|
|
|
|
|
|
by yourad_io
4189 days ago
|
|
|
The difference is that these stores volunteered. EDIT: How is the mob parallel applicable in this scenario? The stores voluntarily give them a discount hoping for more frequent police presence there (on breaks, etc). Nobody's threatening the stores to give them a discount, "or else". Did you think this was a bribe to ensure speedier "service" by the Police if the need arose? I don't get it. |
|
|
Not to enter the argument about whether it's a protection racket (i.e. whether it shares many characteristics with the racket of the 1920s), but I think the problem is apparent. Absent incentives, the police would be present evenly according to their estimate of which places they should be at. If incentives did not increase a policeman's desire to be at a store, then providing the incentive would be pointless (and indeed the GGGP comment implies that the purpose of the incentive is to get a couple of cruisers in the parking lot in order to deter crime).
The only reasonable conclusion is that these incentives are provided in order to skew the locations at which police would be present. So the issue isn't speedier service. It looks like he's implying that they'd get more frequent visits as a consequence of providing preferential treatment.