Slashdot Mirror


LAPD Police Claim Helicopters Stop Crimes Before They Happen

HughPickens.com writes True Angelenos don't even bother to look up when one of the LAPD's 17 helicopters rattles their windows searching for a car-jacked Camry or an assault suspect hiding under a jacaranda but few doubt that more bad guys would get away without the nation's largest police helicopter fleet to help chase them. Now the LA Times reports that data shows that LA's helicopters are stopping crimes before they happen. Tapping into the data-driven policing trend, the department uses heat maps, technology and years of statistics to identify crime "hot spots." Pilots then use their downtime to fly over them, on the theory that would-be criminals tend to rethink their nefarious plans when there's "ghetto birds," as Ice Cube calls them, hovering overhead [explanatory video with annoying sound]. Months of data show that the number of serious crimes reported in the LAPD's Newton Division in South L.A. fell during weeks when the helicopters conducted more flights. During the week of Sept. 13, when the helicopter unit flew over Newton 65 times, the division recorded 90 crimes. A week later, the number of flights dropped to 40 and the number of reported crimes skyrocketed to 136, with rises seen among almost all types of crime, including burglary, car theft and thefts from vehicles. "It's extremely cutting edge," says Capt. Gary Walters, who heads the LAPD's air support unit. "It's different. It's nothing that we've ever done before with this specificity."

But Professor Geoffrey Alpert. a policing expert who has studied the use of police helicopters in Miami and Baltimore, says the choppers can deter crime in the short-term but criminals will likely return when they're not around (PDF). "You are deterring the criminals but you aren't getting rid of them and their intent. Those criminals could strike in a different time and place," says Alpert. "I mean that's the whole thing about random patrol. You see a police car and it's the same thing. You hide, he goes around the block and you go back to your breaking and entering."

29 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. LAPD Police? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is the LAPD so bad that they need a police force that exists just to keep them in line?

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:LAPD Police? by rmdingler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is the LAPD so bad that they need a police force that exists just to keep them in line?

      There is some historical evidence to corroborate your theory.

      Of course, it could be the LAPD needs to justify the huge expense of patrolling from Ghetto Birds instead of ground-based black-and-whites, and they're not at all bothered by the statistical insignificance of the small sample trotted out here as causation.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    2. Re:LAPD Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The LAPD Police are there to protect the PIN numbers for the ATM machines.

    3. Re:LAPD Police? by al0ha · · Score: 4, Informative

      The LAPD helicopters are annoying as hell, I freaking hate them. One of the problems is the LAPD buys military type helicopters that make a huge racket, when they could be using much smaller birds that are far quieter. Then they also fly super low, much lower than is necessary at most times. I live on top of a hill, and the g*d damn helicopters will fly directly over my house multiple times a night and perhaps no more than 300 feet above my roof, waking me and the entire neighborhood up. It totally sucks, and I do not believe for one second the helicopters deter crime whatsoever, that is completely irrational. Sure they might deter crime in that exact moment they are flying over, but do they really think the criminals are going, "Oooh, the helicopter flew over a while ago, I'm scared to commit a quick crime." Give me a break, that's total bullshit.

      The only time we've had any peace is when an independent entity audited the flight records of the LAPD helicopter squad and found multiple instances of abuse, like flying politicos and their friends around on tours. I can bet the copter pilots also fly around pretty girls they are trying to impress and make other completely needless flights. It's ridiculous...

      --
      Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
  2. Could be but, by invictusvoyd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd use a drone instead of a chinook and run a community program with the money saved on helicopter fuel .

    1. Re:Could be but, by UncleWilly · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Drones could broadcast helicopter sounds.

  3. Better than Minortity Report by Flavianoep · · Score: 2

    That story sounds quite better than Minority Report, as the would-be criminals won't even get to commit crimes or be arrested, so even them benefit from the aerial surveillance.

    --
    Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
  4. Pretty obvious by Chrisq · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So criminals will wait until the police pass by before committing a crime. Pretty obvious. .

    1. Re:Pretty obvious by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So criminals will wait until the police pass by before committing a crime. Pretty obvious. .

      Except that it is not "obvious". Most crime is opportunistic. Take away the opportunity, and you take away the crime. Criminals do not operate on a "quota system". The additional flights lowered crime over the entire period measured, so there is no evidence that criminals were just waiting for the helicopters to pass by.

