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

LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

lapdhelicoptertracker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–317 of 317 posts

Re: LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

#311

Post by brian-armstrong »

hollerith wrote: post #239
Aurornis wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, yes. Dropping a magnet onto a car and pulling it off, especially if not recently cleaned, will damage the paint to some degree. Maybe not enough for an average person to notice, but you really shouldn’t do this to other people’s cars. Some people will get snide about anyone who cares about their car’s paint, but as someone who once bought a car I had to save a long time for and spent a lot of time with…

I'll avoid doing it from now on.

I'm curious, how did you make it this far in life without realizing that paint is delicate and scratches easily? Do you have untreated brick walls in your house or something?

Re: LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

#312

Post by zimpenfish »

wredcoll wrote: post #307
zimpenfish wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> over one hundred years Look, I know I'm old and it feels like it but 1980 is absolutely not one hundred years ago. > I would love to see more comprehensive stats to answer this question Have some more recent California examples (between 1994 when they created the law and 2012 when it was loosened): "[...] given life sentences for offenses including stealing one dollar in loose change from a parked car, possessing l…

From my pseudo-ivory tower viewpoint it seems like the concept of 3 strikes has some validity but with totally the wrong response. If someone is convicted three times of stealing in a year, even if it's like 1$, clearly something is not working here between this person and the system. It's a pipe dream but it would be nice if we could have some kind of board you could refer cases like that to with the mission stateme…

> convicted three times of stealing in a year [...] clearly something is not working here between this person and the system.

Yep, it's definitely a "this person needs some kind of help" signifier.

I can see the logic of "three top-line serious felonies" -> much more severe punishment (even though, I believe, more severe punishment doesn't actually tend to reduce recidivism but I guess if you get life without parole, that's not a huge issue) - if someone commits three distinct murders[0], obviously there's a problem with letting them loose in polite society.

> powers to take actions that involved things other than prisons.

I think various places have tried things like that and (IIRC) they tend to work out well - people get reintegrated into society, they don't reoffend, etc. - but all it takes is one agitator (right wing paper or politician looking for cheap points) to bring up the "soft on crime" angle and it all goes out the window.

[0] obvs. without justification - if they've killed in self-defence three times, that's different than three unprovoked straight out murders, but you'd still want some kind of "look, maybe don't go places where you end up in fights etc." conversation.

Re: LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

#313

Post by zimpenfish »

closeparen wrote: post #304
hkpack wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about depressed people? What about stressed people? What about people with autism who overreact when spooked? What about people on the edge who didn't care about the consequences because of the life situation? What about people who are convinced that police may kill them for mild violation as they saw that multiple times on the news and social media? The reaction to flee may be justified at the moment as it is l…

Driving on public roads carries a responsibility to respond reasonably in all kinds of stressful situations. People incapable of handling a traffic stop should not be licensed.

> Driving on public roads carries a responsibility to respond reasonably in all kinds of stressful situations.

Yes.

> People incapable of handling a traffic stop should not be licensed.

Also yes. But both of those points apply to the (US) cops and they frequently fail on both points (the first amply demonstrated by how many police chases end up in crashes and/or deaths; the second by any one of thousands of videos showing where the cops needlessly escalate traffic stops.)

Re: LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

#314

Post by vee-kay »

