Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wallfacer120 1451 days ago
No, it's completely contradictory. You either want police to police high crime areas or you don't. You either think they should arrest people in those areas committing crimes, or you don't. The police are both biased for enforcing laws, and biased for not, is not a valid position.
1 comments

Police can be strongly enforcing some laws and regulations, while not enforcing others.

Typically you see under-enforcement of crimes that have direct victims and real impact on people's lives - property and violent crime (say, a stolen car, or stolen bike that leaves the victim unable to get to work/child care, or the victim injured and unable to work, if only temporarily) that directly impact a person's life...and over-enforcement of general "orderly society" crimes and regulations that don't have a direct victim or impact one people's lives.

For example, you'll see cops take 20 minutes to respond to calls of domestic violence, which might come down to being short staffed.

But isn't it strange that every patrol cop in the neighborhood never fails to make sure to check that the corner sausage cart vendor and ice cream van have every single permit in order? And how there's always time to stop someone for a non-functional tail light? And to stop random dudes for pat-downs?

Could this be down to the fact that police need reasons to stop cars in the US? In Australia they set up random stops and alcohol/drug test every driver without needing any suspicion. There is also no chance for racial bias since everyone gets tested.

While in the US they have to come up with a billion bullshit reasons to stop someone which mostly impacts poor people in bad cars.

My car looks like a homeless meth dealer lives in it and the registration is often expired. I very rarely get stopped but maybe that's because I live on the east coast?
> But isn't it strange that every patrol cop in the neighborhood never fails to make sure to check that the corner sausage cart vendor and ice cream van have every single permit in order? And how there's always time to stop someone for a non-functional tail light? And to stop random dudes for pat-downs?

it's not that surprising. I'm sure malice is part of the explanation, but it's also just easier. the ice cream van either has the permit or they don't. they're not going to run away. in 30 minutes, the officer gets to add another citation to the monthly tally. it's a nearly certain outcome that takes little effort.

the stolen car or bike is already gone by the time the officer shows up to the scene (if they bother to). it takes an indeterminate amount of time to track down the stolen item, and even more to gather enough evidence to actually charge someone. it sucks, but most people who are evaluated on metrics try to avoid spending a lot of time on tasks where they might come out empty-handed. it's a hard organizational problem to incentivize this sort of work.