Ferguson Effect?

[DetroitBoy]

The police got the part about "probable cause" right. The Blake arrest was based on resemblance to the perp, who was not far away, as reported by someone familiar with
that person.

What should be banned is the practice of tackling young men preemptively just because
they are physically fit and therefore could cause more harm or run away. Tackling
young men can cause them harm. It can cause the rest of us harm because if the
arrestees really ought to contact the police at some point in the future, for some other matter, they won't, because they naturally will have formed an aversion to the police,
having been effectively mugged by them.

Just as a nurse should call for help when moving a heavy patient, a policeman should
enlist help when arresting persons with a greater potential to harm or flee.

You people really have no idea of what it is like to live in NYC. He was not brutalized by the police officer. What happened is a common occurrence in NYC. The New Yorkers didn't even bat an eye and kept walking by when this happened. Look at the video:

http://nyti.ms/1UIvrOg

If you were there during 9/11 and lived through that horrific experience, you'd wish there was even more police surveillance and action. There are often armed soldiers with machine guns in Grand Central terminal during heightened security warnings. Everyone is watching and knows that even minor threats are serious and have to be dealt with aggressively because millions of lives could be at stake. Also, this happened on the anniversary of 9/11, so you can be sure anything even remotely suspicious would have an aggressive response.

[LP_85]

LP, its clear that we both see the same data -- and we have different opinions of what the statistics suggest to us. I don't see that changing. We each read into the facts in front of us. This is a problem not just for us, but for all of us today. Politicians and advocates are both finding the stats that support their POV, or they are interpreting them in the favor of their cause.

How do the numbers support your position? You haven't even attempted to explain that. You're entitled to your opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts. If you think the numbers support your argument, you need to explain why.

This isn't to me an argument about stats. The stats in some cases are for such low figures, that I think many of them fall within what might happen randomly. And that cuts both ways. It can support your position. Or mine.

It's true that statistics aren't always crystal clear - I'm not trying to claim they are. There are a lot of real problems with crime stat reporting that need to be addressed, which will hopefully make it easier in the future to see what's going on and how to address specific problems. But that doesn't mean the numbers we have now can't show us really important things, and letting those stats fuel unfounded fears helps absolutely nothing.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...-s-crime-wave/

The argument to me is about incentives. Do cops and robbers respond to changes in the relationship between each other? I think they do. You seem to not believe this.

I don't believe it simply because I've seen no real evidence that the relationship between police and criminals is changing in any appreciable way that allows criminals to commit more crimes. As I've been saying again and again and again, show me the evidence.

I believe the stats are alarming, and confirm what to me is an unintended consequence of BLM. Their goals are noble. Their actions harm blacks disproportionately.

What specific actions are you referring to here? How, specifically, are those actions "harming blacks"?

A 'nationwide crime spree' does not need to be proven to me. Cherry-picked examples showing urban crime upticks do.

So then we've moved the goalposts since your original post where you said "urban murders increased broadly across America". And how can "cherry-picked examples" give us any useful information? What are you trying to say here?

That St. Louis crime spiked before the exact date of Ferguson means little to me. BLM didn't start at Ferguson: Does that mean BLM caused in the increase in Wazooville, MT. Probably not.

Then why are we even talking about any kind of "Ferguson" effect? Your argument is quickly losing any internal consistency.

Do criminals feel just a little emboldened when cops take it just a little easier? I think so.

How are criminals emboldened, and how are cops "taking it easy"? Stop being vague. I'm not even asking for statistics, I'm just asking for any real evidence that this is something happening anywhere outside of your own mind.

I believe we need to find a way to control police abuses, yet support police in being aggressively going after bad behavior -- ignoring this absurd 'disparate impact' argument. I believe very strongly in 'broken windows' policing -- because I think we have too many broken windows -- and that criminals do respond to incentives -- and that this is a part of the crime reduction that we're tossing out the window at the altar of BLM -- and that its costing us black lives.

