Considering that the crime in some of those major cities could be very hard to control, police departments still need to make an effort to decrease crime rates. According to "thereason.com", there are approximately 2.4 officers per every 1,000 resident of chicago. Yes, it is difficult to have a small amount of officers attempt to maintain a city as large as Chicago, but if police just target certain "hot spots" of where crime takes place, crime should decrease tremendously. Like they said in the video, most crimes occur on the corners of those popular street intersections. Maybe police should stake out there more often. Police Departments should also reach out and make a difference in the community, not just in Chicago, but everywhere. Add more lighting to neighborhoods, set up a larger community watch to cooperate with Police on duty, and perhaps clean up parks and streets where most crime occurs. make communities safer for the people who live there and not only will the crime rates decrease, but everyone will become happier in the process. -Eclipse456
I agree with you about cops locating hot spots and patrolling those areas more often. If we light up neighborhoods more people will be less likely to commit a crime becuase they will be more likely to be seen. Neighborhood watch programs are a good idea because it will get the community involved in helping rescue crime. I agree with helping clean up the city ad in a hope that it would help reduce crime and making the cities a nicer and safer place. dragons456
I also agree with you about the topics you chose to comment on. The hot spots should be their main focal point. Also if these communities had community watch I feel like the criminals causing all of the problems would be hesitant about breaking the law because they might get caught. KLICK456
I like where your coming from, your points are good. I like how you mentioned cleaning up the cities parks and adding more lights. Something real simple can go a long way, because your allowing people to feel good about their community as well as feeling safe in it. Klick456, I like how you brought up the idea of community watch, because like eclipse456 said there is 2.4 officers for every 1,000. I think the police can only do so much. If you think about it, there are more people than there are police and with that I feel the community will need to step up and come together to bring their city back. This goes for everywhere, if we go back to our roots and not rely on others to do something than we will never change. If its not us, then who is it? Palmdaddy456
I agree completely with your post, like you said by lighting up places, just that can make an impact on helping with crime rates. I also liked how you did research and found that there is 2.4 officers for 1000 people. Just that statistic can make people realize how much police officers have on their plate. I also agree with Palmdaddy's comment about the community needing to step up and make a effort to clean up Chicago. Broncos456
Police should clean up the the neighbor hoods by lighting dark streets and ally ways. If the police know where the general area of crimes are happening then they should patrol it more with undercover adjents or unmarked cars. Another thing is the Chicago police department should set up a neighborhood watch program. This would get the community involved in helping the police clean the streets up.savage456
I couldn't agree with your statement more. I feel the exact same way that you do. If they would put lights in then people could also see were there going. Also I have a side of me that think that lights won't do any good. I can use the excuse of saying that that would help cops see the bad guys, but they have a spot light on there car as well. bodybuilder456
I agree with this article because we should be finding a way to help out are communities better. That's the whole reason why I want to be a police officer. I want to make everything better. Now I know that I can't just magically make everything better but that doesn't mean I can't try. I think teaching the cops how to be better cops would help things. It's all about how you talk to the people. Don't order them around like pigs. People don't like to be treated like pigs. bodybuilder456
Many good points were made in the video. Police will never be able to stop crime completely but they can take actions to help try and reduce the crime rate. There is more people in the community than their is officers at a department so police can't be everywhere to stop crime but they could do many things to help reduce crime. Police could find the hot spots for crime and patrol those areas more often and let people know they are in the area and it will make someone think twice before the commit a crime. Cities could also set up neighborhood watch programs so the people in the community can also help the crime rate decrease in their city. Police departments could also do more activities in the community for the public to show the public they aren't bad people. If people see that cops aren't really bad people they won't hesitate to call them when they need help. So people will call them when a crime happens instead of not reporting the crime so they don't have to deal with the police. dragons456
In this video they explain a lot of really brilliant points. Her points about hot spot policing made a lot of sense. Why police an area that has no past reputation of violence over a spot that is known for violence? These concepts and strategies of policing she talks about like community policing are pretty straight forward and make a lot of sense. If all police officers practiced these methods the crime would then go down and it would hopefully then build a trust between the community and law enforcement. 2.4 cops for every 1000 people in Chicago is crazy to think about but the strategies thought about and perfected are made to make that ratio not matter as much. If that 2.4 practiced all of what they are taught they wouldn't have as many problems controlling the community. KLICK456
I agree that the hot spots should be the main focus of the police department, but if you have more officers in those areas then the crime will just move where the police officers are not. There still should be officers in the areas where there is no previous history of crime, just not as much and maybe there aren't as strict there as well.
