Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities • Hacker News Board

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#91

Post by Spooky23 » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:04 PM UTC

king_jester wrote: post #32

Spooky23 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's two sides to the coin. My dad worked for NYC during the Dinkins administration, which took a stance of not antagonizing the population with minor tickets and citations. His big story about the downside of this approach was a major snowstorm, which crippled the city in many areas. In his case, he was stuck at work at a public housing project for 3 days with the residents, because the city didn't ticket parking…

> In his case, he was stuck at work at a public housing project for 3 days with the residents, because the city didn't ticket parking violations and the plows couldn't clear the clogged streets. This has still be case during some of the big snows of the past several years even with parking violations tickets. > Broken elevators left the elderly trapped in high-rise buildings for days. People with medical emergencies…

I was specifically referring to city-owned housing.

The point is, there are extremes, and neither is the correct answer. I recall living in late 1980's Queens where getting a response from the police for anything short of a murder was an exercise in frustration. That wasn't the the case 10 years later.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#92

Post by korzun » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:04 PM UTC

pyrophane wrote: post #28

From the Times editorial board: > If the Police Department’s current commanders cannot get the cops to do their jobs, Mr. de Blasio should consider replacing them. > He should invite the Justice Department to determine if the police are guilty of civil rights violations in withdrawing policing from minority communities. > He should remind the police that they are public employees, under oath to uphold city and state…

You can't replace the union and NYPD has some serious voting power. So have fun with that.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#93

Post by Xylakant » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:04 PM UTC

kailuowang wrote: post #80

pcthrowaway wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Vancouver, police appear to be fairly hands-off (of course this is coming from a white male perspective, and I don't know enough black people here to have an idea of how different their experience is). And while we have a lot of drug activity, homelessness, streetwalking, etc. I believe there is a lower rate of violent/organized crime than NYC. Of course, Canadians have a much different attitude towards gun o…

Manhattan is pretty safe. People walk in the central park pretty late in the night (9-11pm) because there are (were) police patrol in it.

Police patrol != enforcement. Having relaxed police in the vicinity makes me feel safer, having police nearby that is just looking for minor infractions makes me feel less secure - and I'm privileged white.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#94

Post by utefan001 » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:05 PM UTC

Stopping the aggressive pursuit of people selling individual cigarettes would be a good place to start. If cigarette taxes are too damn high, people will find a cheaper way to smoke. Quit picking on poor people that smoke. Note: I don't smoke or drink.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#95

Post by korzun » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:05 PM UTC

Zigurd wrote: post #12

Spooky23 wrote: post #2

New York public employees cannot strike, so this is the labor action available to them. The union should think carefully though. If life just goes on without the nanny-state tickets and other revenue generators, the thought process may change. Maybe more fare jumping and double-parking would be ok, and we can live with that -- but with 10,000 fewer policemen. 10,000 * $100,000 = less need for ticket revenue.

The effectiveness of cost-cutting in the NYPD would be multiplied if they started with the shiny toys first. Cut the number of SWAT teams, sell off the armored division's tanks, to Ukraine perhaps, and cut the spies and surveillance gear first, and you'll be able to keep a lot more of the useful police who might then be able to focus on boosting their solution rates for crimes people care about.

Yes, cut the SWAT teams in.. NYC. Send armored division tanks to.. Ukraine.

They should hire you to run NYPD.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#96

Post by lkrubner » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:06 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #50

gharial wrote: post #29

I work in Manhattan and visit fairly shitty areas of Brooklyn and Queens regularly. These past few weeks have been the first time since I moved here that I've felt safe in the presence of cops. I'd read about enforcement being down just after the funeral for the officers shot in the Bronx but it really didn't click until a pair of them walked down the street by me in Chelsea. They didn't look at my SO like they were…

I'm suspecting that it will eventually prove that those that don't remember history are doomed to repeat it. NYC in the '70s and '80s was not that safe. Street crime, muggings, etc. were common. In the 1990s Giuliani stepped up patrols and sarted enforcing what most people thought were petty crimes, such as loitering, graffiti, parking violations, subway-gate-jumping, etc. with the effect that more serious crimes als…

The "broken windows" theory of police enforcement doesn't stand up when compared to other Western cities. A big part of the "broken windows" theory is that small crimes, such as graffiti, created an atmosphere that allowed worse crimes to happen. And yet, if you visit Berlin, you will see a city with a shocking amount of graffiti, but very little crime. If you visit parts of London you'll see run down industrial districts, but very little crime.

Even if you confine your analysis to the USA, the "broken windows" theory of crime does not explain the relative shift in crime towards the suburbs, nor does it explain the increasing epidemic of drugs in rural areas. There is a lot that it does not explain, so it should be treated with suspicion. A theory that only explains one data point is not a theory at all.