I don't want to take this off on another tangent, but it's worth pointing out that one of the originators of the "broken windows" theorythinks its been badly misapplied in a lot of cases.

I would argue that our theory has been largely misunderstood. First of all, broken windows was never intended to be a high .arrest program. Although it has been practiced as such in many cities, neither Wilson nor I ever conceived of it in those terms. Broken-windows policing is a highly discretionary set of activities that seeks the least intrusive means of solving a problem—whether that problem is street prostitution, drug dealing in a park, graffiti, abandoned buildings, or actions such as public drunkenness. Moreover, depending on the problem, good broken windows policing seeks partners to address it: social workers, city code enforcers, business improvement district staff, teachers, medical personnel, clergy, and others. The goal is to reduce the level of disorder in public spaces so that citizens feel safe, are able to use them, and businesses thrive. Arrest of an offender is supposed to be a last resort—not the first.

And what is this "altar" of BLM you're talking about? Your own Wikipedia link points out that the movement "is a decentralized network, and has no formal hierarchy or structure." It's a grassroots movement of people speaking out about things that have been impacting their community for a long time - long before Baltimore, and long before Ferguson. Again, you would do well to listen to what people are actually saying:
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/o...e31827543.html
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9247901/...ves-matter-mlk

[LP_85]

Another typical rant ignoring and protecting the hoodlums who cause the majority of crime and fear both on other blacks and attack of police officers.

I would hardly say James Black appears African American. If anything, he looks Middle Eastern and there is an aggressive stance on these people particularly after 9/11 in NYC.

The area around the Grand Hyatt is heavily guarded with complete surveillance due to the adjacent Grand Central terminal. The police thought he was involved in an identity theft ring, of which, much of the terrorist activities use to plot attacks on the US. He did not have his 'ass kicked by a bunch of NYC police officers' nor was he 'bruised, battered and handcuffed just for being black' according to the surveillance video.

Quit spurting this race-baiting bullshit based on no facts. There were black men who walked by the scene of the arrest and we're not touched by the police. Most likely if James Black truly appeared African American, he would not have fit the description and would have had no problem.

Let me get this straight - you think it's perfectly OK for a non-uniformed police officer to tackle a civilian, who is just standing next to a building and not doing anything, to not identify himself as a police officer in any way, to handcuff him, take his wallet and all his credit cards, with zero explanation.

You think that him looking somehow "Middle Eastern" [[he doesn't) justifies such treatment because of some imagined connection between a fraud investigation and potential terrorist activity. That it's all OK even when the suspect he supposedly resembled turned out to be an innocent person himself:

"If you look at the photo ... it's a reasonable likeness to Mr. Blake," Boyce said. "They look like twins."But the Instagram photo can't be shown to the press, he said, because it turned out to be the image of an innocent person, not anybody involved in the fraud case.

I also want to make sure you actually said this:

arent you immediately seeking a civil law suit to bilk anyone you can out of money? That's part of the hustle you and your ambulance chasing attorneys have learned when growing up in the ghetto trying to be slick instead of working for a living

So everybody's on the same page about what kind of a delusional, paranoid racist you really are.

[LP_85]

And this is a great summary of why we have such race problems in the U.S. Blacks commit a wildly disproportionate proportion of crime, but it's everyone else's fault when law enforcement tries to control crime.

How is tackling an innocent person, with zero provocation, for resembling another innocent person a reasonable way to control crime in any way?

Even James Blake stated that the incident had zero to do with race, BTW. He looks exactly like the guy they were after. If there was improper police procedure, that's a different issue, but there's no indication it has anything to do with race

Where did he say this? I'm having a hard time finding a quote from him that indicates he feels that way. The quotes I have been able to find seem to indicate something to the contrary:

Blake, once ranked No. 4 in the world, vowed in an earlier statement to "use my voice to turn this unfortunate incident into a catalyst for change in the relationship between the police and the public they serve."