I agree about the hot spots, police need to be more focused on where the overly abundant amount of crimes are happening and narrow in on where those locations are and work on making them better policed in order to work on cutting that crime rate down and making them better living environments and safer for the people who do live there. tiger456
A very important assumption that I made while watching this video was that in Chicago, Community policing the most important attribute and most effective way to prevent crime , mainly homicides as discussed in the video, ever. A good example of this is a teenager is pulled over and a cop discovers some marijuana in the passenger seat. Instead of doing protical and arresting the young teenager the cop destroys the product and tells the teenager that was his warning and lets him go. It's in my opinion a very good way to teach teenagers to respect the law, instead of rebelling and doing again and again. Let's not forget that Chicago and other major cities have millions of people living in them and only a handful of cops in each city. There is no possible way a police department can patrol that many people. With Intelligence lead policing a department can use there small amount of resources effectively by fallowing crime patterns, and being able to predict future crimes from happening in the future. Jail is an effective way to deter crime, and even if a department uses their resources effectively, and prevents multiple crimes from happening they still can't arrest everyone. Departments need to address the source of crime and educate the "bad neighborhood" of there wrong doing. Number1Whiteguy456
This video had several good points about policing. The police department's main focus should be on the "hot spots" of the city because that is where most of the crime happens. That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be officers in the other areas of town. There should just be more officers in the areas where crime is more prevalent. I also think that the broken windows theory could be implemented into the hot spot areas too. This could cause people to take better care of their communities and have less crime as well.
This video hit a lot of good point, one major one that i strongly agree with is community policing. If the police have a more personal relationship with the people in the community and establish that trust, it would change the effectiveness of a lot of things. I believe that if there was a stronger bond of trust between police and the community they're in, more people would come to them when something happened because they TRUST them. If a person in need didn't trust the police, why would they go and open up to the police about what happened to them? Another topic that caught my interest was where policing is happening. There are certain areas in every state where crime is higher than some other areas, that is just inevitable, but we do not need to be jacking up policing everywhere else, rather, focus on the major cities and work on bringing those rates down and not looking at a state as a whole, but rather certain cities and jurisdictions that are having trouble juggling the amount of crime and focus on making them better, and stronger.
Trust is definitely essential between officers and community. Like you said, if there's no trust, then there's no reports. But what ways are there to build trust between an officer and the community? If we can assume that the average lower class resident isn't watching news that's pertaining to the department and what's going on within it, whether it be good or bad, how will the trust be built? Should there be programs helping conjoin the department with citizens? Or should the trust have to be gained solely by what happens when addressed by an officer? If you have a bad interaction with an officer, your trust for the entire department already diminishes. So how do we fix that is the question. -Leilani456
I understand that the first logical thing to do would be to add officers in the hot spots of the town, and pulling back a bit on areas with low reputations of crime, but who's to say that adding these officers won't just have an alternative effect, just pushing crime to the borders and beyond of the officer lines? Obviously if officers are flooding one area there won't be crime, but that wouldn't stop crime. It would just go elsewhere. Equally distributing officers throughout the city maintains crime rate. Sure, if need be add an extra officer or two, but we should not be flooding these "hot spots" with officers. -Leilani456
I agree with her on this. Criminals know how to go outside the boundaries of officers, easily. If officers were only pinpointing one area, there would be higher crime rates in other areas, decreasing the effect of community policing and procedural justice. KayaJ456
I agree with her on this. Criminals know how to go outside the boundaries of officers, easily. If officers were only pinpointing one area, there would be higher crime rates in other areas, decreasing the effect of community policing and procedural justice. KayaJ456
I think that this video has made some very logical points. I especially like the comment she made about cops not being able to be everywhere at once. They will never be able to stop all crime completely. However, they do their best to pinpoint locations and link criminals together by association. I also like the idea of trying to change the perception of the community. All cops use reasonable purpose when pulling someone over, it is their job to protect and serve the community. They do not have the time to stop and frisk everyone who looks suspicious. The procedural justice outlook can be used effectively, and if used more, there would be less crime. KayaJ456
This video had some major points in it that were all around solid. One that I agree with would have to be how they talked about the "crime rate rising". As we all know, media blows everything out of proportion and when doing statistics it shows the reality behind it all. When they say the crime rate is rising it may be true but its only from the reference point they chose from the previous year and I feel as if a lot of people don't understand how they do this or what they mean. They also talked about crime rates in micro places and how just because the crime rate is high in the state or general area does not mean that the whole state or area is a rough place, the crime cant take place in one little spot, I feel as if people forget to think like that so they automatically think it is a rough place to be. Sparks456
I agree that the media has everyone convinced that the world is going to hell. People need to have enough interest in this to where they will do some of their own research and not just regurgitate whatever they hear on television as if God himself said it. People need to learn how to think for themselves and become educated on a topic before believing whatever reporter is telling them off a screen.
