These people are just brain dead.

People have been researching this for 50 years. The copypasta you see in your instagram and Twitter feeds is not research.

There is a mountain of additional research. This is not controversial among non-activists.

I don’t have anything from an advocacy group comparable to Vera, but here are a handful of research papers from academic journals. You need to understand that the idea that policing has no effect on crime is a fringe activist view that has been mainstreamed by dimwits copy-pasting on social media.

Aziai, Alberto. 2022. “What happens when the police go on strike? Analysing how a marked reduction in policing impacts upon homicides in Ceará, Brazil.” Global Crime, DOI: 10.1080/17440572.2022.2098121 (The [police] strike led to a statistically significant increase in homicides ranging between 110% and 250%…. Even in a violent context, the perception of a higher risk of apprehension induced by police presence acts as a powerful deterrent against homicides.)

Blesse, Sebastian and André Diegmann. 2022. “The place-based effects of police stations on crime: Evidence from station closures.” Journal of Public Economics. Vol. 207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104605 (Many countries consolidate their police forces by closing down local police stations. Police stations represent an important and visible aspect of the organization of police forces. We provide novel evidence on the effect of centralizing police offices through the closure of local police stations on crime outcomes. Combining matching with a difference-in-differences specification, we find an increase in reported car theft and burglary in residential properties. Our results are consistent with a negative shift in perceived detection risks and are driven by heterogeneous station characteristics. We can rule out alternative explanations such as incapacitation, crime displacement, and changes in police employment or strategies at the regional level. We argue that criminals are less deterred due to a lower visibility of the local police.)

Braga, Anthony. 2017. “Editorial introduction. Impact of Police on CJ Reform. Arrests, Harm Reduction, and Police Crime Prevention Policy.” Criminology & Public Policy. Vol. 16(2): 369-373. (Communities expect the police to control violence. Ineffective strategies will undoubtedly undermine police legitimacy. Effective police crime prevention efforts are characterized by changing the perceptions of potential offenders of apprehension risk and by modifying criminal opportunities (Nagin, Solow, and Lum, 2015). Although arrests are inevitable, police should be oriented toward preventing crimes from happening in the first place.)

Braga A., Kennedy D., Pielh A and Waring E. 2001. “Measuring the Impact of Operation Ceasefire in Reducing Gun Violence: The Boston gun project’s operation ceasefire.” NIJ. (The time series shows a 63-percent reduction in the mean monthly number of youth homicide victims from a pretest mean of 3.5 youth homicides per month to a post test mean of 1.3 youth homicides per month. Analyses suggest that the Ceasefire intervention was associated with statistically significant reductions in all time series., including: A 63-percent decrease in the monthly number of youth homicides in Boston. A 32-percent decrease in the monthly number of citywide shots-fired calls. A 25-percent decrease in the monthly number of citywide all-age gun assault incidents.)

Braga, Anthony A., Andrew V. Papachristos & David M. Hureau (2012). “The Effects of Hot Spots Policing on Crime: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Justice Quarterly. Vol. 31(4): 633-663. (Abstract: Our research suggests that hot spots policing generates small but noteworthy crime reductions, and these crime control benefits diffuse into areas immediately surrounding targeted crime hot spots. Our analyses find that problem-oriented policing interventions generate larger mean effect sizes when compared to interventions that simply increase levels of traditional police actions in crime hot spots. We also find that only a small number of studies examine the impacts of hot spots policing on police-community relations. The extant research on this topic, however, suggests that community members have positive reactions to these focused policing actions. [See also: Braga et al, 2018, “An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence.”])

Braga A., Weisburd, D., Turchan, B. 2018. “An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence.” Criminology & Public Policy. Volume 17. Issue 1. (The results of our meta-analysis demonstrate that focused deterrence strategies are associated with an overall statistically significant, moderate crime reduction effect.)

Braga, A. A., D. L. Weisburd, E. J. Waring, L. G. Mazerolle, W. Spelman, & F. Gajewski. “Problem-Oriented Policing in Violent Crime Places: A Randomized Controlled Experiment.” Justice Quarterly. Vol 31(4): 633-663. (Many researchers believe that crime problems can be reduced more efficiently if officers systematically focus their attention on crime “hot spots.” Previously, the value of focused problem-oriented policing efforts in controlling violence was not known. This randomized controlled experiment […] concluded that the Jersey City Police Department’s pilot problem-oriented policing program was successful at reducing crime and disorder at violent places, with little evidence of displacement.)

Braga, Anthony A., Brandon C. Welsh, and Cory Schnell. 2015. “Can policing disorder reduce crime? A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. Vol. 52: 567–588. (Suggests that hot spots policing generates small but noteworthy crime reductions, and these crime control benefits diffuse into areas immediately surrounding targeted crime hot spots. Our analyses find that problem-oriented policing interventions generate larger mean effect sizes when compared to interventions that simply increase levels of traditional police actions in crime hot spots. [See also: Braga et al, 2018, “An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence.”])

