Potshots?...c'mon man. PGR's posts/links about Camden have been in this thread and others for months...they're really not that hard to find. And a simple google search will also illustrate what Camden did. And sorry, but my question as to why more cities have not adopted the same "model" that Camden used is a valid question...and there are multiple reason's as to why not...and the other poster knows it too...he just won't admit it. But I do agree that cops have to put up with a lot of crap, day in and day out for a dangerous job that doesn't pay nearly enough. And I still contend that no amount of cops will alleviate the problem without the local citizens being "actively assisting" the police. What I have in mind has actually been around for quite awhile for smaller ares but I don't see why it could not be modified in a way that would also bring positive results in larger areas. Camden bummed from the state of NJ and then simply more than doubled the size of their police force with mostly white cops for a city where 94% of the people are non-white. Much of those funds could/should have been used on things like a lot more security cameras and other security devices and software.
Perhaps you've misunderstood my statement. Why more cities haven't adopted the Camden model is absolutely a valid question. Examining the reasons why is undeniably a valid exercise. Intimating that the absence of other cities adopting that model is, by itself, a valid argument against its value or workability is what I term a "weak logical position". The difference may be slight, but significant.
As much as I want that to be the case, how do you overcome the massive amount of public anti-police sentiment that has pervaded the social fabric and the media? If the vocal minority is constantly yelling "ACAB", how do you get the citizenry that is being browbeaten into fearing the police to be willing to assist them?
My hunch is that the reason you can't find any instances of what you seem to be advocating for is due to human nature. That's just not how most people work. Bystander Effect And Diffusion Of Responsibility
For clarification, I am not married to any individual solution. I am only advocating for what the evidence I've been able to find supports as the most successful model that also supports the most freedom (similar to the German/Scandinavian/Nordic models). If I see evidence of an alternate model that works as well and still offers increased freedom, as well as offers the community safety of travel and trade, I'll gladly support it.
This is the precise question I have posed to FGR on multiple occasions and also to others, and I pretty sure FGR read the same reasons I have but won't admit it. He also keeps pointing to Scandinavian countries/cultures to Camden freaking New Jersey's as if that's somehow a fair comparison and like I said, he might as well try to draw a parallel of Camden and Asian countries. I have also acknowledged that some types of crime in Camden have dropped. But, others have recently flat lined or even risen.
There is a point in time where all good ideas/theories had zero evidence, research or examples… until it was executed to provide. Just because there is no evidence does not disprove a theory or idea from being a good one.
Not gonna be easy, that's for sure...and it certainly won't happen overnight. It has taken us a long time to get where we're at, so getting everyone on the same page may also take a while. But yeah, gaining mutual trust through sincere dialogue is key.
There is plenty of evidence showing that dispersed responsibility is opposed to normal human behavior. As I understand it, this is a well understood concept in behavioral psychology. It would be extraordinary to find an effective system that relied on dispersed responsibility. As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. However, I'd be happy to see ANY evidence at all.
Yeah i read your link. It seems to be referencing emergency situations which i do not believe has anything to do with what Yankee has been trying to explain. You want an example of dispersed responsibility working in non emergency situations? Just check out the PTA. Continual decreases in parent participation closely corrolates with our educational degradation. Yankee can correct me if im wrong, but im pretty sure he is referring to things like “help thy neighbor raise thy barn” which has nothing to do with the link you are using as pushback. What the link is referring to it seems is when people wont put themselves in danger for others during an emergency situation. Another example would be neighborhood watch programs, which have shown success at reducing crimes in some areas. Nothing extraordinary about it: How effective are neighborhood watches in reducing crime? "); display: inline-block; height: 24px; width: 24px; transform: rotateZ(-180deg);"> Offenders may notice the spike in community surveillance, and in turn decide not to strike or possibly target a different area. While there are various studies on this topic, meta-analysis found that community watches were associated with a relative reduction in crime of about 16%.Sep 18, 2020 You said you aren't married to the camden trial which has shown to large marginal improvements at best, yet are extremely quick at shutting anything else down. Sure reads like you are married to it based on the continual push and referral to an experiment that hasn't really helped on its own without a huge uptick in financing. neighborhood watch programs cost nothing. Thats the extraordinary part….
^^^BAM ! you nailed it, and that is one of the very alternate "models" I was alluding to. I am a active participant/member in that very same community watch...and it works. We nailed a group of 3 or 4 individuals in a theft ring about 3 years ago...of course, the "bastard cops" had a huge part. I had not revealed the "NW" and one of the other "models' I had in mind that may also work because I was having too much fun with PGR by not posting it. And in many instances, whenever someone "demands proof", they are kidding themselves into believing they somehow have superior intelligence. Besides, they are so entrenched in their beliefs, they tend to arbitrarily dismiss any sort of proof that may be provided anyway.