    2. Re:Pretty obvious by FhnuZoag · · Score: 2

      Yeah. There's no evidence presented to back up the claim that criminals just do crime elsewhere or elsewhen. Obviously any law enforcement measure isn't perfect, but thus far all the data shows this thing works. Professor Geoffrey Alpert is just mouthing off.

  5. If you defund us crime will go up!! by Charcharodon · · Score: 5, Insightful
    LAPD Police Claim Helicopters Stop Crimes Before They Happen

    Translated LAPD Police tries to justify their bloated helicopter budget.....

    1. Re:If you defund us crime will go up!! by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you eliminated police entirely, reports of crime would *certainly* go down. If police simply stopped responding to calls, reports of crime would certainly go down.

      This is my problem with concluding that choppers deter crime from police crime statistics; while it seems plausible, "reports of crime" are just an approximate proxy for "incidence of crime". Gaming this has been an unfortunate consequence of "data driven" approaches to policing (see Campell's Law).

      Which is not to say that helicopters don't deter crime. It seems perfectly plausible. But it's also possible they cause crime to move elsewhere, timeshift ,or take forms which are harder to spot.

      This gets to how you use data effectively for anything. When something in the data jumps out at you, it's tempting to believe your initial interpretation of it because it's so compellingly satisfying. But what you really need to do is *test* that interpretation, beat on it as hard as you can. If it can stand up to that you really have something. There's a world of difference between "promising" and "conclusive".

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  6. You want a deterrent? by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Combine liberalized concealed carry with the police subsidizing the purchase of guns and ammo by law-abiding, poor concealed carry holders. Let them also use police shooting ranges for free as long as they're in good standing. Then, on the street, take a reflexively pro-CCW holder stance until the facts say otherwise.

    1. Re:You want a deterrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Combine liberalized concealed carry with the police subsidizing the purchase of guns and ammo by law-abiding, poor concealed carry holders. Let them also use police shooting ranges for free as long as they're in good standing. Then, on the street, take a reflexively pro-CCW holder stance until the facts say otherwise.

      The biggest problem with your idea is that the police will find it a lot easier to say "I thought he had a gun" when they shoot people. Or even just assault them.

      Tell you what, let's also require that for every person hurt by anything the government does(absolutely anything, justified or not), a government employee or family member will also suffer some equivalent harm. I'm not sure if it should just be those responsible in some way, or if it should be one big pot from the President on down, I would let it be split by entity, but there's too many branching responsibilities.

      The only thing I'm uncertain about is improper convictions, I worry that they'd refuse to admit them even more when they'd know somebody would have to go to jail in exchange. Maybe for every government employee who could have made a decision to change things there will be one also imprisoned. That might increase the fear enough to nip it in the bud.

      I'm not entirely serious with this idea. But I'm not entirely comedic either.

    2. Re:You want a deterrent? by Wootery · · Score: 2

      let's also require that for every person hurt by anything the government does(absolutely anything, justified or not), a government employee or family member will also suffer some equivalent harm

      Good idea, but let's make a small adjustment: the individual responsible for the harm should be the one punished, as that's only fair. And only wrongful actions should be punished, as punishing justified harm would obviously be idiotic.

      Oh, wait. That's on the books already, and it's certainly a damn sight less stupid than your suggestion of punishing random government employees for justified government actions.

    3. Re:You want a deterrent? by sumdumass · · Score: 2

      I'm currious. Are there any instances of concealed carry holders being shot by the police when carrying their weapon or not?

      It just seems to me that should happen more often than news reports indicate if shooting innocent unarmed people is as common as it is portreyed. Oh, i'm not disputing that it happens and i certainly believe we have coward cops who will shoot first and ask questions later. I just do not think it is as systemic as it is claimed.

  7. Angelinos are being groomed for droning by omems · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Once we accept the premise that continuous, warrantless, aerial surveillance reduces crime, they'll tout the benefits of drones: no pilot, less fuel...missiles.

  8. Re:Freedom, liberty and privacy, and the police by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think helicopters would work better than drones here because they're a visible and audible reminder of the police. I think seeing a police officer walking down the street would work as well. There are a bunch of impulsive people who will behave better, if they saw a cop earlier that night.