Most Western nations have seen decreases in crime during since the late 1980s. The USA had the most crime, and the USA has seen the biggest decrease. No one knows why. New York City has seen the biggest decrease of all the big cities, but figuring out why, given the extremely multi-variate nature of the problem, will be extremely difficult to do. Even those theories that attempt to explain the decline of crime in the USA (aging of the population, Roe vs Wade, unleaded gasoline, change in police tactics) fail to explain why New York City should see the largest decrease in crime, since one can find other cities, for any of those variables, that saw larger changes than New York City.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#97

Post by cynicalkane » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:06 PM UTC

krschultz wrote: post #55

ams6110 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm suspecting that it will eventually prove that those that don't remember history are doomed to repeat it. NYC in the '70s and '80s was not that safe. Street crime, muggings, etc. were common. In the 1990s Giuliani stepped up patrols and sarted enforcing what most people thought were petty crimes, such as loitering, graffiti, parking violations, subway-gate-jumping, etc. with the effect that more serious crimes als…

The truth of the matter is that we don't know why crime dropped over the last 30ish years. There are lots of theories, broken windows policing is just one of them. https://www.themarshallproject.org/2014/11/24/10-not-entirel...

The idea of tough, aggressive policing in New York has a lot of cultural momentum that will be hard to reverse. Despite the impression that Internet media subcultures try to create, New York is not united against police harassment. This is why de Blasio & co are being extremely careful to not politicize that incident where two policemen were randomly executed; and why the police union is doing its best to do the opposite. They are fighting for the "support the police" crowd.

The reason for this cultural momentum is because it wasn't too long ago that Manhattan was overrun with open drug use, open solicitation of prostitution, three-card-monte scammers, squeegee men, and so on. Central Park was dangerous after dark (and somewhat so even during the day). This is a particular sort of crime that we can imagine is solved by tough policing--and in the judgment of many people, this is exactly what happened.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#98

Post by jbooth » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:07 PM UTC

Alupis wrote: post #70

UrMomReadsHN wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of what was said was that the police (in Ferguson) seemed ill trained to use this fancy gear. With little oversight on how and when it is used. Allegedly. http://mashable.com/2014/08/14/war-veterans-ferguson-police/ Personally, I think the problem is when there us no cost benefit analysis. What's the cost in terms of maintenence as well as public perception and trust.

> that the police (in Ferguson) seemed ill trained to use this fancy gear I do realize you put the disclaimer "seemed", but I don't see any evidence that the police in Ferguson (or anywhere) were ill trained to drive an APC or use riot gear (gas masks included). APC's have been used by police departments for a long long time, just only they were purchasing them back then and now the military is giving them their old…

In terms of 'trained', it seems like their attitude towards crowd control was to out-macho the crowd, which can only really escalate the situation. Look at that picture of the dude on top of the APC brandishing the mounted gun. He's completely exposed, he's not in a combat position, he's in an intimidation position.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#99

Post by gambiting » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:09 PM UTC

specialp wrote: post #72

byerley wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly meant anti-regulation. I'm not sure we need strict laws regarding parking, public drinking, loosies, ect. Let alone aggressive enforcement. I think parts of NYC are a good example of how enforcement can cause a more negative environment than the original activity.

If you have ever been to NYC you would know that if the parking regulations were not enforced so zealously the city would be a mess. The only reason why $40 parking garages are full is that you know if you park illegally on the streets of Manhattan, your car is getting ticketed, and likely towed. Surely it makes NYC a ton of revenue but it is the only way to make things work. I agree with you on the other points.

Every time I get annoyed by how religiously parking regulations are followed in the UK(and they are anal about it to the extreme), I remember how it works in the country I come from. Try parking in Krakow or Warsaw - very little regulation, and people park everywhere, on sidewalks, on the grass, on pedestrian crossings...they would park on top of each other if they could. Parking regulations are a good thing.

Re: Life in New York City, Where Arrests Are Down and Tickets Are Rarities

#100

Post by logfromblammo » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:11 PM UTC

uiberto wrote: post #79

angersock wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He should remind the police that they are public employees, under oath to uphold city and state laws. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

I have no legal training, but doesn't the ruling say police officers still have a duty to the public, just not to the individual?

I am not a lawyer, so forgive me for trying to apply logic to the law.

What set cardinality would be minimally necessary to generate a police duty to protect a group, if it is not one? "The public" is, after all, nothing more than a set of individuals. Two? Three? Ten? A million? Are police subject to some selfish calculus where they are not obligated to risk their own lives unless it would save more than N non-police individuals?

Since this does not make sense by common definitions, I suspect that somewhere in the law, it defines "the public" to be the municipal corporation that employs the police, meaning essentially that the police don't ever have an obligation to do anything at all, unless a madman is threatening the city's articles of incorporation with a shredder or lighter.

That seems to me to be madness. But I am not a lawyer.