|
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ace_O_Spades
The broken window theory seems to work, yes... But it works on the premise of reaction as opposed to proaction.
Reactive policing is just as effective as proactive policing... I don't have the study handy, but there have been studies done in New York and Chicago which have lent credit to this theory.
More proactive laws are just a nuisance and impinge on our basic freedoms... Plus, our legal and policing systems are already so clogged with crimes actually worth policing and judging, this just makes an already bogged down system moreso.
Having laws controlling clean sidewalks and busses, then taking actual manpower to police them is probably the lowest priority that our justice system should be focusing on.
|
I'm sorry I cannot make heads or tails of what direction your reactive vs. proactive statements mean but based on what I think they mean, here's my response.
Reactive policing meaning that someone has to be there to react to the situation and then address it, meaning that someone has to be present to stop it, and have authority to stop it. What gives them the authority? Law, so there has to be some written form of what they are enforcing. So I'm completely missing what you're saying about laws impinging on freedoms. That's the points of laws is it not? To define those freedoms?
Also that means then someone has to be there... are you suggesting then more "police"?
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
|