Chalfin, Aaron, Michael LaForest, and Jacob Kaplan. 2021. “Can Precision Policing Reduce Gun Violence? Evidence from ‘Gang Takedowns’ in New York City.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. Vol 40(4), pp. 1047-1082. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pam.22323 (During the last decade, while national homicide rates have remained flat, New York City has experienced a second great crime decline, with gun violence declining by more than 50 percent since 2011. In this paper, we investigate one potential explanation for this dramatic and unexpected improvement in public safety—the New York Police Department’s shift to a more surgical form of “precision policing,” in which law enforcement focuses resources on a small number of individuals who are thought to be the primary drivers of violence. We study New York City’s campaign of “gang takedowns” in which suspected members of criminal gangs were arrested in highly coordinated raids and prosecuted on conspiracy charges. We show that gun violence in and around public housing communities fell by approximately one third in the first year after a gang takedown. Our estimates imply that gang takedowns explain nearly one quarter of the decline in gun violence in New York City’s public housing communities over the last eight years.)

Chalfin and McCrary. 2012. “The Effect of Police on Crime: New Evidence from U.S. Cities, 1960-2010.” https://eml.berkeley.edu//~jmccrary/chalfin_mccrary2012.pdf

Cheng, Cheng, Wei Long, 2019. “Improving police services: Evidence from the French Quarter Task Force.” Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 164, pp. 1-18, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.05.002. (This study sheds light on the improvement of police services by examining the French Quarter Task Force (FQTF) – an anti-crime program in New Orleans’ French Quarter. First, we provide new evidence that increasing police presence is effective in crime prevention. Our difference-in-differences estimates suggest that the FQTF, which increased police visibility in the French Quarter, reduced robberies, aggravated assaults, and thefts by 37.4%, 16.9%, and 13%, respectively. Second, our findings imply that the proper use of monitoring and incentive strategies has the potential to further improve police services. Exploiting the program’s change in management, we find that providing officers with more monitoring and performance incentives led the FQTF to reduce robberies by 22.12 and aggravated assaults by 5.56 each quarter.)

Yes, approximately a million if you include charter school students (which you should because charter school costs are included). So that’s approximately $35,000 per student. If that’s under-funding, I’d like to know how much is enough. $100,000 per student?

Thx good talk

You’re misreading me. I’m saying nothing can eradicate crime. That’s why we need policing. To deal with, you know, rapists, for example.

What’s not a crime that looks like a crime?

I highly doubt that.

There’s no magic number but there is no way that ~$35 billion is “underfunding.” People talk about it as if it’s draconian austerity. That’s ridiculous.

There’s that, too. As if NYPD is going to be flooding the zone in response to “suspicious behavior” reports.

Like I said, it’s just a higher tech version of “don’t call 911 because policing disproportionately affects POC.” Unfortunately, most of the 911 calls are probably coming from POC.

We don’t need more police in NYC—we have a lot of officers—but we also don’t need many fewer.

“Police do not prevent crime” is midwit copypasta. Really dumb, really wrong, and contrary to both common sense and decades of research. But there are some people who will never stop cutting and pasting it.

Trying to give women support structures to help them leave violent relationships is good but it will not eradicate rape.

No I haven’t looked into the “40%” thing. I do know it’s copypasta so I assume there are massive caveats that need to be added to it.

TIL that “it’s literally scientifically supported” that rapists rape “due to lack of resources/legitimate avenues to meet their needs.”

So don’t make it publicly available.

Cops and prisons are not all we have and have never been all we have.

Thinking you’re going to eradicate crime by any means—whether by aggressive policing or by “addressing root causes”—is as foolish as thinking you’re going to eradicate any social problem. There has always been crime and there will always be crime. We have to manage it as best we can by using all society’s tools, which include policing, to strike the best balance we can.

That’s a small amount in the context of the massive DOE budget.

The education budget is $38 billion this year. It’s not underfunded.

So you wouldn’t help the police identify a suspect in a rape you witnessed?

If you want to see near-constant increases, look at the education budget. It is almost 40% of the entire budget.

It’s a sad thing but some people are effectively bad down to their roots.

I agree if we’re talking about a situation where there is a chance that you will conceivably be or become the target. And doubly so if you are stopped or arrested by the police.

But if people are victims of crime, they absolutely should report it—assuming, of course, that they themselves are not engaging in criminal conduct that police would find as interesting as or more interesting than the crime you’re reporting. Apart from that circumstance, telling people not to report crimes because you can’t trust the police is paranoid and harmful.

NYC spends a lot on police, but I don’t think 10% is the budget is unreasonable, and it’s certainly not “everything.”

45 minutes, no way.