Chicago Police Force Wins CIO Magazine Award

Roland Piquepaille writes "The Chicago Police Department (CPD) is the sole winner of the 2004 Grand CIO Enterprise Value Award for its data warehouse and application suite. In Taking IT to the Street, the magazine writes that Chicago police officers have an immediate access to more than to 200 GB of data and nearly 8.5 million records of arrests and other incidents. It took $45 million and 3 years to the CPD to build this database with the help of Oracle, but the return on investment is huge, with labor savings of $88 million from 2001 through 2003. And while the national crime rate rose 2 percent from 2000 to 2001, Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives, but in Police Power Coming Up Behind You, the author reports he is somewhat worried that all these tools could fall into wrong hands. This overview contains selected excerpts and comments about this long article."

Comments

with the help of Oracle?

[andy1307]

with the help of Oracle

I'm sure Oracle built this system for free and the system uses DB2..

Re:with the help of Oracle?

[hpavc]

The question is if each person they pull over requires the state to buy a client license or something simular.

Re:with the help of Oracle?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's easy to stop crime when you have an Oracle. Everybody knows that.

Re:with the help of Oracle?

[Poligraf]

Nope, they just come to Oracle to find out whereabouts of criminals ;-).

Re:with the help of Oracle?

[pod]

Oracle doesn't charge you per record stored in database, or number of queries. You'll be paying Oracle per databse CPU, or a site licence.

Wrong hands

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

the author reports he is somewhat worried that all these tools could fall into wrong hands

Given how paranoid the US, its administration and its various police forces are these days, I think the problem is that the database is already in hands that can potentially go disturbingly wrong.

Re:Wrong hands

[frdmfghtr]

the author reports he is somewhat worried that all these tools could fall into wrong hands

ANYTHING, in the wrong hands, can pose a hazard to anybody. Guns, information, paper clips, the little umbrellas that get put in tropical drinks--all these can be dangerous if they get in the wrong hands.

The phrase "into the wrong hands" is simply a way of spreading FUD without being specific. There is no such thing as something that has no "bad" associated with its "good." Technology provides many comforts and conveniences for decent people; but it also brings these comfots and conveniences to people who will use them to do unlawful things.

Re:Wrong hands

[DrEldarion]

paper clips, the little umbrellas that get put in tropical drinks

Only if you're talking about Jackie Chan.

Re:Wrong hands

[Anonymous Coward]

Like mossad? :)

Re:Wrong hands

[Fulcrum of Evil]

How about John 'I killed the president of Paraguay with a shrimp fork' Cusack?

Re:Wrong hands

[brunes69]

I can't think of any possible "good" associated with the "bad" of firearms.

Think about it, if you could go back to the beginning and prevent man from inventing firearms, how different would the world be?

What is the possible benefit of a firearm, other than to shoot someone else who has a firearm before he shoots you?

Sure there would still be violence without firearms, but at least it would be forced to either be hand to hand or bow+arrow and thus there'd be much less civilian deaths in large scale conflicts.

Re:Wrong hands

[Anonymous Coward]

MJNO, Minnesota's own TIA program was shut down as it had no controls on who could access the data, included private data and was in the hands of a private paramilitary. Article and AP news references

Re:Wrong hands

[tftp]

There is an answer to your question already. Kings and knights were armed with manually operated weapons, and the peasants were forbidden to own any weapons (even despite the fact that the peasants were not trained to use them.)

The result was that the strongest men ruled, and everyone else was oppressed (as illustrated in one well known movie :-)

If you logically extend Middle Ages into today, you will see something resembling Japan 100 years ago. Rifles and other firearms were not welcome in Japan until about 20th century...

It is a completely different question, though, whether you'd like to live in such a society. Have a look at Rurouni Kenshin.

Re:Wrong hands

[Dun Malg]

It was Martin Blank, as played by John Cusack in Grosse Pointe Blank. And wasn't it just a regular fork? I don't remember it being a shrimp fork.

Re:Wrong hands

[Thomas Shaddack]

The peasants weren't allowed to carry weapons. The only possible result was the appearance of fighting techniques not relying on weapons per se, but either using bare hands and feet, or using agricultural equipment as weapons. Nunchaku being a prime example what can be done with a farmer's tool. A scythe can become a formidable weapon as well, as many government goons found out when facing a peasant uprising.

Re:Wrong hands

[tftp]

But the movie is still called "Seven Samurai", not "Seventy Peasants"... also, all peasant uprisings failed. Most peasants could not fight well, and the trained troops had an advantage. Revolutions started winning only when firearms enabled weak and young and old to fight superior troops.

Re:Wrong hands

[frdmfghtr]

I can't think of any possible "good" associated with the "bad" of firearms.

I can...it's called "hunting." As I think back, I think back to the settlers of the 1800s who, as they made their way west, needed firearms to hunt bear, deer, etc. as sources of food to make it through the winter. They also used them to protect their milk cows from predators such as wolves.

Do you think a man could club a bear to death? Bears are big; I bet it takes a heckuva bow and arrow combination to bring one down (disclaimer: I am not a hunter.)

OK, man's earliest ancestors didn't have firearms, and they hunted down big game. They also hunted in packs of 10-20 and lived in tribes, lucky to live past 30. The settlers were typically single families homesteading, with the nearest neighbor or town miles away.

Man with club + bear = well-fed bear.

I look at the reverse from your statement; the good of firearms is the ability to hunt for food and protect oneself from one's predators. The associated "bad" is that if the predator is another human, then the predator can and generally will use the firearm as well.

My point was that any good idea can and will have bad applications "in the wrong hands." The "in the wrong hands" phrase is stating the obvious in an attempt to diminish the worthiness of something while wasting space on a page and the reader's time.

Re:Wrong hands

[TyrranzzX]

And a lone paperclipman is going to destroy our freedoms?

Think of what hitler could do if he had all that information. He could've rounded up ALL the jews. What if china attacks? I wonder where all the slot-eyed tan people are going to go, hmmmm? It's a little known fact that many japanese families in WW2 were taken to concentration camps (although they got an education, food, water, etc there), many old heirlooms were destroyed by hateful people and goverment officials confiscated stuff if they wanted it.

Can that cop pull up a list of books people have purchased? Or better yet, would anyone care if the police decided to start putting people in jail for owning certain books?

What happens when the database begins tracking everywhere you go, pointing out the small descrepencies in your life that look suspicious. What then? What happens when it begins to catalouge evidence?

Most people don't consider smoking marajuana or selling marajuana a federal offense, but the cops do. With a system like that, they can track everything.

What happens if the religious right gets involved in all this?

"Well Mr Anderson, seems like you've been seeing Betty a lot, and she's been spending the night over for longer and longer periods. Time to goto jail, Mr Anderson, sex without marrage is wrong."

Right now it's just a bunch of information they've collected. As long as it's used for good things that everyone believes in, like catching rapists, murderers, frauds and the like and not for legislating morality or decency, we'll be just fine. Our goverment is handling the drug war by making all kinds of minimum sentances, putting little kinds in jail for 20 years for stealing a candy bar. 3 strikes your out programs that give life sentances and death penalties for getting into a few fights while your in prison and stealing televisions. Privitized prisons which make a profit at incarcerating people, who they then torture to get them to rat out their friends. All kinds of promises to make punishments worse and worse to deter their form of crime. Then turning around and not handling other, much more serious criminals like the RIAA, Microsoft, MPAA, GE, GM, Montanso, Nestle, etc. I can definatly see a tyrrany coming into play in a decade or two like no other tyrrany we've ever known. Accept this one won't be about jews, blacks, or captialism. This one will be about ideologically cleansing the world of anyone with a view that doesn't complement your agenda under false guises. Unlisenced knowledge if pornagraphy, and dangerous you know. And if you've got a bunch of guys with guns and toys who don't mind running around after such idiocy, you've got a tyrrany.

Re:Wrong hands

[Thomas Shaddack]

That's true. Still, in a low-intensity conflict when a whole army is not involved, even farmer-equipment weapons pose tremendous advantage over no weapons at all.

Besides, pretty similar situation is in the US now. The population can have handguns, but handguns won't do much against the adversary equipped with missiles and helicopters. (Though it isn't *that* hopeless, if enough luck would get involved.)

Re:Wrong hands

[tftp]

The population can have handguns, but handguns won't do much against the adversary equipped with missiles and helicopters.

Iraqis probably kill more US soldiers daily than US soldiers kill iraqis. That is for foot soldiers, who fight more or less on same terms. Helicopters killed more US soldiers (by crashing) than they killed the enemy, since the official war ended. Tanks, airplanes, H-bombs are useless.

Re:Wrong hands

[Fulcrum of Evil]

There was specific emphasis on the shrimp part, sort of underscoring strangeness of the encounter.

Re:Wrong hands

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a spurious argument.

Saying you're worried a nuclear device may fall into the wrong hands is not FUD _if_ there are good reasons for thinking it could happen.

It might sound like FUD, but you can only dismiss it by showing the worry unsubstantiated, and not by arguing that, in the wrong hands, paperclips can be dangerous too.

Re:Wrong hands

[AstroDrabb]

much more serious criminals like the RIAA, Microsoft, MPAA, GE, GM, Montanso, Nestle, etc.

I am with you on Microsoft, RIAA and the MPAA. However, what is wrong with GE, GM and Nestle? I must have missed a few /. postings!

Re:Wrong hands

[brunes69]

Hunting is not much of an exuse... humans were alive, multiplying and flourishing for tens of thousands of years before the invention of firearms. Just look at the native american, they never seemed to have any trouble with hunting.

Aside from this, how much hunting do people have to do nowadays to survive?

Sure maybe it may have taken a hundred or two more years for society to advance to this technological level without firearms, but IMO it would have been well worth it.

Re:Wrong hands

[frdmfghtr]

Firearms and hunting was just an example of something that has good and bad uses. The point I was making was that ANYTHING can be bad if it "fell into the wrong hands" and for somebody to say such is just stating the obvious.

Pick another example: the airplane. It allows for all sorts of good things--world travel, moving cargo, sightseeing tours, etc. We all know what happens when an airplane "falls into the wrong hands."

Anything and everything has good and bad uses. THAT is the point I was trying to get across.

Re:Wrong hands

[TyrranzzX]

Well, last time I checked GE and GM were the same company (spare my spelling and grammar...and drunken logic). They've been engineering crops for the past decade and planting them out in wide open fields. Crops that automatically produce pesticides that kill off predators. They want to put it onto the world market without testing, just like Montanso creats false research, submits it to the FDA as real research, then goes ahead and begins selling surcrose, monosodium glutamate, aspartame, neotin ect.

The short-term research shows and gives that only a small amount of those products can be added to food. The independant research doctors wanted to do on the long-term effects, of for example Monosodium glutamate, were canceled because the doctors couldn't bear to violate their hippocratic oath. They came back with every ailment in the book, and a few of their older patients developed debilitating nuero-degeneritive diseases like parkinsons and altimers. Why do I believe that? Because before I got off of all of montanso's great products (which are mislabeled in about 60% of our foods BTW, goto www.ideatown.com/nxta ) I'd get pissed off at the drop of a pin (as in, someone would come to the kitchen table, talk to me, and I'd yell at them) and couldn't think straight. My blood pressure also dropped from 160/87 to 128/62 within a 6 month period. I haven't turned back to eating foods with those things in them, it's been tough and I'v had to make sacrifies but I feel much better.

GE also makes nuclear power plants and weapons. The reason you never see CBS bash nuclear power plants or war, is because they own CBS. They also make gigantic campaign controbutions to your goverment. Of course out goverment is addicted to their money and has to think of the bad PR restructuring the economy after breaking up these megacorps would cause. So, they don't do it, and things get worse and worse.

Re:Wrong hands

[AstroDrabb]

Ok, I have added GE/GM to my list of nasty companies : )

Re:Wrong hands

[KgRaves]

Given the police's track record, I think the database is in the wrong hands already.

Re:Really?

[Jedi Alec]

so what do you propose, the poor cop sitting in his car waiting for the system to respond, while his colleague is trying to keep his eyes on 3 people at the same time, all of whom *might* draw a weapon, gun him down and take off in their car at any given time? One would think that in a job where a split second can mean the difference between a dead cop and a living cop only the best gear is good enough...and in the long run those dead cops cost a lot more than those notebooks did.

This is always the case.

[Osrin]

Whenever the Police get new tools or new powers some nut always comes along and worries about what would happen if the tools fell into the wrong hands. Without much thought, the argument can be liberally applied to computer systems, guns, patrol cars, uniforms and whatever else the police might have access to. They always dismiss a number of crucial facts. a) The Police are regulated and monitored, their tools and training are studied, monitored and controlled. b) The Police are not 16 year old kids who might accidentally leave their new gadget on the bus. Let the Police get on with their job, 99.99999% of the time their doing great things, taking substantial risk on our behalf. The more we can do to make that job easier and reduce that risk the better.

Re:This is always the case.

[barzok]

"The wrong hands" already have these tools. There are bad cops in every force. You'd like to think they aren't out there, but they are. Fortunately, the good ones far outnumber them, but you still have to hope luck's on your side anytime you encounter an officer.

Re:This is always the case.

[Osrin]

Of course there are - hence my not using 100%. The same goes for any organization, commercial, government or otherwise.

Re:This is always the case.

[d3faultus3r]

They don't mean the wrong hands as in some guy getting ahold of the technology, they mean a member of the police force or the whole edifice abusing the power that has been entrusted to them. Eventually some unscrupulous administration will decide to use these tools for a corrupt purpose. There has to be some safeguards when that much power is put into the hands of a few.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let the Police get on with their job, 99.99999% of the time their doing great things, taking substantial risk on our behalf.

Are you white and living in Switzerland or something?

Re:This is always the case.

[DAldredge]

Since you say 'the more we can do to help the police ' the better, do you think we should get rid of search warrents and other things that 'impead' the speed of justice?

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Police are not 16 year old kids who might accidentally leave their new gadget on the bus.

They might not be 16 years old, but they most certainly do misplace their gadgets. A few years ago in St. Petersburg Florida, a police officer set an automatic weapon and ammo on top of his car and drove away. Luckily a few days after it being on the news, a man returned it. He found it the same day as it was lost, but was so terrified by his find that he just hid it in his house.

Re:This is always the case.

[antiMStroll]

Whenever the Police get new tools or new powers some nut always comes along and worries about what would happen if the tools fell into the wrong hands.

True, there is an unfortunate history of that in America, starting with the Framers of your Constitution. Good thing you've outgrown such primitive attitudes.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't a FBI or CIA agent recently leave an important laptop in a taxi? At least the ones in this article will be built in to police cars.

Re:This is always the case.

[SlamMan]

Where's my big troll sticker when I need it?

Re:This is always the case.

[agentZ]

And so to quote the argument always made against the police, why not go after the bad cops and not the tools they use. In the same way that P2P is not, in and of itself, evil, it's the people who do illegal things with it. Similarly, it's not the technology that's bad, it's the cops that abuse it. So let's audit the police use of this technology and punish those cops who abuse it. Punish the guilty, not the technology.

Re:This is always the case.

[ev1lcanuck]

I was listening to random radio stations on the 'net and I stumbled on the emergency radio of (I think it was) Detroit and one officer had radioed to another (who was obviously still at the Starbucks) to grab his cell-phone, which he had forgotten on the table. The other officer radioed back saying "yup I found it, you left your jacket here too haha!"

Scary thought.

Re:This is always the case.

[DAldredge]

Some people just have trouble with giving the state the capability to monitor its citizens so close.

Gee, I wonder why?

Re:This is always the case.

[Chauncy]

Naive.

Nobody is going to make the police accountable for anything. Their work brings home the bacon for local government.

I'd rather arm myself and take my chances with fighting the bad guys for myself than submit to a police state.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

"99.99999% of the time..."

Error: made-up statistic detected.
Detail: Adding more nines doesn't make it more believable

Re:This is always the case.

[agentZ]

The idea of a "civil" society is that you are willing to give up some rights, such as those to exact punishment on those who commit crimes against you, in return for protection from the state.

If you're not willing to engage in that kind of social contract, you should consider moving to an area that does not have one. Possible destinations might include Afghanistian or, more recently, Haiti. In those places, you will be free to take all of the chances you like with "the bad guys."

Have fun, and please don't let the Constitution hit you on the way out!

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Bad cops are a reality, but even bad cops get caught. Every few months there's a new story about some cop getting in a whole lot of shit for using the DMV database to look up his ex-girlfriend's new address. I'm not saying all of them get busted, but there are audit trails, and there are people monitoring how these databases are used.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Assume 1 million law enforcement officers in America(the real number might be a bit lower, but there were around 800,000 total in 2000). Assume they work 40 hours per week. 99.99999% of their time is spent "doing great things". That leaves four hours per week shared between all of them to do anything that is not great.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

What about the San Francisco cop who had been passing info on Arab citizen to the ADL for years before he was caught?

And I have read that contrary to the media campaign by police and their backers - relative to other occupations (esp like steel workers, wild land fire fighers) the job is actually _not_ that dangerous.

But this urban myth is so well entenched that I will be modded in to oblivion...

Re:This is always the case.

[jsdkl]

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety." - Ben Franklin

Re:This is always the case.

[Dravik]

I don't believe anybody has a problem with that social contract. The disagreement is about how far people should go in giving others power over them. giving up the power to hunt others down who you believe have wronged you is not objected to by many people. However, in the US, the right to defend oneself while in the proccess of being wronged is a closly held belief. The questions about this database are in a grey area in between those two types of extremes. To restate, it's not the kind of social contract but the extent of the social contract that is under discussion. aside: I know my grammer and spelling are bad. The purpose of all communication is to pass on ideas. If you have understood my idea then my purpose was accomplished rendering the grammer and spelling minimally important.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Police are regulated and monitored, their tools and training are studied, monitored and controlled.

In 99.9% of cases, this is absolutely false -- the cops go entirely unmonitored. The comment about using this system on a need to know basis and tracking usage is a hopeful sign, if done. In general, cops can have unmonitored use of these systems and can use them for whatever they want.

See a babe in a car? No problem -- run the license plate to find out where she lives. No penalty for having no legitimate (and later justified) law enforcement reason for the query.

As an aside, a cop I know personally went into DMV records to track down all women in his wife's high school graduating class because his wife was on the ten-year reunion commmittee. She sure looked good when they managed to contact all but two out of a large class. No one questioned his massive number of queries.

Case in point -- guy in Illinois gets divorce. Wife gets custody of young daughter. Wife remarries. Guy goes to FBI friend asserting fear (yes, fear only, goddamit, no real evidence, and on zero real grounds) that new husband might be a danger to daughter. FBI guy (with no notice to, nor supervision by, the FBI -- in fact against standing policy) finds shadiness, but no danger to daughter in new husband's records. FBI guy passes on unauthorized information to friend who asked for it. Friend takes information to judge who, after investigation, again finds no reason to transfer custody to ex-husband. Stress of this intrusive investigation leads to breakup of wife's new marriage. When unauthorized access is brought to attention of FBI, no action is taken against either FBI guy nor original husband. Everyone gets off because original husband used magic words -- fear for the child.

Fucking bastards win again.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever the Police get new tools....

Whenever cops refer to any process as a "tool", especially an "important tool", they're trying to violate your civil rights. These terms are invariably an attempt to justify the intrusion as something useful to which they should not be denied access. It's just a fucking guilt trip to make you feel as if you're crippling them unnecessarily and to preempt meaningful debate on the social implications of giving them unfettered access to your private information.

Stop the bastards before they own you.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

And so to quote the argument always made against the police, why not go after the bad cops and not the tools they use.

Because they're protected by your "good cops" under the code of silence. The fucking cop thugs can always make the "good cops" knuckle under by implying that, if they rat out the thugs, there'll be no backup the next time the "good cop" is in danger.

Case in point about behavior of thugs -- I know a deputy sheriff whose wife tried to enter the same department. The thugs didn't want any women on the force. There was much harassment of both the guy and his wife, including telephoned death threats. Where were the "good cops"? Why didn't they turn out the thugs? Why didn't they come together in a massive show of support? Answer: because, as always, the "good cops" are easily silenced by the thugs.

Re:This is always the case.

[E-Rock]

I want to know where you get this idea that the police are there to protect you? From the side of their car, mabye, but that's not their purpose. Cops are there to catch those who ares uspected of having already comitted crimes. You should take your own protection seriously. A cop may come to take a report after, but only on TV do they magically show up during a crime.

Re:This is always the case.

[Thomas Shaddack]

Gee, I wonder why?

Whole East Europe and vast majority of Asia have enough experience with oppressive governments.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have often wondered why people always talk about how dangerous a job the police have, but nobody seems to pay too much attention to how dangerous the police are to innocent civilians.

Re:This is always the case.

[Belzu]

You obviously do not live in Chicago. The CPD is the best Police Department that money can buy, the joke goes. And out of this you expect some kind of responsible oversight? You can say that the judges here will be effective at overseeing this largely thuggish band of cops, but you are wrong: The Chicago courts are known to be the most corrupt in the nation. You may be right when mentioning these 'implicit controls' with regards to a smaller, relatively wealthier city, but not for Chicago. There is a strong and justified current of paranoia and cynicism directed at the CPD in the city.

Re:This is always the case.

[Roman_(ajvvs)]

The Police are regulated and monitored

um.. who exactly monitors the police? The duty of care in that respect is placed on the government. And (un)fortunately, I'd trust the police to manage themselves better than I'd trust the politicians and other governmental employees. A cop deals with people every day. They deal with ethical issues every day. I'd be much more worried about some bureacratic brown-noser who sits behind a desk allo day, getting access to what the cops use in their every day dutues in order to discredit and dissuade opposing voices.

Information is Power and Power Corrupts, so having giving more information to those in power isn't necessarily the best thing to do.

Re:This is always the case.

[Chauncy]

We don't have a constitution anymore. They just make it up as they go along these days.

Re:This is always the case.

[Chauncy]

In fact it has been ruled (by SCOTUS) that police have no responsibility to protect the lives or property of citizens.

They can stand by idly while you are murdered and do nothing. This has happened and, as mentioned above, has been deemed correct behavior by the state.

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds as if you are arguing this on a theoretical basis, had you lived in Chicago perhaps you might not be quite as comfortable with your assertions. My direct experience with some of their 'finest' [TM - PBA] leaves me with severe doublts.

Take one point, probably would not leave it 'on the bus', <i>for the <b>right</b> price: it's yours!</i>

Re:This is always the case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let the Police get on with their job, 99.99999% of the time their doing great things, taking substantial risk on our behalf.

Yup, I suppose getting a blowjob from a prostitute technically meets both criteria.

Re:This is always the case.

[licklebarfe]

Apparently, you've never lived in Chicago.

Re:This is always the case.

