Slashdot Mirror
NYPD To Replace Motor Fleet With Electric Scooters
XueCast writes "A few days ago, the New York Police Department, one of the largest police forces in the US, announced that they are planning to make New York greener by replacing their gasoline motorcycle fleet with the super-quiet and energy efficient electric scooters from Vectrix.
NYPD said that they will first road test four electric scooters from the Rhode Island-based electric vehicle manufacturer next month, and if the road test is a success, NYPD said that they plan to order more electric scooters from Vectrix to replace their less-than-green motorcycle fleet."
Motor fleet = Car fleet Motorcycle?
Why spend $11,000 on new motorcycles when that sort of investment in more efficient police cars would have a much greater environmental impact? (Not to mention savings at the pump) Traditional motorcycles don't use that much gas, and can easily get 2-3 times the mpg of a car. Halving the energy consumption of a motorcycle is nowhere near as interesting as halving the energy consumption of a car.
Since when were police supposed to be intimidating? They are supposed to be public servants that you can trust and feel comfortable around, not some militant force that will shoot you because you look at them wrong. Unfortunately this isn't the case in many places and your post validates how people (rightfully) perceive them.
For all bloggers thump their chests about blogs being the new way to report the news, they are in my view just a new way to talk about the news.
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
"Stop linking to blogs whose sole purpose is copy+pasting content from other sites and link to the source [cnn.com]"
Yeah! Stop linking to slashdot. Oh wait!
For all bloggers thump their chests about blogs being the new way to report the news, they are in my view just a new way to talk about the news.
What, you mean like slashdot?
I don't know about in NY but in the UK rush-hour a motorbike can travel through city-centre traffic at four times the speed of a car. Read 30mph average instead of 7. Don't underestimate the usefulness of going through narrow spaces either, many crimes have planned getaway routes that can only be negotiated by a small car, with a small clearance that you would only take at speed if you are not bothered about scraping the sides. I have also heard it said that if a motorcyclist refuses to stop it is almost impossible to give chase in a car, if there is no motorcycle available they just take the numberplate and call round later, when the bike is almost certainly "reported as stolen".
Public safety should never be something that gets compromised by poorly thought-out "green" initiatives.
"NYPD To Replace Motor Fleet With Electric Scooters" should read, "NYPD to Test Electric Scooters."
Yeah, they're big motorcycles. They only get 45 mpg in the city, and that's observed fuel economy, not some Science-Fiction EPA rating.
So, let's replace the most fuel efficient motor vehicle the NYPD has in the fleet because it's "less than green" and let's keep those cars, trucks, vans, helicopters, and who-knows-what else. You know, for the children.
With a maxium speed of 60 and a range of 68 miles at 25 mph what's the point? Either they are for chasing pedestrians or motorcycle escorts. The speed is only adequate for city streets for short trips. I'm assuming they are intended for traffic and parking tickets and are more a replacement for for the old Cushman type vehicles. They are hardly a replacement for motorcycles. They could servie some of the purposes that mounted officers did but they lack the high visibility that was a benificial feature of being on horseback. I really wish the article had gone into the intended use because it is a puzzle.
When the USA turns into a failed state like Sudan or Chad, where warlords & tribal leaders are fighting for control, then maybe you'll have something to complain about.
Crime rates have been trending downwards for quite some time now. The only thing that's been trending upwards are arrests for drug violations.
P.S. When exactly are these "more civilized times" you're referring to?
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Recharging batteries requires electricity, which in the US, is derived primarily from burning coal, which is worse ecologically than burning gasoline.
I bet you can't back that up with any facts. A modern coal burning power plant is probably 50% efficient or better and cleans its exhaust. A gas engine in a vehicle is about 20% efficient (ignoring the transportation costs of getting the fuel to the vehicle) and does very little cleaning of the exhaust.
The only reason coal is considered such an ecological threat is that we use so much of it. If we tried to produce the same amount of energy using gasoline (assuming we could build the refineries to make it all), that would be a true ecological disaster.
*sigh* back to work...
PPL are losing respect for the police, not for law and order. They would very much like to see it. The problem is that we have too many corrupt police, combined with police brutality. Even in the gangs, they know that they can buy more and more cops. And half of those that they can not buy, will beat them if given a chance.
As to the gun, the vast majority do not respect it. They fear it. That is two very different concepts. It is also part of the reason why more and more criminals are getting bigger guns.
Want ppl to respect the police? Then the police need to enforce the laws on themselves.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Well, I imagine that for a cop, intimidation is like his service revolver. It's there for him to use, but he's not supposed to make a habit of it.
By giving somebody a nightstick and a gun, you are presupposing there are circumstances in which he'll use them, rather than ordinary persuasion. If the moral imperative is to do your job with the least force possible, then intimidation fits right between reasoned persuasion and beating or shooting people. Saying cops should never intimidate members of the public is one of those things that sounds right, but you have to examine the alternatives in any particular situation.