I believe that police should focus less on catching people who commit crimes, and focus more on convincing people that they do not need to commit the crimes to begin with. Police officers need to be sent to the areas where more crime happens to effectively prevent the crime. I feel the reason many people commit the crimes they do is because they see it everyday, in the world around them. These so called "hot spots" could be decreased if the people living there would teach the next generation that they don't need to commit the crimes to get by. They need to be shown that there are better ways of getting through life and contribute to their community. One of the first steps toward this is the police and the communities need to come together as equals and collaborate on ways of improving their lives.
I agree with your beginning statement and believe that police officer's focus should be shifted from catching those who commit crimes to preventing crime in the first place. If the focus remained on those who are committing crimes, then it would be a vicious cycle of catching people committing crimes over and over again without getting to the root of the problem and preventing crime in the first place.
The thing that I enjoyed so much about this video was hearing about something that we have been taught in our criminal justice class multiple times. Getting police officers is, from what the speaker explained, the most effective way and our best chance at lowering crime rates. According to the speaker in the video, deterrence may have a positive short-term effect, but it is not long lasting and has been shown to be expensive. If citizens feel they are involved in a community and are seen as equals with police officers, they will feel less compelled to act outside of the social norm and commit crime. For this to happen, both the community and police departments need to make an effort. Both must be required to be respectful, accepting, and willing to start completely anew. As mentioned in the video, cops being legal is not equal to community-involved policing, or procedural justice. Officers must be legal AND morally good, which will in turn result as an effective policing method and ultimately reducing crime.
In major cities there is a lot of crime but, crime does not happen in random places. There are always certain areas that it occurs. They very rarely occur in random places, but like the video said it is not impossible to be in those areas. Most of the time homicide is not random. It occurs with rival gangs. In gangs homicide are always like "one uping" each other. If one gang kills a member of another that gang wants to go and one up the other. Police are going in and threatening all members in the gang instead of one member. No one wants to go to jail so they tell members of the gang to knock it off. I strongly agree with that way of reducing gang violence. I also agree when the police also give people a way out. They give people a chance to make better of themselves dance456
The video had many important topics. One that stood out to me was when they mentioned how Chicago had 500 homicides, to many they may consider that bad. But if you look at the total population, in reality homicides are going down. In most cities, homicides occur in particular places repeatedly and people know where they are. Officers can watch those areas, but you dont want to flood the area because then the crime will just move. A good tactic is to communicate with the residents and become more community involved so the members of the community are supporting the department. When there is a homicide, most likely someone saw it, or heard who made the offense, then officers can get information from the residents. Homicide usually occurs as revenge, I thought this was a very important point. So when someone kills a member of a gang, that then creates the need for revenge, so the killing goes back and forth. That is also a major contributor to a "high" homicide rate. Broncos456
I agree with your statement, The tactic that you provided in your comment was good and i agree with what you are saying. Having the community involved and supporting the police department could help decrease homicide or get the ones doing the crime off of the streets faster. bball456
The police department in major cities have a difficult time controlling all of the gang violence and the homicides going on around the area. I believe that if the department focuses on eliminating the gang rivalries and putting those homicides to a stop, then the crime rate will decrease. I also think that when looking at the times of when a crime occurs having more police officers around at that time. Most people are not going to commit a crime in front of a police officer so if more officers are circling around the areas that are affected with gangs and shooting then the crime rate may decrease. The community can also help the police department in trying to get the crime rate decreased by staying connected with them instead of against the department. bball456
