This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

Police put skywatch on Washington and Sterling - Page 4 — Brooklynian

Police put skywatch on Washington and Sterling

124»

Comments

  • King without a crown wrote: Well since we're talking about statistics, it appears the 77 Pct has seen 18 Murders this year, more than any other Brooklyn South Pct. Also Brooklyn North has seen 109 Homicides year to date, as opposed to 89 in Brooklyn South. Brooklyn alone would account for 198 of the 492 Murders City Wide, which is quite impressive.
    whats most impressive is what must be going on in the 77th to achieve such unmatched numbers. it might raise the question of police competency, or perhaps indicate that something out of the ordinary is happening there, but then again, maybe im just projecting... which is likely, as i seem to be in the minority as someone who perceives the disconnect between "is skywatch really worth it?" and "omg, check out these numbers and feel the fear!"

    but getting back from all these tangents... can someone please challenge my opinion by making a solid case that skywatch is not only productive, but worth it (financially, rights, etc) and do so by citing something slightly more substantial than oblique fearmongering and nebulous police PR statistics that may or may not really have anything to do with skywatch, per se? if one were to look at all of those pdfs of every precinct's crime stats, there are many patterns, specifically around the crack epidemic years and giuliani's reign of terror, that come out and say a lot about policing and how changing demographics drive crime stat changes in a directly proportional way. i happen to think that an initiative like "skywatch" is an empty gesture. if you can convince me that its not, id love to hear your case.
  • well i woulnt mind if they parked that skywatch thing in front of my building it would make me feel safe. i bet there has not been to much crime on that corner with that skywatch thing.
  • rhodamine wrote: [quote=GOD]rhodamine: Looking back through this topic it seems that you're the one slamming your opinions down everyones throat. The person (Troll) clearly was messing you. But some of the things this Rorschach troll was saying was just a clever why of expressing an opinion about skywatch.
    playing devils advocate is one thing, trolling is another. similarly, being outspoken about ones opinion and "slamming your opinions down everyones throat" are also two different things.

    but thanks for your observations, Rorschach :wink:

    Thanks Pete.

    :wink:
  • Subject: skywatch price

    So today in the NY Post, the cost for a skywatch was listed at $90,000. Thought I'd throw that out there. I'm not sure where one would find stats on the effectiveness of the skywatches. Like I said in an earlier post, I'd rather see cops on the street than cameras policing us.

    Re: Per Capita crime stats: Good point. I did think about that after I posted, but didn't have the info on how many people live in each precinct. I kind of assumed more people lived in Manhattan precincts, but there is that old saying about assumptions.

    However, if you look at each Brooklyn precinct then as King Without a Crown did in his post about the 77, as compared to other Brooklyn precincts, I think it's clear that location matters, within the borough itself, though perhaps this also has more to do with precinct per capita size than I would think? I haven't crunched the numbers, but my gut is telling me no on that. Population size makes a difference, but not enough to demonstrate the disparity between different neighborhoods. How else to explain that Brooklyn has twice the number of murders than Queens, while the difference in population size between the boroughs isn't all that great? (All numbers for current crime stats were found on the NYPD's website).

    However safe NYC may now be, and I consider it pretty safe myself, NYers are still effected by crime that happens in their neighborhood. Consider for instance, the guys who work in the bodega where Mohammed was assaulted and recently someone was shot. They may not have been injured, but I can't imagine that they are not at all rattled by having witnessed a beating or a shooting or both. What about the kids who live and play on the block by the bodega? I would argue that people are effected in many different ways when they witness or hear about crimes on their blocks and it doesn't alway equate to an unnecessary fear for their own safety. Talking about crime isn't necessarily fear mongering.

    So I'll throw this out for you. I had a friend at an old job who lived in this neighborhood (Crown Heights/Prospect Heights, depending on who is trying to sell the neighborhood to you) with two kids. Here was her approach to living here: She didn't talk to many people on the street and she didn't let her kids play outside in front of the building ever. She had emigrated to the area from Trinidad. Now some might say that she was overreacting, but I'm not going to judge her because I think she was just doing what she felt was right for her family. It is a fallacy I think to say that gang or drug activity doesn't effect the people who live in the neighborhood where it occurs. It matters.
  • Subject: Re: skywatch price

