Steely’s thread about gun control got me thinking about Chicago. With crime so pervasive, what can or should be done? A few years back I read up on Giuliani’s successful efforts in NYC, but I can’t remember much beyond getting more cops out on the corners. What do you all think? What can be done? What should be done? Anyone from Chicago want to add some insights?
According to the NYTimes this appears to be the plan right now:
There goes 60+ million down the tubes. Should just buy everyone a bullet proof vest with that money.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Getting more cops out on the corners.
[/quote]
You kind of answered your own question…
Reduction of crime is basically the same no matter the area: decriminalise victimless crimes, get more cops out there.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Steely’s thread about gun control got me thinking about Chicago. With crime so pervasive, what can or should be done? A few years back I read up on Giuliani’s successful efforts in NYC, but I can’t remember much beyond getting more cops out on the corners. What do you all think? What can be done? What should be done? Anyone from Chicago want to add some insights?
According to the NYTimes this appears to be the plan right now:
Mr. Hubermanâ??s plan for stemming the violence is built not on guns or security guards but on statistics and probability. A former police officer and transit executive with a passion for data analysis, Mr. Huberman believes that the school system can systematically identify the students who are most at risk of becoming involved in future violence, either as perpetrators or as victims, by intensively studying past incidents.
With $60 million in federal stimulus grant money, Mr. Hubermanâ??s plan uses a formula gleaned from an analysis of more than 500 students who were shot over the last several years to predict the characteristics of potential future victims, including when and where they might be attacked. While other big city school districts, including New York, have tried to focus security efforts on preventing violence, this plan would go further by identifying the most vulnerable students and saturating them with adult attention, including giving each of them a paid job and a local advocate who would be on call for support 24 hours a day.
[/quote]
Profiling?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Getting more cops out on the corners.
You kind of answered your own question…[/quote]
I do think this is a major part of it. Do you think it’s enough though? You can “surge” for awhile, but the $$ is going to run out.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Reduction of crime is basically the same no matter the area: decriminalise victimless crimes, get more cops out there.
[/quote]
Wasn’t Giuliani somewhat draconian on all crimes?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Profiling?[/quote]
Who/what do you propose profiling?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Getting more cops out on the corners.
You kind of answered your own question…
I do think this is a major part of it. Do you think it’s enough though? You can “surge” for awhile, but the $$ is going to run out. [/quote]
Long term solution: Encourage the people to bear arms. Encourage attendance at shooting ranges etc. Encourage CCW. Encourage the people of Chicago to get involved in the community. To start up neighborhood watches.
You have to realise the problem is cultural. People need to be shown that if they stand up for themselves and their rights the police/city/wider community will be on their side. When a store owner shoots and kills an armed robber throw the store owner a parade. Make him a hero. After all he has taken another scumbag off the streets. As it stands the store owner would probably go to prison.
Likewise if Tom shoots a rapist that is running away after just raping a girl he should be treated as a hero. In Chicago he would go to prison because the rapist wasn’t an immediate threat.
In the short term get more police so that the long term solution is possible.
The profiling sounds terrifying.
I believe NYC drastically reduced the murder rate by adding cops.
(And pricing out crime, of course, but that’s not a solution, really.)
I also, tbh, like the long term solution – I don’t know if there are real life examples of such a “virtuous gun culture” but in principle it would be great.
Why not simply wall of portions of the city prone to crime and let the people there kill each other? Drop food from helicopters and let 'em fight over it. Once down to the most violent, just put poison in the food. We could put cameras in there for entertainment.
Problem solved.
A lot of what Guiliani did was to strictly enforce laws on the books in targeted areas. He aimed to prosecute at 100% all the ‘small stuff’-- pot offenses, graffiti, civil disturbance, etc. He targeted ‘high crime areas’ (defined by some set of criteria) with enforcement, much like traffic engineers track ‘high crash rate’ locations on highways for targeted re-designs.
Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book “Tipping Point”, basically about very small events that at some point culminate to create a ‘point of no return’ effect of momentum. He discussed how Guiliani (and neighborhoods, groups, etc.) followed a zero-tolerance for grafitti. Every time some was found, it was cleaned up and many areas started to spring back in part because of the attention it was given (as well as addressing drug deals, petty crime, etc.).