Overall the video was a good insight into Chicago with the amount of homicides that occur each year. Even though the shootings are in certain locations, the rate is low. Police have to work with the community and try to bring down the crime together. Since crime effects everyone. I found the "gift" analogy to be helpful as this gives us an insight on why things happen the way they do. Most of the crimes are gang related, but the gangs are endangering the communities with every shooting that takes place. Broken Glass policing doesn't resolve the underlying problem but allows the problem to be contained. As well if we saturate the location it will begin to spread out further. We cannot completely get rid of crime but we can only bring the rate down. Palmdaddy456
I agree that the gift analogy was helpful. It makes it easier for us to understand the lifestyle of these gangs and the endless cycle that is crime. -sf135
This video really opens your eyes to the world of crime. Before I moved to Illinois, visited Chicago, and did my research, I always assumed it was a dangerous place to be. Because that's what we've been told by the news. The news doesn't tell you that there are certain parts of Chicago that are dangerous. That areas like the Gold Coast and Lincoln Square are perfectly safe. The news tells you that Chicago is the murder capital of the world. The news makes you paranoid and panic. What the news outlets don't focus on is that there are hot spots in every crime filled city. That there are certain areas and certain streets that need to be targeted and need the most help. I like the point made in the video about the community helping to decrease crime. The police and the community need to work together to decrease crime and the number of homicides. -sf135
Considering that the crime in some of those major cities could be very hard to control, police departments still need to make an effort to decrease crime rates. According to "thereason.com", there are approximately 2.4 officers per every 1,000 resident of chicago. Yes, it is difficult to have a small amount of officers attempt to maintain a city as large as Chicago, but if police just target certain "hot spots" of where crime takes place, crime should decrease tremendously. Like they said in the video, most crimes occur on the corners of those popular street intersections. Maybe police should stake out there more often. Police Departments should also reach out and make a difference in the community, not just in Chicago, but everywhere. Add more lighting to neighborhoods, set up a larger community watch to cooperate with Police on duty, and perhaps clean up parks and streets where most crime occurs. make communities safer for the people who live there and not only will the crime rates decrease, but everyone will become happier in the process. -Eclipse456
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about cops locating hot spots and patrolling those areas more often. If we light up neighborhoods more people will be less likely to commit a crime becuase they will be more likely to be seen. Neighborhood watch programs are a good idea because it will get the community involved in helping rescue crime. I agree with helping clean up the city ad in a hope that it would help reduce crime and making the cities a nicer and safer place. dragons456
DeleteI also agree with you about the topics you chose to comment on. The hot spots should be their main focal point. Also if these communities had community watch I feel like the criminals causing all of the problems would be hesitant about breaking the law because they might get caught.
DeleteKLICK456
I like where your coming from, your points are good. I like how you mentioned cleaning up the cities parks and adding more lights. Something real simple can go a long way, because your allowing people to feel good about their community as well as feeling safe in it.
DeleteKlick456, I like how you brought up the idea of community watch, because like eclipse456 said there is 2.4 officers for every 1,000. I think the police can only do so much. If you think about it, there are more people than there are police and with that I feel the community will need to step up and come together to bring their city back. This goes for everywhere, if we go back to our roots and not rely on others to do something than we will never change. If its not us, then who is it?