[sonamchauhan]

> A cop may come to take a report after, but only on TV do they magically show up during a crime.
That's because they don't have ESP.

Seriously, why do you think... ?
- police escorts are provided for certain demonstrations and sporting events
- police are posted to guard some violence affected schools
- police protect witnesses and certain people targeted by organized crime
- why the concept of "protective custody" exists ... why, dear citizen, but to *protect*, and to serve... you, the people!

Re:This is always the case.

[sonamchauhan]

> In fact it has been ruled (by SCOTUS) that police have no
> responsibility to protect the lives or property of citizens. ...
> They can stand by idly while you are murdered and do nothing.

I have heard this before elsewhere, but do you have a link handy please?

If this outrage is true, remember that SCOTUS, in a 7/9 decision including Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, was the institution responsible for the wrong Dred Scott decision.

Elect politicians that can appoint you the judiciary you deserve!

Re:This is always the case.

[Gsus411]

I most definitely don't agree with the morality of Scott, but the ruling was based on the law at the time. Have you actually read the majority opinion? There was no other legally accurate ruling to be made. Then again, that never stopped Taney or Marshall before him..... but I digress.

The reasoning is that the Constitution actually regulates slavery much like property. The Constitution prohibits the Federal Government from taking property from a person without the due process of law. Therefore, the Missouri Comprimise was unconstitutional because the feds couldn't legislate away property rights. It wasn't until the 13th amendment when the constitution was amended to eliminate slavery so they were no longer considered property.

The other issue and the reason why the case was dismissed is because Scott was not a citizen and therefore did not legally have access to the courts. The Constitution clearly defines slaves as another class of people, a group that were not citizens. This was not changed until the 14th amendment.

The SCOTUS was simply supporting the law of the time. The reason why things are different today is because people cared enough to have the constitution changed.

Re:This is always the case.

[sonamchauhan]

> but the ruling was based on the law at the time...

You're possibly right, I am appealing to conscience rather than to imperfect US law.

> The Constitution clearly defines slaves as another class of people,
> a group that were not citizens.
Hmm. Also see: http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/respub/v6n1/boyd. html

I see inherent contradictions between statements in the declaration of independence ("we hold these truths...") and certain other statements in related documents and in the constitution. It took constitutional amendments and a civil war to resolve several of those contradictions. However, conscience should have resolved it for Taney and for SCOTUS, indeed for all individuals. It is wrong now, and it was wrong then... but people in general do not choose the good.

Re:Really?

[andy1307]

For the same level of effectiveness, the cops could have enlisted a bunch of programmers to work on their code using open source, instead of Oracle, and they would gain better security in less money and likely a lot less time.

This is just your opinion. I'm sure Microsoft feels they could have done it better and cheaper. I support open source as much as the next guy but a project requires much more than gifted programmers to succeed.

crime, which is mostly caused by citizens failing to make a decent living, sick of the system and just mad at everything.

So people only take to crime when their job search on monster.com draws a blank?

so? chicago = murder capital.

[grimani]

chicago tribune

Re:Really?

[BlackHorse]

It'd be a little awkward to throw a desktop in a police cruiser. Generally they mount the laptops in the center of the dash similar to a cell phone.

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

What a load of bullshit. This is actually a fine example of something that can't easily be done with Open Source software, and needs an established company such as Oracle behind it to work.

Re:Really?

[Gedvondur]

Your on crack. Used laptops in cop cars? PCs in cop cars? They needed the equipment they got, not crappy used HP and Dell laptops. Jesus.

Open source is a nice thing, but it's not the end all and be all. Try not to drink SO MUCH of the open source kool-aid.

Dropping crime rates

[Anonymous Coward]

"Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years."

Yes. Now that they have such a great database, each year they run the

"crimetotals == crimetotals * 0.84"

algorithm. Brings crimes stats down real good!

Re:Dropping crime rates

[matticus]

Hmm. That statement will always return -1:

#include <stdio.h>
void main(){
int crimetotals=100;
int temp;
temp = (crimetotals == crimetotals * 0.84);
printf("temp = %d\n",temp);
}

Running gives:
temp = 0

I guess that is a good way to decrease crimetotals, as you can't really beat 0.

Re:Dropping crime rates

[matticus]

i mean always return 0.
ugh. embarrassing to try and make a funny point because of a misuse of == vs =, and end up screwing up. I feel like one of those people who complain that someone else used bad "grammer".

Re:Dropping crime rates

[sploxx]

And you're still a bit wrong :) Try putting 0 into the equation. Depending on your architecture it will (and should) return 1.

Re:Dropping crime rates

[ckswift]

You may laugh at the prospect of police underreporting crime rates, but as the citizens of Atlanta discovered it happens.

From the article:
Several police officers told auditors that during the selection process for the 1996 Olympics "a concerted effort" was made to improve Atlanta's chances for selection by underreporting crime to the point of discarding incident reports and improperly closing cases. Their claims have not been verified.

Violent crime that Atlanta reported for F.B.I. national statistics in 2002 was 6.8 percent lower than it should have been, the report found, while the F.B.I.'s margin of error is two percentage points. Reports for 22,000 responses to 911 calls in 2002 cannot be found in department files.

Re:Dropping crime rates

[Anonymous Coward]

That's hard to get away with. They'd probably do something is redefine what counts as a crime and what doesn't. When caught they just say the new system is more accurate.

Re:Dropping crime rates

[matticus]

Yes, that is clear. I never thought chicago's crime totals would be 0 before the algorithm though. I guess once the algorithm is run, the crime totals vacillate between 1 and 0 each time it is run. Interesting-who is the 1 and why can't this person make up his/her mind if they were mugged or not?

Re:Really?

[ignipotentis]

Touchscreen is the only way to go. These are police officers, they don't have time to lean how to use whatever system you want to hack together. They want a picture menu on the screen that they can touch to get at what ever information they need.

Developers should never be conerned with what makes things easier for themselves, but what makes things easier for thier users.

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent troll, sir! Not only did you get modded up, you got a boatload of biters taking you seriously, despite your obvious nonsense.

Well done!

Resisting arrest? Committing a crime?

[Anonymous Coward]

"That will make me feel real good when I get "accidentally" shot by the police dept."

Most of these incidents occur when the shooting "victim" is resisting arrest, or is caught in the commission of a crime. If the money needs to go anywhere else, use it to give the cops a raise.

Re:Resisting arrest? Committing a crime?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. Shooting some unarmed guy who it turns out was mentally ill... I can't even count how many times in the past couple of years cops have shot someone in a car who they claim "was gonna try to run them down" - I had to kill the driver because I would have lost face in front of my partner if I stepped out of the way - yeah, right.

San Jose a couple of days ago, some unmarked cars containing "State [now Fed] Agency Employees" shot a guy because he was running away and pleading with them to not shoot him - oops, sorry wrong guy but he shouldn't have run from our unmarked cars...

Re:so? chicago = murder capital.

[ignipotentis]

At least we (suposadly) report all of our crime. Unlike other cities.

Correlation is not causation

[donutello]

And while the national crime rate rose 2 percent from 2000 to 2001, Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives

Repeat after me:
Correlation is not causation.
Correlation is not causation.
Correlation is not causation.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[Anonymous Coward]

I am repeating after your but still have no idea what it means.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[DrEldarion]

Basically, just because two things happen together doesn't mean that one caused the other.

For instance, when ice cream sales go up, crime goes up as well. Does this mean that ice cream causes crime? No, there's another factor that influences both of them - the temperature outside.

People tend to jump to conclusions a lot when, if they actually looked into the issue, they'd see that they're completely wrong.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[Anonymous Coward]

It i svery simple. It means that there is always some third couse that allows you to connect any two events. It is called lurking variable.You have to do you research in such way that you eliminate it, otherwise you proved nothing. Example: The number of ice cream sales and the number of drawns are highly correlated. But you cannot conclude that increase in ice cream sales leads to more drowns.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[wondafucka]

I'm a Chicagoan through and through. IMHO, the drops in crime were most likely from Gentrification rather than increased technology.

As much as I hate the implications however, the crime in this city still centers around the public housing. The CPD has installed cameras on the west side, and this has made a difference in the crime in the area (Before anyone starts freaking out, the cameras are highly visible with blue flashing lights on them. You cannot miss them).

While the technology is scary in the wrong hands, this can potentially be a very good thing. CPD are harsh when necessary, but realistic. They are not the typical chest-beating, ego-fragile, farces that I have run into in other sections of the Chicago-land. If they have a tool that tells them instantly that I am not a suspected drug dealer or convicted child molester, then they can give me my ticket and let me go. At least there could be some sort of "hard criteria" rather than some judgemental cop pulling me over and hassling me based on how I look (And oh boy, has that happend before)

In the wrong hands the technology is obviously a potential risk. I can just imagine a coupla dirty pigs (not the sane kind) scanning liscense plates and running them constantly.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[kfg]

But dude, there is a shitload of money and power to be derived from jumping to such conclusions.

You aren't against money and power. . .are you?

KFG

Re:Correlation is not causation

[Anonymous Coward]

its more like

correlation *does not imply* causation

Re:Correlation is not causation

[Anonymous Coward]

It means post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[Tiro]

I am in Politics of Local Justice class taught by a professor who also oversees police discipline as a civilian. The use of these databases comes from Bratton & Maple's Compstat method in NYC. Bratton came in as Guiliani's police chief, and they used computer to map and chart crime statistics in the hundreds of local precincts.

Folks, if you want to worry about police abuse, these databases [the Chicago and NYC ones here] aren't the ones to worry about. They are used to enforce accountability on chiefs who spent all their time staying out of trouble by doing absolutely nothing but the bare minimum police work. Applying accountability and using these stats to test out new policing methods makes a huge difference in crime, like 10-20% annual drops sustained over several years in the New York and Chicago examples. These numbers cannot be explained by gentrification or nationwide crime drops.

If you want to raise alarms, look to the Patriot Act and its variants, but not these efforts.

Rick Pastore is spreading FUD. He has no evidence that the police know where cars are purchased in the database info, and frankly the usefulness in Comstat clone database systems has nothing to do with keeping that kind of personal information! The usefulness comes from being able to check for outstanding warrants and for mapping areas with lots of crime, not from features allowing on the fly police browsing of your credit history, which they can't do anyway!!

Re:Correlation is not causation

[jratcliffe]

As my stats professor was fond of saying, "Correlation does not equal causation, but it should make you damn suspicious."

Re:Correlation is not causation

[10am-bedtime]

wow, if i repeat after you, that is a high correlation (of something)! but, as you point out, there is no guarantee that this would produce the expected effect (presumably, learning the lesson "correlation is not causation"). in fact, my scatterbrain might just desensitize to the message completely and actually reverse my understanding of logic resulting in even more gaffs and blunders!

(experiment for kids at home: say "New Jersy" 100 times out loud. when you are finished, see how strange that sounds....)

we now return you to your regularly scheduled slashdot rantings...

Re:Correlation is not causation

[ImpTech]

What gets me about this "correlation" is that they're not even talking about the same time period. Sure, 2000 to 2001 is *one* of the last 3 years, but it sure as hell isn't all of them. This statistic doesn't make any sense. For all we know from the article, Chicago's crime rate could have precisely followed the national crime rate over the past 3 years.

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.

If it bothers you that much, maybe you should just stop using a sig.

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

This situation doesn't occur in Chicago anymore. They banned handguns a while back, so the criminals don't carry them anymore. The police force found no need to carry weapons anymore because of the unarmed outlaws. There are no guns at all in Chicago.

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're overestimating the quality of the state of open-source software vs the more robust products available in the current software market. Remember, they implemented 3 years ago, which means they started about 5 years ago... and which open-source database had full transaction support at that time? Yeah, I thought so.

And the way I look at it, this was an excellent investment in reducing the amount of paperwork and buraurocracy inherant in crime fighting. Poverty prevention? I think that's called education and removing the bad elements from society (and keeping them out, not reducing their sentances and letting them back out to commit more crimes).

No paranoia involved

[Anonymous Coward]

Given how paranoid the US, its administration and its various police forces are these days

The paranoia is zero. The terrorists are actually out to destroy us (they state so repeatedly), and the administration and police are doing nothing more than engaging in a reasonable response to an existing threat.

It would only be paranoia if there were no terrorists. Perhaps you think tha the 9-11 incident was a special effects collaboration of Fox News, Steven Speilberg, and the "Jewish owned media"

Re:No paranoia involved

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

How strange, when something goes against the accepted way of thinking here on Slashdot, it's modded as troll. I'm not saying 911 wasn't horrible and grave, or that it was some conspiracy, but my opinion is that the US is overreacting to terrorist threat, or more precisely, isn't reacting properly. How's that a troll?

Re:No paranoia involved

[Anonymous Coward]

"It would only be paranoia if there were no terrorists."

That's pure utter nonsense. With all due respect, you have no idea of what you are talking about. It's not difficult at all for a "civilian" to tap into police databases; you just have to know how, and/or have enough money and the right connections.

I have personally seen someone do this first hand.

Re:No paranoia involved

[mr100percent]

Paranoia is zero? Then pray tell, why did the US government round up nearly 2000 Muslims after 9/11? Why were hundreds detained for over a month, without charges? Why are some still there even today? (and why did the NY Times and Washington Post stop reporting on it? Did they give up on anyone caring?) How come detainees report being beaten by guards because they looked Muslim?

Why is the deportation rate for all illegal immigrants down by 25% and the deportation rate of Arabs and Muslims is UP by 75%? Why is it that Muslim citizens in the US are fleeing to Canada in fear? How come "little Pakistan" in Brooklyn, formerly home to over 500,000 is half empty?

Why is the government using the Patriot act to spy on Arab and Muslim Americans, but not using it to go after anyone else, like drug dealers? Why did Dr. Goldstein of Florida get a lesser charge for plotting to blow up mosques and islamic schools in Florida, instead of the new Terrorism statute? Why is it that the thousands of hate crimes against Muslims since 9/11 don't get harsher sentences?

How come John Ashcroft is forcing people to plea bargain by threatening them with "enemy combatant" status? How come the FBI is given orders to count specifically mosques in every area? Why is it that Muslims who wrote editorials condemning terrorism in all forms, including by other Muslims, got a visit from the FBI?

How come all these new anti-terrorism laws don't curb the drug flow into this country? How come all the mafia members aren't caught yet, what with all these new snooping laws?

Don't straw man the argument, I'm not going to toss in Fox News, or the "Jewish owned media" as you put it. I think that the US has sharply overreacted in this case and panicked the Muslim population in this country. The one group who we are counting on to tell the rest of the world that we mean well (they're Americans too! They have debated on our side in the past! They helped us in Iraq both times.) and we are treating them poorly. Why do you think the mosques burning down here in the US post-9/11 got headline coverage in the Middle East? Or when Jerry Falwell called Islam's prophet Muhammad (pbuh) a terrorist? Do you think that actions like these have no consequences?

The US needs to realize that it can act too aggressive sometimes. Things like this have ruined the US's reputation abroad, and the war was obviously a bad move in international relations. Heavy-handed stuff like this generates even more hatred and more terrorism.

The tools always fall into the wrong hands

[Anonymous Coward]

Show me a police database that has not been abused and I'll show you one that does not yet exist.

Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[DavidinAla]

This post assumes that the 16 percent drop in crime in Chicago is a result of the new system. Why? Where is the evidence for that? I slept late yesterday and it rained. I got up early today and it didn't rain. So does that mean that rain is caused by me sleeping late? Absurd. Correlation does not necessarily equal casusation.

I don't know if real crime in Chicago was down or not. Such "official statistics" are very easily manipulated, either by design as the data are being gathered or afterwards as they're being interpreted. Unless there is MUCH better evidence of a link between the statistical drop in crime and this new computer system, the poster's conclusion is completely unwarranted. It's POSSIBLE that the system does indeed reduce crime, but the assumption isn't supported at this point.

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[betelgeuse-4]

"I got up early today and it didn't rain. So does that mean that rain is caused by me sleeping late?"

Probably. I got up late today and it did rain

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[AmigaAvenger]

It has been shown that 75% percent of all statistics have been made up!!

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[Tarwn]

If the biggest tactics change was implementation of this system, then it is also the most probable reason for the drop in crime. Considering the size of that drop (16% is not small) it is a safe assumption that a large amount of thaty drop is in fact due to the implementation of this new system. Outreach programs didn't change much, the methods of answering a call (beyond the assistance of the computer) didn't change much, what does that leave? Did 16% of the population move to another city so that the crime rate percantage would stay the same while the numbers would seemingly drop?
The article itself states things like the amount of time saved booking people, paperwork, etc. So we could also look at the extra time the officers can now spend on the street as a direct result of this system.
Even if the system itself isn't providing the extra information necessary to arrest individuals that may have later added to the number of murders, it is still giving officers more time to go out and answer calls, etc.

And there were direct correlations drawn between the system and other violent crimes, which lead me to believe that the same tactics that are being used against other violent crimes (with the use of this new system) are probably being used to get murderers and near-future murderers off the street. I doubt they have decided to only use the system in solving only one type of situation but not use it in a higher fatality one.

Now I'm sure someone will pick apart my words and argue things like "near-future" murderers and try to say things like I am promoting a police state, but that is just their own ignorance. By near-future murderers I mean people that are arrested for another crime with no clue that they would have murdered someone a week from now. So a gang member gets arrested a week before he would have had a violent confrontation with a rival gang member, or shot someone as he was attempting to steal a car. If people who are breaking the law get arrested faster, or are found faster and arrested, then things like this will happen.

The numbers are there, and while anyone can come up with statistics to say anything, this isn't an MS report to show better TCO, this is percentages based on raw numbers, ie, number of murders in a year.

And while I like the idea of outreach programs and such, (from the article) saying that all of the money should have gone to the families of the deceased is just ignorant. I think outreach and police together are the solution, outreach is a slower solution and had it been implemented much earlier perhaps it could have kept the numbers down to the number that was achieved last year. And the system has basically paid for itself in labor cost savings and such, while giving away the money would have had only two affects; 1) made people feel a little better (unless they noticed the price the city placed on their family members life) and 2) made a politician look good.

The system has paid for itself, and even if all it did was help with labor costs, it is worth it because it will keep cops on the street more, cutting down on time filling out paperwork. And those time savings are hard fact as well.

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[Anonymous Coward]

Still not necessarily a correlation that is also a cause. There was a jump in crime in many urban centers during the late 80s with the advent of crack cocaine. Then Darwin went to work and crime stats plunged within a few years. Dead crackheads commit no crimes. Ditto the violent dealers who managed to win themselves life sentences by offing competitors.

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's subtler -- the article says that national crime rose 2% from 2000 to 2001, but the 16% drop happened from 2000 to *2003*.

Anyone care to find a reference for the two missing years?

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[DavidinAla]

Without a LOT of serious work, you CANNOT draw the conclusion that this new system was the ONLY changed variable. The real world is messy. There are dozens of factors that might influence the crime statistics, some of them related to reality and some of them related to the politics of the statistics.

As a newspaper reporter and later editor, I saw public officials spin such figures all the time. If ANY statistic showed something positive, it was THEIR actions which caused it. If a statistic showed something bad, it was their evil opponents who always were the fault. As a political consultant over the last 12 years or so, I've been a part of the same spin. Politicians will sit in meetings and acknowledge that they have no idea what causes most things (either for good or bad), but they are willing to take credit or assign blame in whatever way is good for them.

I have no opinion about whether this system is a good thing or not in its present form. I don't even have any opinion about whether the money could have been better spent elsewhere. The only thing I'm pointing out is that there is no honest, hard evidence that this thing possibly could have reduced crime by 16 percent -- unless this system gives police the power to predict who's going to commit crimes and arrest them ahead of time.

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[iamthemoog]

Indeed - in the UK's last round of crime statistics, crime figures actually went up; simply due to the police recording and cataloging more incidents than before. Previously, minor misdemeanors and street punch-ups etc wouldn't make it onto records anywhere.

I would have thought in the Chicago case, there was a significant chance that with speedier database systems, more crimes could be recorded, not fewer...

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[Tarwn]

Without a LOT of serious work, you CANNOT draw the conclusion that this new system was the ONLY changed variable

I agree, which is why I never stated a belief that the new system was the ONLY changed variable, and in fact was only attributing part of that 16% to the new system. At no point are population changes factored in, or any of a milion other changes that could have caused part of that drop in crime rate, the task is to large. The only way to get even a decent estimate would to slip next door to a parallel dimension that is like ours to every specific except that they did not purchase the computer system in question.

My point instead is that a result that dramatic requires an equally large change. Whether that change accounted for 10%, 14% or even a change in the general state of mind of the officers in question, it is most likely that the given drop in crime rate can be attributed to the adoption of this system.

I am not in the news, so don't have the same degree of familiarity with spin and manipulation of statistics or stories, and my opinions are only along the lines that this was money well spent (original cost made back by labor savings). Perhaps the crime rate drop should be entirely attributed to something else, I don't know. What I do think that a statitical percentage is difficult to fudge if you use the same population and same guidelines and that a dramatic result is caused by a dramatic change.

It is possible that the numbers reflect a secondary change that came about due to the integration of the system. That changed policies caused better efficiency in crime reduction that weren't the absolute direct result of using the new system. Even so, the system itself would have been the stimulus to these changes and whether they could have occurred on their own is even further from the possible to find from finding whether this system did in fact accont for the change in the crime rate.

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[brianerst]

My wife's uncle is the Chief of Police for Chicago. We chat informally at family gatherings and such, and the impression I get from him is that the computer system is a big help (I believe one of my wife's cousins works on the system as well), but it's the change in tactics that it has helped facilitate that is the biggest change. More police are assigned to hotspots and certain patterns of crime have become more obvious.

Since becoming chief, he's also been really pushing for more cops in the streets instead of at the station - every member of the force (including himself) has to work a patrol at least occassionally. Additionally, there is a strong emphasis on gang-related violence, which is why the statistics for violent crime have gone down so much more dramatically than those of property crime.

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[DavidinAla]

Assuming what you're saying is accurate -- and I have no reason to doubt you -- you're absolutely proving my point, so thanks for chiming in. This computer system might be the best thing since sliced bread, but to attribute a huge drop in crime stats to it alone seems ludicrous, especially without further evidence. Your anecdotal evidence tends to make me think that the computer system is a good tool that happened to come along at the same time as other things which really are the primary cause of the improvement. If the improvement is real (and not just a statistical illusion), my congratulations to your wife's uncle and the people who work for him.

Re:Why did THIS cause lower crime number?

[weiyuent]

If the biggest tactics change was implementation of this system, then it is also the most probable reason for the drop in crime.

Yes, but crime rates often fluctuate for reasons other than policing tactics, especially demographics such as income distribution, age distribution, ethnic tribalism, etc.