    Flo wrote: I'm not sure where one would find stats on the effectiveness of the skywatches.
    at the sure risk of sounding like an ass, this is exactly why i asked you to show these facts. the reason you dont know where to look is because theyre not there. there is, however, plenty of proof that such draconian surveillance does not work, which brings us back to the original point i made in this thread to begin with! ...not to say anything of the irony of you not sharing any facts immediately after posting a comment saying "more facts, less snark!" lol. so at this point, weve come full-circle and proved nothing. sigh.

    perhaps look into the MTA "bag and large container" searches... thats a more popular topic, and theres tons of info about its ineffectiveness and annoyance online.
    Flo wrote: However safe NYC may now be, and I consider it pretty safe myself
    then im assuming you agree with me that skywatch is superfluous? then whats the point here? being pro-skywatch when you think that nyc is pretty safe is rather duplicitious.
    Flo wrote: I would argue that people are effected in many different ways when they witness or hear about crimes on their blocks and it doesn't alway equate to an unnecessary fear for their own safety.
    what is it, then? property values? reputation? what is it that people are so scared of that they need watchtowers full of cops and videocameras and flashing lights pointed in their faces as they go about their daily, private business? i dont feel fear for my own safety, and i dont think im the only one who would feel a tad offended to be included in your giant generalization that new yorkers as a whole automatically feel fear when something bad happens in their community. fuck fear. everyone is such a victim these days!
    Flo wrote: Talking about crime isn't necessarily fear mongering.
    i would buy this generalization if you even bothered to make the most cursory effort to stop mixing the two, then. so... as you didnt offer us any facts, and only offered fearmongering tales of how supposedly damaged these alleged "kids who live and play on the block by the bodega" are in regards to a comparatively isolated shooting in said bodega(?) ...or perhaps your alleged new-immigrant friend who had to turn antisocial to feel safe (?!). facts are facts. extrapolation is extrapolation. your mixing of the two then clamoring for facts is a bit confusing. pick a side and stick to it. otherwise its hard to take you seriously in a conversational confrontation... lol.

    so in closing, ill say this: its clear we dont agree, and id hate for you to have to wait until you live in a gulag-style police-state to feel some false sense of safety. how about this... when you get scared, you can buy a gun or some mace or go inside. as for me, ill be outside living my life because having a "skywatch tower" doesnt change my life one iota for the better, unless you count the satisfaction it gives me to give the middle-finger to the tower-borne clowns who only care about our safety inasmuch as they can shoot a bullet at it on a whim or get paid overtime for sitting in a tower high above the masses who, sometime since 2001, somehow became suspect by default, not because of Just Cause or precedent.

    no, as an american, i enjoy the rights the 4th amendment grants us, and i feel that its done just fine for the past 250+ years... but at the crux of what im trying to say is that it shames me that americans- as a whole- are such malleable, gullible, brainwashed lemmings as to be continuously led into false senses of security such that they now will gobble up any rights-invading contrived sense of security like so many swines dining on shit just to feel an empty sense of safety from such an empty gesture that, at best, was put into place simply to blow some "homeland security" bucks (or lose them the next year)....

    that being said, im out of this thread until someone can bother to rub a few brain-cells together and hit me with a meaningful retort that hopefully cites more facts than emotions, and for the love of god, doesnt contradict itself with each convolution.
  • ...And that concludes another zany episode of The Rhodamine Show!

    Be here next week when our guests will be...

    Actress Marisa Tomei

    Chef Bobby Flay

    And

    Dr. Maximilian Der Overlord of ICX Tactical Platforms
    with stupid "Skywatch Tricks"!

    Good Night and don't forget to tip your waiters.

    :wink:
  • GOD wrote: ...And that concludes another zany episode of The Rhodamine Show!

    Be here next week when our guests will be...

    Actress Marisa Tomei

    Chef Bobby Flay

    And

    Dr. Maximilian Der Overlord of ICX Tactical Platforms
    with stupid "Skywatch Tricks"!

    Good Night and don't forget to tip your waiters.

    :wink:
    eeeeeeeeverybody loves a troll. at least i do it under my real name!

    :roll:
  • everytime i pass it I want to whistle the tune from "The Great Escape". Can't help it.
  • "at the sure risk of sounding like an ass, this is exactly why i asked you to show these facts. the reason you dont know where to look is because theyre not there."--

    Too late.-- I wasn't speaking about London. I was wondering what stats the city might have on the numbers of skywatches operating, their cost as opposed to man-on-the-street hours cost, etc. I was imagining someone might have read a report or knew of data from the NYPD or city (as in during these weeks, x number of skywatches were in place in whatever precinct and in these weeks, the crime rate was??? or x number of crimes were or were not solved because of the videotaping or x number of dollars is being spent with no results) Somehow, I feel that this information might be available or researchable.