When such a serious and ongoing problem like this exists, its much better to try many different things to best determine what will work. To take one idea that was put on trial with marginal success and claim its the best answer for all, seems to me, to be extremely short sided. There hasnt been a great answer, so to me, any and all ideas are welcomed to try to solve the problem with resounding success. I personally wouldn't shun any idea, no matter how extraordinary, without giving it a test run. Try many things. Thats the only way to determine what works best. Not just take the first one that proved to not be largely successful and think that it can be used everywhere and problem will be solved. Thats extremely simplistic and doomed to failure to me. Community involvement has long been touted as the best answer. Just like parental involvement is the best answer for improving our kids mental state and maturation.
Diffusion of responsibility happens in many situations. It can be as harmless as not putting your dishes in the dishwasher because nobody else has. It's human nature. The fact that it also happens in emergency situations shows how strong of a human nature it is. The neighborhood watch programs like the one that George Zimmerman was captain of when he killed Trayvon Martin? I'd much prefer vetted and trained individuals. But if you're going to vet and train people that's going to cost money. A lot of money. There are claims, though not much evidence, that Neighborhood Watch can help reduce crime by 16% on average. Camden's "marginal" improvement of 60-70% reduction in murder rates (depending on the years you're looking at) kind of puts that to shame... And neighborhood watches don't do anything to address rampant police corruption and brutality. But sure, I'm all for neighborhood watches as long as the participants are carefully vetted and trained. And excluded from the watch if they don't have the proper disposition. As long as it's well organized and regulated it can't hurt. *Edit* However, getting poor neighborhoods to have time for being on the neighborhood watch when they are working 2 or 3 minimum wage jobs just to keep up is probably going to be a hard sell...
I didn't actually see any evidence... It was an interesting suggestion that may help in some situations. By all means, if there is any evidence of neighborhood watch addressing the concerns of this thread I'd still love to discuss it. Not sure how discussing the merits of a program's ability to address specific situations equates to "dismissing" it, either...
I just figured it out!!! You are a politician! Are you running the next term? Only a politician can cherry pick one stat(decreased murders) and dismiss other stats(that went up). Only a politician would dismiss an average a 16% of crime reduction, cost free, due to a singular instance…. And claim they are always right. Politicians only see what they want to see and will only claim they see evidence if it fits their narrative. Only a politician…. Good luck gathering votes! Ill continue with community first involvement, regardless of how “wrong” you think it is.
You can include the percentage of the murder stats as well ( 60-70% reduction, depending on the year you start with). Feel free to discuss the stats that went up if you can actually find evidence to support it. Looks like Camden's police budget before the change was estimated to have been at $62 million and went up to 63.4 million by 2015. $68.45 million in 2019... which is pretty much in line with the increases in the rest of the country. So I'm not really sure how this is considered to be "throwing money" at the problem. Looks like they expanded the police force without ballooning the budget, while getting substantially better results. Nearly every crime statistic has dropped in Camden. Fewer reports of police abuse. Fewer deaths. Again, happy to talk about it. Or you can just keep up with the personal attacks. Whatever.
“According to police, murders occurring between those dates have decreased 50 percent from 2012 to this year, from 16 incidents to 8.” 70% cherry picking stat is such a small sample size its far from proven squat. If this were the blazer sode of the forum clinging to a stat like that wpidl be laughed out of the thread…. meanwhile similar stats with numbers of “significance” you think hold no merrit…. Lol: https://www.ncpc.org/resources/home...ch is one of,crime and make communities safer. “ Neighborhood Watch is one of the oldest and most effective crime prevention programs in the country, bringing citizens together with law enforcement to deter crime and make communities safer.” https://luskin.ucla.edu/ucla-study-...n crime is,Jordan Downs and Nickerson Gardens. “The impact on crime is significant. According to the analysis, in a one-year period, CSP has led to seven fewer homicides, 93 fewer aggravated assaults and 122 fewer robberies than would otherwise have been expected at Jordan Downs and Nickerson Gardens.”
The reality is no stats hold true anymore because polls and numbers can be held and added up to fit darn near any narrative. I trust those who can see past stats because stats/polls lie all the time. Someone who will only allow stats to change their mind concern me. Eye test has value, common sense has value and people are not always honest. There is more to everything in life than just stats and one who lives in only a stat world is only living a half truth.