Chicago Mafia

[AtariAmarok]

There are no guns at all in Chicago

I know. It's kind of interesting. The Chicago mafia actually has violins in their violin cases these days, ever since the government banned tommy guns. Gang battles resemble "The Devil Went Down to Georgia" now.

If they'd combine that data with GIS

[enrico_suave]

I hope they implement some sort of GIS/mapping solution (no not google image search) to make all that data more useful/presentable.

That's one thing that NYC did right in lowering their crime rate/"cleaning up the streets". They'd did very simple mappings of WHERE and WHEN crimes would occur (turns out there was a pattern... they'd show up to one complex every night just after dark with all sorts of calls)... and increase patrols in those areas during those times. Thereby using their available forces more efficiently by using the data they already had more effectively.

*shrug* It's not just about instant access to relevant information for the officers, it's what they do with it... (for good or bad) =)

E.

Re:If they'd combine that data with GIS

[Swanktastic]

Hidden deep within the first page of the article is this little nugget:

The most advanced use of computing in reducing crime is predictive analysis. The Deployment Operations Center (DOC), a 20-officer special unit, uses street intelligence, CLEAR data and a new CLEAR crime-mapping tool to identify potential hot spots, particularly for gang activity. "Our initial vision for information-driven policing has come full-circle with DOC," says McDonald. "They're using CLEAR data to anticipate where crime may occur so we can have the resources there before it happens."

When mapped by CLEAR, locations of recent gang-related crime (indicated on the screen maps by little green gun icons) reveal patterns that point to areas where rival gangs are likely to cross paths. "I know four gangs are vying for dominance in this area," says Sgt. David Betz, pointing to a map with a relatively clear zone of several blocks, ringed by a dozen gun icons. "I can drop 35 extra police in this one area and saturate it." DOC officers make weekly recommendations to district chiefs to redeploy patrol officers in these locations. They also supply them with gang member suspects to look out for. "I can use CLEAR to find their hangouts, nicknames, and put faces with the names," Betz says.

Does this technology prevent crime?

[jludwig]

Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives

Really? What city with similar demographics to Chicago that didn't implement this technology served as the control for this comparison? Sounds like "Eating ice cream causes drowning". It just happens more people eat ice cream during summer, which also happens to be when most people swim. Be very careful of drawing correlations like this!

Another problem with this is a fundemental issue of economics... for sure spending money on this system may reduce crime, but is there a more effective use of this money? For example, after school programs, education, free drug rehab, etc. Giving more money to law enforcement treats the symptoms not the caues!

Re:Does this technology prevent crime?

[Ironica]

Really? What city with similar demographics to Chicago that didn't implement this technology served as the control for this comparison?

Unfortunately, the Bureau of Justice Statistics Data Online only goes up to 2000, so I can't give you their numbers. But according to LAPDonline, Los Angeles experienced an 8% increase in violent crimes from 2000-2002 (they changed reporting in 2003, so the numbers aren't comparable). As the article says, the nation as a whole experienced a 2% increase in crime during the same period.

I spent a lot of time as an undergrad in Sociology learning that correlation is not causation. However, when you look at a major program being put into place, and you see that, during the time it's been available, there has been a MAJOR drop in crime vs. other municipalities and the nation as a whole, and you haven't experienced anything else that might explain it, chances are a large part of the drop can be attributed to the new program.

And it does make some sense. For example, they cite that their arrest rate for sexual assault is up to 69% from 43% before the CLEAR program rolled out. This (a) increases the risk of being caught if you commit this particular type of crime; and (b) removes people from the streets who might be more likely to commit crimes again.

There's a whole lot of skepticism to this report, but I'm not sure why. This isn't profiling every frickin' citizen (a la Department of Homeland Security wet dreams). It's taking information about crimes and putting it into an easily accessible format, so that multiple reports can be correlated more effectively and suspects can be more easily and quickly identified.

In Los Angeles, we have things happen where someone's arrested for something like tagging, is held for a few hours, then released because there's no point in prosecuting them for such a minor crime... and then the next day, they find out the same guy is wanted for a drive-by. When a drunk driver rear-ended me in a stolen vehicle (and then hit a parked car while fleeing the scene), it not only took 90 minutes for them to produce a couple officers to take a report (by which time the guy might have killed someone, I dunno), it also took two days to find out the car was stolen, and a week and a half to give me some mug shots to look at (by which time, my memory was getting hazy). Putting the info together faster is *crucial* in solving crimes.

As long as the information is incident-based (which from everything here it sounds like it is) and not individual-based, it's less prone to abuse (I said LESS... there's *always* risk, and should always be precautions), and sounds like it's been very useful. I hope Chief Bratton somehow manages to get LAPD using it, though it seems unlikely since we can't even afford to hire the officers we *know* we need.

yah, and

[Anonymous Coward]

you're the original poster, aren't you?

Re:yah, and

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I'm not

Responsible journalism

[lukewarmfusion]

I haven't read the article (surprise!), but I'm glad to hear that the author expresses concerns about privacy and abuse of the system.

Look at the summary - crime increased 2% from 2000 to 2001. What did it do in Chicago during that time? We got two different facts that are not comparable. I'd like to see the numbers for the country over the last three years (to compare to Chicago's decrease of so much).

Confusing Information with Statistics

[CaptCanuk]

"And while the national crime rate rose 2 percent from 2000 to 2001, Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives"

Beyond the obvious point that multiple factors affect a crime rate (from stricter policy to varying levels of people leaving the city) there is the fact that "all this information can" prevent crime and save lives but it neccessarily does not. Information CAN help but used inappropriately or not used at all could lead to nothing more than an incomplete system being updated for managerial reasons and being shunned by the users of the system. It's just like any other piece of software; it could be extremely beneficial but isn't unless used properly.

Re:Confusing Information with Statistics

[jackb_guppy]

Or maybe live in Chicago and find out they have changed when and where they portal.

This got many on the Chicago City Counsol mad, because it took cops away from their "safe" districts.

Neat, but people will still complain

[enosys]

This sort of thing is nice to read for a change. It seems we usually just hear about such projects being way over budget, extremely late, horribly buggy or even given up on.

I guess people will still complain though, this time about big brother type stuff.

Re:Neat, but people will still complain

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess people will still complain though, this time about big brother type stuff.

Why shouldn't they, weaselfuck?

It treats the cause

[Anonymous Coward]

Giving more money to law enforcement treats the symptoms not the caues!

Since the cause is outrageous greedy/violent actions by mean people, this IS treating the cause.

If you're concerned you must be a criminal

[Anonymous Coward]

"...the author reports he is somewhat worried that all these tools could fall into wrong hands."

Is he?

I'm worried that all this information has fallen into the right hands. 'The law abiding people have nothing to fear' they always say. But it takes only a little twist, like Prohibition, to make a _lot_ of people nuovo-criminals; and all their information is then fair game.

I'm all for law enforcement and the protection of the truly innocent, but the time is coming when there will be only two kinds of people: Those being watched and the watchers. And there are supremely efficient and brutal criminals on both sides of that divide.

Re:If you're concerned you must be a criminal

[Superfarstucker]

Why did you post anonymous? Most insightful post in this entire topic.

Re:If you're concerned you must be a criminal

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed, whether the use is 'good' or 'bad' depends entirely on the agenda of the organisation holding the data. If that organisation is subverted then the data is in the wrong(right) hands. Since we live in a world where the nature of long established organisations that we trust seems to be changing I can see why it raises fears. But if there is one organisation you could trust enough to make this tradeoff it is probably your local police.
The problem comes when entities beyond that scope aquire the data, you not only have to trust the use but also that the data is protected and limited to that use by the police.

Re:If you're concerned you must be a criminal

[Anonymous Coward]

But if there is one organisation you could trust enough to make this tradeoff it is probably your local police. The problem comes when entities beyond that scope aquire the data, you not only have to trust the use but also that the data is protected and limited to that use by the police.

I'd definetely have to agree with you there. I've met, and on occasion worked with, a number of the local city police in my hometown, and I'd trust them over a state or federal investigator anyday.

Re:Really?

[Lord Kano]

The way I look at it, they spent $45 mil fighting crime, which is mostly caused by citizens failing to make a decent living, sick of the system and just mad at everything. If they took most of that money and invested it into poverty prevension, you would see likely even better results.

Would you like a band-aid for that bleeding heart? It's an economic reality that some people will always be poor. The trick is in doing whatever you have to so that you're not one of them. Get a job. Work hard. And don't steal from people. It's not easy, but it isn't all that hard either.

LK

Re:Really?

[jackb_guppy]

Boy are you ever wrong.

I did a study for police force 2 years ago about 80 outside of Chicago. These men and women are smart, they been computerized for years.

They where looking for next thing...

Centralizing multiple cities and county into one system for 911, police and fire.

Use of handhelds with scanners and cameras to handle recording, labeling, and TRACKing of property... They have to keep it on file during the entire time the suspect/case runs... Can you say 50 years for some one in for life?

They carry at least two computers in even car... one connected to the dash and radio systems. The other a laptop to write-up reports and download when they get back to the office.

Pictures are great for those that change jobs every 3 weeks... But to become a cop, it takes years of commitement.

One of the guys I work with now, full time programmer is also a part time police officer. He volunteers his time.

Re:so? chicago = murder capital.

[BoomerSooner]

supposedly or supposebly if you're a fan of Friends.

They paid too much...

[sheapshearer]

It took $45 million ... with the help of Oracle

Couldn't they have done it cheaper using MySQL (even if it is not free for commercial use)??

Re:They paid too much...

[cmdrbuzz]

Dude, read the article.....

Oracle don't just make a Database, they consult and design...

It took 10 months to design the data model....
Not the sort of thing you do in 20 minutes with SQL CREATE statements!

Re:They paid too much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't they have done it cheaper using MySQL (even if it is not free for commercial use)??

Yes, it might have saved them the software licensing, however I wouldnt doubt that oracle developed the database structure for them as well.

By the way, MySQL *is* free for commercial use, because the license is GPL. Don't be mislead by their webpage.

Re:They paid too much...

[skifreak87]

I'm sure the costs included labor costs to input all of the information into the database (which was probably a huge process since it requires no just the input, but also getting all the information from wherever it is currently stored and processing it). I doubt they paid $45 million for just the software.

Consolidating information on criminals

[fname]

Well, if we're going to put together massive government databases on citizens, this is the way to do it. If you're convicted of a crime, you give up certain rights. After reading so much about CAPPS and other super-spying databases that are geared towards law-abiding citizens, I'm glad someone saw the utility in applying it to people who actually commit crimes.

As for the "correlation does not equal causality" mantra being waved like a flag: no shit! I don't think the article even makes that jump, it just points out the correlation. It's left to the reader to draw his or her own inference. It's a data point, it's useful, and it should be reported. The fact that others (not so smart as yourselves) will seek to twist this one data point to their own benefit is a separate issue. I'm sure it will happen (or had happened). Doesn't mean a reporter should ignore it.

Re:Consolidating information on criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

"If you're convicted of a crime, you give up certain rights... I'm glad someone saw the utility in applying it to people who actually commit crimes."

Not that any police force is known to arrest people for the purposes of getting more names onto their database, oh no.

What shall we make illegal today, so that we can gather data on more people?

Re:Consolidating information on criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I bet you can help me out with something. My JFK assassination investigation group is going on a field trip to Washington D.C., and I was wondering: can you tell me where I can get the really good tin-foil hats?

Re:Consolidating information on criminals

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Exactly. Having had some professional experience with systems like the NCIC, I can say that there are all kinds of information in these "criminal" databases on people that have never been convicted of a single misdemeanor. These people have commited no crime yet they are in the databases, sometimes with very prejudicial "half-truths" (e.g. records showing they were arrested for murder, but not showing they released the same day and never prosecuted because the real killer was caught).

Re:Consolidating information on criminals

[the drizzle]

Yup. Don't you just *love* it when you see highly-rated posts with nothing but "correlation doesn't equal causation"? You said it best: no shit!

The crime rate in Chicago has dropped 16%, which is certainly nothing to sneeze at. I don't have the background necessary to make too many judgements on this particular statistic, but it's probably fair to say that they're doing something right. Isn't the most logical conclusion that it is this system that caused the drop? Doesn't it seem natural that fast access to 200gigs of relevant information could help law enforcement a little bit, oh say, somewhere around 16%? Correlation is the first thing you seek when finding the cause of something -- cause necessarily implies correlation. I think a better mantra would be "correlation does not necessarily imply causation."

Of course it's too early to draw broad conclusions about this system. Yes, this is anecdotal evidence, but I think it's clear that this is not being presented as iron-clad scientific evidence, but as an observation of a system that appears to have some real merit to it.

So let's quit disputing a fact that we all know: that correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation. Let's get to the more interesting subjects, like what the preverbial "bad cop" could do with access to this information.

Re:Consolidating information on criminals

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Isn't the most logical conclusion that it is this system that caused the drop? Doesn't it seem natural that fast access to 200gigs of relevant information could help law enforcement a little bit, oh say, somewhere around 16%?

Repeating something does not make it true. It's quite possible that the gentrification mentioned earlier, combined with demographic changes, is responsible for a lot of that 16% that you're so fond of.

Correlation is the first thing you seek when finding the cause of something -- cause necessarily implies correlation. I think a better mantra would be "correlation does not necessarily imply causation."

No, the point is that simple correlation doesn't tell you who caused what - you need more info.

Re:Consolidating information on criminals

[scaryjohn]

Well, if we're going to put together massive government databases on citizens, this is the way to do it. If you're convicted of a crime, you give up certain rights. After reading so much about CAPPS and other super-spying databases that are geared towards law-abiding citizens, I'm glad someone saw the utility in applying it to people who actually commit crimes.

I agree, there's a huge difference between data-mining my legal activities and data-mining ilegal activities. For example, it's fair game to use my parking tickets against me to track my movements if the police are still working on getting a warrant. But it's not acceptable for them to follow my legal use of the tollway if they don't have probable cause to suspect me of a crime yet. Same goes for any other sort of data related to legal vs. ilegal activies. According to the articles, they aren't collecting that kind of information... at the present, anyway. I can't say that was true of CAPPS.

The fact that they're also digitizing contact cards for leads in ongoing investigations is also not problematic. So long as the information that I'm Joe Killer's brother-in-law stays in Joe Killer's file, and isn't attached to a search of my good name, it'll help keep that asshole my sister married in check.

Re:Consolidating information on criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you read my goddam post? Yes it's possible that other factors could cause the drop in crime, but I think it seems more likely that this system makes up the majority of this drop.

Why is this so unconceivable?

There is no fool-proof method for determining what causes drops in crime, or other similar events. All we can do is guess. My point was that we need less people like you who bitch when we do this.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?

[Anonymous Coward]

So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives

Underreacting?

[Anonymous Coward]

"but my opinion is that the US is overreacting to terrorist threat, or more precisely, isn't reacting properly. How's that a troll?"

Overreacting? It's more like underreacting, considering that major sources of terrorism like Syria and Saudi Arabia have gone untouched (even though two terrorist regimes have been retaliated against.

Re:Underreacting?

[ctxspy]

Have you ever read Noam Chomsky's work? Perhaps it would serve to give you a more global perspective regarding international terrorism & who's responsible for what.

-Tomaj

Re:Underreacting?

[Ralph Wiggam]

George Bush spent his entire business career working closely with Saudis and losing their money by the billions. He'll never take a hard line with them. They're an Islamic based monarchy with extensive ties to terrorism, but they play ball, and that's what counts in Bush's world (which bears little resemblance to the real world). Pakistan was providing real WMD to "Axis of Evil" countries while we were hunting imaginary WMDs in Iraq. Again, they won't be touched because they play ball.

Until we start focusing on actual terrorism issues and not politically convenient smoke and mirrors, we'll never make any progress against terrorism.

-B

Re:Underreacting?

[Anonymous Coward]

TWO terrorist regimes? HAHAHAH hahaha hahaha Such delusions.

Re:Underreacting?

[Anonymous Coward]

Chomsky has one unifying goal in all of his non-linguistic work: he looks at anything that is wrong in the world, and tries to figure out how to blame America for it. He will go to extreme lengths and support horrible violent people (Hamas, Taliban, Castro) just to forward his world views. He is a perfect example of somebody who had already made his mind up before doing any research, so he only looked for stuff to support his conclusions.

In other words, don't let his brilliance in linguistics and computer science fool you. He is solid proof that you can be a genious in one area, but a complete fool in another.

Re:Underreacting?

[ctxspy]

Perhaps you should read some of his work instead of citing the usual anti-chomsky rhetoric. You say he 'supports' these groups... I haven't hit a point so far where i've seen him do anything near to what you say.

He simply takes what to me looks like an objective view and points out that America is not as innocent in the world view as we like to think.

-Tomaj

Crime Drop

[superpulpsicle]

Ok if the crime rate has dropped for Chicago, I am not so sure the database was the reason for it.

It's great achievement yes. But to say Joe Smoe didn't commit a crime because he feared a 200GB oracle db, that's just silly.

Re:Crime Drop

[SlamMan]

I dunno. That big red logo is pretty scary.

Re:Crime Drop

[Anonymous Coward]

"But to say Joe Smoe didn't commit a crime because he feared a 200GB oracle db, that's just silly."

If you ever had to mirror a 200GB Oracle database over ftp you would _know_ that PhEaR!!

Touchscreen

[AtariAmarok]

Touchscreen is the only way to go. These are police officers

These are police officers.... How well do touch-screens work once grubby cop fingers cover them with smears of donut glaze?

We live in the land of stats for politicians...

[reynolds_john]

The bottom line is, are they measuring the crime the same as before? If they are, then great, but if not....

Harken to the Bush administration stating that unemployment remains low, but they also changed the way the statistics were gathered and reported - which suits their political agenda rather nicely.

look here and at PBS for an example.

I'm really surprised!

[kompiluj]

They didn't have such a base already? Damn, on every movie when police or FBI are tracking someone they use such a base, and you tell me it did not exist?

Yes. I've read Chomsky

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I've read Chomsky's fiction. He is an extreme left-wing fascist whose political rants are wisely dismissed by just about everyone.

If you read Chomsky, you won't get a "more global perspective regarding international terrorism & who's responsible for what." as he lies about just about everything. All you will learn from reading him is what other kooks think.

He has some authority in the field of linguistics, but outside of that he writes hateful fictions.

The DOD is doing this as well

[instantkarma1]

I just spent the past two years working on a project to link together Security Departments across the world, sharing information about criminals, victims, vehicles, etc. Basically, it would all the security departments to tap into a huge database, and retrieve information about Incident Compliant Reports (better known as ICRs).

Initially, we were an open source project. Naturally, we were swatted down by the Navy Marine Corp Intratnet (NMCI), because they wanted Microsoft-Only solutions (but they allowed us to choose from SQL Server and Oracle for our databases). Strike one up for the beaurocrats. Anyway, my point is this, it is not always possible to go with an open source solution due to political reasons (as opposed to technical). I will say, however, that Oracle is probably the right tool for the job, when comparing with other open source solutions (read Postgres and particularily MySQL).

Another thing....when working on this project, the people I worked with during the design phase had absolutely no concept of security (as in information security) or Need-to-Know basis. They thought that every person who used the system should be able to lookup anybody's information. Let me clarify, not only would military cops be using this system, but also the people who worked the Pass & ID offices (these are the people you have to go to get a pass to come onto the base). In other words, this would be like allowing the people at the DMV to view your police reports, (ie you were a suspect in a particular crime, but never charged). I proposed allowing the 'DMV' people to see that you weren't allowed to get a driver's license or base pass if you had been convicted of DWI/DUI (based on the DOD standards), but not be able to read the police reports. It's all a matter of Need-to-Know. They strongly disagreed.

To sum up, these types of systems will more than likely be used in ways they shouldn't. Not necessarily nefarious uses, but still violating one's privacy. This is a necessary tool, I think, but most likely not implemented properly (privacy-wise, in IMHO). The police need info fast, and privacy needs to be taken into account. It is a delicate balance to find.

Re:The DOD is doing this as well

[Anonymous Coward]

In other words, this would be like allowing the people at the DMV to view your police reports

I don't know, but to me it sounds like a tough sell, denying access to the base's gatekeepers, the Pass & ID people.

Re:The DOD is doing this as well

[chewy]

erm... just code the thing with security built in. i'm pretty sure they wouldn't find no reason to give your average pleps (traffic officers *g*) access to murder-cases...

i'm pretty sure it's a specification requirement.

access is power. :)
be more worried about root.

From the article...

[mellonhead]

THE GUY IN THE SUV in front of us, stuck in Chicago traffic with about a million other cars, lives in Virginia, has not been arrested in the past several years, has one outstanding ticket for speeding (in Virginia), and is six months delinquent in renewing his registration.

I am highly skeptical of this statement. Speeding tickets are misdemeanors. Most states don't even put them into their own state databases because police agencies will not extradite for a traffic ticket. I'm not familiar with Virginia, but many state police agencies will put a warrant on the drivers license if they have an unpaid ticket, perhaps that is how the information was available. All of the other information is available via MVD and Computerized Criminal History checks (expired registration and arrest info). The way the article introduction was written, it sounds like big brother is on the prowl. I would venture to guess the vast majority of this information was available to the officers before, but they had to go to a station computer to access it. Now they can just pull it up from the car.

Re:From the article...

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Speeding tickets are misdemeanors.

Nit: Speeding is not (usually) criminal. It is an administrative offense. This allows a looser process, more akin to a contractual breach than a crime.

Re:From the article...

[mellonhead]

I respect your opinion but I've never heard of an "administrative offense" in the legal arena.

The state I'm familiar with is Texas, and speeding is a Class "C" Misdemeanor.

Re:From the article...

[Dun Malg]

Speeding tickets are misdemeanors.

Nit: Speeding is not (usually) criminal. It is an administrative offense. This allows a looser process, more akin to a contractual breach than a crime.

Further nit: speeding is indeed usually just an infraction, but failure to post bail (pay the fine) and subsequent Failure To Appear by the court date on the ticket generally results in a bench warrant being issued. FTA for a traffic violation is a misdemeanor and pretty much always results in a driver's license suspension. Stuff like license suspension will always show up when the cops punch your name in.

Re:Really?

[SlamMan]

And you, dear sir, just made it onto my friends page. Nice to see a splash of sanity in the midst of the 'police hate' around here.

Re:Really?

[asdf 101]

You my friend are getting carried away in your quest for "open-source everywhere".

It's imperative you realise that more often than not (actually practically always) open-source has come to be for a particular solution as an option only after a proprietory solution for the same niche has already been in the offing for a while. Sometimes in function, sometimes in form.