Palmdaddy456
I agree completely with your post, like you said by lighting up places, just that can make an impact on helping with crime rates. I also liked how you did research and found that there is 2.4 officers for 1000 people. Just that statistic can make people realize how much police officers have on their plate. I also agree with Palmdaddy's comment about the community needing to step up and make a effort to clean up Chicago. Broncos456
DeletePolice should clean up the the neighbor hoods by lighting dark streets and ally ways. If the police know where the general area of crimes are happening then they should patrol it more with undercover adjents or unmarked cars. Another thing is the Chicago police department should set up a neighborhood watch program. This would get the community involved in helping the police clean the streets up.savage456
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree with your statement more. I feel the exact same way that you do. If they would put lights in then people could also see were there going. Also I have a side of me that think that lights won't do any good. I can use the excuse of saying that that would help cops see the bad guys, but they have a spot light on there car as well. bodybuilder456
DeleteI agree with this article because we should be finding a way to help out are communities better. That's the whole reason why I want to be a police officer. I want to make everything better. Now I know that I can't just magically make everything better but that doesn't mean I can't try. I think teaching the cops how to be better cops would help things. It's all about how you talk to the people. Don't order them around like pigs. People don't like to be treated like pigs. bodybuilder456
ReplyDeleteMany good points were made in the video. Police will never be able to stop crime completely but they can take actions to help try and reduce the crime rate. There is more people in the community than their is officers at a department so police can't be everywhere to stop crime but they could do many things to help reduce crime. Police could find the hot spots for crime and patrol those areas more often and let people know they are in the area and it will make someone think twice before the commit a crime. Cities could also set up neighborhood watch programs so the people in the community can also help the crime rate decrease in their city. Police departments could also do more activities in the community for the public to show the public they aren't bad people. If people see that cops aren't really bad people they won't hesitate to call them when they need help. So people will call them when a crime happens instead of not reporting the crime so they don't have to deal with the police. dragons456
ReplyDeleteIn this video they explain a lot of really brilliant points. Her points about hot spot policing made a lot of sense. Why police an area that has no past reputation of violence over a spot that is known for violence? These concepts and strategies of policing she talks about like community policing are pretty straight forward and make a lot of sense. If all police officers practiced these methods the crime would then go down and it would hopefully then build a trust between the community and law enforcement. 2.4 cops for every 1000 people in Chicago is crazy to think about but the strategies thought about and perfected are made to make that ratio not matter as much. If that 2.4 practiced all of what they are taught they wouldn't have as many problems controlling the community.
ReplyDeleteKLICK456
I agree that the hot spots should be the main focus of the police department, but if you have more officers in those areas then the crime will just move where the police officers are not. There still should be officers in the areas where there is no previous history of crime, just not as much and maybe there aren't as strict there as well.
DeleteGodFieri456
I agree about the hot spots, police need to be more focused on where the overly abundant amount of crimes are happening and narrow in on where those locations are and work on making them better policed in order to work on cutting that crime rate down and making them better living environments and safer for the people who do live there.
Deletetiger456
A very important assumption that I made while watching this video was that in Chicago, Community policing the most important attribute and most effective way to prevent crime , mainly homicides as discussed in the video, ever. A good example of this is a teenager is pulled over and a cop discovers some marijuana in the passenger seat. Instead of doing protical and arresting the young teenager the cop destroys the product and tells the teenager that was his warning and lets him go. It's in my opinion a very good way to teach teenagers to respect the law, instead of rebelling and doing again and again. Let's not forget that Chicago and other major cities have millions of people living in them and only a handful of cops in each city. There is no possible way a police department can patrol that many people. With Intelligence lead policing a department can use there small amount of resources effectively by fallowing crime patterns, and being able to predict future crimes from happening in the future. Jail is an effective way to deter crime, and even if a department uses their resources effectively, and prevents multiple crimes from happening they still can't arrest everyone. Departments need to address the source of crime and educate the "bad neighborhood" of there wrong doing.
ReplyDeleteNumber1Whiteguy456
This video had several good points about policing. The police department's main focus should be on the "hot spots" of the city because that is where most of the crime happens. That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be officers in the other areas of town. There should just be more officers in the areas where crime is more prevalent. I also think that the broken windows theory could be implemented into the hot spot areas too. This could cause people to take better care of their communities and have less crime as well.