If the imperative is to protect the public safety with the least force, then using intimidation where a lesser alternative is available is like drawing and firing a gun when there isn't a life at stake, only to a lesser degree. It is true that the public should not live in continual fear of the police, but occasional fear is not so terrible, provided that the police remain servants of the public. It's one thing to feel fear when you are speeding and see a cop parked on the side of the highway; it's something that either you can live with, or which you should change by voting in politicians who will raise the speed limit. It's another thing to be afraid that every time you talk to a police officer you might be "disappeared". Just because the situations feel somewhat alike doesn't mean they are alike.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
People have been repeating that mantra since time immemorial.
Agreed. Every generation thinks the next one will be the end of civilization. There are some great quotes from ancient Greeks to the affect.
When the USA turns into a failed state like Sudan or Chad, where warlords & tribal leaders are fighting for control, then maybe you'll have something to complain about.
This is crap. The "we're not as bad as China" has never eld any water. You can always point to someone worse, but that in no way mitigates how bad things are in a given place and we should always be looking to make things better by pointing out what is wrong and trying to correct it. Trying to excuse problems by pointing to others is a logical fallacy.
Crime rates have been trending downwards for quite some time now. The only thing that's been trending upwards are arrests for drug violations.
Crime statistics aren't too meaningful by themselves because so many things are crimes, including things we all do (speeding, swearing in public, having sex when not married). Laws are enforced or not and that can significantly influence the "crime rate." What I care more about are violent crime rates, since these are the real, serious offenses. Violent crime rates started going up in 2005, and have increased significantly in both 2006 and 2007 according to the FBI. It is disturbing as a societal trend but it actually fits with sociologists predictions. The strongest correlation with violent crime is wealth disparity. Wealth disparity has been increasing in the US, with the middle class shrinking, the upper class staying about the same size, but becoming richer, and the lower class growing. This trend boomed in about 2001, and after about the usual 5 year lag, violent crime rates have begun to boom as well.
You know what I find really sad? One of the most effective programs to reduce wealth disparity is socialized healthcare. Health care costs are the number one cause of personal bankruptcy in the US and costs of health care are a significant expense for the poor. Despite the clear statistical indications that this would lower crime rates, not a ingle politician on either side of the debate has had the balls to bring this topic up. They think anything that is a complex causality is beyond the comprehension of the voters, and they're probably right.
P.S. When exactly are these "more civilized times" you're referring to?
As to the original topic, respect for the police and the laws. Just the other day the cops started following a car I was in, then pulled us over when we tried to pull into our driveway. They claimed it was because our muffler sounded "a bit loud" but why then would they follow us around, through several turns before pulling us over? It was bullshit. They weren't trying to enforce a law, they were trying to pull people over in the hopes they could bust us for something. Previous to their following us, they were speeding, and changed lanes three times without using an indicator. When the police don't respect the laws or obey them, it erodes one's respect for both the police and the laws. When absurdly stupid laws are still on the books and occasionally enforced at the whim of those with power, it erodes one's respect for the laws.
I know an old, retired officer who is proud of the fact that he never broke any laws the entire time he was a cop. I know a dozen people who are cops today and every one brags about abusing their authority in a "funny" way and the fact that they can get away with breaking the laws whenever they want. My brother used to be a cop. One day he was puled over for speeding in his private car and when the cop saw who it was, he just chatted wit him and let him go, with no mention of the speeding. I'd say their is a trend towards lack of respect for police and laws in the US, and it is very justified by our current laws, enforcement practices, and police hiring practices. 90% of
How one looks at that equipment is going to depend on how they perceive the police. When I'm near a cop, I trust that person in general to use the equipment in a manner consistent with my safety, so long as I'm not attacking him or someone else. It gives me a sense of protection.
However, other people (including people in my own family) view cops as just looking for a reason to write them up, and see the equipment as a method of intimidation. Most cops that I talk to are happy to help and joined the force because they wanted to help. There are a few of them that are bad apples, but most are on the level.
They do get insular, but most of us do when we have experiences that differ from the norm and we have some people around who understand. When a firewall has to be rebuilt from scratch, I don't call my friends who work in customer service, because they won't understand. I do talk to friends who are at least in IT, because they will. That group tends to also back each other a bit more than others because we understand what can go wrong, and why there are alternative explanations that don't seem likely to the outsider (read: non-technical management), but which are perfectly logical (or at least understandable) to those inside. Cops get like that because they deal up close with people that may shoot them just because they don't want to spend six months in jail, or even just get a speeding ticket. Soldiers involved in combat often do the same thing, commiserating with each other rather than with their spouses, because their spouses won't understand.
I think both groups -- cops and civilians -- need to loosen up some and not be so suspicious. Relaxing the laws will help, as police won't have a long list to work from and civilians won't fear that there's something on the list that they don't know about.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.