CrimeTalk

An educational resource at the heart of public debate, criminological research and professional practice......

Cop in the Hood

Cop in the Hood
  • End Mass Shootings? The Four-Percent Solution.
    Of the twenty-five worst shootings in the US since 1994 only one was committed by an African American. The vast majority of shootings, twenty-two of twenty-five, were committed by whites and Asians. And these are the two groups most underrepresented in our criminal justice system.

    It’s entirely conceivable that African- Americans are underrepresented in the annals of mass murders because of mass incarceration. If you’re dangerous, emotionally disturbed, and a young black man, there’s a very good chance you’re already behind bars. Prisons are already the largest provider, albeit an extremely incompetent one, of mental health services in the US. More massive incarceration could prevent mass shootings because, well, if you cast a wide-enough net, you’re bound to catch a fish or two.

    President Obama recently said, “if we can save the life of even one child, then we have a responsibility to act.” Indeed, so let us be bold and incarcerate five million white men.

    All we would need to do is identify, through police and the courts, the poorest, most desperate, and most troubled four percent of white men — roughly the percentage of black men presently incarcerated — and lock them up. Thanks to drug prohibition, law breakers are not in short supply. It’s just a matter of cracking down on whites like we’ve done to blacks.

    The cost of keeping the rest of us safe, by housing five million prisoners, is but 0 billion per year, or the equivalent of the budget of the US Navy. But spent wisely, by focusing incarceration on the jobless, as we do, overnight we could cut the unemployment rate in half!

    Along with taking five million potential criminals off the streets, one million new correctional officers would be needed to guard so many white men. Think of the boost to poor, rural, prison-hungry communities. And this doesn’t even count the additional jobs in court, police, and probation related fields.

    Of course… even if it would reduce mass shootings and provide jobs, we won’t and shouldn’t lock up four percent of any population. The moral and financial devastation of such a gulag far outweighs any possible benefit. But, so why then do we lock up four percent of African- American men and have the largest prison system in the world?

    Even without locking up one more person, we already have the largest incarceration system in the world. In rate and numbers, we lock up more people than any country in the world. Ever. We have more prisoners than China, and they have one billion more people.

    Were we to expand our incarceration levels to, in effect, level the playing field for whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, the incomprehensible failings of the status quo would be readily apparent.

    Are Americans such an evil people that we need to lock up so many? Are so many prisons necessary for public safety? Of course not. We got into this mess after 1970, when we decided that the war on drugs and longer sentences were the answer. Historically our country has had its fair share of moral failings, often related to race. More than two million people behind bars reflects American society — all of America — no less than did slavery and segregation.

    This is not about “them,” the prisoners; it is about us.

    To bring our incarceration rate back not just to world standards but to where it was for most of American history, eighty percent of all prisoners would need to be freed. That won’t be easy, but again, the norm in America was to lock up one person per 1,000, not, as we do, seven.

    The good news is that prisons can be closed without increasing crime. Take New York City: Last year there were 414 murders in the city; in 1990, there were more than two thousand. Were all the potential murderers locked up? Quite the contrary. During these two decades, while the city’s population increased by more than a million, the number of incarcerated New Yorkers actually substantially decreased.

    Of course my four-percent proposal is a Swiftian ploy. Luckily the solution of fewer prisoners could also reduce shootings. More palatable options are, in fact, plentiful. We can provide mental health services for those in need. We can restrict gun possession while fully respecting Second Amendment rights. We can expand punishments that don’t involve jail. We can establish a social safety net for all. If we want to stop violence and prison, these are exactly what we have to do. Anger, fear, and retribution only make the problem worse. They’re also not in the best spirit of our exceptional national character.




    Originally published by the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences in ACJS Today, Vol 38(2), March, 2013


  • Tic-Toc Like Clockwork
    Jeanmarie Evelly of DNAInfo.com writes about a "massive drug sweep" in the Queensbridge* and Ravenswood Homes in Astoria/Long Island City. 28 people indicted; 23 others arrested for selling drugs to undercover cops on "hundreds of separate occasions over an eight month span from 2012-2013."

    Well, slap my back and declare victory.

    Just like we I wrote about in 2009.

    And happened before in 2005.

    If drugs were so bad, one might logically wonder why police didn't simply arrest those who sold them drugs back in 2012 before they could peddle their addictive wears to other innocent people. The answer, of course, is you need to shut down the whole operation. Get the kingpin. And, you know, make the projects drug free. Just like we did four and eight years ago. In the war on drugs, we're always behind enemy lines. The depressing part is that the goal of the drug war isn't even to win. It's to keep fighting in perpetuity.

    We can win a battle or two every four years. But I suspect today some other "entrepreneur" is already gleefully taking the place of those arrested. And he'll get paid and live large till he's arrested four years from now. And then we'll all pay to lock him up for five or twenty years.

    Ask yourself, do you think one addict can't get drugs today because of this operation? If you think the answer is yes, you're very very naive. People want to get high. The only question is how. There are certainly more and less harmful drugs as well as more and less harmful ways of distributing them (liquor stores seem to work pretty well). So you then might wonder, couldn't there perhaps be a better way of reducing use and the harms of public drug markets than swooping down every four years and imprisoning "many vicious characters"*(at a cost of ,000-,000 per man per year)?

    Of course there is. We could reduce drug use (the US has the highest rate of illegal drug consumption in the world). We could drastically reduce the violence and effed-up culture that goes along with illegal selling. We could regulate the drug trade. But that won't happen with a prohibitionist mindset.