    At different times during the last 5 or so years there have been larger "communications" NYPD stations set up on Franklin Ave. Sometimes they have been around for a short while and sometimes for months. I always assumed that these stations had cameras too. (And I cannot say for sure because I do not work for the NYPD, but they seem to have been in response to a shooting on the street.) Whether or not crime was reduced during those times, I couldn't say. But just because we don't know the answers to the questions, doesn't mean the answers are "no where". I think we should be asking for that info. We should be requiring the city to supply it. Perhaps Rhodamine with his big beautiful mind and his sharp internet searching skills can get us the details.

    Re: debating whether we want to live in a Big Brother police state or not: Um. Again, my inclination would be to NOT have cameras everywhere. As for the population being lemmings in re: to Patriot Act laws, wiretapping, etc, again, I would agree with you. I would argue that whether or not the skywatches work is not the point for me. But that is only my opinion. We might better be able to convince the people who would support the "camera" state though if we had stats based in NY on whether they work or not. (For instance, it doesn't seem that NY is using the cameras in the same way here. In London, they are supersaturated. Here they seem more targeted.)

    Not for nothing though--- the 4th amendment doesn't guarantee us privacy. None of the amendments do. Unreasonable searches? Yes. Being filmed walking down the street, um no.

    As for the "alleged" isolatedness of the shooting--once you've been on the block for a bit, you might find that shootings within the 4 block radius of say Washington to Franklin and Lincoln to St. John's aren't like clockwork, but they aren't at all surprising. I'd say I've stumbled upon 8 or so in the last 6 or so years on those few blocks.
  • Flo wrote: Perhaps Rhodamine with his big beautiful mind and his sharp internet searching skills can get us the details.
    your sarcasm is duly noted. i wish i had the spare time to keep sinking into this largely tangential and increasingly unfriendly chitchat. lol. im not interested in arguing and youre not interested in logic, so... thats that.

    hit me on PM if you care so much beyond all the rhetoric. otherwise, laterz!

    *flounce*
  • http://www.notbored.org/nyu.html

    Here's a group writing about the proliferation of cameras in and around NYU in April of 2004. Maybe the Brooklyn bloggers could do a little spot -a skywatch- project and then you might have an idea of how frequent the NYPD skywatches are here in Brooklyn. My guess is there are more cameras on private buildings. (lots of those black and red 24 security signs around) People can simply post where they see the skywatches or count how many cameras they see on a given day in their neighborhood----maybe if there's some people out there who like to take photos in and around brooklyn--maybe you could spend a day or two simply filming the cameras you see.

    A quote from the group above:

    "In April-May 2004, we returned to the area and, from scratch, made another map. According to our research, which required 12 hours' of effort, there are now 510 cameras installed in public places: 500 of them on privately owned buildings (including those owned by NYU and other universities); and 10 on city-owned poles. In other words, the number of cameras in the area has more than doubled over the course of the last 1.5 years; this area has eight cameras per-square-block, which makes it the most heavily surveilled area in Manhattan that we've mapped. And yet, there is virtually no crime in the area, and no locations that might be tempting targets for terrorists."
  • sentinel story was funny...

    should all nyers plan a facemask day?

    again, off topic and i am completely out of date on this one, but i find the streetview on google map a little creepy too. I know it's not surveillance technically... http://maps.google.com/help/maps/streetview/index.html
    I had no idea this existed and was looking for directions and found myself looking at a photo of my parent's house and did not like that one bit.

    did they get all of these shots by driving around? every highway and byway?
  • Flo wrote: sentinel story was funny...

    should all nyers plan a facemask day?

    again, off topic and i am completely out of date on this one, but i find the streetview on google map a little creepy too. I know it's not surveillance technically... http://maps.google.com/help/maps/streetview/index.html
    I had no idea this existed and was looking for directions and found myself looking at a photo of my parent's house and did not like that one bit.

    did they get all of these shots by driving around? every highway and byway?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Street_View
  • Flo wrote: did they get all of these shots by driving around? every highway and byway?
    http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/31/the-google-street-view-vehicle-revealed/
  • Carnivore wrote: [quote=Flo]did they get all of these shots by driving around? every highway and byway?
    http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/31/the-google-street-view-vehicle-revealed/

    lol. im pretty sure the van is a ruse. word on the street is that they use ESP to generate the streetview images :shock:
  • Heh. Maybe if it was all filmed on a bike, it'd be better? More green, at least.