Just some examples:
1. Unix begets Linux
2. MS_Office begets OpenOffice
3. Windows* begets multiple ergonomically inclinded GUIs based on X
4. Oracle DBs beget MySQL
5. Winamp begets XMMS ...

These are just instances that came to my mind (and probably the most obvious too). There may be examples to the contrary, but to the best of my knowledge there are no "large-scale" solutions that I know of which have "first" been implemented as open-source and then aped (or not) in some proprietory form.

I might ofcourse be wrong, but I would imagine (and more importantly in the context) that it would be very hard (impossible?) for a mission-critical solution such as that of a police force to be put into use w/o some form of:
1. Quality guarantee: which suits are "brandishers" of and which "a few guys hacking away" would find tough to "certify".
2. Support to fall-back on: ditto argument.

It is however entirely possible that now, once this one solution is on the ground and ticking, we might soon see some state department make an open-source implementation of the same.

Clearly, corporate money today has the financial muscle over open-source to market/sell solutions in new avenues. Nothing wrong with that, especially if those new avenues are then paved with more open solutions.

Heil Chomsky!

[Anonymous Coward]

Chomsky is antisemitic, too. He is so clueless about reality that he can't deal with the fact that his fringe lunatic views just aren't popular, so he has made up silly conspiracy theories ("Manufacturing Consent") to explain it (and to also try to justify having the State take over and censor all the media).

A Warning from Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

While I'm happy to see the crime rate go down in Chicago and the police freed from clumsy bureaucratic work, we shouldn't forget that technology is always two-sided. These same databases could be used for other purposes.

I believe it was Gerhard Ritter, the great German historian, who gave three reasons why he was able to remain a vocal anti-Nazi in Hitler's police state.

1. Before the Nazis took power, he already had an international reputation. If the Gestapo were to arrest him, the world press outcry would do the Germany of the 1930s (very concerned about exports) more harm than good. Despite movie stereotyping, the Nazis were neither stupid nor insane.

2. All his colleagues in the history department at his university shared his sentiments. That meant he could get support and encouragement from them without fear of an anonymous denouncement.

3. Despite what some thought, the Gestapo, forced to used card files and paper folders, wasn't that well organized. One department would issue an order that "under no circumstances was Dr. Ritter to be allowed to leave Germany to speak at a conference," while another department would issue him a permit to speak at a conference in Switzerland, where he would make anti-Nazi remarks.

It's in this third area that the danger lies, not so much in the U.S. where the traditions of freedom and democracy run deep, but in the still-existing police states and half democracies of the world from Iran and Syria to Russia. This all too effective databases could be used to squelch the process of dissent and demonstration that can lead to freedom.

Those wanting a parallel should read IBM and the Holocaust, paying particular attention to how the Nazi were able to use punch card census data correlating ethnic/religious data to name and address to round up Dutch Jews and send them to death camps.

As Reagan and Schultz would point out to the Soviet leaders, technology develops best in a free society. But we shouldn't forget that, once developed, technology is easily transferred to less free societies.

Finally, we should not forget that in history good is always in a desperate race with evil. There are technologies loose in the world (and not just databases) that are dangerous in the hands of repressive governments. Democratizing the Middle East is in the interest of us all, as well as the peoples of the region. It's not a project we can put off until it becomes convenient and risk free.

--Mike Perry

Editor: Dachau Liberated

Editor: Eugenics and Other Evils

Author: Untangling Tolkien

http://www.InklingBooks.com/

Re:A Warning from Germany

[Ironica]

technology develops best in a free society. But we shouldn't forget that, once developed, technology is easily transferred to less free societies.

It all depends on who your government is... and, in the US, we technically still have power over that.

Take a look at everyone's favorite incident, 9/11. The CIA knew that at least two of the guys who flew those planes were linked to Al Qaeda, and were tracing them. At the same time, the INS didn't know this, and renewed their student visas. The FBI didn't know this, and had other opportunities to arrest them for other things, but didn't.

In that case, the CIA just kind of wanted to do their own little thing and didn't think they needed any other TLA's help. They're paid to be paranoid. But a lot of folks have said that if our information correlation was better at that level, 9/11 could not have happened (at least, not as badly as it did).

Another example of how information played a role in 9/11 is the fourth plane. The folks on it found out from their friends and families (via cell phones) what happened to the first three planes, and knowing they weren't likely to survive this no matter what they did, took the plane back from the hijackers.

Information is a powerful tool. How it is used depends entirely on who is using it, like any other powerful tool. Who watches the watchers? We do. And we should scream loudly when they don't want to be watched, because it's a sign they aren't acting in our interests.

Re:A Warning from Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent remarks, I absolutely agree. The transfer of technologies to less developed regimes is the area that has the greatest risk,
indeed a lot has been written about this subject of controlling strategic technologies in a deregulated global environment. Wherever there is dual use , a 'good' and 'evil' side to a technology, then the tinpot dictator is the guy who will subvert it towards evil and repression.

Apart from your last sneakily inserted sentance, which is presumptuous and arrogant imho. 'Democratisation' and its intended consequence 'democracy' does not of necessity provide a environment in which only 'good' uses prevail. The present failure of American democracy is my case in point. Notwithstanding
this a great post. Sincerely.
AC

Vigilante

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'd rather arm myself and take my chances with fighting the bad guys for myself than submit to a police state"

Just what we need. "Judge Dredd" out there appointing himself legislature, judge, jury, and executioner.

When you are out there executing litterbugs, I'll be running to a city far away.

Re:Really?

[Lord Kano]

Nice to see a splash of sanity in the midst of the 'police hate' around here.

I have plenty of hate for the police as well, but you can't blame them when someone gets caught stealing or selling crack.

LK

Moron

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever the Police get new tools or new powers some nut always comes along and worries about what would happen if the tools fell into the wrong hands.

You're an idiot. Many of your statements are incorrect, although they lack the precision to make it worthwhile refuting them. History has shown,reapeatedly, that police officers and criminals are not disjoint. By giving the police unchecked powers you are giving criminals unchecked powers. Every extra right that has been afforded to police officers has been abused, and this system will be abused as well. The question to ask is what are the risks associated with abuse of this system? Are there adequate checks in place to assure that abuses will be caught? etc.
Being a police officer should be hard. It is very naive to think that making the job of policing easier creates a better situation for all Americans. There is a reason the words "police state" have the connotations they do in the eyes of most Americans.

Wrong.

[DAldredge]

It is more safe to assume that those in positions of power who authorized the spending of 40+ million of Tax Dollars wish to look like it was well spent.

Re:Wrong.

[DrEldarion]

Uh, it was well spent, even if you DON'T factor in the drop in crime rate. Did you even read the headline where it said they saved $88 million in labor costs?

Some of the data is available to citizens as well

[frinkster]

The Chicago Citizen ICAM allows us to see crimes (as REPORTED - without any verification as to the actual occurance of a crime) in our own neighborhoods. It's a very nice little tool, and I hope it can survive a good slashdotting.

Except Chomsky has references, unlike you troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Chomsky's works are chock full of references to newspaper articles and government documents you can get you hands on through the freedom of information act. His opinions are solidly rooted in factual information, unlike your line noise.

Nice troll! You're completely wrong.

Re:Really?

[AtariAmarok]

I have plenty of hate for the police as well, but you can't blame them when someone gets caught stealing or selling crack.

And you really can't blame the police when a violent criminal creates a hostage situation and gets shot as a result of efforts to try to end it. Or when someone flees police and runs into someone else.

You are completely wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

"Chomsky's works are chock full of references to newspaper articles and government documents"

He is a master at selective and intentionally false use of such information. This kind of thing is easy to do.

"His opinions are solidly rooted in factual information"

No, his opinions are solidly rooted in Marxist ideology (and the idea that the State should have all power and the people none). He twists things to fit this invalid world view, and just about all of his arguments on foreign affairs have nothing to do with reality and actual events that ever happened.

Noam Chomsky is an anti-semitic "velvet glove" Stalinist who has only drawn the adoration of a tiny lunatic fringe.

Re:so? chicago = murder capital.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you read your little link, you will realize that most of the murders happen in neigborhoods where there is a lot of gang activity. If you stay out of there, you will be fine. Furthermore, in the really bad neigborhoods they now have bulletproof remote camera systems so the police can track crime more easily.

Open source

[eth00]

I am all for open source and I would love to see mysql used for this but sometimes products like Oracle would work better. It can be scaled alot easier and better, especially when you are talking about such a huge database. On top of that its also alot easier to have somebody to point a finger at when it breaks, sure mysql you can talk with some developer or admin but thats it. I am all for open source but sometimes the government just wants to spend more of our hard earned money. If linux can get into the desktop enviroment and work its way into government offices they would probably be more receptive to open source. All sorts of other governments, we are just a little slow...that word free in the same word as government spending such a wierd thing afterall! It would be interesting to see how the database reduced crime unless they did something like somebody posted above by creating trend maps.

Re:Really?

[Lord Kano]

And you really can't blame the police when a violent criminal creates a hostage situation and gets shot as a result of efforts to try to end it. Or when someone flees police and runs into someone else.

Christmas eve 2002 in Uniontown PA (about an hour drive from Pittsburgh) a 12 year old boy was shot by police after crashing a stolen vehicle and attempting to run away. There is much more to the story, but I'm not going to get into it here.

People were up in arms about the shooting, but if that little bastard hadn't been out committing a felony, he'd probably still be alive today.

I think that police brutality should be punished severely, but I don't blame the cops when they are in the right.

LK

Oracle built this system for free

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure Oracle built this system for free and the system uses DB2..

Oracle doesn't shit for free. They charge $400 an hour to build a house out of Legos.

Re:so? chicago = murder capital.

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhhmm.

Atlanta is the new Murder Capital, you wannabe!

Do the crime, do the time

[Anonymous Coward]

All convicts are sentenced to being Oracle DBAs without pay.

Useful system but bad article, Roland.

[carlmenezes]

Here is what makes sense:

The system cost $45 mil. It saved $88 mil - therefore it was worth it and has already paid for itself.
"The system gives immediate access to more than to 200 GB of data and nearly 8.5 million records of arrests and other incidents" - it saves time and that is a good thing.

Now Roland, the next time you write an article, think b4 you make claims like this :
"Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years" - absolute rubbish. Seems more to me like a guy trying desperately to spice up his article.

As for the "falling into the wrong hands bit", well, like another poster said, you always have bad cops on the force.

So the next time anybody reading this wants to write an article, think about this : without that 16 percent claim, this would have been a good, interesting, factual article.

Re:Useful system but bad article, Roland.

[Ironica]

"Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years" - absolute rubbish. Seems more to me like a guy trying desperately to spice up his article.

Do you have a citation for this? Granted, my math shows only a 13.5% decline from 2000 to 2003, based on the City of Chicago's own reported statistics. But that doesn't really make it "rubbish." To me, it says that we're using different numbers, so I wish I knew what numbers they're using (I went by total Index crime reports, and as I said, from 2000 to 2003).

What is your take on the crime rate in Chicago? And where is your data from?

Re:Useful system but bad article, Roland.

[Anonymous Coward]

shows only a 13.5% decline
Yeah, now if someone would have claimed that there was a wide spread conspiracy to not report or under report crime for some reason, like in Atlanta so they could get the Olympics (and get people to come to them) certain /.'ers would have claimed that it was as absurd as us not going on manned missions to the moon and that the claimant should "adjust their foil hat".
Why wouldn't the higher ups say "We need some good numbers to show that the big $45 M that we paid Oracle and Accenture actually did something, so lets make sure that the numbers look good so that we more money in the future." Oh, god, that could never happen...

Foil hat question - If you have a lander rocket engine blowing moon dust all over, why is there no moon dust on the pictures of the lander feet? No dust == no rocket blast. Never heard anyone bring this up.

Chomsky, what boob

[Anonymous Coward]

I just read something by him that I had not read before. It was an interview (from a couple of years ago?) in which Chomsky argued passionately in favor of Taliban rule in Afghanistan, for reasons including that if the Taliban were overthrown, famine would hit Afghanistan.

What an imaginary world he lives in: it turns out that the starvation problem was caused by the Taliban, and ended when they were overthrown.

Chomsky, very strongly pro-Taliban, also lies in the same interview, claiming that the Taliban had submitted to US demands to turn over bin Laden. In fact, they were given weeks to do this, and refused.

Re:Chomsky, what boob

[Endive4Ever]

I'm pretty sure he's on the record as a supporter of Pol Pot in Cambodia, too.

Re:Chomsky, what boob

[horos2c]

> I'm pretty sure he's on the record as a
> supporter of Pol Pot in Cambodia, too.

yeah right. christ guys, back up your opinions with *citations*. As an example, here's one from chomsky himeslf, from "Genocide; the United States and Pol Pot"

Pol Pot was obviously a major mass murderer, but it's not clear that Pol Pot killed very many more people -- or even more people -- than the United States killed in Cambodia in the first half of the 1970s. We only talk about "genocide" when other people do the killing. [The U.S. bombed and invaded Cambodia beginning in 1969, and supported anti-Parliamentary right-wing forces in a civil war there which lasted until 1975; Pol Pot ruled the country between 1975 and '78.]

So unless you think that chomsky is praising pol pot for being a mass murderer, I'd take your head out of your ass if I was you.

Re:Chomsky, what boob

[Endive4Ever]

Chomsky was an apologist for Pol Pot and part of the chorus of people pooh-poohing early reports of the atrocities that occured in Cambodia, or as Chomsky is known to refer to it: Peoples Kampuchea. His work during that period helped to prolong Pol Pot's rule.

Your fretting about what he says from his comfortable armchair, years after the fact, are irrelevant.

He was a brilliant linguist who published breakthrough work in the 60's. Why can't he just sit down and stop being a goddamn tool now? This is a guy who refers to the Wall Street Journal as 'Fascist.' You know, like any college Freshman does when he's been reading too many leaflets from the Socialist Worker's Party table.

Blues Brothers are in trouble now...

[NLG]

Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses.
Jake: Hit it!

...Blues-Mobile gets pulled over...

Elwood: I bet these cops got SCMODS.
Jake: SCMODS?
Elwood: State County Municipal Offender Data System.

"They've got S.C.M.O.D.S"

[Anonymous Coward]

Jake - "What's scmods?"

Elwood - "State County Municipal Offender Data System"

16% , just think if we

[SlydogSZ]

Passed a law forcing everyone to have a GPS enabled RFID chip implanted in their body so we can track where they are at anytime.

If you are doing nothing wrong you shouldn't care.

Re:16% , just think if we

[Anonymous Coward]

Restrict it to prior offenders (keeps the niggers in line) and I WON"T care. :)

Re:16% , just think if we

[catherder_finleyd]

Don't need to go that far. We just need to jazz up E911

Hmm..., Chicago Police systems, I wonder if...

[Nick Driver]

... they weren't actually designed by some dude named Dean Utley who runs an outfit called "SJR DataSystems" :-)

Congratulations

[nniillss]

9 out of 10 times when I read something about recent US government or politics, it gets me started on a rant (anti-US government). In particular, I won't bring my family to the US as long as you have the Guantanamo-Problem.

However, credit when credit is due. In Germany, we are used of reading stories about multi-million government projects which, in the end, do not work. Several examples are police projects. This sickens me because we tax payers are ripped off and because good police officers waste their time and cannot protect us. So, again: congratulations to the Chicago police.

And stay out....

[Anonymous Coward]

"In particular, I won't bring my family to the US as long as you have the Guantanamo-Problem."

Since the only people that end up in Guantanamo are those caught red-handed fighting in terrorist armies, it is rather interesting that you think you'd might get tossed in there or something. It would be better for all concerned if you stayed out.

Re:And stay out....

[Anonymous Coward]

Since the only people that end up in Guantanamo are those caught red-handed fighting in terrorist armies
It doesn't matter if they were caught red handed, they can't now be given a fair trial. Anyway, you should read up on the 5 British detainees who were released recently -- they weren't caught doing anything. It's a fundamental legal principle that you cannot imprison people indefinitely until they admit to doing something naughty; you have to have evidence and present it in a public trial. Otherwise how do we know that any of these people have done anything wrong, if they are not given fair and public trials?

Re:And stay out....

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't matter if they were caught red handed, they can't now be given a fair trial.

A fair trial is one in which justice is served. The problem is, the lawyers have wanted to get involved and obstruct justice.

"It's a fundamental legal principle that you cannot imprison people indefinitely"

If they are caught committing crimes, then what is the problem? As long as the innocent are not imprisoned.

"Otherwise how do we know that any of these people have done anything wrong, if they are not given fair and public trials?"

Fine. Lets have the trials, on the condition that they really ARE fair. The defense attorneys have to agree not to lie in the courtroom, and they have to agree to make public anything that the terrorists tell them (no hiding of evidence). The crooked attorneys would not agree to this, of course. It would mean justice, and they can't have that!

Re:Really?

[wfberg]

Ever heard of Gorilla Arm? Do you want the police to tumble down in swathes, grabbing their arms and yelping from touchscreen induced pain?

The best interface would be simply a QWERTY keyboard. Police have been using keyboards since.. well, since ages. They do paperwork, you see? No windows and widgets, just simple menus (like a wizzard!) with every option labelled with a letter or number.. So that a few keystrokes give them access to a screen where you input a license plate and you get a list of owner and outstanding tickets.. No pictures, just text - it's easily the most effective interface..

I have a serious beef with touchscreen graphical systems that are so full of whizz-bangy "user friendly" animation and menus that the GUI is what's slowing the thing down..

Case in point; old machines to buy traintickets had a list of codes (identical to zipcodes!) of all destinations on them, enter the 4-digit zipcode, select method of payment, and you get your ticket.

On new machines I have to first select the first letter of the city I want to go to, and then pick it out of a list of cities (and press cancel if I tapped the wrong letter because it uses the real estate of the entire screen).. This is "easier" only if you go to a different destination every time you use it because it's way easier to blindly(!) tap in a zipcode..

Last time I checked, my bank still had a text-only DOS-like interface on their computers.. Why? Because simply tapping in "ANNC" to enter a new customer account is way faster than navigating through wizzards and menus and "most recently used" lists..

Try for yourself; try finding that app you installed last week in your overcrowded start menu.. Now just tap in windowsflaggykey+r, c:\pro(autocomplete)\nameofprogr(autocomplete)\nam eoffile(autocomplete).exe

Which is faster?

RE: So we're "nuts" to consider all the angles?

[King_TJ]

I'd agree with your sentiments, to at least some extent, but I'm already turned off by your tone. Why would someone be a "nut" simply because they ask some tough questions about the possibilities we don't want to consider?

A very real problem with computerizing data into databases has *always* been keeping it secure. The nice thing about traditional methods of filing data (file cabinets full of folders and so on) is it has a certain level of inherent security. (EG. If I waltz in to the police station and try to sift through private file folders, there's a really GOOD chance someone will see me and stop me before I get very far.) When you "virtualize" this information into a computer, people can't immediately see you accessing the data remotely. For that matter, employees using other people's passwords could be accessing files they weren't supposed to access, and it's likely other workers would walk right by them, not realizing anything was "out of place".

Can this technology be implemented so security isn't compromised? Sure.... but it takes some awareness and effort. In a world where most people still think their password should be the name of their pet dog or cat, and it's a "nuisance they'd rather avoid" to force changing a password once every 6 months - there's a very real need to keep questioning the security procedures used!

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is a stolen car really worth a life? Sounds like out of whack priorities to me.

Compare:

Sure, she was fined thousands of dollars, but she shouldn't have illegally downloaded the full house tv show theme song from kazaa!

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is a stolen car really worth a life? Sounds like out of whack priorities to me.

Yes, it is out of whack. Yet, this decision was made by the thief. In fact, he endangered more lives than just his own.

Re:Some of the data is available to citizens as we

[Anonymous Coward]

The Chicago Citizen ICAM [12.17.79.6]

Hmm.

[me@box]$ host 12.17.79.6
Host not found.
[me@box]$ whois -h whois.arin.net 12.17.79.6
AT&T WorldNet Services ATT (NET-12-0-0-0-1)
12.0.0.0 - 12.255.255.255
Chicago Police Department CHIPOL-76 (NET-12-17-76-0-1)
12.17.76.0 - 12.17.79.255

Aha! I love when they're honest like that.

[me@box]# ipfw add 515 reset tcp from !$ to any
ipfw add 515 reset tcp from 12.17.79.0/22 to any
00515 reset tcp from 12.17.79.0/22 to any
[me@box]# ipfw add 515 reset tcp from any to 12.17.79.0/22
00515 reset tcp from any to 12.17.76.0/22

Before we start applauding Chicago's police

[TheViewFromTheGround]

I live in Chicago, and wanted to respond to several comments I've seen in this discussion and to the article. I also live in one "ghetto" and work in another, which are famous hotspots for police activity.

First, their IT infrastructure claims to make policing more effective. As several have pointed out, correlation is not causation. As a further addendum to that, several other forces are at play which could be responsible for the drop in crime: gentrification, relocation of public housing residents (many of whom are going to the suburbs and beyond), and what seems to be a few more jobs at the low-wage end of the spectrum. Basically, you'd have to try to control for a) new, affluent residents of "crime-ridden" neighborhoods making more calls, b) how relocation of public housing residents (many of whom are involved in criminal activity that ranges from peddling to drug dealing and gangbanging) is tranforming crime (I'd guess, but I don't know, that drug arrests and such are down, because murders and rapes are most definitely going strong in Chicago), and how job creation for poor folks is also reducing some of the crime.

Secondly, lots of people have immediately argued that this IT infrastructure is a good thing and that Slashdot police-bashing is a Bad Thing.

In Chicago, police corruption and brutality is systematic at the highest levels, pervasive, and shocking.

Further, a good IT infrastructure cannot mitigate the effect of the completely shitty policies that keep good police from being effective in certain situations. Many of my friends on the police force lament the way that resources are deployed and policy works in handling drug-related crime, because the police necessarily tip their hand in busts, allowing the worst criminals to get away and leaving a couple of poor drug-addicted saps (not exactly the folks who marshall significant resources to get heroin and crack into the city and into the neighborhoods) for the police to nab.

Finally, and this is absolutely significant to this award, the Chicago police have often argued that their job is NOT crime deterrance or prevention, but crime reponse. Therefore, in several cases of police brutality and misconduct, the police claimed that they knew that crime was likely to occur in the places they raided or severely beat (killed in one instance, raped in another) innocent people, but that they couldn't just show up in order to deter the crime, because then the crime wouldn't happen. If the police are serious about deterring crime in Chicago, then the CLEAR system needs to be used in conjunction with pre-emptive prevention policies. These are things like simply stationing officers in cars in places they know (probably know even better with this new system, though it doesn't take a genius) lots of drug dealing happens, a stunningly effective and rarely used technique compared to the-chase-folks-around-yelling-"nigger"-and-then beating-them-up-without-an-arrest-but-pocketing-th eir-cash technique.