  9. Re:Freedom, liberty and privacy, and the police by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think seeing a police officer walking down the street would work as well.

    Seems to me that 20 years or so ago, that was the idea of choice for solving crime - cops walking (note that walking and driving are NOT the same) a beat.

    Worked where it was tried, but I think it was dropped when the Next Great Idea came along. Shame, really, since it actually would have gotten away from "the police is the enemy" notion that permeates entirely too much of our culture (with good reason, at time, but still a problem).

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  10. Re:Freedom, liberty and privacy, and the police by khallow · · Score: 2

    It depends on location, I bet. New York City, for example, starting implementing a lot of walking beats again about that time and they're still doing it as far as I know.

  11. Captain Obvious by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "I mean that's the whole thing about random patrol. You see a police car and it's the same thing. You hide, he goes around the block and you go back to your breaking and entering."

    No fucking shit. Thank you Captain Obvious.

    Perhaps I'm reading the tone wrong, but it seems like he's complaining. "Ugh, police oppressors! How dare they patrol neighborhoods and reduce violent crimes!"

    Isn't this kind of exactly what we want cops to do? Wander around, see if anybody's being beaten or mugged, or just be a visible presence to let the bad guys know somebody's watching? You'd prefer they left?

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    1. Re:Captain Obvious by mellon · · Score: 2

      As a general rule, it's preferable not to have continuous noise. I only ever spent a brief time in LA, but the helicopters were really disturbing. I wouldn't be surprised if the stress they cause increases violence and shortens lives. But the lives it shortens are civilian lives, so I guess it's okay.

  12. Re:Freedom, liberty and privacy, and the police by Wootery · · Score: 3, Insightful

    cops walking (note that walking and driving are NOT the same) a beat

    I've heard the same thing. I wonder if it's because walking is slower than driving (stop beating the guy for a second as the car passes), or if it's because seeing 'people' has more of an effect.

  13. Re:Freedom, liberty and privacy, and the police by gnasher719 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Worked where it was tried, but I think it was dropped when the Next Great Idea came along.

    In the UK, I'd explain that with the ridiculous "targets" based policies.

    Say you put a cop walking around in a really bad neighbourhood and suddenly crime there stops altogether. You think that's perfect. The people living there (except the criminals) think it's perfect. Life is good. Then someone higher up in the police force notices that this cop hasn't solved a single crime, and his target is to solve x crimes per month. So he is taken off the beat, crime returns, and he happily solves ten percent of the crimes and makes his target.

  14. Re:RAYYYYCCIIISSSTTT!!! by Roodvlees · · Score: 2

    Because they are not racist. Also I think the people living in the ghetto's are happy to see less crime. When they mount guns on the helicopters and start shooting whenever they think they see a crime, that's when you'll get protest.

    --
    Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
  15. 1984 by H0p313ss · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the far distance a helicopter skimmed down between the roofs, hovered for an instant like a bluebottle, and darted away again with a curving flight. It was the police patrol, snooping into people's windows.

    -- 1984, George Orwell

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    1. Re:1984 by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      Did we notice the fact that the helicopter was cruising at 5000 feet and wasn't looking into anyone's windows? Or is there just such a frisson at quoting 1984? One good turn deserves another, deal with this wisdom:

      "It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy."
      -- George Orwell, "1984"

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  16. Re:If helicopters become commonplace by mellon · · Score: 2

    It's not a novelty.

  17. The 'peaceful enjoyment of liberty' by Sir+Holo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The 'peaceful enjoyment of liberty' of hundreds of innocent citizens is being infringed to prevent a few car break-ins.
    These copters are LOUD. And in these 'pre-crime' patrols, they make liberal use of their spotlight, essentially treating ordinary citizens as criminal suspects. They even invade Santa Monica (independently incorporated city), circling endlessly for 3 hours at a stretch in the middle the night, depriving entire neighborhoods'-worth of a restful night of sleep.

    Oh, the best part, was on a radio interview show: The LAPD guy justified the practice on economic grounds! Wah, we just don''t have enough officers to patrol... Really? How much does a helicopter cost to operate? Maybe $300-500 per hour? Plus the two pigs along for the ride are getting salary. Could that money not be spent on neighborhood patrols on foot, or at least in squad cars?

    It's ridiculous.