    I know I'm way behind on this--am only an internet junkie in fits and spurts (I don't own a computer or a tv..heh), so I really did just discover this google map feature yesterday. I realize we cannot go backwards with technology, but there is something nice about setting out on an adventure and not knowing what you will see along the way. Obviously you can still do this, by just getting a map though. Hey remember when people used those ancient things and they called them maps and they were really really really hard to fold?
  • Flo wrote: they were really really really hard to fold?
    have you tried folding googlemaps? have you?! :o
  • ah...you gave me chuckles...

    i am happy to report that there are still roads unknown. I tried out a few biking routes and yes you can little yellow man your way from Brooklyn out to Port Washington on the roads I like to take, but I don't think they have the view from the old Vanderbilt motorway near Alley pond park and you will still have to pedal if you want to see what the road looks like all the way out to Montauk. So there's hope yet.
  • there are some places, indeed, that the little yellow man can not go:

    Blurred Out: 51 Things You Aren't Allowed to See on Google Maps
  • He can make that left in Albuqurque, New Mexico though. I just saw him do it.

    Montauk, no. Albuqurque, yes.
  • I copied an entry on the Crown Heights Board here because it seemed to belong here....it is below

    Won't UB My Nabor
    ENTP


    Joined: 13 Aug 2007
    Posts: 54
    Location: The Crown of Kings
    Wed Dec 24, 08 4:49 pm EST

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I am pretty sure there is a long trail about Operation Impact on this board, but I could not find it. In any event, here's a good article from the NY Times about the positive impact of Operation Impact in its designated zones, including in Crown Heights (71st precinct is mentioned specifically).

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/nyregion/24.....tml?pagewanted=1&_r=1

    December 24, 2008

    Police Project Credited With Cutting Crime in Tough Precincts

    By AL BAKER and KAREN ZRAICK

    Along Linden Boulevard in East New York, the officers of Operation Impact patrol the Pink Houses with all the rigor of a military patrol, a clannish band of partners whose uniforms shout authority even when they do not speak.

    They tread the maze of eight-story buildings, inspect the interior staircases, aim their flashlights into the nighttime darkness of rooftops and — on a recent frigid night — coat their lips with layers of ChapStick.

    The police officers in this outpost in the eastern end of Brooklyn are part of a mini crime-suppression operation, one reliant on money, manpower and labor. They are the tip of the New York Police Department’s crime-fighting spear.

    “We feel really proud of the job we’re doing here,” Officer Kevin Martinez, 24, said as he walked his beat in the Louis H. Pink Houses, a public housing project of 1,500 apartments in 22 buildings.

    “When they see us here, they feel safe,” he said.

    So far this year, police officials are praising the results: Impact has driven crime down across the 75th Precinct, a place once so violent that newspapers called it “the murder capital of New York City.” The number of homicides reported in the precinct this year has dropped to 16 by last weekend, down from 33 in all of 2007. Fifteen years ago, 126 people were killed there.

    A similar story can be told in 19 other precincts using Operation Impact, the broad anticrime program devised by Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly, in which rookie officers join with supervisors to flood the city’s toughest neighborhoods. By focusing on such high-crime plateaus, the Police Department is poised to end another year with even less overall crime.

    Yet a stormy economy is not receding.

    Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is tightening budgets and warning of tough financial times. Joblessness is up. Homicides have increased slightly; after dropping to 496 last year — the lowest number in more than four decades — the city hit that number last week. By 5 p.m. on Tuesday, the city had 502 homicides, the police said.

    At the same time, the Police Department, with 94 percent of its $4 billion operating budget devoted to personnel costs, is facing budget reductions of $45.4 million for the remainder of this fiscal year, which ends in June, and $167 million in the 2010 fiscal year. On top of that, City Hall wants the department to find ways to save $285.7 million more.

    After the next cut is made, the Police Department’s uniformed force will have shrunk by 4,400 officers, from a peak strength of 40,800 in 2001. The incoming Police Academy class in January will have 250 recruits; the department had previously anticipated hiring 1,100. An additional 1,100 officers set to graduate on Dec. 30 will join the 1,300 officers already in Operation Impact posts — effectively doubling their strength.

    But if promotions and retirements create dangerous shortfalls in some precincts, some Impact officers may have to be moved to other spots, Mr. Kelly said. “We’ve had contracting and expanding numbers of cops in Impact, so the concept will remain,” the commissioner said in an interview last week. “But the numbers may vary.”