In other words, once the apathy threshold is reversed, and law enforcement and communities ACTIVELY enforce rules and hold standards for their neighborhoods, change happens.
Draconian? I don’t really think so-- just enforcing laws on the books-- ie. What the “people” created. To me, ‘draconian’ is gun-control type things.
Guiliani was, of course, targeted as ‘racist’ simply because of the number of black and minority arrests that resulted in high crime locations.
I’m generally not a fan of Guiliani’s (national) politics, in fact he’s been a proponent of more gun control laws. However, I do believe he was effective executive at his local level, at least to the extent he was somewhat successful at combating crime in his city.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Profiling?
Who/what do you propose profiling?
[/quote]
No, that’s what it sounds like to me. The passage you shared says they’re going to do a study that will give them characteristics to use in identifying potential victims and perps.
Putting more cops out there helps until the brutality, racial profiling, and harrasment charges start up.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Putting more cops out there helps until the brutality, racial profiling, and harrasment charges start up. [/quote]
Except that those are real problems, too.
[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Putting more cops out there helps until the brutality, racial profiling, and harrasment charges start up.
Except that those are real problems, too.[/quote]
And what happens are cycles of cop “surges” with decreasing crime rates. Followed shortly by mounting complaints of jack booted thuggery in the media. Leading to a police force backing off, resulting in resurgent violent crimes.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
A lot of what Guiliani did was to strictly enforce laws on the books in targeted areas. He aimed to prosecute at 100% all the ‘small stuff’-- pot offenses, graffiti, civil disturbance, etc. He targeted ‘high crime areas’ (defined by some set of criteria) with enforcement, much like traffic engineers track ‘high crash rate’ locations on highways for targeted re-designs.
Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book “Tipping Point”, basically about very small events that at some point culminate to create a ‘point of no return’ effect of momentum. He discussed how Guiliani (and neighborhoods, groups, etc.) followed a zero-tolerance for grafitti. Every time some was found, it was cleaned up and many areas started to spring back in part because of the attention it was given (as well as addressing drug deals, petty crime, etc.).
In other words, once the apathy threshold is reversed, and law enforcement and communities ACTIVELY enforce rules and hold standards for their neighborhoods, change happens.
Draconian? I don’t really think so-- just enforcing laws on the books-- ie. What the “people” created. To me, ‘draconian’ is gun-control type things.
Guiliani was, of course, targeted as ‘racist’ simply because of the number of black and minority arrests that resulted in high crime locations.
I’m generally not a fan of Guiliani’s (national) politics, in fact he’s been a proponent of more gun control laws. However, I do believe he was effective executive at his local level, at least to the extent he was somewhat successful at combating crime in his city.[/quote]
This was my memory of what he did as well. The complete opposite of decriminalizing certain crimes as others have mentioned. And I think it’s pretty hard to argue he wasn’t effective in NYC. He did some amazing things from what I understand.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Putting more cops out there helps until the brutality, racial profiling, and harrasment charges start up.
Except that those are real problems, too.
And what happens are cycles of cop “surges” with decreasing crime rates. Followed shortly by mounting complaints of jack booted thuggery in the media. Leading to a police force backing off, resulting in resurgent violent crimes. [/quote]
Did this happen in NYC?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Sloth wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Putting more cops out there helps until the brutality, racial profiling, and harrasment charges start up.
Except that those are real problems, too.
And what happens are cycles of cop “surges” with decreasing crime rates. Followed shortly by mounting complaints of jack booted thuggery in the media. Leading to a police force backing off, resulting in resurgent violent crimes.
Did this happen in NYC?[/quote]
The complaints are happening, the backing off will follow.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Profiling?
Who/what do you propose profiling?
No, that’s what it sounds like to me. The passage you shared says they’re going to do a study that will give them characteristics to use in identifying potential victims and perps. [/quote]
In order to provide social services, right? I don’t know of anyone who claimed this was a bad idea. Are you implying a connection to police profiling for crimes? Perhaps you should start another thread to make a tangential political point.