Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 643 posts

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#221

Post by godelski »

lostapathy wrote: post #212
godelski wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant specifically arresting people before they committed a crime. There is a fine line between that and putting someone under watch, but I think Minority Report was pointing out that this line might as well not exist. Personally, I think putting someone under watch before they have committed a crime or there is reasonable suspicion that the person is about to commit a crime is unconstitutional. I do not think stat…

Everybody commits minor infractions of the law regularly. Putting someone under watch, by a cop who needs to report that he enforced something, is going to ensure they get picked up sooner or later. There's a saying to the effect that a good cop can find a reason to pull any car over if he follows it for just a couple minutes.

I have one that goes back a few more centuries

> If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.

- Cardinal Richlieu

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#222

Post by diag »

whatshisface wrote: post #207
TallGuyShort wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If crime being caught by a drive-by patrol is a significant way in which crime is being caught, to me that screams "victimless crimes". I break victimless laws all the time, sometimes with my police officer friends and neighbors present, sometimes on private property miles from any public roads. I never seem to get busted for it. So if 10-block patrols of "troubled areas" really saw an increase in enforcement action,…

Of course if the law is bad, the solution isn't to dismantle law enforcement, it's to fix the law.

How do you deal with police forces ignoring policy and performing as they deem fit all while protecting themselves?

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#223

Post by TallGuyShort »

iguy wrote: post #214
TallGuyShort wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If crime being caught by a drive-by patrol is a significant way in which crime is being caught, to me that screams "victimless crimes". I break victimless laws all the time, sometimes with my police officer friends and neighbors present, sometimes on private property miles from any public roads. I never seem to get busted for it. So if 10-block patrols of "troubled areas" really saw an increase in enforcement action,…

If what you describe was the pattern, then the regions with lots of observed "victimless crimes" would be uncorrelated with the regions with lots of serious crimes (e.g. from counting bullet holes down at the morgue, or from ShotSpotter). That's great, this theory makes a testable prediction. It's falsifiable. That said, I agree that the smart use of such predictions should be sensitive to this. Try to predict where…

I'm not saying it's the pattern, I'm saying it's a significant pattern. And I strongly oppose the idea that our law enforcement should be treating any individual based on "patterns" anyway.

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#224

Post by CivBase »

> predictive policing relies on algorithms to interpret police records, analyzing arrest or parole data to send officers to target chronic offenders, or identifying places where crime may occur.

So... instead of using algorithms, how will the police decide where to patrol heaviest? Putting a human in charge of that seems like a great way to increase racial bias. Or am I misunderstanding what "predictive policing" is?

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#225

Post by m0zg »

This is a really bad knee-jerk in the long term. These systems should be improved, and relied upon less, rather than banned. You want to identify the "at risk" individuals and focus on them not getting into trouble, preemptively? Predictive policing could help you with that. Arguably, this should be its main purpose in the first place.

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#226

Post by thescriptkiddie »

kadabra9 wrote: post #3

Honest question here. Are these neighborhoods “over policed” because their residents commit more crimes, or do the residents commit more crimes because their neighborhood is “over policed”?

Given that the USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world, I'm going to go with the latter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarcera...

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#227

Post by hckr_news »

WrongThinkerNo5 wrote: post #182

With what seems to be nothing but criticism of policing policies, I would love to know what the ideal or even acceptable policing policies are, presuming that any policing will be accepted. The most simple minded can be critics, but what is the alternative? What happens when the lawless mob and criminals want to break and enter your home and take your things and burn down your life? It's easy enough when it's the "ot…

Username checks out

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#228

Post by riazrizvi »

godelski wrote: post #171
riazrizvi wrote: post #63

> Used by police across the United States for almost a decade, predictive policing relies on algorithms to interpret police records, analyzing arrest or parole data to send officers to target chronic offenders, or identifying places where crime may occur. The promise of the software made in a sales pitch or on the website, is a far cry from the reality of what such software delivers. That's fine when it's business, t…

When we talk about this I think we really need to talk about Blackstone's Ratio [0] which was clearly an influence for the founding fathers. We're talking about peoples' lives and freedom, how highly do you value these? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio

Thanks for introducing me to this. Personally I think instead Schrodinger's Cat is more appropriate to legal policy. Measurement effects the result. In that excessive policing, where a people are treated with extreme prejudice as likely offenders, creates more offenders. Because the incentive to be a good citizen is eroded by your social guardians.

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#229

Post by jjeaff »

onetimeusename wrote: post #204
bhntr3 wrote: post #184

The problem with predictive policing is in the name. Inference (ML) predicts the future from the past. If the past is racist, then inference will create a racist future. Since racism is systemic[1], especially when it comes to policing, predictive policing is actively working against an anti-racist future. There may be statistical ways to factor out systemic racism. There are two reasons I don't think that works: 1.…

What is the claim when data is said to include systemic racism and bias? Is it that race data does indeed predict higher crime but that biased policing causes the crime rate to be misreported as higher because police only focus their attention on certain areas? Is it that police actually cause crime due to racist beliefs so that they must in some way entice crimes to be committed? Is it that crimes are equal between…

For myriad of reasons, we know clearly that controlling for no other factors, crime is higher among black populations. So to extrapolate that any one person is more likely to commit a crime because they are black is the definition of racism.

It is not ok to assume that someone might be more likely guilty or more likely to commit a crime based on the color of their skin. Even if you had perfect historical data. It's just not acceptable ethically, morally, whatsoever. And the very idea by some that it is ok, as long as your stereotypes are backed by accurate data, perpetuates racial oppression and creates a self fulfilling prophecy.

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#230

Post by jjeaff »

tootie wrote: post #185
riazrizvi wrote: post #63

> Used by police across the United States for almost a decade, predictive policing relies on algorithms to interpret police records, analyzing arrest or parole data to send officers to target chronic offenders, or identifying places where crime may occur. The promise of the software made in a sales pitch or on the website, is a far cry from the reality of what such software delivers. That's fine when it's business, t…

NYC has used analytics since 1993 and it's widely credited as contributing to the incredible drop in crime. I don't buy for a second that ending these kind of programs will help anything. Certainly we can decrease brutality by sending police into areas with no conflicts but that defeats the whole purpose of policing. We need effective and aggressive law enforcement as much as ever. We need to root out the worst abuse…

Did NYC drop significantly more than almost every other city in America? Because they all dropped precipitously as well and most are not using these detailed analytics.
Post reply on HN