this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
883 points (97.0% liked)

News

22561 readers
3971 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Yeah, police are a service, not a cost of goods sold. It's supposed to cost money, it's not supposed to pay for itself.

[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Very true but there is a line my man. If they had blown that much money going after serious criminals? Sure. But 150 fucking million to track down and catch what is essentially half a step above shoplifters?

[–] Orbituary@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago

Half step below, I'd say. Shoplifting is a more serious infraction (not that I care) because they're taking physical items.

This is just a small fraction of the cost of upkeep and maintenance and is intangible.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You might be right, and I'm not one to suggest we ought to spend more on police when an equivalent crime reduction could be the result of spending the money on social services.

All I'm saying is that you cannot measure its success or failures by comparing the cost to one type of arrest. The article mentioned a 2% reduction in major crimes, and while we can't really know if that's caused by theincreased spending, if one rape or one murder was stopped as a result of increased police presence or increased overtime, then what is that one crime worth?

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 3 points 7 months ago

But did they stop any of those things while on toll duty? I think someone should have gathered information like that before parading out a cost sink this big, that on the surface, has the look that they just pulled off the perfect in plan site crime of stealing NY tax dollars to punish a few people that for whatever reason didn't pay the toll.

If you could instead point to a chart that stated, while we had officers stationed watching for toll dodgers we caught X amount of people trying to rob people, or stopped X amount of potential rapes I could see the benefit. But tooting your own horn without any of that, over what looks like robbing the NY citizens of millions of taxes dollars should have the attorney general bringing charges.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 20 points 7 months ago

But is it supposed to waste money?

[–] grue@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

The same thing is true for public transit! We shouldn't even be trying to charge for it in the first place, let alone spend money policing fare evasion.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

I agree with you and I really do not like modern policing at all. Just like the post office we shouldn't evaluate it simply on the most discrete of monetary accounting. However in this case I prsonally feel like the response was disproportionate in both money and execution wise comapred to even the desired goal, which takes a little longer to say but has a teeny bit of nuance to it.

The downvotes you're getting are wild to me, I feel like everything you said was objectively true, and without personal opinion even. If someone has an issue with what the police are doing here it's not hard to look further than the money in vs. money out equation, and it is lazy to lean on only that financial argument.