    When asked if New York could ever return to crime levels seen in the late 1980s, he said: “Never. We’d never let that happen.”

    A preliminary Police Department analysis of this year’s homicides showed that, as in past years, the typical killing occurred indoors, on a weekend night, with a gun fired by someone the victim knew. Among the 280 killings analyzed so far in which the police have identified both the victim and a suspect, 63 were found to have been committed by strangers, the police said.

    But a new trend may be emerging: Guns, while still the deadliest weapon, were used in fewer cases citywide, 272, down from 298 last year. Conversely, the number of people killed by knives or other sharp instruments spiked, to 123 from 76 last year. Other methods included “blunt impact,” or a beating with an object; strangulation; and arson.

    In the 75th Precinct, where crime levels have been driven down from peaks reached two decades ago, Mr. Kelly said he was still committed to supporting a system in which the entire 5.5-square-mile precinct is treated as one large Impact zone divided into three parts.

    Inspector David P. Barrere, the precinct’s commander since 2005, said Operation Impact had put officers in the midst of crime, forcing criminals to relocate out of the areas where they are comfortable.

    The officers’ presence might change the path a drug dealer takes from a stash house to a corner where he sells narcotics. It might alter a gunman’s escape path from the scene of a robbery, or alter his hideout location.

    Once the criminals are “displaced,” said Inspector Barrere, other officers in the precinct — from anticrime units, narcotics enforcement units or regular patrols — can swoop in to make arrests. The officers on Impact posts speak with people in the community and pick up tips — a nickname or a location where crime is prevalent — and those bits of data can be run down with computers in the precinct or at 1 Police Plaza.

    “It’s faster, smarter and better policing,” said Inspector Barrere, 43. “It’s more organized, with maps and computers.”

    The crime rate has fallen even though the precinct’s overall police head count dropped to 356 officers from 403 officers three years ago. The number of Impact officers has fluctuated, and now there are 89 officers assigned to Impact. The inspector hopes more will join them in January.

    “If you have to do it with less police officers, does it get more difficult? Absolutely,” Inspector Barrere said. “But does that mean we cannot continue to succeed? Absolutely not.”

    Residents of the Pink Houses interviewed the night the Impact officers visited said that they did feel safer than in years past, though crime was still a fact of life. “It probably is more safe, but everyone still does the same things,” said Donna Pettiford, 37. “It hasn’t stopped the people in my building from selling drugs.”

    A couple of residents complained that the officers tended to be rude and aggressive in demanding identification. Rob Wright, 40, a Fresh Direct deliveryman, said he kept his company jacket on even when he was off so that the police know he is a working man.

    “These are kids to me,” he said of the young officers. “They have to learn to respect people. If it was another neighborhood, they’d know how to act then, if it was an all-white neighborhood.”

    Paul J. Browne, the department’s chief spokesman, said, “We realize in areas where there is more police contact with the public, there will be some complaints.”

    “We emphasize in training with our officers that they conduct themselves professionally at all times,” he added.

    To the west, in Brooklyn’s 71st Precinct, Operation Impact officers work in teams of 12, in two shifts each day. In the Impact zone this year, officials say, they have helped drive crime down more than 40 percent in the heart of the precinct, which covers parts of Crown Heights and Flatbush.

    There have been no killings in that zone, but in the rest of the precinct, homicides are up, to 16 through last weekend from 11 all of last year.

    Deputy Inspector Peter J. Simonetti, the commander of the precinct, said six of the killings were related to gang incidents, a reflection of an increase in gang violence that he said he was addressing.

    Inspector Simonetti said he hoped to keep the same number of Impact officers in place next year: 48. In a system new to that precinct, Mr. Kelly said, mobile teams of Impact officers will swarm in at times — groups of officers known as Incident Response Teams.

    “Everybody would like more cops,” Deputy Inspector Simonetti said. “But we will work with what we have.”

    To understand the future of crime fighting in the city, Edward Skyler, the deputy mayor for operations, said one must understand the past. He said that the cut the Police Department is now enduring is small compared with the one it took early in the Bloomberg administration, and that crime has come down by 30 percent in seven years.

    “It bodes well for their ability to continue to reduce crime even with less resources,” Mr. Skyler said.



    Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
  • Gone after a month...
  • Hatemail wrote: Gone after a month...
    imagine that... back to status-quo with no change save for whomever got the overtime pay for manning that pointless thing. hey, its not all a loss though... maybe theyll do their part to stimulate the economy by blowing their overtime pay at circuit city :lol:
Sign In or Register to comment.