T3OU-736 wrote: post #300
vee-kay wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those high-powered toys by the cops are merely for showing off and to victimize the weak. Those toys typically never come into play to protect the citizens. Case in point: during the Uvalde school shooting incident in 2022, when a shooter (Salvador Ramos) went on a killing spree inside the school, then hundreds of cops gathered outside with brand new body armor (gifted to them just months ago) and armed with automati…

```you should know the Uvalde school shooter was a minor but he managed to buy the guns legally from a gun shop on credit!``` That does not appear to be true. The investagiom reporting shows that the shooter bought the guns after he turned 18 - the legal age to purchase them (long guns, aka rifles - different from pistols) in the state of Texas. Buying things on credit seems like a reasonable way to do business in ge…

In my country, no firearm can be issued to any civilian (certainly not a minor), without verification and license from police.

In Texas, there is no minimum age for purchasing ammunition beyond federal limits, no requirement for an ammunition seller to keep a record of the purchaser, and no specific license to buy or sell ammunition, according to the Giffords Law Center.

https://www.kxan.com/investigations/uvalde-shooter-had-1600-...

Salvador Ramos, the Uvalde school shooter, legally purchased two AR platform rifles Ramos got his guns legally through Oasis Outback, a Uvalde sporting goods store and federal firearms licensee, according to published reports. He also purchased hundreds of rounds of ammunition, on his 18th birthday.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/25/us/uvalde-texas-school-sh...

I know the USA has a bad habit of buying things on credit, but firearms & ammo should never be allowed to be purchased on credit. Let it be purchased only after a verification and license from police, and only via debit card or bank transaction with proper legal paper trail, not credit or cash. And any firearm and ammo purchase should be ratified with local police, so they know if someone is making a suspicious purchase.

Re: LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

#315

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

mike_d wrote: post #308
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Helicopters avoid car chases by allowing them to follow the car until it gets to a destination or runs out of gas. So, the thing that we could do cheaper and easier with drones, we should continue to do with vastly more expensive helicopters.... why? > Even if they "usually" start from a minor traffic violation (which they do not), Except that both independent journalists, and every major law enforcement agency, ha…

You literally just made the case for helicopters. I don't believe you are very familiar with LA airspace, but it will be one of the last places drones ever make sense.

So, you think a drone is harder to fly in protected airspace than a helicopter, and somehow you've taken my evidence that police chases need to stop (de-emphasizing the need for helicopters...) as evidence that we need helicopters. Might also be worth considering that the police often don't respect airspace limits. They frequently fly where they're not supposed to, in LA.

Re: LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

#316

Post by nenxk »

jeltz wrote: post #241
nenxk wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Restricted high speed chases lead to a lot more crime though there’s some car thief’s I’ve watched on insta and they avoid LA and stick to Oakland because of the chase laws you also have people in New York like squeeze benz, license, doolie, and a lot more who have made entire social media careers driving around recklessly and getting into crashes on freeways because they won’t get chased more than a mile there’s bee…

Not sure why car chases are necessary to solve this problem. Just arrest these people in their homes. Those videos are enough evidence for arrest and conviction.

The problem with the YouTubers posting these vids are they hide their faces and most of the cars are either stolen or borrowed and even when they aren’t they don’t have any plates so let’s say the police see a video there’s not a whole lot they can do they can get a warrant for the channels owners info but they still have to prove that the person uploading the videos was actually driving the car and not just editing the videos their other option is to figure out the cars owner but they still have to prove that the owner was the one driving which is hard and in many cases of atleast the popular channels they don’t even own the cars it’s not impossible to pin it on someone but it’s not worth their time to build a case like that for reckless driving they have many more important cases. If it was a few one off instances then I could see it but it’s became increasingly popular if you go on Instagram you can find thousands of accs uploading these videos and only a few ever get arrested and most of the time like in squeeze Benz’s case it’s for unrelated crimes. With these videos becoming popular and more people catching on that they can just drive recklessly without being pulled over there’s thousands more teens driving like this without ever posting about it nypd doesn’t have the time to track down 100s of cars each day just because they drove fast and didn’t pull over hell look at how long it took them to track down Luigi who was NYs most wanted there for a bit.

Re: LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

#317

Post by SauntSolaire »

zimpenfish wrote: post #298
SauntSolaire wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to see more comprehensive stats to answer this question, rather than relying on cases studies you have to go back over one hundred years to find.

> over one hundred years Look, I know I'm old and it feels like it but 1980 is absolutely not one hundred years ago. > I would love to see more comprehensive stats to answer this question Have some more recent California examples (between 1994 when they created the law and 2012 when it was loosened): "[...] given life sentences for offenses including stealing one dollar in loose change from a parked car, possessing l…

1912 is over one hundred years ago, which is obviously what I was referring to.

My point is you're just pulling out a few incidents, and not even very many at that. I would like to see real stats on the subject, but it seems you're working under the "plural of anecdote is data" theory.

Post reply on HN