I'm not trolling. I believe in strong, effective policing. But that's so far from what I see in Chicago that congratulating them for an IT infrastructure that reduces costs and makes the police more "effective" is laughable compared to their abhorable behavior on a daily basis.

Re:Before we start applauding Chicago's police

[bomb_number_20]

For the most part I agree with what you are saying, but I feel the need to respond to one portion of your comment. I should also preface this by saying that I also live in Chicago and live in very close proximity to a housing project that is being 'redistributed'.

I disagree when you say that placing police in cars in problematic areas works. I live on a street where police come regularly. They sit in their cars, sometimes two or three at a time for several hours on end. It's a one way, off-the-main-drag sort of street and my personal opinion is that they come here to hide. Anyway, despite the fact that the police are present and in number almost nightly 100 feet from the front door of my apartment, the following has happened within the past 18 MONTHS:

(1) My girlfriends car was broken into. They punched a hole through her door with a screwdriver and cleaned out her vehicle.

(2) My vehicle has been broken into twice. Both times they smashed out the window and took everything inside.

(3) Both basement apartments in my building have been broken into and robbed.

(4) A girl in my building was attacked by someone hiding in the laundry room.

And these are just the stories from my building. A coworker of mine lives a block away, and about 2:00am one weekend, he hears a crunching noise. Looking out the front window, he sees someone driving over his motorcycle while trying to park their car. he calls the police and runs outside. it turns out that the driver is an unlicensed, uninsured underage drunk teenager who has no id. the cop shows up, and he and the girl start talking to each other in spanish; refusing to speak english for my friend. he asks repeatedly what is going on and is told to shut up by the cop. The cop turns around eventually and starts asking my friend for his drivers license, insurance, title and registration. when my friend asks about the girls id, the cop yells at him and threatens to arrest him. then tells him to shut up again. By the time it's over, my friend has given the cop every piece of ID he has and the cop has warned him not to 'push it'. the girl got off without even getting a ticket.

So, I agree with you when you say that police claim their job isn't crime prevention. I will go one further, though, and say that police (in chicago) seem to think that their job is revenue generation.

I was surprised when i first moved into this building to find that i was starting to get parking tickets on a regular basis- with a grand total of 7 by the time i resolved the problem. It turns out that I was getting parking tickets because i drove a pickup truck, and, in the city of chicago, it is illegal in most residential areas to park a pickup truck on the street overnight (Some wards have special permits you can use that will allow you to park, but mine doesnt). The insanity of that law is another discussion- especially when you take into account the fact that i drive a compact pickup and the guy up the block drives a cadillac escalade and has no problems.

This problem cost me over $500 to resolve; and I'm still bitter about it. If anyone is interested or having the same problem, the solution is to get non B-Truck license plates. I chose environmental plates, but if the back of your truck is covered, you can also get RV plates. anyway, i'm drifting off-topic.

I can't even begin to tell you how angry this stuff has made me. The chicago police system is wrong in every sense of the word and the best database in the world is not going to make up for that fact.

Re:Before we start applauding Chicago's police

[TheViewFromTheGround]

Hey, that was a very thoughtful reply. I'm curious where you are -- it sounds a lot like the west side, near UIC. I might even know the Escalade you're talking about.

I probably spoke too decisively about the presence of patrol cars and cops, but I know that in the south side housing project where I work, it certainly works better to stop the drug trade than other methods. I think the difference is that in more dispersed residential areas that tactic doesn't work. And certainly, it has a lot of potential for abuse.

I agree about the revenue. The cops in Chicago are interested in doing things primarily on the criteria of how much money it makes. This is a big problem in public housing. Lots of drug dealers have told me about getting stopped by the cops, having their money "confiscated" and then let go.

But, like you said with the truck thing, it's part of life in Chicago. Same thing with "trucks" on Lake Shore Drive. I got pulled over in my friend's small pickup and told that I'd be given a $500 ticket if I kept driving on Lake Shore and pointed to a sign that made it clear that enormous semis were not permitted). At which point I asked why he wasn't pulling over all those Lincoln Navigators and Grand Cherokees that were streaming past us. "Those aren't trucks, you dumb prick."

Anyway, I feel your pain. I wonder how many other US cities have such bad policing. It doesn't seem like SF, Seattle, Pittsburgh, or Portland (cities I've spent some time in during the last year) are nearly as bad.

Re:Before we start applauding Chicago's police

[bomb_number_20]

Actually, I'm on the northside. I'm just a couple of blocks from the Lathrop(?) homes at Diversey/Clybourn. I've lived in the same couple of blocks (with one move) for the past 4 years.

I plan on moving this year when my lease is up; but i almost wish I didnt have too. There are other reasons for moving, but the increasing crime rate is, by far, the largest factor in my decision. The other big factor (I firmly believe the two are related) is the gentrification that is taking place in this area.

I really hate that crap. It's disgusting to watch these developers build their condos, Bed Bath and Beyonds, Ultas, Home Depots and golf stores right up to the front doors of the projects and then just wait. They know the city will shuffle the poor people around like cattle to make room for more condos and shopping. And the poor people aren't stupid- they know it's coming. Between that and the single family homeowners in the area who are being forced out because they can no longer afford the property taxes on the houses they live in, it's a wonder that the crime rate isn't triple what it is.

I don't really have a point- sorry for the rant. I just see a cycle of rich peoples money and police working hand in hand against poor people. It's tough to explain until you see it, but it exists.

Re:Before we start applauding Chicago's police

[TheViewFromTheGround]

Yeah, you're right by the Rock n' Bowl. I had a pretty serious bike accident over there in the summer and a fellow from Lathrop homes helped me out big time. I'm in Humboldt Park. Anyway, the gentrification of the city is incredibly depressing, just as you say. I also think that you're exactly correct about single family homeowners. The changes in the city are not just screwing the exceptionally poor, they are also hurting working lower middle class types. It actually makes the term "gentrification" more apt -- the transformation is towards a large urban gentry.

Well, I'm ranting now, too. Why don't you contact me: eads-AT-invisibleinstitute.com. I'd be curious what you do for a living, since you obviously care very much about the changes in the city, and without some of the gooey liberal BS that people tend to invoke when talking about this stuff. Two more things. One, what's also scary is that Chicago's urban "renewal," if sucessful, will likely guide urban policy all over the country. Second, I feel like Chicago is becoming more like cities have been historically: a rich "inner city" with shanty towns at the geographical margins.

I agree about needing to see it to see that it exists. Now that I'm grad school, I'm meeting a lot of the people who are actually driving this process along intentionally, which is odd. I worry that despite spending my money at local businesses, hanging out with my neighbors, learning Spanish, etc, that just by being white I'm encouraging others to move to Humboldt Park who won't in the least make an effort to figure out what it means to be a good neighbor here.

Re:Before we start applauding Chicago's police

[GPLDAN]

I'm probably quite a bit older than either of you. Maybe not, I am going back to grad school, but I am 35. I lived off the corner of Taylor and Loomis for 4 years, on Loomis between Taylor and Harrison.
You may know this area as the UIC west side, also known as the Italian Village. I'm not Italian, I was doing grad work there in the 1990s.
The gentrification you bemoan happened for years. In the late 70's, it used to be impossible to walk down Ashland at night. I have no idea what you mean when you say "gooey liberal BS" - I probably would disagree with you on most issues. This issue is somewhat sensitive for me, as I used to live across the street from the commander of the CPD, my family was in Chicago politics, I have been out of Chicago for a number of years now, but may be coming "home", and so I can't say what has happened to the police department. I have a hard time buying that you were stopped on Lake Shore Drive for being in a small pickup truck, and that the cops treated you as you say.
To the topic at hand, I would be somewhat wary of the 16% drop in crime, this is Chicago you are talking about. Operation Greylord anyone? besides New Jersey, the place where ghost payrolls are an art form? Those numbers are probably bogus. I'd see to see some detailed reporting of exactly how cross-refercing and having millions of criminal records at the fingertips has ACTUALLY done a damn thing.

Impresive - but is it all true

[Omega1045]

I worked in IT for criminal justice a few years back. We ran a system that intigrated data from various agencies to provide this type of data to officers on the street, lawyers, etc. It was not what it appeared to be. Result sets often were very different depending on when you ran them, as various legacy systems would time out, etc. To be short, it would most often provide incomplete data. And we had a major DB vendor (not Oracle or MS, but MAJOR) taking credit for our awesome system.

The simple fact is that criminal justice IT is not up to date AT ALL becuase you have so many different agencies running REALLY OLD technology, and none of them really want to work together. Who funds the project when you are not only working with various agencies, but different branches of government?!

I don't buy the propoganda.

Re:Really?

[thetaikung]

One of the guys I work with now, full time programmer is also a part time police officer. He volunteers his time.

My boss is the same. Flies the ghettobird.

Imaginary?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pakistan was providing real WMD to "Axis of Evil" countries while we were hunting imaginary WMDs in Iraq

Imaginary? Iraq had them at the close of the last gulf war. They even admitted it. However, they won't say what happened to them. Calling them "imaginary" is a lie. Kay could not find them. This means that:
1) Saddam really did destroy them
2) Saddam just hid them really well
3) They are moved to another place like Syria or Iran.

Until we start focusing on actual terrorism issues

We've gone after the root causes so far: two major terrorist governments.

Re:Imaginary?

[Anonymous Coward]

We've gone after the root causes so far: two major terrorist governments.

You mean the u.s./eu -right?

Re:Imaginary?

[Anonymous Coward]

"You mean the u.s./eu -right?"

No, the US is strongly anti-terrorist. You might call the EU terroristic, due to antisemitic rumblings in France, and the problem of both France and Germany siding with terrorists (Saddam) in Iraq, but that is kind of stretching it.

That is even worse flamebait.

[Anonymous Coward]

For one thing, you are calling moderation "censorship". Moderation is nothing of the sort; it is a form of free speech.

For another, you are assuming that an anti-black racist is a "conservative".

This makes you some sort of liberal troll trying to make hay with a false stereotype of a conservative.

Re:That is even worse flamebait.

[danny256]

This form of moderation is censorship. If the default level was -1, and people got sick of reading trolls they would figure out how to change it, similar to the DNC list. The way it is now, slashdot defaults new users to 1, so they never see any comments below that unless they activly work for it. Isn't this the same situation as Netscape vs IE? Sure the freedom is there, but when you give someone an easy default, 90% of them are never going to switch.

Re:That is even worse flamebait.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh you aren't racist anymore? Just anti-gay?

Re:That is even worse flamebait.

[Anonymous Coward]

The way it is now, slashdot defaults new users to 1, so they never see any comments below that unless they activly work for it.

Countless A/C comments are moderated up on every story, so what's your point?

Here in Chicago, we have a saying

[Nybble's Byte]

In Chicago, walking will keep you healthy, but running can save your life.

sloppy logic. correlation is not causality.

[Anonymous Coward]

And while the national crime rate rose 2 percent from 2000 to 2001, Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives...

correlation != causality. say it with my again now.

Re:so? chicago = murder capital.

[Anonymous Coward]

After living in Chicago, I must say they have one of the most predjudice police forces I know. Police acting as on the spot judge and jury. Does NOT help crime.

"IT" is NOT to solution to reducing crime, "better" police are. This money would have probably better spent on a public complaints form and independent investigations into police corruption. To reduce crime police can not be above the law. This only leads to distrust which results inturn to more crime.

I am sure it a very usefull, but only in good hands.

Re:Really?

[Ironica]

I have plenty of hate for the police as well, but you can't blame them when someone gets caught stealing or selling crack.

No.

You also can't blame them when the laws for stealing or selling crack are way out of line compared to the laws for stealing or selling cocaine (though you can blame our legislators).

You *can* blame them when they use the 'dropsy' method of coming up with a reason to arrest someone (the police officer drops a bag of a 'suspicious substance' on the ground, claims the suspect dropped it, and now has probable cause to search and arrest them). You can also blame the judges who know that this is full of crap but go along with it anyway.

They've got T.IT.S

[Tmack]

Nope, they have TITS (Taking IT to the Street), at least thats the title of the article. Who knew that all it would take were some TITS to reduce crime! So Im guessing the database is really a 200Gb Pr0n stash..

Tm

crime solving oracle: The Movie

[MikeCapone]

It's easy to stop crime when you have an Oracle. Everybody knows that.

Wasn't that the premise of Minority Report?

I don't think it turned out too well in the end...

In other CPD news...

[Ian Bicking]

It's also just been revealed that the Chicago Police have been spying on several local peace activist groups, starting in 2002. Previous to 2002, there was a consent decree from a case against the CPD, for their efforts in the 70s and 80s to suppress dissent or the exercize of free speach. The consent decree was recently largely invalidated by a appeals judge, and it was only months before police informants were infiltrating groups. The FBI, which of course has its own similar history (COINTELPRO) also appears to be back in the political-suppression game.

Some coverage: Chicago Police case, Google News on the recent Iowa/Drake U thing

I have access

[ProudClod]

to 200GB of data on my hard drive right here.

So they paid oracle 45m$ to get arrested 8.5m times? /coat

Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course this will work against people. The father of the current mayor, one of the biggest political monsters ever, used the law to his own advantage to, among other things, blackmail reporters who were too close on his heels.

I can't say how I know this, but put the question point blank to the current mayor, and he'll admit it.

At least once upon a time he hated that son of a bitch as he should. Now he might be just as corrupt. (And yes, I know him, which is why this has to be AC this time, guys.)

bushesque logic

[oldbenway]

Wow, the database made crime drop! Is this the same person that wrote george dubya's economic plan?
Is it possible to create a logic-check as a browser plugin, so when you type something (e.g. tax breaks for rich people will give boost the economy, a database lowered crim 16%, et al) on shaky logical foundations, you get a red underline?

Re:bushesque logic

[Anonymous Coward]

"the same person that wrote george dubya's economic plan?....(e.g. tax breaks for rich people will give boost the economy"

That is certainly not Bush's plan. Bush's plan was to cut taxes for all taxpayers (of whom a minority are rich). "Tax cuts for everyone". It's been working so far. The only reason the economy is sluggish is that, thanks to the Democrats, the tax cuts were too small.

The real problem is unemployment.

[ziggy the zagnut]

Under this system, we're going to put people in prison for stealing, selling drugs and dodging tickets all to feed their families. Meanwhile unemployment won't be affected.

Re:The real problem is unemployment.

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if the point is feeding their families, if they're committing crimes to do so, they should still go to jail.

Hands up anyone who doesn't mind his car getting stolen or his house getting broken into just so some criminal can feed his children...

Re:Really?

[Dirtside]

There may be examples to the contrary, but to the best of my knowledge there are no "large-scale" solutions that I know of which have "first" been implemented as open-source and then aped (or not) in some proprietory form.

Web servers. FTP servers. IRC servers. In fact, most server applications for common protocols were developed and invented by those who developed the protocols, which, usually being open, naturally led to open servers. Actually, I think web browsers and other network applications also quite often fall into this category.

Although I could be wrong. Does anyone have any more detailed knowledge of this? A quick Google search was inconclusive.

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but it's for a court to decide what punishment he deserves, not a policeman. There was clearly no need to shoot him to make an arrest (and in fact shooting him prevented him from being brought to justice at all, and was therefore very stupid).

In short, you don't understand how legal/justice systems work. The police use the minimum of force necessary to bring a suspect to trial, and the judge and jury decide how severely they should be punished.

Oh, and he was 12, for fuck's sake...

Re:Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

"There was clearly no need to shoot him to make an arrest"

The guy was a maniac who had already been trying to kill people.

"The police use the minimum of force necessary to bring a suspect to trial"

It was beyond that point: he was dangerous and had been resisting arrest. If you don't want to get harmed by the cops, submit to arrest. It is your own fault whatever happens if you refuse to and try to kill people along the way.

"Oh, and he was 12, for fuck's sake"

That is still no excuse for homicidal behavior.

Chicago police calls itself the "goon squad"

[michaelmalak]

No award should be given to a police force that directs its tallest members into what the police themselves refer to as a "goon squad" to break up demonstrations.

Re:Chicago police calls itself the "goon squad"

[ostiguy]

Cops do not need to be PC amongst themselves, just like IT jockeys. You have no idea as to what the origin of that name was, as goon may be self depreciating or referring to the protestors. And it isn't surprising that they will have a squad to break up the demonstrators because it is a near certain that there will be violent protestors there.

Why aren't you worried about the inability of antiglobalization protestors to police themselves and stay non violent?

Underreported

[El]

Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. Correction: reported crimes have dropped 16 percent. Just like reported crimes in Atlanta went down in the years before the Olympics there. Funny how now we find out the cops were just fudging the reports... remember, when you report a rape of mugging, it's not really a rape or mugging until the investigator agrees with you that it's a rape or mugging.

Stopping violence

[Anonymous Coward]

You should have noticed that the goon squad was for only breaking up violent demonstrations.

As for "underreported.com", nothing is underreported. The stories are reported, but no-one really cares.

Re:Some of the data is available to citizens as we

[Anonymous Coward]

From the access page which requires a click to agree:

The unauthorized use of the words "Chicago Police Department," " Chicago Police," or any colorable imitation of these words or the unauthorized use of the Chicago Police Department logo is unlawful.

The Chicago Police Department are a bunch of mindless Nazi pig-fuckers. I am not authorized to say these words. Come and get me dick-lickers.

A better way to reduce crime...

[Frennzy]

According to this document, there were a grand total of 237,706 crimes in Chicago in 2002.

Of those, 172,812 (~73%) were 'non indexed' crimes. Of that total, nearly 60,000 (nearly 35%) were either narcotics violations, or prostitution.

Want to reduce non indexed crime by 35%? Make drugs and hooking legal.

Want to reduce overall crime by over 25%? Make drugs and hooking legal.

This doesn't even take into account the intangible reductions in "drug-related" crimes (i.e. gang bang murders over sales territories, deals gone bad, etc). Not only that, but it doesn't require a $45 million database, or three years to build. Just take two laws off the books. (yes, I know about all the attendant time and effort required to do such a thing...and I am blatantly ignoring it)

Just an alternate viewpoint. Flame away.

Why stop there?

[Anonymous Coward]

Want to reduce overall crime by over 25%? Make drugs and hooking legal.

Why stop there? Get rid of all the laws, and your crime all goes away! Sounds great!

Re:Why stop there?

[kryptkpr]

I know, it's Flamebait, but I'll bite..

There are places where drugs and hooking ARE legal, and it's working very well. These things are not legal everywhere, but only legal within designated recreational zones. Drugs can only be sold by people who operate recreational establishments in these parts of the city. Hookers are required to get weekly check-ups and STD tests. It doesn't mean you can kill someone there..

More importantly these stats are not correlated

[bluelantern]

And while the national crime rate rose 2 percent from 2000 to 2001, Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives

The two statistics aren't even correlated. The rate rose 2 percent from 2000 to 2001. The rates dropped 16 percent in the last three years which are the years 2001-2004. The two stats don't even match up in the period they are measuring.

Lack of correlation certainly does not imply causation.

Remembering Detroit 1967

[Anonymous Coward]

Your description of Chicago, triggered a recollection of this factoid:

Causes of the Detroit Riot The origins of urban unrest in Detroit were rooted in a multitude of political, economic, and social factors including police abuse, lack of affordable housing, urban renewal projects, economic inequality, black militancy, and rapid demographic change.

Detroit Riot, 1967

As immortalized in Gordon Lightfoot's classic "Black Day in July" covered by "The Tragically Hip" in my currently favourite album:

Beautiful

Chomsky = chumpsky

[Anonymous Coward]

"He is a perfect example of somebody who had already made his mind up before doing any research, so he only looked for stuff to support his conclusions."

Exactly. His use of newspapers and government sources is masterfully deceptive.

Using his tactics of using stuff out of context, and of using off-the-cuff comments by government officials as evidence of government policy (again, out of context), one can easily write a "well documented" paper about how Dennis Kucinich is to the right of Pat Buchanan. Or how George Bush is to the left of Ted Kennedy.

Chomsky and others

[Poligraf]

As someone who likes psychology and knows it pretty well, I can tell you what is wrong with Chomsky and his ilk.

It is called GUILT.

As one psychotherapist put it, "Guilt is a form of delusions de grandeur. It states 'Everything is happening because of me'. This is the line a child assumes when something goes wrong in his surroundings - like, for example, when parents are fighting all the time et al".

When one has guilt, he starts projecting it towards anything that can be equated to him like his country et al. From outside it looks like a highly moral person judging imperfections of the world, but inside it is a little boy whose subconscious patterns want him to be "bad" while he wants to prove that he is not bad.

This thing is one of the two biggest foundation of leftists' state of psyche. Hence constant bashing of the US and Israel or claiming that the Western world is supposed to "share its wealth". Hence all of the attempts to inflict this guilt on the rich for them being rich.

Re:Chomsky and others

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't take something that works on an individual level, and extrapolate it to explain behaviour of a group of people. If you can even begin to criticize Chomsky's work, you must surely know this.

Re:Chomsky and others

[Poligraf]

> You can't take something that works on an individual level, and extrapolate it to explain behaviour of a group of people. If you can even begin to criticize Chomsky's work, you must surely know this.

Yeah? Similar causes cause different people behave in a similar way. The amount of different types of subconscious programs is limited (unlike the amount of different manifestations of even a single program).

Re:Chomsky and others

[stephanruby]

Speaking of "GUILT", the warmongers are pretty good at using it too. Oh you're against the War, you're unpatriotic, you're not supporting our troops, you should leave this country since you don't like it, you're a self-hating jew, etc.

Re:Chomsky and others

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of "GUILT", the warmongers are pretty good at using it too

Your pro-Saddam side is the real warmongers. Saddam had engaged in a decades-long war against several countries including his own. killing many thousands a year. Bush and the large coalition have pretty much ended this war. The protesters strongly supported Saddam's rule and his ongoing wars.

Oh you're against the War, you're unpatriotic, you're not supporting our troops

Not supporting the troops? That is 100% true. Just ask the soldiers. Unpatriotic? There is a pretty good case to be made to apply this term to those who favored keeping an anti-US terrorist (Saddam) in power. ... you should leave this country since you don't like it

And good riddance.

Film about GWB's failed Coup in Venezuela [chavezthefilm.com]

I know all about this. It was not GWB's coup. It was a popular uprising against the fascist dictator in Venezuela. Hopefully, the next will succeed. We don't need a Castro II or an "Allende Jr" taking Venezuela backwards to its banana republic dictatorship past.

Re:Chomsky and others

[stephanruby]

Your pro-Saddam side is the real warmongers. Saddam had engaged in a decades-long war against several countries including his own. killing many thousands a year. Bush and the large coalition have pretty much ended this war. The protesters strongly supported Saddam's rule and his ongoing wars.

