Sorry to hear that. And frustrated that VT was a “gun-free” zone so that nobody could protect themselves.
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
********

So you really think that in the chaos and confusion of the VT shooting that having more civillians firing off rounds would have been a good thing? You really think that when the assailant walked into that first classroom and started shooting people, someone in the back of the class could have just shot him and they could have gone back to their lecture? If a single person dies senselessly at the hands of a gunman that is still a tragedy! You don’t think that the idea of everyone needing to arm themselves 24/7 would mean our society had completely broken down?

If we reach the point that getting ready for class means packing your glock into your bag alongside your books and pens it means that the moral fabric of our nation has disappeared and we are living in anarchy.

And I say that as someone who had a good friend die in the VT shooting.

Manufacturing Low Crime Rates at the NYPD: Reputation Versus Safety Under Bloomberg and Kelly
Posted: 08/13/2012 10:16 am
React
Amazing
Inspiring
Funny
Scary
Hot
Crazy
Important
Weird
Follow
NYPD , NYPD Whistle Blowers , NYPD Marijuana Arrests , Compstat , Downgrading Crimes , New York Police Department , Ny Stop And Frisk , Nypd Arrest Quotas , Nypd Downgrading Crimes , NYPD Scandals , Stop And Frisk Nypd , New York News

share this story
34
12
5
Submit this story

The practice of manufacturing artificially low crime rates increased substantially after 2002 under Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his police commissioner Raymond Kelly. New research based on interviews with 2,000 retired police officers from the NYPD reveals pervasive, system-wide corruption of criminal records and police practices. This research suggests that concern with the department’s reputation for reducing crime, much more than with public safety, drives police policy.

Mountains of scientific evidence supporting this are explored in The Crime Numbers Game. The bulk of the book’s evidence came from a survey of 500 retired police officers ranked captain and above, as well as from in depth interviews with over 40 retired and active officers.

A new survey of former NYPD officers includes 10 police chiefs, 36 inspectors, 63 captains, 262 lieutenants, 382 sergeants, and 1,154 patrol officers and detectives. The survey asked officers if they had witnessed words being changed in crime reports or observed other unethical efforts to downgrade serious crimes to lesser offenses. Using the officers who retired before 1995 as a baseline, the survey found that 25 percent of those officers had personally observed unethical crime reporting. Only 28 percent of those who retired between 1995 and 2001 had observed these activities.

However, in the Kelly/Bloomberg era (2002 and after) over half the officers — 51 percent — had observed the intentional misclassification of serious crimes as petty offenses and other unethical practices, typically multiple times. Officers also reported that since 2002 they had experienced unusually strong pressures from supervisors to downgrade crimes and keep crime numbers low.

The consequences of downgrading or not reporting crimes can be severe. For example, in 2010 recently retired Detective Harold Hernandez revealed to Village Voice reporter Graham Rayman that a series of sexual assault-robberies in Washington Heights had been downgraded from serious felonies to misdemeanors. As a result, the NYPD missed the crime pattern and allowed a sexual predator to remain at large for at least two months and to commit six more rapes.

More evidence came from numerous NYPD whistleblowers. Since 2010 officers Adrian Schoolcraft, Craig Matthews, Frank Polestro, Adyl Polanco, and Vanessa Hicks have talked openly to reporters and TV cameras about the routine downgrading of crimes and the use of illegal arrest quotas by the NYPD. Not surprisingly, they have been punished by the department for doing so. Other officers have discussed confidentially the pressure to keep numbers low with reporters and researchers (including the authors).

It is important to understand that the official crime rate is a powerful indicator of crime in New York and a broader gauge of how the city is doing. The mayor and other officials, the real estate and tourist industries, and the top brass at the NYPD all have a strong interest in keeping the crime numbers low.

This research also indicates that the corruption of crime reports is a consequence of the misuse of Compstat (the NYPD’s computerized crime reporting and mapping system introduced in 1995). Ironically, this innovative management accountability system, which was designed to reduce crime, has become twisted. Compstat now serves as a powerful mechanism to ensure that downgrading permeates the whole department.

At weekly Compstat crime strategy meetings, commanders are held accountable for crime in their precincts. When used in a community-oriented and problem-solving fashion, this makes great sense. But when the upper echelon’s ability to keep tabs on the crime rate and closely monitor officers and precincts is coupled with pressure to keep crime numbers low, the Compstat system is turned on its head.

There is now a clear message emanating from the top commanders at police headquarters: make many stop and frisks, write many summonses, make many arrests for petty offenses, and downgrade serious crimes. In other words, the NYPD seeks to keep the serious crime numbers low while showing lots of officer activity. The NYPD’s 50,000 marijuana arrests, 600,000 summonses, and nearly 700,000 stop and frisks do little or nothing to make the city safer. Indeed, this unnecessary activity alienates communities and hurts the NYPD’s ability to fight serious and violent crimes.

