1 1
BillStime Posted April 25, 2023 Posted April 25, 2023 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: fourth amendment Fourth? These idiots only know what they are told about the second - c’mon Tibs 1 1
LeviF Posted April 25, 2023 Posted April 25, 2023 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Totally disagree on first part and totally agree on second part. Stop and frisk does not seem to have reduced crime, but is clearly unconstitutional. If it clearly worked and did help beyond doubt, then it could be made an exception as a public safety necessity. Blame progressives all you want but the fourth amendment is part of the constitution. Terry stops are constitutional. I think late Bloomberg-era stop and frisk, the highest number years for those stops, had like a 12% hit rate (~80,000 out of ~600,000 stops) where a "hit" is a stop that results in a conviction. That's actually pretty good when you consider that RAS is the standard for a Terry stop. Hit rates were higher for the Giuliani years but it wasn't being pushed *as much* and so officers were using more discretion and observation. Again, this goes back to some fair criticisms of how the NYPD operated in the Bloomberg era. Number of Terry stops shouldn't be a performance metric, for instance. 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: The hot spot thing is a great idea. Malcom Gladwell wrote about that in one of his books but as far as I understand it the police were the one resistant to that reform. CompStat originated in NYC Transit Police, back when that was its own entity. Due to several factors nearly all proactive policing in large cities has ceased which means hot spots are basically only used to determine how many officers will be assigned to take calls there. 1
LeviF Posted April 25, 2023 Posted April 25, 2023 1 minute ago, SUNY_amherst said: I agree with you on stop & frisk but it is not just progressives that reject that policy, it is loathed by the 2nd amendment fans as well. If someone is a second amendment fan and living in NYC I'm not sure what to tell them lmao. I am not generally a Bloomberg or Giuliani fan per se, but the crime drop in NYC over the rest of the country during their tenures is staggering. There are real issues w/r/t police training around firearm rights. For example because the second amendment exists the presence of a firearm is not on its face a threat or even a basis for reasonable suspicion in many areas. In NYC this is obviously not the case because acquiring a gun permit is nearly impossible for the average citizen. But this cuts multiple ways as a few "blue on blue" incidents have illustrated. So when a police officer articulates their RAS, simply "I saw the imprint of a concealed firearm" is increasingly not meeting the standard. 1
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted May 2, 2023 Author Posted May 2, 2023 (edited) 10 hours ago, aristocrat said: The real victims here are the ones being forced to beat this generational wealth recipient white male by their lack of inheritance. Edited May 2, 2023 by Over 29 years of fanhood
LeviF Posted May 2, 2023 Posted May 2, 2023 14 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: The real victims here are the ones being forced to beat this white male by their lack of inheritance. You can see the socioeconomic factors take hold of their brains in real time. 1
Recommended Posts