Who supported whom? Ten years ago, six months after Saddam gassed his own people, and six months after everyone in the World knew about the massacre, our own US government lent him another billion dollars. And I won't even go into the details of whom supplied him with the gas and the other chemical/biological weapons he had at the time.

Not supporting the troops? That is 100% true. Just ask the soldiers

May be, that's what the soldiers would have said at the beginning, but now I think they just want to come home. And speaking of which, now it seems it's the US government which is not supporting our troups. Our US government is not supporting them adequately in Iraq and our US government is not supporting adequately their families here at home. One would think that we could have sacrificed a little bit for their families here at home, but I guess Bush doesn't want to go there.

I know all about this. It was not GWB's coup. It was a popular uprising against the fascist dictator in Venezuela. Hopefully, the next will succeed. We don't need a Castro II or an "Allende Jr" taking Venezuela backwards to its banana republic dictatorship past.

Educate yourself a little more then. Read the Forbes magazine between April 8th and April 12th to see why the US may have had something to do with it.

Re:Chomsky and others

[Endive4Ever]

Read the Forbes magazine between April 8th and April 12th

Oooooh! Oooooh! The truth 'leaks out' every once in awhile when some crank gets an article or two published.

Americans for the most part understand what journalists are in business for. To get the most attention with the most outrageous content they can get an editor to publish. It helps if it reinforces the stereotypes they've nurtured since their college days, passing out leaflets on the mall.

Re:Chomsky and others

[stephanruby]

A crank? The Forbes magazine actually hates Chavez more than you do. Read their articles, start with their articles three days *before* the coup.

Re:Chomsky and others

[stephanruby]

I love how a post can be modded to +5 insightful one day and then modded down to -1 flamebait the next.

I'll bet they've got S.C.M.O.D.S.

[Qrlx]

Jake: 'Scmods?' What is that some new kind of VD?
Elwood: State County Municipal Offender Data System.

Re:Really?

[chez69]

still mad about that speeding ticket?

I know quite a few cops and people just love to cling on to the image of corrupt cops from TV. most cops are cops because they do want to make a difference. They want the world to be safer.

how many cops do you know personally?

$88 mln labor savings

[Poligraf]

Does it mean that the new system has allowed them to lay off some of its employees?

Another effect of the "Curse of efficiency"...

Poor logic

[adrianbaugh]

> And while the national crime rate rose 2 percent from 2000 to 2001, Chicago rates have dropped 16 percent in the last three years. So all this information can and does prevent crime and save lives

Ahem. A happened, and B happened, therefore A caused B? That's an awfully big jump to make without consideration of other factors at all.

OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

The entire Iraq war was about messages, especially to Saudis.

Here is my take on it: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/iraq.html

You don't always go and beat the crap out of ALL the bad guys to get your point across.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[timeOday]

I'm surprised your linked page didn't mention Iran, which suddenly opened its nuclear program to international inspection just a few days after watching Saddam get dragged up out of his hole in the ground.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

The article was written in fall of 2002, before the war.

BTW, Saudis has also made some steps to crack down on the anti-American propaganda.

One other offender is the Egypt. They get $2bln+ each year, and still their state-controlled press puts tons of dung on the US, on some of the officials (like Colin Powell and then US ambassador who was Jewish) et al.

The reason for that is that Egypt, while formally democratic, is not really democratic at all.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

So you're saying that Egypt should take the bribe money we are giving it, and shut up? Not all the media is state-controlled. Censorship maybe, but definately not all the papers are state-controlled.

Egypt has a right to free speech. Isn't that one of Bush's stated reasons for war, because they had no rights? Besides, I don't care how much you think they should fawn over us, if you see something wrong, speak out. What, do you want them to cover stories up? The people there have a right to know that there are no WMDs. Perhaps this 'dung' as you call it could just be ugly truth about ugly leaders and ugly decisions to war.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

> So you're saying that Egypt should take the bribe money we are giving it, and shut up?

They are supposed to have some respect, and not ridicule the ambassador's religion.

> Not all the media is state-controlled. Censorship maybe, but definately not all the papers are state-controlled.

Unfortunately, it does not work the way you think. I've lived in soviet Union and Russia, and I know how it is done. And Egypt has press controlled much more tightly than modern Russia.

>Egypt has a right to free speech. Isn't that one of Bush's stated reasons for war, because they had no rights?

If you believe that everything government states is truth and ALL that government really thinks, I feel sorry for you.

Government is like Java Sandbox for most of the population; it isolates them from whatever really happens in the world in all of its gory details.

>Besides, I don't care how much you think they should fawn over us, if you see something wrong, speak out. What, do you want them to cover stories up? The people there have a right to know that there are no WMDs. Perhaps this 'dung' as you call it could just be ugly truth about ugly leaders and ugly decisions to war.

This is a bunch of leftist BS. Why - because you try to project some Western principles into the society that is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and expect similar reaction from people who are completely different.

Imagine people who vote the way their mullah says them to vote; imagine people who don't think and don't have their own opinion. Imagine them who assume whatever some leader puts into their heads, and you get the picture of a typical person from what can be called a traditional civilization.
(find /. topic about cultures and how it affects software development teams, and read what they write about oriental cultures).

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

Ok, I am curious as to who got ridiculed and when. US ambassador to who and when?

I mentioned the US government supporting free speech to point out its hypocrisy. If they can't print this stuff, then Egypt gets bashed for its lack of free speech. If they do print it, then Egypt gets bashed for not leashing reporters. You're not making sense here. What about when all the newspapers in the US poked fun of Saddam? Is that hypocrisy if they can't do the same for Bush? Remember, Bush did quip "There ought to be limits to freedom." And he wasn't laughing after saying it.

And don't strawman the topic here, who votes how their mullah tells them to vote? Name one group of people, and I'll show you that it hasn't happened yet. Not the Taliban, not Iran, definately not Iraq. The only people in question who voted as told were under Saddam Hussein's regime.

And why would I trust a /.er opinion on oriental cultures?

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[sonamchauhan]

> Egypt has a right to free speech.
Islamic countries are not known for free speech. Try printing a book pointing out the flaws of Islam - it will be received with violence in most Islamic countries.

While there are *always* "limitations to freedom" (for eg, the govt. wont' permit you to manufacture a nuclear bomb) the US gives it's citizens a freedom of conscience and freedom of religion and speech that people living in Islamic countries do not possess.

> What, do you want them to cover stories up?
> The people there have a right to know that there are no WMDs.
If there are no WMDs, there are no WMDs' - did the OP really want that info suppressed? Or is it just a strawman you setup?

> So you're saying that Egypt should take the bribe money we are giving
> it, and shut up? Not all the media is state-controlled.
Where the US has leverage, it is permissible to use it to persuade a government to tone down attacks in the media it has control over, and to stop educating it's young with false stereotypes and irrational hatred.

However, the most lasting change comes once rulers discover for *themselves* how much of a cancer blind hatred really is. Look at Pakistan - after the recent attempts on Musharraf's life by the jihadis, he's apparently become more sincere in his efforts to down their terror infrastructure, to reform the madrassas (religious schools), and to try and walk the path of peace.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

> Ok, I am curious as to who got ridiculed and when. US ambassador to who and when?

US ambassador to Egypt (they moved him since).

http://www.memri.org/ is a pretty good site for translations out of Middle Eastern press.

>I mentioned the US government supporting free speech to point out its hypocrisy. If they can't print this stuff, then Egypt gets bashed for its lack of free speech. If they do print it, then Egypt gets bashed for not leashing reporters. You're not making sense here. What about when all the newspapers in the US poked fun of Saddam? Is that hypocrisy if they can't do the same for Bush? Remember, Bush did quip "There ought to be limits to freedom." And he wasn't laughing after saying it.

I hope you're intelligent enough to understand the difference between free speach and orchestrated media campaign. Just look at the facts: Egypt media is full of anti-Israeli bias to such extent that even after supposedly 20+ years of "peace" they hate Israel's guts. combine this fact with the fact of them arming themselves to the teeth, and you might understand that Mubarak is preparing his country to the eventual war with Israel.

>And don't strawman the topic here, who votes how their mullah tells them to vote? Name one group of people, and I'll show you that it hasn't happened yet. Not the Taliban, not Iran, definately not Iraq. The only people in question who voted as told were under Saddam Hussein's regime.

Haven't you heard about Muslim Brothers in Egypt (from the top of my head)? Mubarak even needed not to let many of them to vote in order to stay in power.

>And why would I trust a /.er opinion on oriental cultures?

Because you're a leftist idiot, and I know a lot ;-).
Seriously, you don't need to trust anyone. Many leftists (Chomsky, Nader et al) have a very distorted interpretation of life, and nothing can convince them.

You might easily ignore the fact that I'm bi-cultural, that I've read A LOT, that I base my opinions on understanding individual and mass psychology.

Thus, I can just give you links to a couple of books about Arabs (if we're at it) written by serious researches and a book that is a must read for everyone who wants to understand the society.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

There is freedom of religion in Islamic countries. There are Hindus living in Saudi Arabia and Jews living in Pakistan, for example. There is also some freedom of speech as well, just not libel or slander. Case in point, Al Jazeera routinely points out corruption in the Mid Eastern governments, to said government's dismay.

what is an OP?

You are still saying that bribery is a legitimate way to get people to tone down their anger, and you seem annoyed that it's not working. The government takes this money, and the citizens are rightly outraged at this insult to their intelligence.

Pakistan is a bad example, Saudi Arabia really went through a different change. People there hate Al Qaeda, because now they are attacking Saudi Arabia itself. Pakistan has a much different issue, people hate him for being a puppet of Bush, and they hate him over there for cracking down too harshly on the terror structure. Guess nobody's satisfied.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

I don't trust Memri, I think they slant their coverage. I've seen awful anti-Muslim coverage in english editorials in the US as well, but they're not all that frequent. If I compiled them like Memri has done, you would think that everyone in the US despises Muslims.

Egypt can say whatever they want, Bush took sides in the Israeli-Palestianian debate long ago. But look at how they act. Egypt sent their foreign minister to Israel to speak with the Israeli cabinet. He was attacked by a group of Palestinians who cursed him, threw shoes at him, and called for the resumption of Jihad in Egypt. Egypt sounds far more moderate then, don't you think?

The Muslim brotherhood, to my knowledge, didn't tell people who to vote for, but they did enjoin their followers to support religiously conservative candidates. I fail to see the issue here, I thought a large portion of Americans voted for Bush because it was 'sinful' to vote for a pro-choice candidate.

So I'm a leftist idiot? What do you draw that conclusion on? I'm not, BTW. And how are you bi-cultural?

Yes, I would like some links or sources you can refer me to.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

These explosions in Saudi Arabia were most probably made by their secret service in order to use it as a pretext for a crackdown on terrorists and islamists.

It was one of the effects of the Iraq war that I've predicted in my article that is linked here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=97775&cid=8357 310

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

>I don't trust Memri, I think they slant their coverage.

I don't think so. I have had some reference by reading some of these articles in non-MEMRI versions (not in English).

>I've seen awful anti-Muslim coverage in english editorials in the US as well, but they're not all that frequent. If I compiled them like Memri has done, you would think that everyone in the US despises Muslims.

This was not a coverage that accused Muslims in drinking the blood of Christian infants, like Muslim do about Jews resurrecting the dirty European medieval myth ...

>Egypt can say whatever they want, Bush took sides in the Israeli-Palestianian debate long ago.

It is no fucking debate, it is a war! and Bush made a CORRECT choice.

>But look at how they act. Egypt sent their foreign minister to Israel to speak with the Israeli cabinet. He was attacked by a group of Palestinians who cursed him, threw shoes at him, and called for the resumption of Jihad in Egypt. Egypt sounds far more moderate then, don't you think?

How they act? Ask for who they act, and what were the results? They try to APPEAR a "peacemongers" to the West, but in reality they haven't achieved much because it was not their goal, just a lip service. They were not able to convince Palestinians to stop terror; they give a blind eye to smuggling of weapons from their territory to Gaza; they have recalled their ambassador from Jerusalem et al.

>The Muslim brotherhood, to my knowledge, didn't tell people who to vote for, but they did enjoin their followers to support religiously conservative candidates.

What is the difference?

>I fail to see the issue here, I thought a large portion of Americans voted for Bush because it was 'sinful' to vote for a pro-choice candidate.

It was more of their personal choice.

What you fail to understand is that EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT. I mean my basic reactions are different from yours, and an Arab or a Chinese is different from either (but they are much closer to each other because they both are from a completely hierarchical society). In this in the West everyone still decides for himself. In the East it is completely different.

If you GET this difference, your understanding of the world will jump tenfold. You'll be able to understand why Chinese were so stubborn in the story with air collision, you'll understand why most Chinese or Hindi employees prefer to talk to you directly instead of going to the boss or criticizing you in the meetings et al.

This is one more article of mine that explains a lot about modern "civil war" in the US and some of the causes of Israeli-Palestinian conflict not finishing yet: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/civilwar.html

>So I'm a leftist idiot? What do you draw that conclusion on?

2 things.
First, the way you talk about Bush and the US policy.
Second, the way most of your ideas have an underlying thought that everyone is the same. This simplification is typical for brain-dead leftists because they use the left, logical side of the brain too much.

>I'm not, BTW.

Are you a scientist then? ;-)))

>And how are you bi-cultural?

I live in the US, but I was brought up in different country and culture.

>Yes, I would like some links or sources you can refer me to.

Start with Konrad Z. Lorenz's "On Aggression" ( http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0156 687410/qid=1077609607/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/103-306963 2-8823857?v=glance&s=books ), you'll be able to find it in a library. This book will give you some underlying principles even thou these in power has vilified it and his ideas. I was lucky to find some articles in my native language by a scientist who was able to develop these ideas further and explain a lot of how humans, states and societies operate.

Then read this: http://www.geocities.com/protopop_1999/treatise.h

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[sonamchauhan]

An OP is "original poster" - the person whose post sparked off this discussion thread.

Now, if the US demands that a government lie, or that it hides the truth, that is wrong - I am opposed to that. I am saying the US is allowed to demand that Islamic countries that take it's money work against *evil* and malicious *lies* that spreads hatred (I am sure you *know* there is a lot of that in Islamic countries). Why would you be opposed to this? It does work - see Pakistan. What exactly would make Pakistan a bad example - it is like most Islamic countries. Most Pakistanis I know admire Musharraf.

If countries still want to spread hatred from Govt. papers, they should have enough self-respect not to take American money.

> There is freedom of religion in Islamic countries. There are Hindus living in Saudi Arabia...

Tolerating foreign expatriate workers is one thing - they will be sent back one day. However, no Saudi citizen can become a Hindu or a Jew.
-----
From http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2003/24461.htm

The country is ruled by a monarchy with a legal system based on Islamic law (Shari'a). The Government does not provide legal protection for freedom of religion, and such protection does not exist in practice. Islam is the official religion, and the law requires that all citizens be Muslims. The Government prohibits the public practice of non-Muslim religions. The Government recognizes the right of non-Muslims to worship in private; however, it does not always respect this right in practice, and does not define this right in law.

-----

How can Islam offer one freedom of conscience or religion when the penalty of converting away from Islam is death? Please consider these deaths Islam is responsible for:
-----
http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/apostacy.html
* Iran

Ruhollah Rowhani, 52, was executed in 1998 for converting to the Baha'i faith from Islam. The US State Department has called on Iran "to protect the lives of 15 other imprisoned Baha'is. Three of them, Ata'ullah Hamid Nasirizadih, Sirus Dhabih- Magadamme and Hidayad Kashifi, have already been sentenced to death. Moderate President Khatami can do little to help as the courts are controlled by religious hardliners.

* The Reverend Mehdi Dibaj had converted from Islam to Christianity 45 years ago. On 21/12/93 he was sentenced to death on charges of apostasy. Released on appeal his body was found on 5 July 1994. The Reverend Haik Mehr, Superintendent of the Church of the Assemblies of God, who had campaigned against Dibaj's death sentence was found dead on 20/1/94. On 2 July 1994 the body of the Reverend Tatavous Michaelian, Chairman of the Council of Protestant Ministers in Iran was found with several gun shots to the head.

* Egypt

We wish to raise what, at first glance, may appear to be an inconsequential or even humorous matter [at least in Australia where a good proportion of partners are unmarried]. A Cairo court has ordered the divorce of a couple who wish to stay together. Islamists have claimed that Professor Nasser Hamed Abu Zaid is guilty of heresy in writing that "Islam's teachings should evolve with changes in society." However, a Muslim woman cannot be married to a heretic, a non-Muslim. He and his wife, Ibtihal, also an academic have appealed against the ruling and can remain together for the time being. However if the prosecution stands, they could lose their jobs or even be killed .by fanatics as "adulterers ("living in sin") or as apostates ("deserters of Islam") [From "Some Islamic History]
-------
From : http://www.j-e-s-u-s.net/Jesus/evangelo/thecost.ht ml

Executed in Iran

In Iran apostasy carries a legal death penalty. In December 1990 Hossein Soodmand, a Christian convert from Islam, was hanged for apostasy in a state execution. His body was buried in a cemetry for outcasts.

Killed by her own brother

Even

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

I've seen editorials in the US advocating "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." I've also seen editorials that say not to trust Muslims, Muslims are barbaric, Muslims are a fifth column in the US. I will condemn that Saudi "Blood Libel" editorial, but don't be so blind as to say the same thing doesn't happen in the US.

Bush made a correct choice in the Israeli-Palestinian issue? I think his Road Map was overall good, but "correct" is subjective, Israeli hardliners hated it.

Quit calling me a leftist. I don't think that everyone is the same, that would be stupidly dumbing everything down. I talk about US policy the way I do because I am an outraged conservative (who registered Republican long ago) who did not support this war and feels that the country is slow to conclude that it was a mistake.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

While I do think that the books you cited have some merit (and they look informative), you should perhaps read books written by Muslims. I doubt they fully understand the motives of Muslims if they aren't one. Big difference in my experience

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

I don't *know* that there are lots of evil and malicious lies in Islamic countries. If there are, then I'm against that as well. Pakistan is a HORRIBLE example to use. Are you going to say the same thing when the people finally overthrow him for betraying his own people, as the Pakistanis see him? They are angry at him. Some Pakistanis admire him, but they are angry that he is doing more mass arrests than John Ashcroft. They are angry that he supported the war against Afghanistan. You should see the news there, you see a lot more dead Afghani children than CNN lets us see. He's blocking democratically reached laws that the people support.

No, Islam doesn't allow people to convert to other religions, because it views them all as false. Not everyone sees it as a Capital Crime, however. Don't assume what the Saudis do is automatically what all Muslims believe. The reason they executed them was because all the converts they had in the past became enemies to the State. I'm not condoning it, just telling you their reason.

It appears that if you want to convert to another religion, then leave first. They have a state religion, just like many European countries.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

>I've seen editorials in the US advocating "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

What was the newspaper? Some Christian one for fanatics? There would not be any editorial like that in a significant and respectable newspaper.

Also, press in the US is not controlled by the government.

>I've also seen editorials that say not to trust Muslims, Muslims are barbaric, Muslims are a fifth column in the US. I will condemn that Saudi "Blood Libel" editorial, but don't be so blind as to say the same thing doesn't happen in the US.

Again, press in the US is not controlled by the government, and .

>Bush made a correct choice in the Israeli-Palestinian issue? I think his Road Map was overall good, but "correct" is subjective, Israeli hardliners hated it.

Americans don't understand what is going there at all; Europeans do, but they are really easy with the idea of crucifying Israel in order to wrest Arab markets from Americans. Regular population is dumb in both places. The only solution to end the war is a transfer of Arabs out of Palestine.

>Quit calling me a leftist. I don't think that everyone is the same,

Yeah? Whoi was telling about press as if press has the same role and is perceived the same way in both Arab world and USA?

>I talk about US policy the way I do because I am an outraged conservative

Frankly speaking, you sound more like a Muslim who lives in Europe or the USA. I can understand that life suddenly became uncomfortable for you, but it still does not mean you're right in our argument.

>(who registered Republican long ago) who did not support this war and feels that the country is slow to conclude that it was a mistake.

This war was mandatory for the long-term survival of the USA and the world.

> While I do think that the books you cited have some merit (and they look informative), you should perhaps read books written by Muslims. I doubt they fully understand the motives of Muslims if they aren't one. Big difference in my experience.

Hey, man, you don't understand the fact that I look at the deeper level. It is not about Muslims or not Muslims (and most "motivations" are just rationalizations of certain deeper motives that only a psychologist or ethologist can uncover), it is about civilizations built on k- or R-strategies.

This is why I think this entire "Israeli-Palestinian peace process" is a sick joke and crap; it is self-deception for anyone who thinks this will end up in a long-lasting peace.

Agreements with Arabs (and anyone else whose ideology is based on R-strategy) are not worth papaer they are written at - just look at the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.

Palestinians don't want peace; they want only victory, and they are ready to put any amount of bodies to achieve their goals. Also, their whole self-identity and "natianal idea" is in this war; any peace agreement will be just a step to regroup and gather forces before starting a new war (look at Egypt that arms itself for 20 years; look at what happened after Arafat got power).

Being a "Warrior civilization", they will never have "peace advocates" at power; only these who can show strength can be at the helm. After all, this is hyerarchical society.

This is why I want you to read the books. Unfortunately, you most probably don't know Russian, otherwise I'd give you a couple links that would totally transform your view on the world and society, but you still can pick up some pieces of information from English language sources (like ones I gave you).

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

The editorial was here, written by Ann Coulter, popular Fox News 'expert' who has also been on CNN a few times as well. This was a syndicated piece she wrote.

Point of Order, transferring all Arabs out of Palestine is an extreme option, and unfair to the millions of Palestinians. If that happened, terrorism would skyrocket. What would stop people then from more attacks? They already lost their homes and livelihoods, and probably some family members in that transfer.

If you think this war was mandatory, then you are the only person I know of who believes that. And the facts are looking less in your favor daily. Didn't Bush make these plans since the day he was inaugerated, according to ex-White House officials? Didn't Cheney and Rumsfeld create such a scenario in a think-tank in the 90's?

There are millions of Palestinians, are you going to say that none want peace? So are you going to be so blind as to say Israel wants peace, but Palestinians don't? That's an awfully big generalization, and an incorrect one considering the PA backed the Road Map, and Palestinians helped author the newer Geneva Accords.

I'm not comfortable with your perception of Arabs as this 'warrior civilization.' That pushes aside centuries of history and progress that they have. I know it's common to call your opponent stupid and claim that they are good for nothing, but that isn't right. Palestinians have the highest number of PhDs per capita in the world. The ones I have seen are nice people, they do want peace and don't support the terrorists.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

> The editorial was here, written by Ann Coulter, popular Fox News 'expert' who has also been on CNN a few times as well. This was a syndicated piece she wrote.