This strategy does not involve intelligence gathering, surveillance, or community involvement — nor does it make good use of Compstat. This is a policy created to maintain appearances, not to catch dangerous criminals. When the NYPD protects and serves its reputation for reducing crime, it does not protect and serve the people of New York; these are conflicting priorities.

In the next year New Yorkers have an opportunity to effect change. The mayoral race is heating up as opposition to the NYPD’s racially-biased stop and frisks, marijuana arrests, and other practices intensifies. As the New York Times and others have suggested, this is an excellent time to install a federal monitor or inspector general with powers to investigate and supervise the NYPD’s practices.

_____________ 
Eli B. Silverman is coauthor of The Crime Numbers Game: Management by Manipulation and professor emeritus John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

John A. Eterno is coauthor of The Crime Numbers Game: Management by Manipulation and professor and associate dean of criminal justice at Molloy College in Rockville Centre, New York.

Jesse P. Levine is a researcher for the Marijuana Arrest Research Project and a student at City University of New York School of Law.
——-

YOU’RE WELCOME.

Of course, we can’t take any responsibility when the next gun-lovin’ American (or terrorist, for that matter) flips-out and unloads in some school, day-care center, church, shopping mall, etc. and kills several dozen people. That’s not our problem.

To quote a line from A Few Good Men, “I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way”.

It would also cut down on criminals breaking into a home, finding and stealing your gun that you use for protection and shooting you or someone else with it. It would cut down on innocent bystanders being shot because the criminal firing into a crowd and missing their target. It would cut down on kids finding their parent’s gun and shooting themselves or others. It would cut down on kids being able to go into their grandfather’s arsenal and shooting up their school.

Criminals don’t go down to the store and buy guns. At least, not many of them. Criminals use stolen guns. And where are those guns stolen from? The factory? The police? Gun store robberies? No, they are stolen from honest citizens who probably didn’t even need a gun to begin with.

The assumption that everyone who owns a gun is a responsible gun owner and they keep the weapon under lock and key with the ammo separately is silliness. The assumption that criminals would be invading homes left and right if we didn’t all have guns is silliness.

The assumption that the only thing protecting your rights from the government is your gun is more than silliness.

The Branch Dividians had lots of guns, how’d that work out for keeping the ATF out? What do you think your Beretta 9mm is going to do against an M1A1 Abrahams Battle tank? Do you think having twenty handguns, eight rifles, and a handful of shotguns is going to protect you from a cruise missile?

And for the guy talking about an EMP taking out the electricity and everyone coming begging for guns and ammo… Good job plugging an NBC show on the NBC sportstalk pages, but it is hardly a realistic scenario. Might as well say, “when the dead walk the earth…”

I’m American and not a big fan of guns, but I’m even less of a fan of people making assumptions that all Americans are ignorant trigger-happy cretins.

I don’t see any of the American commentors bashing your super-high tax rates or the fact that cannot pronounce your O’s correctly.

I feel safer with Harrison owning guns than I do with you having an internet connection.

So let me follow your logic… a majority of the PLANET hates me for no reason other than my citizenship, yet I’m “paranoid” if I’m concerned for my safety? Are you like 13 years old?

Just saying.

It seems that the view that Harrison is right is running 11-1 above the view that Harrison was wrong. Are we sure that doesn’t make his view the popular one? The first post here speaks about Harrison being correct in his views. The “thumbs up” for that post are currently at 1100+. The “thumbs down” are 100. I would call that a landslide victory for those that support the second amendment. But NBC sees it as proof that Harrison is insensitive and that he takes unpopular views without fear. No wonder the news networks are hemorrhaging viewers in the last decade. They take the polar opposite view over the one the citizens of this country actually take. I wonder if they remember why Bill Clinton lost the congress back in 1994? I do. It was because he attacked the second amendment. It wasn’t a popular thing to do then either. Now they sling mud at someone who speaks up in opposition to their propagandist, Bob Costas and they have the gall to claim he is insensitive for bring up this issue. What a joke that is. Pot Kettle Black But liberals always circle the wagons when people see them as they truly are.

And outside of the 2nd Amendment, these clowns, without a doubt, know NOTHING about our Constitution, probably can’t name who wrote it, and sure as hell can’t articulate the various powers outlined in it.

I am sick to death of these people holding us back from joining the rest of the civilized world in the 21st century.

So … do you guys all feel that the best way to peace in the Middle East is to give all the Palestinians guns? I didn’t think so.

So as Chuck Heston said in his most Mosaic voice, expressing the ancient sentiment of freedom-loving Americans everywhere, “You can have my gun, Mr President . . . when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.” Same goes for you, Mr Costas.