    Meanwhile, I'm marking my calendar for 2017. Because this will happen all over again.


    *Here's a nice video about the Queensbridge Homes. It's the largest public housing project left standing in America. And it's not as bad as you might think.

    **New York Police Superintendent Pillsbury, in a 1859 quarterly report. Pillsbury wrote about “[Youthful immigrants,] many vicious characters, and a still larger number of needy and ignorant persons, who, under the influence of over ten thousand grog-shops become recruits to the army of law-breakers.” In 1859, 84% of arrests were drug related (alcohol). (And 80% of those arrested were foreign born.)

  • Good Cop
    The Reese Witherspoon arrest on video.


    You know what I like?
    Reese: "I have to obey your order?!"

    Officer: "Yes, you do.
    Well done, officer. Well handled. Grace under pressure.
    Witherspoon: "Do you know my name... You're about to find out who am I."

    Officer: "That's fine. I'm not really worried about you, Ma'am."
    ...
    Witherspoon: "I'm an American citizen, I'm allowed to do whatever I want to do."

    Funny she should think that.

    Honestly, Witherspoon didn't embarrass herself too much. But she was wrong. And she got arrested. And Reese was also wrong about it being national news. It is international news.

    As a side note, I'm always amazed when I see a solo officer arresting somebody. I patrolled without a partner, but I was taught never to arrest without backup. The one time I didn't follow that advice, I ended on the pavement of Eager Street wrestling with a handcuffed suspect.

    That's right. He was handcuffed. I wasn't. What could I do? I couldn't mace him. I couldn't hit him. He was in handcuffs, for crying out loud! He had not one but both hands tied behind his back! And I still couldn't get that SOB under control.

    Never was I so happy to hear sirens coming.

    And never again did arrest anybody without backup.
  • "Crazy Crooks & Kookie Cops"


    Seen at a thrift store in Silver City, New Mexico.
  • The War on Drugs is (Not) Over
    Despite the false promises of White House Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske, it's the same old same old. This from LEAP's Sean Dunagan:
    If you haven’t seen it, the National Drug Control Strategy and accompanying budget and performance summaries are out. Requested funding for 2013 totals .6 billion, a 5 million increase over last year. The allocation is 58.8% for law enforcement and interdiction (vs. 59.7% last year) and 41.8 percent for treatment and prevention (up from 40.3% last year).

    Notably, the “prevention and treatment” funding includes gems like million for the ludicrous “above the influence” media campaign and million for mandatory drug testing. Despite the “change in strategy” spin, 58.8% is the same percentage that went to LE/interdiction in the 2008 drug control budget.

    The request for domestic LE, .4 billion, is the highest amount ever and a .15 billion increase over 08 (+ .4 million over last year). The request also seeks 0 million more for the BOP, .3 million more for interdiction, and .9 million more for DEA. Interestingly (at least to me), the request acknowledges that 51.4 percent of BOP's budget is drug-related (p. 165). On a positive note, requested funding for treatment is up 4.6 percent.
    A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon we're talking about real money.
  • Women shot by LAPD in Dorner manhunt get million payout
    Back in February, when Christopher Dorner was busy killing cops, two unarmed hispanic women delivering newspapers in a blue Toyota Tacoma were shot at 100 times because the cops were afraid it was a Dorner, black man, driving a gray Nissan Titan.

    Now I'm not normally one to criticize police...

    And indeed, I wasn't there... And yet...

    The cops just openned fire on the first pick-up truck they saw?!

    It doesn't get much worse than this.

    Luckily the ladies lived. And at least they won't have to deliver any more newspapers.

    The story in the BBC and the LA Times.

  • Now Hiring
    The Nueva Leon (Mexico) Fuerza Civil needs you!

    I picked this up at recruiting stand in the Mexico City subway last month.

    Here's a CBC (Canadian) story about the area.

    According to Fox News Latino: The Fuerza Civil is an elite unit "trained in military and police techniques, receive a college level education, which include ethics classes, and are paid better than normal Mexican police, with full benefits."






    The salary figures are pesos per month. It works out to about US,000 per year (before taxes) after the college-like academy. And that's not including the one-million peso (US,000) life insurance policy...

    Alas, I'm too old.
  • Institutional Review Board advice
    What can universities do to improve the IRB? Zachary Schrag, Professor of History at George Mason University and the author of, Ethical Imperialism: Institutional Review Boards and the Social Sciences, 1965-2009, summarizes what your school can do (in ten easy steps).
  • Cop Down at MIT
    Can we make a new rule for killers?

    "Know your victims."

    It may not help the victim, but it does help everybody else.



    Update 12:15am: Word is the officer has died. I think it's safe to assume this is the first MIT police officer to be killed in the line of duty.

    My condolences and sincere hopes this situation resolves itself without any other good person being hurt or killed.

    Another Update: This is the part that always gets me choked up: "A Wilmington, Mass., police car carrying what appear to be family members arrived sirens blaring. A few Officers arriving in tears."

    A couple of days ago I tweeted this: A nice ode to Boston, from one of the many who frolicked in The Hub. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/you-may-leave-boston-but-boston-never-leaves-you/275018/
  • New Tool for Police Officers
    Using tech and smart phones to help police. This is great, right? I can't think of downside. Am I missing something? Kudos to the NYPD.
Friday, May 24, 2013
Text Size