He called on the city "to make a significant financial commitment to improving that relationship, particularly in those neighborhoods where incidents of the type I experienced occur all too frequently."
...
"You wonder how many times its happened without anyone knowing," Blake said of the incident.
"I've gotten emails and texts from people that tell me, 'This happened to me. This happened to my friend, my father, my brother,'" he said. "None of them get public apologies. They deserve the same treatment I'm getting."

How the idea that "U.S. blacks commit a wildly disproportionate proportion of crime" has any bearing on the justifications of this officer's actions is baffling to me. Is it just that you think blacks are more prone to criminality, or do you think deeper issues might be at play?

http://www.theatlantic.com/video/ind...herited-trait/

[Dumpling]

I did review the video carefully. I would say there were significant reactions to the Blake
arrest from passersby that witnessed the interaction. With their body language, they
were signifying that they were witnessing what was going on. They were not about to
interfere with either a mugger or a cop, whatever they thought might be taking place.
None of them knew the full story at that time. Later on they could be valid witnesses
in court if they had to be.

Had Mr. Blake been a part of a sports team that was right there at the hotel with him
the incident could have ended with the sports team taking out the cop, believing that he
was a mugger, which New York does have, though one operating right in front of a major
hotel and picking a fit and healthy target would be pretty unusual.

You may not feel that Mr. Blake was brutalized, but something happened to him that
merited highest level apologies. Was it ONLY the misidentification that needed apologies? Preemptive tackles of nonthreatening, nonviolent persons are okay and should be allowed to continue?

[LP_85]

The police chief apologized. The civilian review boards suspended the officer. This incident is not cause for outrage. Its cause for celebration that NYPD handles problem cops well.

It's absolutely not a cause for celebration. All of the reporting on this story seems to indicate that the NYPD was slow to respond to this complaint, and reluctant to address previous complaints against this officer. From the CNN article, again:

The officer, James Frascatore, who is white, is a defendant in two federal lawsuits filed earlier that allege excessive force in separate incidents.

Last year, Frascatore was named in an amended complaint filed in federal court in Brooklyn alleging he and seven other officers and sergeants beat and unlawfully arrested a man in a Queens deli in May 2013.


The officer is also named in a complaint filed in May alleging that officers used excessive force against a man named Warren Diggs for riding his bicycle on the sidewalk in 2013. The city denies the allegations in an answer to the complaint, according to court paperwork.

And from the New York Times:

At least seven people gave accounts — in civilian review board complaints, lawsuits and other legal papers — of being roughed up without explanation in 2012 or 2013 by the same officer who tackled Mr. Blake. The officer, James Frascatore, who is white, has been placed on desk duty.
...
“I don’t know how someone that’s got five civilian complaints can keep his job,” Mr. Blake said of Officer Frascatore, using a number reported in an investigation of his history by WNYC last year. He called the officer’s actions on Wednesday “almost criminal,” and said “covering it up was even more wrong,” referring to the failure by the officers at the scene to file the required paperwork to report the arrest, which came as part of an investigation into credit card fraud.


Mr. Blake’s lawyer, Kevin Marino, said it took almost two days of steady pressure, including preparing Freedom of Information law requests, before the Police Department released a hotel surveillance video showing Mr. Blake being pulled to the ground.


Mr. Marino said a meeting with Mr. Bratton would be critical to correcting the deeply rooted problems he said were evident in a suggestion by the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association this week that the takedown was “professional.”

And he hasn't even been suspended - he's on desk duty, still working and still getting paid. This is a part of the problem. Of course not all cops are bad. But look at all of the recent cases of police brutality. In nearly every one, you'll find examples of the chiefs, commissioners, unions, and fellow officers closing ranks around accused officers, even when the evidence against them is abundantly clear. That a badge is so often used as a shield against accountability is a huge issue, and not just here.

