[geeks] What desk toy or "tchotchke" says "geek" to you?

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

Thu, 30 Mar 2006 @ 23:50 -0500, der Mouse said:

> Yes...except you don't have the arrest and conviction rates; what you
> have is _one cop's idea of_ the arrest and conviction rates.  At best.
> (You could actually have something more like what one cop wants you to
> think the arrest and conviction rates are....)

You are confused.

Yes, we definitely do have arrest and conviction rates. It is mandatory
bookeeping nationwide.

Maybe it isn't in Canada, but it is in the US.

The processing and storage of those records is the primary record keeping
function in any police jurisdiction.

> So it's entirely possible that the difference is actually that US cops are
> better at parroting the official line. (This supports your contention.)

Even 100 years ago, the height of cops "on the pay", there were always
those who didn't play ball.

I'm not talking to people like that, and in any case, its actually pretty rare
now. Most now are far more professional than they were even 20 years ago.

The biggest problem in law enforcement right now is falling arrest rates due
to them being forced to be politically correct and not harm criminals.

It's getting to the point where the job is nearly impossible.

> Speaking personally, it's not so much that I "believe what I want to
> believe" as that I just don't care enough to go do the digging necessary to
> turn up the truth.

That's fine. No one can afford the time to look everything up. I'm not
personally interested in the statistics related to fires, so I never both with
it.

> Well, no.  The former could also mean that the armed folk almost always
> take the law into their own hands instead of calling copper.  

Anything is possible, but you are grasping at straws here.

Vigilantes are actually quite rare, and most start out unarmed.

> The latter could also mean that all the local criminals are organized and
> nobody dares call copper on the local gang/mob but has no hesitation about
> doing so on strangers.

Again, possible, but unlikely. Organized crime is not invisible, no matter
what Hollywood might have led you to believe.

This was more of a problem 100 years ago, and even then, the cops knew it so
they didn't mistake that as something else.

You are trying too hard.

> Sounds to me as though it's you who's believing what you want to believe -
> specifically, seeing evidence as supporting the conclusion you like.

In that I want to believe what the evidence supports, yes.




-- 
shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- [governorrhea: a contagious disease that
spreads from the governor of a state downward through other offices and his
corporate sponsors]