I agree with her on many points (even though disagree on some). I also understand that her response was called by the shock of the attack and loss of friend (look at the date of the article). Americans don't know how to deal with death.

For example, she is absolutely right on the point of freedom and trust. american airports security system was intended on people who do not want to hijack planes and slam them into buildings. Thus, now ALL OF US has lost part of our freedom because of these bastards.

And National Revoew is not one of the most popular papers, it is known conservative one.

>Point of Order, transferring all Arabs out of Palestine is an extreme option, and unfair to the millions of Palestinians.

Sure, it is unfair. I was not talking about fairness. But it is the only chance to stop the war. So, it is up to you to decide if you value peace more than fairness/"justice".

>If that happened, terrorism would skyrocket. What would stop people then from more attacks? They already lost their homes and livelihoods, and probably some family members in that transfer.

What will stop them? How about inability to do anything? As of now, they can infiltrate to Israeli territory because the border between territories and Israel is much less secure than the state borders, and blow themselves to pieces hoping to get something out of it.

After the transfer they won't be able to gain anything by exploding themselves (besides having much harder time to get into Israel).

The key in the East is the perception of strength. This way one who makes concessions is considered weak and thus nobody cares about his interests; he needs to submit to force. This is true for any "warrior civilizations", and this is what stupid Americans don't understand.

Israel's "painful concessions for the lasting peace" will be perceived as a weakness, and Arabs will become emboldened in their thinking that they can defeat and destroy Israel. This can be understood by anyone who knows at least anything about their (and not only their) mentality.

If you don't belive me, link the panic withdrawal from Lebanon with the Arafat's war that started about 3 months after that (these 3 months were spent planning and preparing for it). This link is the direct effect of showing weakness, and no amount of paper with "peaceful agreements" will change the mentality.

>If you think this war was mandatory, then you are the only person I know of who believes that.

This is probably because I'm extremely smart and can see more than many.

>And the facts are looking less in your favor daily. Didn't Bush make these plans since the day he was inaugerated, according to ex-White House officials? Didn't Cheney and Rumsfeld create such a scenario in a think-tank in the 90's?

Facts? Who cares about facts? ;-)
Seriously, I think it was mandatory not because of "WMD" that moght not have existed; this is the war to change some of the nastiest policies of the rulers in the region. In these countries tyrannical rulers report to no one and do crap they want.

This war has put them into different boat; they basically felt the wrath of Allah (who works in a strange ways as Gods do in all the religions). Maybe it will bring them some conscience. At least I know that Iran opened its WMD program to inspectors, Lybia decided to settle with the West and Saudies started cracking down on terrorism. Everything is exactly as I hoped in 2002 when writing this: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/iraq.html

>There are millions of Palestinians, are you going to say that none want peace? So are you going to be so blind as to say Israel wants peace, but Palestinians don't? That's an awfully big generalization, and an incorrect one considering the PA backed the Road Map,

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[sonamchauhan]

> Islam doesn't allow people to convert to other religions,
> because it views them all as false
In other words, Islamic states offer their citizens no freedom of religion.

> I don't *know* that there are lots of evil
> and malicious lies in Islamic countries.
Well, there are. For instance, several Arabic newspapers tried to attribute 9/11 to the Israelis rather than the Arabs. Pakistani school children are taught irrational hatred of Hindus in neighbouring India. Arabs schoolchildren are taught to hate Jews, and so on.

This sort of thinking is deeply ingrained within Islam itself. Islam teaches there will be a wholesale slaughter of the Jews by Muslims before the resurrection ... so does Christianity: in the Bible's Book of Revelation and other books earlier in the Bible, it is prophesised this slaughter will occur before Jesus Christ returns to establish to put an end to it and establish his kingdom on earth. Islam teaches that Imam Medhi and Jesus Christ will appear and lead the world to Islam ... but Christianity teaches that a fake (anti-)christ, and a evil false prophet will do miracles in the world to lead it astray and worship Satan (Shaitaan). Islam teaches you to fight: Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden and do not embrace the true faith until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued.

But Christianity - in the person of Jesus Christ - says: "But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you?"

In other words, the faiths are diametrically opposed. Both faiths claim to come from God. Both assure us that God will *preserve* His written word. But Christianity was revealed in full 600-700 years BEFORE Islam.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

Islamic states offer a degree of freedom of religion, but you and they will disagree on how much is enough. If you are a polytheist or a Hindu or Jew or Christian, they will allow you to keep your religion and worship whatever you want. That's mandatory according to what the Muslim leaders say. There were even Jews in Afghanistan, and they were allowed to worship in their own way. Israel has also had some religious intolerance lately. The Hebrew newspaper Haaretz reported that Israel isn't letting Jews convert to other religions.

I've seen several English newspapers also try to show that Israel may have had advance knowledge of 9/11. There even was an FBI investigation.

Eh, I'm sick of hearing how one side teaches hatred of the other side in schools. I want to see proof. I hear Hindus teach hatred of Muslims, and Muslims teach hatred of Hindus. Nobody can claim the higher moral ground here.

You're incorrect, Islam doesn't say that there will be a wholesale slaughter of Jews, and nothing like that before the return of Jesus(pbuh). They don't call it "resurrection" either. Islam says that when the antichrist (Dajjal) comes, many Jews, Christians, and even some Muslims will follow him. They're not singling out the Jews.

You're distorting what Islam says, and that verse is not talking about the coming of Jesus. You're unevenly comparing Christianity and Islam. Remember, the bible claims Jesus said "I came not to bring peace, but a sword. "

The faiths are NOT diametrically opposed. Come by to my town and say that to the interfaith services here. Yes, Christianity came before Islam as we know it, but Judaism came before Christianity. Your point? One faith is the expected next iteration of the last.

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[mr100percent]

Ann Coulter was Fired from National Review because of her extreme and insulting views. The NR originally defended her piece because it was apparently in response to such a shocking event, but she didn't back down from her statement even today.

I strongly diagree with you that it is the only way to stop the war by transferring all Palestinians out. With no further options for peace, ALL Arabs will then support war. It will create hundreds of Bin Ladens. Do you think the Saudis can crack down on citizend funding terrorism if EVERYONE does it? If Israel does that, they will be destroyed. And perhaps they would deserve it for such an extreme and unfair deed.

If you think that Arab culture is all about showing force, then you and Mr. Bush and Mr. Sharon should read more. Treating your opponent in such a disrespectful manner only increases hostility.

You telling me "I'm smart" won't make me roll over and believe your opinions. I think I can see more than many too, but I don't think you will trust me just by my allegation.

You think the US flexing its muscle will keep governments in line. Fine. But it will only encourage individuals and Non-governmental terrorist organizations. Al Qaeda recruiters are swamped with people eager to join now, after watching the carnage and blood on TV. Too bad American journalism is more sanitized. I think you should watch the BBC or Al Jazeera more and tell me if that doesn't shake your opinions.

Some Christians feel non-Christians are inferior, some Jews feel non Jews are inferior, some Hindus feel non-Hindus are inferior.

Your article from 1911 didn't help me understand Arabs any better. Go see my article above.

Mike Hawash is a can of worms, I don't think we should open that. Perhaps the fact that the US was unfairly aggressive got to him. I warned you, starting wars leads to more people joining terrorists. (IF he did, and I didn't follow the case)

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[Poligraf]

> Ann Coulter was Fired from National Review because of her extreme and insulting views. The NR originally defended her piece because it was apparently in response to such a shocking event, but she didn't back down from her statement even today.

You confirm my point of view that extremist views are not a part of the mainstream American press.

>I strongly diagree with you that it is the only way to stop the war by transferring all Palestinians out. With no further options for peace, ALL Arabs will then support war. It will create hundreds of Bin Ladens.

Plain wrong. MOST Arabs ALREADY support war, and they supported it since creation if Israel. As for Bin Ladens, do you know how many terrorist leaders tried to attack Israelis and Jews worldwide?

They were able to do so only because it was allowed and encouraged by their government and Leftists from all over the world (often on the money that Soviet Communist leaders underpaid to my working parents).

>Do you think the Saudis can crack down on citizen funding terrorism if EVERYONE does it?

They can easily crack up current radicals, and thinking ALL will do it is a very big stretch. MANY might whine and yeall, but only a few will DO something.

>If Israel does that, they will be destroyed. And perhaps they would deserve it for such an extreme and unfair deed.

Oh, poor Palestinians! Next step for you to is to declare how they can do terrorism because they are so unhappy, as leftists do!

Fairness is crap; stopping the war is more important. And moving Palestinians out will lead to increasing the probability of peace whether giving them territories will lead to further war and increase of probability for destruction of Israel (as practice has shown).

>If you think that Arab culture is all about showing force, then you and Mr. Bush and Mr. Sharon should read more. Treating your opponent in such a disrespectful manner only increases hostility.

Bullshit. Force is the language Arabs understand as the practice shows. This is how YOU get respect from them.

As for the author of this article, he, suffering from a "need of approval", confuses approval with satisfying your goal. No one will doubt that Arabs will be afraid and vent these fears. However, it is much more important that the governments start cracking down on terrorism and smartest leaders (Caffafi) make peace with the West.

Leftist idiots whine about "everyone needs to be made happy in order for them to love us" whether realists understand that in hierarchical cultures then more you give someone then more they demand, as stupid European liberals learned in 1939 (and in 2000, when Arafat started his war - http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.a sp?ID=1833 ).

Also, about the article. Author is contradicting himself. On one hand, he calls for appeasing TV-watching Arabs by doing steps they would like and PROVING them something (pages 2-6). On the other hand, the first page says directly that it is pretty much futile task ("Because the administration is right about the political, social, and economic stagnation afflicting much of the Arab world, the way out of the dilemma should not be to return to the traditional "realist" course of pursuing U.S. security interests through strategic alliances with local authoritarian regimes. Nor would a change in U.S. policy toward Israel and the Palestinians be a panacea, as the lukewarm regional reaction to the Bush team's promotion of its "road map" for Middle East peace demonstrates".). Appeasing won't work with these who is full of "conspiracy theories" - just look at these Americans who believe that government/corporations are evil. It is a belief that one can't dispell.

His proposal to promote democracy directly is also not a very smart one. It will really undermine and alienate current Arab governments, and they are ones controlling the flood gates of terrorism.

I think that this phenomenon of TVsatio

Re:OK, mr. Troll ...

[sonamchauhan]

> the bible claims Jesus said "I came not to bring peace, but a sword. "
To suggest Jesus is counselling violence is to suggest Jesus tells men to murder their fathers... for the very next verses say:

"For I have come to turn
a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law--
a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'
"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me..."

Jesus is speaking about the high cost of following him - are you willing to pay it?
Responding more directly to your allegation - when soldiers came and arrested Jesus for his crucifixion, his disciple Peter drew his sword and injured one of them. Jesus then expressly forbade him saying: "put the sword back in it's place - those who live by the sword shall die by the sword." Jesus later said "my kindgom is not of this world, if it was of this world, then would my followers fight". He also said "when someone slaps you on one cheek, turn the other cheek". Never are we permitted to violence. God has left *ALL* judgement to Jesus at the end of this age.

Don't get me wrong - the punishment for murder is still death and hell, as is the punishment for rejecting God, for adultery, for sexual immorality, for theft and lies, homosexuality... However God in his loving kindness to all allowed his Son to be a sacrifice for all who would repent, even the most wretched of murderers. We are forbidden to inflict God's judegement on them - that is left to Jesus - we are *commanded* (NOT "requested") to forgive those who even kill and persecute us.

> If you are a polytheist or a Hindu or Jew or Christian,
> they will allow you to keep your religion and worship whatever you want.
> That's mandatory according to what the Muslim leaders say.
The level of tolerance varies with the verses as this link points out. However, Islam takes God's commands (remember what Jesus said about turning the other cheek), and takes it and changes it so that it appeals to our earthy nature ("if someone slaps me, I *should* be able to slap them back").

> Islamic states offer a degree of freedom of religion,
All Islamic countries offer non-Muslims is a very superficial tolerance as long as they stay "subdued". But God help non-Muslims who preach their faith, or a Muslim who converts away from Islam -- death sanctioned by Islam (i.e. Murder) is what follows quite often. Why do you think so many Muslims avoid even listening to other teachings so much?

> Eh, I'm sick of hearing how one side teaches hatred of the other side in schools.
> I want to see proof. I hear Hindus teach hatred of Muslims,
> and Muslims teach hatred of Hindus.
Well, I have just the proof you need.

I was raised a Hindu in Bombay, India. When I went to school in the 80s, the state syllabus never said one word about religion - neither Hinduism nor Islam - because the state was secular. There are, and have always been violent Hindu fundamentalists, but do you think this man would permit irrational hatred to be taught in Indian schools? (he's Muslim)

However, Pakistan is another story...
Let a prominent Pakistani English newspaper describe the problem:...:
One should perhaps be 'shocked' to read in Professor A.H. Nayyar and Ahmad Salim's report on the State of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan (pub.2003 www.sdpi.org) that the intended perversion of Pakistan's education system and national curricula came about as early as November 1947, even before the death of the country's founder ....
It was during [the 80s] that hatred of India, Indians and Hindus, and of all other things not Islamic, was firmly

No censorship occurs on Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

This form of moderation is censorship

No form of moderation here is censorship. It can't be. Slashdot is a forum created by Cmdr Taco and his friends. Anything that goes on here is an expression of their free speech. It is their forum, and they can run it the way they want to.

Moderation is not "censorship" sure as the New York Times is not "Censoring" by excercizing its free speech by refusing to print kooky letters in its letter page.

Re:Really?

[kpharmer]

> While it took $45 million to achieve the crime rates Chicago has today, as an open source programmer,
> I have to think that they wasted about $42 million.

Sure - if the 'bunch of programmers' work for free. Odds are - that over $30 million of that total went to labor. Now - that is a pathetic and inflated figure - but most government projects are hideously bureacratic. And Oracle's hardly a lean and efficient contractor to work with ($300/hr isn't unusual for them).

Would open source have made a difference? Yeah, probably would have pushed the costs up even more. Oracle has far better parallelism, load, and partition management features than either mysql or postgresql.

So, open source has a lot of wins under its belt, but that doesn't mean it can out-compete closed-source on all fronts.

Detroit in 1967 had affordable housing

[Anonymous Coward]

and social factors including police abuse, lack of affordable housing

Detroit in 1967 had no affordable housing problem. Almost all of the housing stock in the city was occupied, which meant it was affordable.

Re: So we're "nuts" to consider all the angles?

[Osrin]

I can only apologize for my tone, I have a number of good friends in the Police force, here in Seattle, in London and in South Africa, it's not an easy life for them.

Post wan't funny. It was accurate.

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering that Chicago is, in actuality, the murder capital of the world, your post isn't funny. It's accurate.

Re:Post wan't funny. It was accurate.

[Belzu]

As if. Colombia has a couple of cities worse than this one. Not to mention Sao Paulo.

Re:Really?

[Dun Malg]

These are police officers, they don't have time to lean how to use whatever system you want to hack together. They want a picture menu on the screen that they can touch to get at what ever information they need.

Police officers are just like regular folks-- many of them have computers at home, and some even know how to use them! A "picture menu"? What are they, illiterate chimps? If my boss can learn to use a laptop, a cop certainly can.

the truth: GIS not cost-effective for police work

[xeo_at_thermopylae]

One reason is because police officers "on the ground" know where the "hot" areas are long before the criminal intelligence group runs statistics.

Also, GIS systems that use maps always have outdated and incorrect information: the map says a warehouse is at a location X but the officers from the area remind you that the warehouse was replaced by an apartment complex 3 years ago.

I did studies for a major metropolitan police agency for years, specializing in GIS. There was never a case where purchase of a GIS system could be justified. Nevertheless no less than 3 such systems were purchased by our department in an attempt to find a use. These costed millions of $; they're sitting in the police IT machine room unused today!

combine it with license plate OCR?!

[spage]

From the sidebar http://www.cio.com/archive/021504/edit.html

THE GUY IN THE SUV in front of us, stuck in Chicago traffic with about a million other cars, lives in Virginia, has not been arrested in the past several years, has one outstanding ticket for speeding (in Virginia), and is six months delinquent in renewing his registration.

I know this because I'm in a cop car, right on his tail. We've just entered his plate number into the MicroSlate notebook mounted on the center console of our unmarked cruiser.

Since patrol cops spend so much time running "make"s on license plates, I wonder if anyone has hooked cameras for red-light runners, speeding, and toll cheats up to a optical character recognition for license plates, and then onto the database. Instead of paying cops to harvest small amounts of data, pay them to act on automated data.

(I'm very aware of the potential for abuse in these systems if a cop wants to make your life hell; for a start, all data coming in and all queries need a full audit trail available to ombudsmen, police oversight boards, and defense lawyers.)

Re:so? chicago = murder capital.

[John Courtland]

That reminds me of a time I was walking down School Street just coming off of Clark to go to a restaurant. Some black guy was yelling "I'm being arrested because I'm black!" as two cops were cuffing him and another two were standing there. One of the arresting officers said, "Yeah, sure buddy, today is Black Day."

Re:the truth: GIS not cost-effective for police wo

[enrico_suave]

I don't think you understand the point and basis of using GIS combined with this type of data: performance measurement.

Anecdotal evidence is fine for a beat cop, but the decision makers in the department (or those FUNDING the police department) who make allocation decisions never get that information. I think more importandly is measuring SUCESS of the increased patrols in a meaningful way. People UNDERSTAND if you show them two maps of their neighborhood and if the violent crime indicator went from "DEEP RED" to a "Pleasent Peach"... or if the red migrated to some other neighborhood.

GIGO (garbage in garbage out) if you are using crappy maps with crappy data, how could one expect a positive outcome? If the department you were doing analysis/studies for purchased 3 different systems and "attempted to find a use" then that's indicative of other internal and process issues, that of course GIS won't magically fix. GIS is a tool not a panacea. Give a monkey a hammer it won't build a house (unless that's one talented monkey!)

*shrug* YMMV and it's not for every sized city, but there's a visualization power that comes when meaningful data is presented well through competent GIS maps.

It doesn't solve crimes for the officers, but it might help justify highering more officers, more specific patrol/equipment types, and measuring the quality of the enforcement (your tax dollars at work)

E.

PS It looks like my eyes glazed over at the initial article where they mentioned mapping =P mea culpa

LEGAL REALITY CHECK: Re:This is always the case.

[mikelieman]

RANT >

Case law has shown us many times that the Police have NO responsibility to protect YOU. In fact, if a Policeman makes a mistake, and KILLS YOU, often he will face no censure. [ Pick a hot-button-Cops-Kill-Innocent case to support argument here ]

Since that's the case, the Police have no DUTY to protect you, and you can't compell them to in any way, this "Contract" you speak of does not pass the FIRST test of contractual validity, namely, an exchange of benefits and responsibilities between the parties, which can be enforced.

You may believe you have exchanged the right to exact punishment for the protection of the State, but the policeman doesn't think that way. You're background noise.

Then you suggest that if I don't subscribe to your (Obviously Flawed) "Social Contract" theory I should consider moving.

Well, buddy, I was BORN HERE in New York. You got a problem with NEW YORK's Constitiution? IT doesn't seem to mention any of this crap you're talking about. In fact it exhorts us to EXPEL CIVIL TYRRANY

[Art. XXXVIII. And whereas we are required, by the benevolent principles of rational liberty, not only to expel civil tyranny, but also to guard against that spiritual oppression and intolerance wherewith the bigotry and ambition of weak and wicked priests and princes have scourged mankind,...]

We Citizens limit what our governments may do, because we know that they are filled with people JUST LIKE US, and as such, should not be trusted.

Oh yeah, and WTF does your close mean?

"Have fun, and please let the constitution hit you on the way out!"

I think that those who believe the "America: Love it or Leave it!" thing, aren't ready to admit to themselves that it's more like "America: Fucked by BOTH Political Parties AND Every Corporation with Enough Scratch To Attend The Rally"

Let me close this rant by saying: "If your Party is MORE IMPORTANT than YOUR NATION, You MIGHT be involved in a Conspiracy to Commit Treason..."
/ rant >

A lone paperclipman?

[Anonymous Coward]

And a lone paperclipman is going to destroy our freedoms?

Do you mean this obnoxious fellow?

Most cops don't

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people don't consider smoking marajuana or selling marajuana a federal offense, but the cops do

"Use/possession" is a drug abuse crime that is found, in different forms, on the state books. It is not a federal offense unless it is under certain specific circumstances (such as in a federal prison).

Cops tend to know more about the laws they are enforcing than the general public, and this includes marijuana laws. In other words, you are wrong: cops know these are violations of state (not federal) criminal codes.

We've read his work

[Anonymous Coward]

"Perhaps you should read some of his work instead of citing the usual anti-chomsky rhetoric"

We've read his work. Don't make the false assumption that if you read his work, you will adore him. Most who read his work reject it as the fiction it is.

He simply takes what to me looks like an objective view and points out that America is not as innocent in the world view as we like to think.

He is not objective at all. Remember, he uses a very subjective and intellectually invalid point of view (Marxism). Yes, America is not "innocent". Nor is it guilty of the numerous fabrications that spout from the imagination of Foamin' Noam.

Re:We've read his work

[ctxspy]

"We've read his work. Don't make the false assumption that if you read his work, you will adore him. Most who read his work reject it as the fiction it is."

Speaking for multiple people?...

Not that i could even verify that i'm talking to the same person considering you're hiding behidn the AC veil.

Out of curiosity, where do you stand politically.. Aside from disliking Chomsky.. Do you agree with US foreign policy? Domestic policy? The changes since 9/11/01?

-Tomaj

Re:We've read his work

[Anonymous Coward]

Out of curiosity, where do you stand politically..

You're going to resort to whitebaiting?

Re:We've read his work

[ctxspy]

I guess i'm unfamiliar with that term... I assume you mean that you think i was trying to make you say you're white?..

I didn't say "Out of curiosity, what race are you"..

-Tomaj

Chomsky in favor of genocide

[Anonymous Coward]

In one particularly embarassing example of his hatred, imagination, and love of left-wing despotism coming together, Chomsky came out in support of Pol Pot, and even went around lying about their genocide totals (making them much smaller than they actually were, in order to somehow make Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge look good).

When it comes to the Khmer Rouge atrocities, Chomsky is a sort of Holocaust denier. The reasons for his support of the Khmer Rouge are easy to see. the Khmer Rouge claimed to be marxist, and they hated the U.S. In Chomsky's simplistic worldview, that makes them heroes, and if they are marxist and hate the U.S., there is no way they can be bad. No way at all.