[DetroitBoy]

It's absolutely not a cause for celebration. All of the reporting on this story seems to indicate that the NYPD was slow to respond to this complaint, and reluctant to address previous complaints against this officer...

And he hasn't even been suspended - he's on desk duty, still working and still getting paid. This is a part of the problem. Of course not all cops are bad. But look at all of the recent cases of police brutality. In nearly every one, you'll find examples of the chiefs, commissioners, unions, and fellow officers closing ranks around accused officers, even when the evidence against them is abundantly clear. That a badge is so often used as a shield against accountability is a huge issue, and not just here.

I am not sure what 'here' you're referring to. If you mean in the City of Detroit, the majority of the police officers are black, and of course, you have no problem with any instances of police brutality with them.

ALL officers put their lives on the line every day and every minute they are on duty. In NYC, many police and firemen lost their lives in the 9/11 attacks. Since I am certain you never attended one of their funerals, you have no idea about the level of danger they encounter to 'serve and protect'. They have to make split second decisions which can often put them directly in the line of fire. It's a stressful, thankless job but they continue to serve even under increasing scrutiny. Try going on patrol and seeing the job from the other side of the badge. You might not be so quick to criticize if you did. In other words, their job is to try to save your ass not kiss it.

[LP_85]

I am not sure what 'here' you're referring to. If you mean in the City of Detroit, the majority of the police officers are black, and of course, you have no problem with any instances of police brutality with them.

"Here" in the context of the case being discussed, which is in NYC. But the racial makeup of a police department has no real bearing on how I feel when they abuse their power.

ALL officers put their lives on the line every day and every minute they are on duty.

In what way was Officer Frascatore's life on the line which required him, in broad daylight, to tackle an innocent man who resembled another innocent man?

In NYC, many police and firemen lost their lives in the 9/11 attacks. Since I am certain you never attended one of their funerals, you have no idea about the level of danger they encounter to 'serve and protect'.

I'll thank you not to continue invoking a national tragedy in order to make an emotional ploy which has nothing to do with the issue under discussion.

They have to make split second decisions which can often put them directly in the line of fire. It's a stressful, thankless job but they continue to serve even under increasing scrutiny.

And yet it's still not okay to tackle an innocent man unprovoked. Or shoot an unarmed man in the back when he runs away. Or shoot a driver in the head at point blank range for missing a license plate. Or shoot a 12-year-old, from a police car, less than two seconds after arriving on scene. Or break a man's neck after putting him in custody for possessing a knife.

All of these, and more, are crimes, and there is no excuse or justification for any of it.

Try going on patrol and seeing the job from the other side of the badge. You might not be so quick to criticize if you did. In other words, their job is to try to save your ass not kiss it.

I'm not asking anybody to kiss anybody's ass. I'm saying that police who abuse their power, overstep their authority, and escalate situations for no legally justifiable reason deserve to lose their job and face criminal charges, where appropriate. And those that attempt to shield such acts of cowardice deserve, at the very least, to be called out for it.

[MSUguy]

ALL officers put their lives on the line every day and every minute they are on duty. In NYC, many police and firemen lost their lives in the 9/11 attacks. Since I am certain you never attended one of their funerals, you have no idea about the level of danger they encounter to 'serve and protect'. They have to make split second decisions which can often put them directly in the line of fire. It's a stressful, thankless job but they continue to serve even under increasing scrutiny. Try going on patrol and seeing the job from the other side of the badge. You might not be so quick to criticize if you did. In other words, their job is to try to save your ass not kiss it.

Give me a break with the played out hero worshiping. It's the same BS people use when people want justify misconduct by the military. They a have tough job I get that, but a lot people have tough and dangerous jobs. They also do job which they are given a lot power with regard to our civil liberties and that demands public scrutiny. To not subject them to that scrutiny simply opens the door to abuses of power.

[DetroitBoy]

"Here" in the context of the case being discussed, which is in NYC...