ReplyDeleteGodFieri456
This video hit a lot of good point, one major one that i strongly agree with is community policing. If the police have a more personal relationship with the people in the community and establish that trust, it would change the effectiveness of a lot of things. I believe that if there was a stronger bond of trust between police and the community they're in, more people would come to them when something happened because they TRUST them. If a person in need didn't trust the police, why would they go and open up to the police about what happened to them? Another topic that caught my interest was where policing is happening. There are certain areas in every state where crime is higher than some other areas, that is just inevitable, but we do not need to be jacking up policing everywhere else, rather, focus on the major cities and work on bringing those rates down and not looking at a state as a whole, but rather certain cities and jurisdictions that are having trouble juggling the amount of crime and focus on making them better, and stronger.
ReplyDeletetiger456
Trust is definitely essential between officers and community. Like you said, if there's no trust, then there's no reports. But what ways are there to build trust between an officer and the community? If we can assume that the average lower class resident isn't watching news that's pertaining to the department and what's going on within it, whether it be good or bad, how will the trust be built? Should there be programs helping conjoin the department with citizens? Or should the trust have to be gained solely by what happens when addressed by an officer? If you have a bad interaction with an officer, your trust for the entire department already diminishes. So how do we fix that is the question.
Delete-Leilani456
I understand that the first logical thing to do would be to add officers in the hot spots of the town, and pulling back a bit on areas with low reputations of crime, but who's to say that adding these officers won't just have an alternative effect, just pushing crime to the borders and beyond of the officer lines? Obviously if officers are flooding one area there won't be crime, but that wouldn't stop crime. It would just go elsewhere. Equally distributing officers throughout the city maintains crime rate. Sure, if need be add an extra officer or two, but we should not be flooding these "hot spots" with officers.
ReplyDelete-Leilani456
I agree with her on this. Criminals know how to go outside the boundaries of officers, easily. If officers were only pinpointing one area, there would be higher crime rates in other areas, decreasing the effect of community policing and procedural justice. KayaJ456
DeleteI agree with her on this. Criminals know how to go outside the boundaries of officers, easily. If officers were only pinpointing one area, there would be higher crime rates in other areas, decreasing the effect of community policing and procedural justice. KayaJ456
DeleteI think that this video has made some very logical points. I especially like the comment she made about cops not being able to be everywhere at once. They will never be able to stop all crime completely. However, they do their best to pinpoint locations and link criminals together by association. I also like the idea of trying to change the perception of the community. All cops use reasonable purpose when pulling someone over, it is their job to protect and serve the community. They do not have the time to stop and frisk everyone who looks suspicious. The procedural justice outlook can be used effectively, and if used more, there would be less crime. KayaJ456
ReplyDeleteThis video had some major points in it that were all around solid. One that I agree with would have to be how they talked about the "crime rate rising". As we all know, media blows everything out of proportion and when doing statistics it shows the reality behind it all. When they say the crime rate is rising it may be true but its only from the reference point they chose from the previous year and I feel as if a lot of people don't understand how they do this or what they mean. They also talked about crime rates in micro places and how just because the crime rate is high in the state or general area does not mean that the whole state or area is a rough place, the crime cant take place in one little spot, I feel as if people forget to think like that so they automatically think it is a rough place to be.
ReplyDeleteSparks456
I agree that the media has everyone convinced that the world is going to hell. People need to have enough interest in this to where they will do some of their own research and not just regurgitate whatever they hear on television as if God himself said it. People need to learn how to think for themselves and become educated on a topic before believing whatever reporter is telling them off a screen.
DeleteEarthquake 456
I believe that police should focus less on catching people who commit crimes, and focus more on convincing people that they do not need to commit the crimes to begin with. Police officers need to be sent to the areas where more crime happens to effectively prevent the crime. I feel the reason many people commit the crimes they do is because they see it everyday, in the world around them. These so called "hot spots" could be decreased if the people living there would teach the next generation that they don't need to commit the crimes to get by. They need to be shown that there are better ways of getting through life and contribute to their community. One of the first steps toward this is the police and the communities need to come together as equals and collaborate on ways of improving their lives.
ReplyDeleteEarthquake 456
I agree with your beginning statement and believe that police officer's focus should be shifted from catching those who commit crimes to preventing crime in the first place. If the focus remained on those who are committing crimes, then it would be a vicious cycle of catching people committing crimes over and over again without getting to the root of the problem and preventing crime in the first place.