Re:Chomsky in favor of genocide

[ctxspy]

http://www.diacritica.com/sobaka/2003/chomsky.html

Ok, so Chomsky bit the bullet on that one...

I think the important thing to look at in that particular situation isn't the Khmer Rouge, it's the circumstance that led up to its creation.

What Chomsky was (maybe) attempting to do is draw attention to the fact that the U.S. perhaps engendered negative feelings by bombing the crap out of the country immediately before these people came to power.

In fact, that pretty much seems to be the goal of everything i've read so far. His main message is that actions have consequences, and that the U.S. tends to act in ways that make people not like us.

Now to that, you may reply "well i don't care if people don't like us" -- Which is fine, but don't be surprised then, that people commit terrorist acts against us as we do them.

Re:Chomsky in favor of genocide

[Anonymous Coward]

"I think the important thing to look at in that particular situation isn't the Khmer Rouge, it's the circumstance that led up to its creation"

Certainly. It was created by mainland China, and was in effect one of their armies.

"What Chomsky was (maybe) attempting to do is draw attention to the fact that the U.S. perhaps engendered negative feelings by bombing the crap out of the country immediately before these people came to power"

More selective memory. This overlooks the fact that the U.S. was forced to bomb when North Vietnam invaded Cambodia and used this as a new front in their invasion of the South. North Vietnam took the war to Cambodia.

"His main message is that actions have consequences"

The problem with that is, is that he never describes the actions accurately, he never describes the consequences accurarely, and he connects them with wild leaps of faith.

"and that the U.S. tends to act in ways that make people not like us."

This is probably true. Yet, he misreads even this, and is lucky if he ever describes things accurately. The people of southern Vietnam have a very favorable view of America and Americans for example (and where did they flee too when an enemy foreign nation finally took them over?). Rather goes against Chomsky's "totally bas-ackwards" and imaginative take on the Vietnam War.

In the case of the 9-11 terrorists, it is very accurate to say that they hate us because we defend freedom and democracy. This is anathema to an Islamist view in which mullahs are supposed to rule all and "infidels" are to be killed or converted.

Re:Chomsky in favor of genocide

[Anonymous Coward]

"Which is fine, but don't be surprised then, that people commit terrorist acts against us as we do them."

except that we didn't commit terrorist acts, especially against Al Quada.

Re:Chomsky in favor of genocide

[ctxspy]

I can't even respond to that completely ignorant comment.

Re:Really?

[Lord Kano]

There was clearly no need to shoot him to make an arrest (and in fact shooting him prevented him from being brought to justice at all, and was therefore very stupid).

The little boy that I was talking about was shot because circumstances made him appear to be a threat.

After he crashed his stolen vehicle, he started running away on foot, two police officers were chasing him. They had their weapons drawn, one of them tripped and when he landed he accidentally fired his pistol. The other officer heard a gunshot and turned to find his partner lying on the ground, he thought that his partner had been shot. He fired at the suspect, killing him.

Oh, and he was 12, for fuck's sake...

My heart goes out to his family, but he shouldn't have been out committing a felony. If I had caught someone trying to steal my vehicle, there is a good chance that I would have shot him.

LK

The real question:

[user no. 590291]

Type in an address--say, the Krispy Kreme on the corner or your neighbor's house--and up will pop a list of all reported incidents for that location. Access a known offender, and you'll get a list of his addresses and aliases, and high-res images of his mug shots and tattoos (tattoos are the criminal equivalent of bar codes and are put to the same use by the cops).

That's nice for cops to have--but every citizen should have online access to that information--it's all public record, after all. Why shouldn't I be able to check out the houses in the neighborhood I'm considering buying in for crime statistics? Or to check my prospective babysitter for priors (again, convictions are a matter of public record).

Re:Really?

[Lord Kano]

The drug laws in the US are insane. For example, we all know that a large percentage of paper money has cocaine residue on it. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you have one of these such bills. If you were to rinse it off in a swimming pool, you instantly have TONS of cocaine and if the law is interpreted literally, you can spend the rest of your life in jail for it.

That is insanity.

It was tried for photo radar tickets in BC

[WoTG]

Here in BC we used to have photo radar vans. That program was recently disbanded for various reasons, including operating costs.
One of the cost overruns was in that in the plan, OCR was intended to read the license plates from the photos of speeding cars. It never worked, and eventually it was replaced (or perhaps supervised) by a human operator. IIRC, the whole OCR fiasco cost millions in tax money to "develop" the software which just couldn't handle the task with enough accuracy to be completely trusted.

Granted, this was several years ago... software and hardware are probably better now. Plus for what you suggest, 100% accuracy isn't required.

Re:Really?

[dolo666]

Hehe. I'm not a troll, but sometimes it's funny when they take me *this* seriously.

Just to clarify my previous statements; I think it's good news for Chicago that the cops are spending money fighting crime. But my real problem was with the use of Oracle staff with their high billing. $300/hr is not uncommon for them, as another user previously stated. To me, it would be nice for them to try and use smaller firms an coordinate the efforts. Thinking about it, 5 or 7 years ago when this was likely planned, open source was still young and unrecognized by "the man", so maybe that's why they went this route.

But 2000 laptops? Touch screens? I'm in shock of the expense that this must have been. It seems like overkill to me. Maybe an automotive computer would have cost less? like build a desktop into the cruisers. That would be way less because the components are less expensive by about 1/2. And that was my main point.

If other police agencies follow Chicago, I would like to see them use more open source tech, where possible. I'm a firm believer in Open Source, as most of the /.'ers are. It can grow up and take on the big closed source companies, and society is beginning to see that, what with the IBM Super Bowl ad, and everything.

The Chicago cops managed to get a nod from /. for doing what they did, but maybe the future policing could try to come up with some kind of open model of thin-client wireless network management that happens to be open source.

Why?

So that programmers can learn how to handle a situation like law enforcement programming.

So that the system is secure.

Like how long before someone pringles the cops and puts an APB out on people? Or adds to rap sheets? Or worse?

"Chicago Police Admit to Spying on Activists...."

[Anonymous Coward]

Chicago Police Admit to Spying on Anarchists and Activists

Who needs COINTELPRO when the local cops can do the job of spying, infilitrating, and disrupting the activities of any grassroots organization?

The police do not exist to protect your interests, but simply to further their own.

They will increase arrests just to make themselves look better. Cities that have low crime, and a well-funded police force usually resorts to the police just harassing random people who happen to look at them.

Re:"Chicago Police Admit to Spying on Activists...

[Anonymous Coward]

Who needs COINTELPRO when the local cops can do the job of spying, infilitrating, and disrupting the activities of any grassroots organization?

With good reason. The organizations named were treasonous "violent overthrow of the government" organizations, or neo-soviet fascistic groups. I'd expect them to spy the hell out of such groups, along with spying the hell out of the Klan and neo-nazis.

Try a factual site next time

[Anonymous Coward]

"but nobody [commondreams.org]"

Next time, try a factual site as a source. Commondreams is a fringe nutjob editorial site: it is opinion and fluff, not fact.

What about the massive job losses

[cyril3]

How come its ok for IT to lead to massive job losses among police and support staff as they find cheaper and more efficient ways to use records but its a big No No when IT companies do the same to program production by having work down overseas.

Or is it like OK for them, they're only clerical. They can get a McJob or retrain or something.

Re:Really?

[Ironica]

still mad about that speeding ticket?

The one I got in July 1998? Hardly. The cop was more than generous; they made sure it was low enough that I could go to traffic school. Of course, I was white and female.

I know quite a few cops and people just love to cling on to the image of corrupt cops from TV. most cops are cops because they do want to make a difference. They want the world to be safer.

Which is why they use the dropsy method to arrest people that they, in their heart, know should be behind bars. They may be right. It's still illegal and unethical for them to do it.

They don't all do it, but it is a pretty common practice, especially in large urban areas.

how many cops do you know personally?

It matters exactly how that I only know two or three cops personally? Analysis of our legal and law enforcement systems isn't necessarily helped or hindered by this bias.

How many "criminals" do you know personally? By that I mean people who have done jail or prison time, whether or not they actually committed a crime. Is that relevant to your perceptions of the criminal justice system? Why or why not?

Concealed Carry lowers crime...

[Anonymous Coward]

A well armed populace reduces crime.

'Gun Free' Zones become sheep pens for criminal exploitation.

So sign up Chicago Citizens to the NRA!

Good Things Bad Things

[baldcamel]

Surely there is no doubt that if this information fell into the wrongs hands it could be dangerous. Vigilantees, Master Criminals recruiting, malicious entering / tampering of data etc. However, new (and new uses of) technologies have always been used in law enforcement, and often with positive results. I am sure that there are cases of people being arrested on one charge and being let go, while they are wanted on another charge. Could this system stop that? Of course it could just result in lazy policing .. "We have this crime. Who do we have in the database. Perfec t match now off to the courts." As citizens we want lower crime rates, and if this helps should it not be supported? But of course it may not stop the people commiting crime in the first place.

they already have

[CAIMLAS]

They already have fallen into the wrong hands. Just because those hands don't seem to be making immediate use for the data does not mean that those people should have that data.

Local law enforcement would probably be the first 'authority' group of people to start taking advantage of the populace, as doing so is relatively easy due to the proximity of space - they don't need to go half way across the country to smack someone down, they can do it as easily as they can go to the 7-11.

Good Grief, where the heck...

[Anonymous Coward]

... is the (+1 Funny) for this?

logically unconnected facts?

[Maljin Jolt]

I don't see the causality between fact the Chicago police has some database and fact the Chicago crime rate actually dropped. First, it should be logically proved that having a particular database should lead to crime rate drop and not having a database should not lead to crime rate drop. Otherwise, having a database is irrelevant to crime rate.

Anyway, a typical police state propaganda. You can use it's formal logic flaws to detect it. Anytime in history and anywhere in the world.

Canadian gun registry

[Sivaram_Velauthapill]

Just for reference the Canadian gun registry cost around $1 billion. Most of it supposedly is due to IT cost overruns (although I'm not 100%). Granted that the scope of the projects are different (Chicago is one city; the gun registry is national).

I'm not dissing the registry; I'm just comparing how IT is used by police and the government.

Sivaram Velauthapillai

SCMODS

[gdad2]

Elwood: I bet these cops got SCMODS.
Jake: SCMODS?
Elwood: State County Municipal Offender Data System.

Re:so? chicago = murder capital.

[Anonymous Coward]

And you had a point, I assume?

No paranoia involved

[Anonymous Coward]

"Then pray tell, why did the US government round up nearly 2000 Muslims after 9/11?"

The ones rounded up were criminal trespassers (illegal aliens) for the most part.

"Why are some still there even today? (and why did the NY Times and Washington Post stop reporting on it?"

"I think that the US has sharply overreacted in this case and panicked the Muslim population in this country."

They deserve to be panicked. I live near a large Muslim communiy, and have for years read the monstrous antisemitic "kill all the jews" letters that the "community leaders" send to the newspapers. This particular community has been lacking in tolerance. Even "moderates" such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations are quite antisemitic, putting the extermination of the Israelis high on their list.

"Or when Jerry Falwell called Islam's prophet Muhammad (pbuh) a terrorist?"

I'm not sure he was a terrorist, but Muhammed was one of those nasty warlords like Alexander or Genghis Khan. You are probably not aware of the fact that he exterminated the large Jewish minority in the Arabian peninsula, and thanks to his edict, being Jewish to this day is a crime in Saudi Arabia. Unlike Khan and Alexander, Muhammed made up his own religion to justify his bloodbaths. He was a Hitler-like figure. The Muslim faith is the only major religion which was founded by a war criminal. The Muslims hypocritically whine about the Crusades of the Christians, wanting us to forget the bloody Arab invasion that engulfed the Israel area from the east a few hundred years before. "Peace be unto him" indeed.

"Why is it that Muslims who wrote editorials condemning terrorism in all forms"

I read these editorials. They refused to condemn anti-Jewish terrorism because they consider this new progrom to be "liberation" not terrorism.

"Why is the deportation rate for all illegal immigrants down by 25% and the deportation rate of Arabs and Muslims is UP by 75%"

There has been a lot of terrorist infiltration among this community, but not others.

"The US needs to realize that it can act too aggressive sometimes. Things like this have ruined the US's reputation abroad"

No, they have not. The actions have made hatemongers and bigots even angrier, but they were already angry.

"and the war was obviously a bad move in international relations."

It was an excellent move. It dealt with the root cause of terrorism.

"Heavy-handed stuff like this generates even more hatred and more terrorism."

The irrational hatred already existed. However, dealing with the root cause of terrorism has reduced the terror.

It is completely factual

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't even respond to that completely ignorant comment.

It is completely factual. Almost all of the examples of "terrorism by the U.S." given by Chomsky are false.

How about the right hands?

[mmeotti]

Using crime data to improve operations/performance is the "big thing" in law enforcement these days. New York probably started it all with CrimeStat, or whatever they called it.

The big issue is will the police and city governments let citizens get their hands on this data (and just the crime, location and other relevant info is enough for me, i don't want to invade privacy, etc.) so neighborhood groups, the media, whomever can map this stuff to better understand what's going on in their communities. Tip O'Neill said "all politics is local", and so is law enforcement and a lot of other city services.

There is a lot of "place-based" analysis that could be very powerful for residents to get their hands on and confront the powers that be with the real info on what's going on in their community. I've heard police chiefs talk about their exciting GIS initiatives to improve tactical operations but as soon as you talk about public access they tend to get quiet. I wonder why??

Nope, different program

[Poligraf]

If you read Conrad Lorenz's "On Aggression" for the theory and "Savage Nation" as an example, you'll understand that the extreme rightists do not use guilt; their primary program is just "Us versus them". Leftist use this program too (calling themselves as one with a conscience ;-), but it is only their guilt-inspired psyche tells "You need to be impecable" (the way their guilt understands it).

Rightists just say "You're not one of us".

And Chomsky REALLY is self-hating Jew. As someone who is Jewish, I know this type very well ... It is a good example of whatever I said about guilt - many Jewish kids can't rationally explain hatreds towards them and thus assume this guilt ...

BTW

[Poligraf]

Your accusations of Bush about Venezuela might be a manifestation of this guilt; it reads like "Look, what our country is doing! We (I) are so bad!".

As for me, I think that Chavez with his populism, unpredictability and pro-Arab stance better be out.

Re:BTW

[stephanruby]

Your accusations of Bush about Venezuela might be a manifestation of this guilt; it reads like "Look, what our country is doing! We (I) are so bad!".

I'm glad you used the words "might be". I have no guilt about what we're doing. I'm a Libertarian. I don't share the socialist beliefs of Chavez.

Re:BTW

[Poligraf]

Libertarian or not, one can tell some stuff (or produce a certain thoughts) not knowing what is its foundation (Guilt, Judgement et al).

And the point is not in you liking or disliking Chavez; point is in you accusing Bush.

Re:BTW

[stephanruby]

"Libertarian or not, one can tell some stuff (or produce a certain thoughts) not knowing what is its foundation (Guilt, Judgement et al). And the point is not in you liking or disliking Chavez; point is in you accusing Bush. "

I understand your point and I agree that this kind of guilt does motivate a large segment of the population to be against the War.

However, I will reiterate that guilt is not what motivated me personally to reach this conclusion. You don't believe me. Fine. Your mind is your own to make. My very existence doesn't fit your limited view of the World. Therefore, there can only be two solutions. Either I do not exist as I am describing myself to you (therefore I am lying to myself or I am lying to you), OR it's your own view of the World and your own righteousness which is limiting your view of the World (and therefore I can not even begin to convince you). In the end, this is your own decision to make, I can only say so much.

Re:BTW

[Poligraf]

>My very existence doesn't fit your limited view of the World.

Not like that.

>Therefore, there can only be two solutions. Either I do not exist as I am describing myself to you (therefore I am lying to myself or I am lying to you),

Good possibility of you unknowingly lying to yourself (or, more precisely, your subconscious distorting your self-image). Russian proverb states that one can see a straw in somebody else's eye and not notice a log in his own one.
This is because mechanisms of psychological defence distirts your issues and the truth so that you can cope with them. This is why I have much harder time seeing my own issues in the realtime even after four years of spiritual studies.

And Guilt is a very treacherous thing; you might have one without actually feeling guilty. I have met a lot of people with htis program who were not feeling guilty, but it was guilt nevertheless.

>OR it's your own view of the World and your own righteousness which is limiting your view of the World (and therefore I can not even begin to convince you). In the end, this is your own decision to make, I can only say so much.

My view of the world has nothing to do with it. It is just my hunch about what is going on inside you. I don't want to argue, it is just an information that you might use to your gain. It is purely subjective, but I usually do not make mistakes with that; I'm something in between natural born and born again psychologist ;-).

Chomsky is a Jew-hating Jew

[Anonymous Coward]

"And Chomsky REALLY is self-hating Jew. As someone who is Jewish"

He is also a Jew-hating Jew. Not only does he minimize the catastrophe in Cambodia by underreporting what Pol Pot did and blaming it instead on the U.S., he has in recent years go to bat for actual neo-nazi "holocaust deniers" and their theories.

Re:Chomsky is a Jew-hating Jew

[Poligraf]

He is one of the examples that prove the point about leftists being brain dead regardless of their academic performance.

Re:Chomsky is a Jew-hating Jew

[Anonymous Coward]

He is also a Jew-hating Jew. Not only does he minimize the catastrophe in Cambodia by underreporting what Pol Pot did and blaming it instead on the U.S., he has in recent years go to bat for actual neo-nazi "holocaust deniers" and their theories.

The particular Holocaust revisionist you're talking about is not an Holocaust denier, he's an Holocaust revisionist. That's not the same thing.

When the WTC Towers fell for instance, we were getting initial estimates that 6,000 were missing and presumed dead. Now, we know that number to be less than 4,000. That number may have been revised downward, but that massacre was not denied.

In the case of the Holocaust, there is some controversy about the actual number of Jews who died. That number is important because it's being used to pay out actual reparations to Israel. Unfortunatly some neo-nazis have latched on to the idea and have polarized the situation even more by claiming that the holocaust never happened. That fact is unfortunate, however, this reason shouldn't be used to villify, do violence against, and destroy the lives of the historians that have actually called the numbers into question.

There is LITTLE freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

There is freedom of religion in Islamic countries. There are Hindus living in Saudi Arabia and Jews living in Pakistan, for example

There is a little freedom, just as blacks in the old south had a little freedom. However, there are laws in Saudi Arabis greatly limiting the free speech of the Hindus. Pakistan has a legal system set up where murder of a Muslim is a much worse crime than murder of a non-Muslim, and it also restricts the free speech of these Jews.

The Islamic law system of "sharia" is designed specifically to punish people who are not Muslims in order to get them to convert. In the great old Muslim empire of the past, Jews paid a special tax just for being Jewish.

Re:There is LITTLE freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

Pakistan is a mess, they're a dictatorship. If anything, I wish they were MORE Islamic, and punish murder equally and allow freedom to speak against the government.

Your idea of Sharia is just plain wrong. That's not the point at all. Sharia is supposed to be Islamic law for Muslims. Non-Muslims are exempt, but pay taxes for a number of reasons. First, the Muslims under shariah must pay mandatory charity, so this balances it out. Second, the tax exempts them from the compulsory draft. Third, if they pay, the Islamic state protects the non-Muslims because they are therefore citizens of the state.

The Chavez coup

[Anonymous Coward]

If there is anything to fault GWB for, it is failing to support the pro-democracy forces enough. It is a real tragedy that Chavez managed to seize power again.

Re:The Chavez coup

[stephanruby]

No, the dictature of the democracy is what put Chavez in power this last turn. He was running against an incumbent and yet he still managed to get 70% of the votes (I don't remember the exact percentage, but it was overwhelming).

Pro-abortion

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought a large portion of Americans voted for Bush because it was 'sinful' to vote for a pro-choice candidate

You mean pro-abortion. Voting for a pro-abortion candidate makes sense if you are for human rights. The "choice" of being able to dismember children is quite barbaric.

The GOP, once again, is ahead of the curve on this one. In 1864, they also got in trouble for being "anti-choice" on the issue of owning slaves.

Re:Pro-abortion

[stephanruby]

You mean pro-abortion. Voting for a pro-abortion candidate makes sense if you are for human rights. The "choice" of being able to dismember children is quite barbaric.

It can be debated at which point the fertilized egg becomes a "child".

Either way and with either side of this debate, the truth is being manipulated and twisted, and frankly your post is not helping either.

Re:Pro-abortion

[Anonymous Coward]

"It can be debated at which point the fertilized egg becomes a "child"."

"Child" is a subjective term used at many stages along the human lifespan. It cannot be debated, however, when the new human being comes into being.

But why bring up "fertilized eggs"? If all abortion is banned except for these, almost all abortions will be banned: abortion of "fertilized eggs" is rare and unusual.

Re:Pro-abortion

[stephanruby]

"Child" is a subjective term used at many stages along the human lifespan. It cannot be debated, however, when the new human being comes into being.

Child is subjective term, yes, but it is being used in this debate precisely because most people associate a grown-up child to the term.

But why bring up "fertilized eggs"? If all abortion is banned except for these, almost all abortions will be banned: abortion of "fertilized eggs" is rare and unusual.

I guess you never heard of the morning-after pill. The morning-after pill, by the way, is vehemently opposed by pro-lifers.

Re:Pro-abortion

[stephanruby]

It cannot be debated, however, when the new human being comes into being.

When does a human being come into being? If the debate is over about this question, then certainly noone told me about it.

He's a fascist dictator

[Anonymous Coward]

Chavez is nothing but a fascist dictator. He has often declared his intent of modeling Venezeula after Castro's Cuba, a totally democracy-free place. Toward this goal, he has been systematically dismantling democratic institutions (such as they are) in Venezeula.

If you like his 70% victory, you'll love the 100% wins he'll get in the future once he has outlawed opposition parties.

"Chavez is very popular in Venezeula: it is the law"

Re:He's a fascist dictator

[stephanruby]

Chavez is nothing but a fascist dictator. He has often declared his intent of modeling Venezeula after Castro's Cuba, a totally democracy-free place. Toward this goal, he has been systematically dismantling democratic institutions (such as they are) in Venezeula.

Chavez has been going after private property. Personally, I'm opposed to this, but I'm not going to start lying about him and saying that he's dismantling democratic institutions.

If you like his 70% victory, you'll love the 100% wins he'll get in the future once he has outlawed opposition parties.

Chavez doesn't need to outlaw his opposition parties. He won with a huge margin of votes against an incumbent. Now that he is himself the incumbent and now that George Bush is after him, Chavez will probably get a little more popular support, but he won't be getting that much more -- all the rich people/upper middle class people hate him.