I'll thank you not to continue invoking a national tragedy in order to make an emotional ploy which has nothing to do with the issue under discussion

And I will thank you, asshole, to not talk to me about 9/11. You weren't there during it. You didn't lose friends and business associates as a result of it and frankly, you have no basis for your comments on anything related to this incident in NYC other than your own obviously biased opinion.

The fact that you feel compelled to use this forum to spout your diatribe is evidence of how few people in the real world find you anything other than deranged.

[DetroitBoy]

Give me a break with the played out hero worshiping. It's the same BS people use when people want justify misconduct by the military. They a have tough job I get that, but a lot people have tough and dangerous jobs. They also do job which they are given a lot power with regard to our civil liberties and that demands public scrutiny. To not subject them to that scrutiny simply opens the door to abuses of power.

Well, the next time you are in a car accident, have your home broken into, are assaulted or if any of these things happen to one of your loved ones, maybe they will stop and scrutinize you to decide whether they think you are worthy of their time and effort. I'd like to see what you think of their conduct if they do this when you are in crisis and need them the most to help.

[LP_85]

And I will thank you, asshole, to not talk to me about 9/11. You weren't there during it. You didn't lose friends and business associates as a result of it and frankly, you have no basis for your comments on anything related to this incident in NYC other than your own obviously biased opinion.

You brought up 9/11. I'm fine with sticking to the facts at hand that are actually relevant to this particular issue.

I'm sorry you lost people close to you on that day. I'm also sorry you lost enough humanity that you think it's OK for an innocent man to be tackled on the street because you think he's "Middle Eastern" looking. There's just no point in engaging with you anymore.

[DetroitBoy]

You brought up 9/11. I'm fine with sticking to the facts at hand that are actually relevant to this particular issue.

I'm sorry you lost people close to you on that day. I'm also sorry you lost enough humanity that you think it's OK for an innocent man to be tackled on the street because you think he's "Middle Eastern" looking. There's just no point in engaging with you anymore.

Thank you very much for your concern and the kind words in your reply. Based on your recounting of the 'facts', I know exactly where to stick it.

[ABetterDetroit]

"The Sentencing Project works for a fair and effective U.S. criminal justice system by promoting reforms in sentencing policy, addressing unjust racial disparities and practices, and advocating for alternatives to incarceration."

Intentionally distorting the positions of others makes it impossible to have a useful discussion. The fact that violent crime rates have been trending downwards for years, while at the same time incarceration rates have skyrocketed to all-time highs is a real and serious problem and warrants quality research. What, specifically, do you take issue with regarding their data and conclusions?



Yes, we have the data. And absolutely none of it supports what you've said. There is no evidence of "skyrocketing" crime following the events in Ferguson and Baltimore. St. Louis murder rates increased last year before anything happened to Michael Brown.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/w...p-in-the-data/


https://www.themarshallproject.org/2...es-not-so-fast





We can't even argue correlation-causation because there's nothing to correlate. There is no evidence of any "surge" in crime.

LP you seem very studied in your knowledge on crime statistics, police misconduct and incarceration. If you wouldn't mind I would like to ask a question. What do you think could be done immediately to reduce violent crime and the murder rate in Detroit? Waiting for D.C. to change its position on drugs is not really the answer that I am looking for [[even though obvious). Something more like what can work now to to reduce the problem?

[bust]

You people really have no idea of what it is like to live in NYC.

If you were there during 9/11 and lived through that horrific experience, you'd wish there was even more police surveillance and action.

And I will thank you, asshole, to not talk to me about 9/11. You weren't there during it.

I lived in NYC during 9/11. I worked nearby. I hope I didn't lose any years from the dust I inhaled. I still live there now.

And I would very much appreciate it if you did not pretend to speak for New Yorkers. You certainly don't. And how grotesque of anyone to call upon that tragedy to advance a political agenda. There has been way too much of that.

