Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjamuser
Responding to ONLY paragraph one........increased Police PRESENCE would ALWAYS deter crime.....end of story.
........Putting oneself in the mind of a criminal, would you rather shoot up a bar or be a burger in an area with no electronic surveillance or an area with HEAVY electronic surveillance? The question answers itself because, with HEAVY video or other surveillance, the criminal is CAUGHT and found GUILTY.........that is called BASIC DETERRENCE.
|
Incidents such as the one at Applebees are “crimes of passion”, so to speak. Done in the heat of the moment, possibly drug- and/or alcohol-fueled, and with nothing aforethought except strong, unthinking emotion. No amount of surveillance is going to stop something like that from happening, nor is “more police presence”, unless already on the premises, going to be a deterrent.
Would heavier surveillance result, as stated, in criminals being “CAUGHT and found GUILTY…….”? Perhaps. And that is a good thing. But it scarcely needs to be pointed out that that being “caught and found guilty” means that the crime has ALREADY been committed.
The only thing that is going to slow crime down in this country is more people taking on the responsibility of assuring their own safety.