zlacker

This article from USA Today in 2018 implies the effect has been indefinite. Interesting graph, too, that shows the drop in police actively stopping petty crime correlates with a growth in homicides. I heard a Baltimore radio show in 2019 that said pretty much the same thing, highlighted by the police commissioner getting mugged in broad daylight as he was walking down the street with his wife.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/07/12/baltim...

“These guys aren’t stupid. They realize that if they do something wrong, they’re going to get their head bit off. There’s no feeling that anybody’s behind them anymore, and they’re not going to do it,” he says. “Nobody wants to put their head in the pizza oven when the pizza oven is on.”

>>yters+(OP)
How does a reduction in police-initiated enforcement actions square with a rise in homicides? Homicide is, pretty much by definition, not a petty crime. Or is this that hoary old "broken windows" theory of policing that's taken such a well-deserved beating over the last couple of decades?

The article also, despite a clear editorial slant, can't quite avoid hinting at the kind of solution that actually does need to happen: not for police officers to simply abrogate the responsibility they accepted with their oaths when the public makes clear their conduct has been unacceptable, but for police officers to improve their conduct, and discharge the responsibility they took on, to actually protect and serve.

I grant that that lies outside the false dichotomy you choose to draw, between police doing nothing and police continuing in the massive abuse of power status quo ante. But, after all, it is a false dichotomy. You can do better.

I hope you can do better, anyway. For one thing, you promoted the deputy police commissioner, which I'm sure he appreciates, and spun the world clear around on its axis so he got mugged in the daytime, when he didn't, instead of at night, when he did. (cf. https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/20/us/baltimore-deputy-police-co...)

These are very strange errors of fact to go on making with, it seems like, every single claim you've introduced so far. Wherever you're getting your information from, you might consider finding sources that do a better job of sticking to facts, because whatever you've been using up to now seems not much good at anything beyond leading you into error.

>>throwa+a6
The point is clear the police withdrawing has not improved things. The solution clearly lies elsewhere. And the 2015 riots did not make anything better.

>>yters+lf
Well, now you're just reiterating things you've already said and failed to support the first time. I guess that means we're done here.

>>throwa+Uf
I showed the crime rates went up after the riots because the police have stopped actively cleaning up crime. You never showed how the supporting evidence is wrong, nor why my inference was incorrect. You mainly nitpicked insignificant details. I would be genuinely interested if you can show violent riots have made life better for law abiding citizens in Baltimore.

>>yters+Po
look, i get the point that riots draw attention and show people are fed up. that makes sense

but, in baltimore that just led to lax police, more crime, and more homicides

i believe the same will happen with these riots. police will withdraw from blac neighborhoods, and the criminal element will have free reign. that is a bad outcome, and more innocent people will suffer than will benefit

we are trying to make life better for innocent black people, but being scared of the neighborhood gang bangers is not a step up from being scared of the police

and this will not bring justice for the victims, police may throw some sacrifices, but they otherwise will just be less caring about black neighborhoods and police mistreatment of black people, and the gulf will widen