[DetroitBoy]

I lived in NYC during 9/11. I worked nearby. I hope I didn't lose any years from the dust I inhaled. I still live there now.

And I would very much appreciate it if you did not pretend to speak for New Yorkers. You certainly don't. And how grotesque of anyone to call upon that tragedy to advance a political agenda. There has been way too much of that.

I don't have any political agenda. Everyone else in this thread apparently does. We have a lot more in common than I want to discuss on this forum about places I have lived.

[MSUguy]

Well, the next time you are in a car accident, have your home broken into, are assaulted or if any of these things happen to one of your loved ones, maybe they will stop and scrutinize you to decide whether they think you are worthy of their time and effort. I'd like to see what you think of their conduct if they do this when you are in crisis and need them the most to help.

So because they help me out doing a job that they are paid to do, I'm supposed to overlook when they abuse their powers?

I don't have any political agenda. Everyone else in this thread apparently does. We have a lot more in common than I want to discuss on this forum about places I have lived.

Your agenda is clear as day. Your experience with 9/11 made you a racist, jerk who is willing excuse police abusing their powers under the gusie of safety.

[Wesley Mouch]

...snip...
All of these, and more, are crimes, and there is no excuse or justification for any of it.

Yes. If we know all the facts, you are right.

I'm not asking anybody to kiss anybody's ass. I'm saying that police who abuse their power, overstep their authority, and escalate situations for no legally justifiable reason deserve to lose their job and face criminal charges, where appropriate. And those that attempt to shield such acts of cowardice deserve, at the very least, to be called out for it.

And they do lose their jobs. And they do face criminal charges. Thus, your point makes little sense.

Abuse, malpractice, corruption, murder, rape. Priests, doctors, presidents, dictators, drug kingpins. The world is full of problems all of which require the swift judgement of LP_85 and BLM. Once a possible crime is detected, justice shall be swift and merciless. You're innocent? No. You are known to be guilty. You lose your job. Your family suffers for your obvious crime of abusing your police authority.

No, that's not how it works. We have created imperfect mechanisms for controlling crime. Criminals get away with murder. Police get away with abuse. Innocent victims of crime do not get justice. Sometimes. Mostly, it works. And looking around the world, you have to admit that we police our police better than most. We're not perfect.

You demand perfection. That is admirable. Perfection unfortunately isn't easy.

[Richard]

So what changed in society?

New York City.

1965 blackout,neighbors got together with cookouts and parties,no looting or violence.

1977 blackout,1,616 stores were damaged in looting and rioting. A total of 1,037 fires were responded to, 3,776 people were arrested.
Thirty-five blocks of Broadway were destroyed: 134 stores looted, 45 of them set ablaze. Thieves stole 50 new Pontiacs from a Bronx car dealership.^[1] In Brooklyn, youths were seen backing up cars to targeted stores, tying ropes around the stores' grates, and using their cars to pull the grates away before looting the store.^[1] While 550 police officers were injured in the mayhem, 4,500 looters were arrested.<sup>[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Yo...ackout_of_1977</sup>

[Bham1982]

So what changed in society?

People will say it's racist, but probably the main difference between the 1965 and 1977 blackouts is that [[for those neighborhoods that experienced disorder) the working class mostly white neighborhoods of 1965 had become ghetto communities that were mostly black and Puerto Rican, and those ghetto communities didn't have the same community norms and had lower tolerance for disorder.

It also didn't help that NYC was under severe fiscal stress, and that the second blackout was a much hotter night.

The most destroyed area from the 1977 blackout [[Bushwick) is probably also the hottest and fastest gentrifying neighborhood in NYC today, so things can change pretty quickly.

[bust]

So what changed in society?

New York City.

1965 blackout,neighbors got together with cookouts and parties,no looting or violence.

