New York City sees surge in gun violence

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I want to bring your attention to what is called NYPD Compstat. It's a high pressure blame session among the police big wigs, and holds various officials accountable for their crime numbers in the 77 precincts of NY (plus housing and transit districts). I can't tell you how often an attempted assault here gets reclassified as "Reckless endangerment". Grand larcenies(Index crime) reclassified as petit (Non-index crime). Attempted burglary reclassed as criminal mischief. Assault 2, reclassed as assault 3 (Big difference). So if you want to compare year over year, look at an index crime that can't be fudged. Such as rape. (and with that they can fudge an attempted rape# as a sex abuse). Or murder (and I don't know what the homicide numbers are this year). I don't know what the true figures are, and I don't dispute you. But I believe only half, may be less, of what I see on a statistics report. It's just too easy to reclass a crime.

I told you. I have a front row seat to NYC. And I was just cracking a joke...

They may reclassify certain crimes to make their stats look better but I doubt that they reclassify a shooting - whether fatal or not - as a stabbing or something like that. A shooting is a shooting is a shooting. It involves the discharge of a firearm. How do you reclassify that?

[SAT 9,609]

Under-reporting. A big issue here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CompStat#Critique

Another criticism of the COMPSTAT program is that it may discourage officers from taking crime reports in order to create a false appearance of a reduction of community problems.^[9][10] According to journalist Radley Balko, "some recent reports from New York City suggest the program needs some tweaking to guard against the twin dangers of unnecessary police harassment and underreporting of serious crimes."^[11] An anonymous survey of "hundreds of retired high-ranking police officials . . . found that tremendous pressure to reduce crime, year after year, prompted some supervisors and precinct commanders to distort crime statistics."^[12]

Similarly, crimes may be reported but downplayed as less significant, to manipulate statistics. As an illustration, before a department begins using CompStat it might list 100 assaults as aggravated and 500 as simple assault. If there were a similar pattern of underlying criminal activity the next year, but instead 450 assaults are listed in CompStat as simple and 50 as aggravated, the system would report that progress had been made reducing major crimes when in fact, the only difference is in how they are reported.

Manipulating reporting data may also negatively affect personnel and financial disbursement; communities whose improvements (on paper) show they need less resources could lose those resources—and still face the same amount of actual crime on the streets

[mota bhai 2,675]

The ones you chose to participate in, yes. I think that pretty much comes with the whole discussion board premise, whether you are a mod or not.

Hate to say it, Charles, but yeah... Teddy is right.

Personally, I don't think moderators should be interacting the way you do at all. They should be more hands off, more aloof. Dispassionate observers.

Edited June 4, 2013 by amriki bhai

[SAT 9,609]

I'm not siding with anyone here. But things are not always what they appear to be.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Under-reporting. A big issue here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CompStat#Critique

Another criticism of the COMPSTAT program is that it may discourage officers from taking crime reports in order to create a false appearance of a reduction of community problems.^[9][10] According to journalist Radley Balko, "some recent reports from New York City suggest the program needs some tweaking to guard against the twin dangers of unnecessary police harassment and underreporting of serious crimes."^[11] An anonymous survey of "hundreds of retired high-ranking police officials . . . found that tremendous pressure to reduce crime, year after year, prompted some supervisors and precinct commanders to distort crime statistics."^[12]

Similarly, crimes may be reported but downplayed as less significant, to manipulate statistics. As an illustration, before a department begins using CompStat it might list 100 assaults as aggravated and 500 as simple assault. If there were a similar pattern of underlying criminal activity the next year, but instead 450 assaults are listed in CompStat as simple and 50 as aggravated, the system would report that progress had been made reducing major crimes when in fact, the only difference is in how they are reported.

Manipulating reporting data may also negatively affect personnel and financial disbursement; communities whose improvements (on paper) show they need less resources could lose those resources—and still face the same amount of actual crime on the streets

Fine and dandy but a shooting is shooting.

[SAT 9,609]

Fine and dandy but a shooting is shooting.

Not a quite true statement. A shooting is only a shooting here....

1- there's actually someone hit.

2- There's news-worthy material.

3- There's a complainant. (And not PSNY, People of the State of NY)

Otherwise, for example: 2 guys in a gun fight, and no one's around afterwards, no one hit. Will simply go on paper as "Reckless Endangerment" even if there are bullet holes/ fragments/ shell casings all over. Even if someone dropped their gun, the complaint will read "found firearm". Unless of course, it happened in midtown Manhattan, then it's world news.

The above scenario is clearly 2 attempted assault #s. But will end up as 0.

[Ban Hammer 13,470]

Hate to say it, Charles, but yeah... Teddy is right.

Personally, I don't think moderators should be interacting the way you do at all. They should be more hands off, more aloof. Dispassionate observers.

i refuse to be a un peacekeeper.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

what, you expect me to read all the topic links to see if they match? try using the report button if you notice a disparity.

You were the first person to jump in and respond to this topic and participate. One would think you'd read the link or the content being posted.

We seriously need more than one active mod in this forum.

[mota bhai 2,675]

i refuse to be a un peacekeeper.

And yet, that's exactly what the role should be.

[Ban Hammer 13,470]

You were the first person to jump in and respond to this topic and participate. One would think you'd read the link or the content being posted.

We seriously need more than one active mod in this forum.

yeah, within 3 minutes after being posted.

as for another active mod, you can argue that out with aj, since he thinks we should observe rather than post - and therefore no one would know if we're active or not.

And yet, that's exactly what the role should be.

so you like meaningless resolutions....

[Penny Lane 8,159]

I don't care what someone else thinks. I care that the one active mod in this place can't seem to moderate it objectively.

[SAT 9,609]

They may reclassify certain crimes to make their stats look better but I doubt that they reclassify a shooting - whether fatal or not - as a stabbing or something like that. A shooting is a shooting is a shooting. It involves the discharge of a firearm. How do you reclassify that?

google "Reclkless Endangerment". I'm sorry, my bad. But I believe this question is covered in post # 21.

Edited June 4, 2013 by SteveAndTiff

[mota bhai 2,675]

yeah, within 3 minutes after being posted.

as for another active mod, you can argue that out with aj, since he thinks we should observe rather than post - and therefore no one would know if we're active or not.

She doesn't need to argue it with me. I'm a nobody just like she is.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Hate to say it, Charles, but yeah... Teddy is right.

Personally, I don't think moderators should be interacting the way you do at all. They should be more hands off, more aloof. Dispassionate observers.

Mods should only get involved when thin skinned posters hit the report button.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

google "Reclkless Endangerment"

It's still a record involving the discharge of a firearm. Look, we can argue this back and forth all day long. The fact of the matter is that our resident gun nuts wanted to celebrate the perceived fact that NYs tighter gun control laws causes gun crime to rise. In order to prove that perceived fact, they have a victory dance around an article that ironically shows the exact opposite of what they think it shows. And once you point that out, the illiterate NRA crowd disappears in hiding. It's quite hilarious, really.