posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 10:17 AM
reply to post by getreadyalready
That the information is deemed confidential is what is problematic in the first place. Tax payers are paying for law enforcement. Citizens make
decisions where to live, socialize, invest, visit. They should be given information that their government has obtained via the ivestments made by
the tax payers. Why is it deemed confidential, because the folks can't handle it? It is far more likely that the city can't handle it.
Crime statistics are tremendously flawed. When government grants are on the table, crime goes up. During an election cycle when an incumbant is
running, crime goes down.
Two examples from NY.
When David Dinkins was running for reelection for Mayor, he constantly touted dropping crime as a measure of his success as mayor. It came out that
he had issued policies that the police were to ignore entire neighborhoods, not prosecute categories of crimes all together, plead down crimes so that
lesser crimes made the statistics rather than the actual crime. The cops blew the whistle and the US Attorney did an investigation and determined
that crime, particularily violent crime had increased dramatically.
When Rupert Murdoch bought the NY Post he began to institute a deal where every crime was listed and to the extent that criminal was outstanding an
accurate description was listed in the paper, under the notion that the public could be of assistance in their arrest. This was back in the days
when there were 2000 murders in NYC and it was a war zone. The outrage was tremendous, with business leaders hammering the Post, racial pressure
groups picketing, the city government seeking to file suit against the paper, the whole schebang. The Post dropped the feature in about 3 months.
It was a fascinating read, page after page after page. It did not want to make you vacation in NYC and definately gave you the information you
needed to stay out of certain neighborhoods.
When the facts become unpleasant it is often time to make them more transparent, not to cover them up under the notion that they need to be analyzed
and placed into context. x number of assaults between xyz street and abc street is important information for people to know and the government has
no right to shield them from it