1977 blackout,1,616 stores were damaged in looting and rioting. A total of 1,037 fires were responded to, 3,776 people were arrested.
Thirty-five blocks of Broadway were destroyed: 134 stores looted, 45 of them set ablaze. Thieves stole 50 new Pontiacs from a Bronx car dealership.^[1] In Brooklyn, youths were seen backing up cars to targeted stores, tying ropes around the stores' grates, and using their cars to pull the grates away before looting the store.^[1] While 550 police officers were injured in the mayhem, 4,500 looters were arrested.<sup>[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Yo...ackout_of_1977</sup>

Conveniently for your argument you left out the two most recent New York City blackouts:

The 2003 Blackout, which didn't just affect New York, but almost the entire Northeast U.S.. People across New York got together with parties. Lots of relationships were started, and babies were conceived. There was no looting.

The 2012 Blackout that happened as a result of Hurricane Sandy, and which affected almost all of lower Manhattan. Not nearly as fun, but still there were a lot of parties, and no looting, as in 2003.

Did you have any good reason for omitting these?

[Wesley Mouch]

...snip...Did you have any good reason for omitting these?

Those two blackouts were post 'broken windows' policing. The two earlier blackouts were closer together in time.

[bust]

Those two blackouts were post 'broken windows' policing. The two earlier blackouts were closer together in time.

You are fixated on "broken windows" policing like it's some kind of panacea. It isn't.

I tell you this as a New Yorker who lived through both of those most recent blackouts, and who has been here, and a city more dangerous, since crime was at its statistically proven worst: It's ridiculous and absurd and adjectives much stronger to attribute any broken windows policy as an explanation why New Yorkers did not misbehave more recently when they easily could.

A broken windows policy did not instill good behavior. New Yorkers decided this amongst themselves. The 2003 blackout happened when 9/11 was still very fresh in our memories. It deserves immeasurably more credit than that. The 2012 blackout happened when we all faced a common enemy: the storm.

I say this even as I agree with "broken windows" policing in theory. This qualification is important. It loses its benefit done with bias or aggression. Alienating large portions of society causes more harm than any short term benefits it brings. Particularly to the individuals subjected to it, and their communities. Consider the question: What is the greater effect when the people suffering most from crime are treated like criminals?

Conditions vary. But from the places I know, and I'm not saying Detroit, "broken windows" policing done properly does help. However broken windows and aggressive or biased policing are not the same. And even if perfectly implemented is not enough. More important: inclusive governance. And policing that fights crime even as it encourages us to join as one. Some lucky places already have it. Not everywhere does.

[DetroitBoy]

It's sad that the police and teachers have been saddled with the responsibility of teaching right and wrong behavior to an ever increasing number of young adults in this country.

Legally, the teachers' hands have been tied by money seeking parents who file lawsuits if a teacher looks the wrong way at their sociopathic angel let alone touch them if they are attacking another student. Teachers face aggression from these same students who will knife their car tires or worse after school if they are not passed on to graduate high school even though many are functionally illiterate with little chance of acquiring needed skills to hold a job. Enter the police, who now try to enforce order utlizing broken windows or zero tolerance theory. Their job is nearly impossible because respecting others and the law are foreign concepts to these young adults. We have now entered a period where every officer and law enforcement agency is looked at with an eye of suspicion for attempting to maintain order and the safety of the community. God forbid they should touch the wrong person or use their weapon to fire back when their lives are threatened in fear of facing an investigation, suspension, threats and dismissal or even death.

In a society where everyone is a victim, no one is responsible for the behavior of their children or themselves. Ultimately, this mindset is destroying the freedom and quality of life we have in this country. If you have an issue with how bad it is here, look at the refugees who seek to come to the U.S. for the opportunity to have a better life. Comparing what you have to those who have nothing often puts life in a much different perspective.

[ABetterDetroit]

It's sad that the police and teachers have been saddled with the responsibility of teaching right and wrong behavior

You lost me on the first sentence here. Teachers uh.. Teach for a living. And the police, well... its their job to do something about bad behavior. Is this stuff difficult for some?