DeleteOldHollywood456
The thing that I enjoyed so much about this video was hearing about something that we have been taught in our criminal justice class multiple times. Getting police officers is, from what the speaker explained, the most effective way and our best chance at lowering crime rates. According to the speaker in the video, deterrence may have a positive short-term effect, but it is not long lasting and has been shown to be expensive. If citizens feel they are involved in a community and are seen as equals with police officers, they will feel less compelled to act outside of the social norm and commit crime. For this to happen, both the community and police departments need to make an effort. Both must be required to be respectful, accepting, and willing to start completely anew. As mentioned in the video, cops being legal is not equal to community-involved policing, or procedural justice. Officers must be legal AND morally good, which will in turn result as an effective policing method and ultimately reducing crime.
ReplyDeleteOldHollywood456
In major cities there is a lot of crime but, crime does not happen in random places. There are always certain areas that it occurs. They very rarely occur in random places, but like the video said it is not impossible to be in those areas. Most of the time homicide is not random. It occurs with rival gangs. In gangs homicide are always like "one uping" each other. If one gang kills a member of another that gang wants to go and one up the other. Police are going in and threatening all members in the gang instead of one member. No one wants to go to jail so they tell members of the gang to knock it off. I strongly agree with that way of reducing gang violence. I also agree when the police also give people a way out. They give people a chance to make better of themselves
ReplyDeletedance456
The video had many important topics. One that stood out to me was when they mentioned how Chicago had 500 homicides, to many they may consider that bad. But if you look at the total population, in reality homicides are going down. In most cities, homicides occur in particular places repeatedly and people know where they are. Officers can watch those areas, but you dont want to flood the area because then the crime will just move. A good tactic is to communicate with the residents and become more community involved so the members of the community are supporting the department. When there is a homicide, most likely someone saw it, or heard who made the offense, then officers can get information from the residents. Homicide usually occurs as revenge, I thought this was a very important point. So when someone kills a member of a gang, that then creates the need for revenge, so the killing goes back and forth. That is also a major contributor to a "high" homicide rate. Broncos456
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement, The tactic that you provided in your comment was good and i agree with what you are saying. Having the community involved and supporting the police department could help decrease homicide or get the ones doing the crime off of the streets faster.
Deletebball456
The police department in major cities have a difficult time controlling all of the gang violence and the homicides going on around the area. I believe that if the department focuses on eliminating the gang rivalries and putting those homicides to a stop, then the crime rate will decrease. I also think that when looking at the times of when a crime occurs having more police officers around at that time. Most people are not going to commit a crime in front of a police officer so if more officers are circling around the areas that are affected with gangs and shooting then the crime rate may decrease. The community can also help the police department in trying to get the crime rate decreased by staying connected with them instead of against the department.
ReplyDeletebball456
Overall the video was a good insight into Chicago with the amount of homicides that occur each year. Even though the shootings are in certain locations, the rate is low. Police have to work with the community and try to bring down the crime together. Since crime effects everyone.
ReplyDeleteI found the "gift" analogy to be helpful as this gives us an insight on why things happen the way they do. Most of the crimes are gang related, but the gangs are endangering the communities with every shooting that takes place.
Broken Glass policing doesn't resolve the underlying problem but allows the problem to be contained. As well if we saturate the location it will begin to spread out further. We cannot completely get rid of crime but we can only bring the rate down.
Palmdaddy456
I agree that the gift analogy was helpful. It makes it easier for us to understand the lifestyle of these gangs and the endless cycle that is crime.
Delete-sf135
This video really opens your eyes to the world of crime. Before I moved to Illinois, visited Chicago, and did my research, I always assumed it was a dangerous place to be. Because that's what we've been told by the news. The news doesn't tell you that there are certain parts of Chicago that are dangerous. That areas like the Gold Coast and Lincoln Square are perfectly safe. The news tells you that Chicago is the murder capital of the world. The news makes you paranoid and panic. What the news outlets don't focus on is that there are hot spots in every crime filled city. That there are certain areas and certain streets that need to be targeted and need the most help. I like the point made in the video about the community helping to decrease crime. The police and the community need to work together to decrease crime and the number of homicides.
ReplyDelete-sf135