Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Clawdius t1_j4gpmlx wrote

What's "mandatory 4k"?

1

Scumandvillany t1_j4grf0u wrote

It stems from the idea that objectivity in law enforcement is important these days. With the police being proven to be problematic in enforcement, from stop and frisk, to vehicle stops, the point is to move to an objective way to get where we want, which is safer streets, better traffic enforcement, and actually catching murderers and violent people.

The city should put up a network of a few thousand cameras. Minimum. The police already have 500 or so, and those should all be upgraded to MANDATORY 4K, while also adding to the network. This would enable real time tracking of suspects and much better intelligence for the cops to solve murders. Think about it, a few thousand shooters are simply walking about, free to roam. Murderers some, hyper violent all. Give the tools to prosecute more effectively, and redirect police to crime solving and simple patrol and responding to 911 calls by expanding the detective unit.

Civil liberties can be preserved by having a MANDATORY obligation to delete any footage not involved in a crime after a set period, like three weeks or so. Have a civil commission in charge of the release and use of the footage, with regular citizens on the board. Only be able to use the footage in specific crimes-violent ones.

At 10 thou a camera(and that's a lot), 20 million dollars rolls out two thousand cameras, all super high def for zooming etc. add in 5 million a year for enterprise cloud storage(leveraged by the bully pulpit and the city's franchise powers), and viola. we spent 150 million in the last budget for violence prevention, which indeterminate results.

Once you start actually locking murderers and shooters up em masse, the violent crimes will go down. It's not a huge swath of people who commit such crimes, it's a few thousands out of 1.6 million. Eventually you lock all the degenerates up and others will get the idea to not fuck around.

I'm not saying this idea is Christ come again, but it's a very simple idea and largely irrefutable. The fact is we are entering a new era of policing and we must find new ways to solve violent crime and enforce the law.

At the same time we can do violence prevention, jobs programs and jail reforms to help ex cons gain a true foothold after they leave a long sentence, while also reducing the amount of people going in for petty drug crimes etc. of course we need to look at the economic reasons as well, and focus on bettering our educational systems and creating opportunities for people to succeed at the same time as MANDATORY 4K. But MANDATORY 4K is about now.

6

spurius_tadius t1_j4gvgpo wrote

>Once you start actually locking murderers and shooters up em masse, the violent crimes will go down. It's not a huge swath of people who commit such crimes, it's a few thousands out of 1.6 million

It's understandable that folks would think that, but crime has been around a LONG TIME and NO ONE has actually figured out how to solve it. It is NOT "simple". There is nothing simple about dealing with crime.

In particular, the "focus on violent offenders" idea has been tried ad nauseum, over and over again in the US and internationally. It never worked. Why? Because for every violent offender you take off the street, there's another one will take their place and "graduate" into violent crime after YEARS of having practiced petty nuisance crimes that never merited attention because everyone is so focused on thug vs thug murdering. And you know what? Locking people up doesn't deter others from whatever is attracting them to commit crimes. The people who do these things DO NOT think like you do.

−8

TreeMac12 t1_j4ig4no wrote

Violent crime and specifically murders went down almost every year starting in 1994:

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/murder-homicide-rate

It might have had something to do with this:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/3355/text

3

spurius_tadius t1_j4jj9wl wrote

Well, I guess it's all solved and we have nothing to worry about then?

Sorry, but I remember that bill, it was yet another attempt at "getting tough on crime". I suppose it may have helped some crimes in some places, but really, by the time someone is "caught" and charged with federal crimes, it's too late. They've already done incalculable damage to the fabric of civilized society with all the crimes for which they've NOT been caught nor charged for.

The fact is crime goes up and down. Law enforcement and the courts can only do so much.

−1