Crime Thread

A catch-all forum for urban discussion. If it doesn't fit elsewhere, post here.
First unread post7017 posts
^ I didn't claim that.... try reading comprehension dude and chill out.
STLrainbow wrote:^ I didn't claim that.... try reading comprehension dude and chill out.
Ok my bad I️ must hav confused your tweet with another. By the way the stfu was not directed at you. I’m at beach with a drink in hand. Max chill has been achieved this week

Cheers!
^ I had no idea how things would turn out but my concern was if it passed only b/c of heavy turnout in SW City wards while getting rejected most everywhere else, then we'd have a more divided city this morning. .I think that was a reasonable concern but it carried more wards than I and a lot of others thought; Enjoy the chill!
I think the turnout numbers are evidence of the divide. The divide is basically between the enfranchised vs the disenfranchised. The disenfranchised have not been voting for years because they've got more immediate needs such as cannot get off work, find childcare, food instability and/or a wide-array of other frequent stresses, which in themselves, compounded over time lead to additional stress (hopelessness, depression) to find time or even care to vote in a system that is arguably rigged against them all because of some combination of the social-racial-economic conditions they've found themselves born into.

Just my two cents.
This was a headline on the KSDK website yesterday: http://www.ksdk.com/article/news/crime/ ... -491507537
^ this sh*t is happening way too often these days. again, if we had Persistent Surveillance these a**holes could be tracked and captured.
Our police departments are too old-school to do stuff like Persistence Surveillance... I think it'd be a great tool though...
38 car jackings in this YTD in a hood of only 6,800 people? Thats unbelievable.
How do police prevent a car jacking?
Well how can they prevent any crime? Police are a purely reactive force
Why don't we see more foot patrols any more? Is it just a matter of resources and covering area?

I live in Shaw and rarely see cops just in the neighborhood patrolling, walking the streets, meeting business owners.

Personally I think the force is too centralized. Too many stay at the district office rather stay at a smaller substation in a neighborhood.
pat wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:17 pm
Why don't we see more foot patrols any more? Is it just a matter of resources and covering area?

I live in Shaw and rarely see cops just in the neighborhood patrolling, walking the streets, meeting business owners.

Personally I think the force is too centralized. Too many stay at the district office rather stay at a smaller substation in a neighborhood.
agreed. More bicycle cops?
I live in Shaw, as well, so this was troubling to hear. I received an email from our neighborhood association president letting us know that an emergency meeting with our alderman and police representative was in the works. To an earlier poster's point, I think the cops can make their presence more known. I moved to Shaw last year around this time and car-jackings and theft were a problem then, too, so this isn't new. However, this goes much beyond what the cops can do as a deep-seeded issue in our city. Why teenagers are brandishing guns, during daylight no less, is absolutely ridiculous. I hate guns and never considered owning one, but I swear, living here sometimes makes me question my values. <RANT OVER>
Remember, the City has about 100 less cops on the force than they are authorized for.

If it were up to me, I'd double the force and flood the city with police. But hey, the Southside "progressives" seem to think that the cops are the enemy. They build memorials to armed criminals, and cuss-out the police. Go figure.
^ give me a break. stop trying to oversimplify. there are more than a few legitimate complaints about recent police behavior. and how do you plan to pay for doubling the force, exactly?
pattimagee wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:42 pm
Our police departments are too old-school to do stuff like Persistence Surveillance... I think it'd be a great tool though...
i mean, if they can make it work in Dayton, OH and Juarez, Mexico I think we can figure it out. besides, i believe the actual monitoring is done by trained PS employees who then relay info to the police.

BellaVilla wrote: Well how can they prevent any crime? Police are a purely reactive force
you can't necessarily prevent a particular car jacking but if you have real-time, recorded aerial surveillance footage a la Persistent Surveillance you can track the criminals back to their nest. this tech has been used to take down drug cartels in Mexico. it's strategic policing versus reactive policing.
I'm trying, I want to believe that I'm making an effort, but it's really discouraging.
I moved recently to St Louis from a major East Coast metro. I and my partner wanted to live in an urban, walkable environment. We hate the suburban lifestyle and fell in love with the architecture and sense of community in the City of St Louis. It was a close call between TGE and Soulard, and we decided to move to the latter. Both are good areas, supposedly (and our rent is definitely NOT cheap for St Louis standards). Every week I hear gunshots in my living room, one of my neighbors gets robbed at gunpoint, or, worse of all, someone gets almost arbitrarily beaten. It's very frustrating. We can still handle it because we have no kids; I would love them to grow up in an urban environment, but not in a one like this. I want to keep believing, but it's really really disheartening under the sound of gunshots. I've lived in several cities in Europe and in the US and I have never felt so unsafe and discouraged as in STL. If I hated this place, this would not be an issue - but I really like the city, its charm and its untapped potential. That's why I feel so frustrated. I apologize for the rant.
Sorry to hear about your experience.

I can agree, and lots of people have become desensitized to the reality of hearing gunshots every night, even in "safe" neighborhoods (by St. Louis City standards, mind you).

I'm not a criminal justice or social work expert, but the city needs to find one and get grip of the reins. Someone has to have the answers, or the means to develop a solution and reduce violent and property crime in this city.

I'll also encourage you to share your experience with your alderman. The more they hear about the reality in St. Louis, the more it maybe, might, possibly effect change.
I'm discovering "good" for St. Louis isn't necessarily all that great.

When good is defined by the amount of carjackings and gun shots you hear is lower in your preferred neighborhood than in another, that isn't exactly comforting.

I realize some crime comes with city living and I can accept that, but 4 carjackings in as many days, robberies at gunpoint, endless car break-ins and theft, beatings in the street, it feels like there are about 300,000 criminals in STL. It is rare that a day goes by that I don't hear of someone's car being broken into in my neighborhood. It's always something.

I was fuming after the carjackings in Shaw with NO visible police presence before or after the carjackings. I've lived in Shaw for 4 years and can probably count the times I've seen a normal patrol on one hand.

I, too, want to live in an urban environment...which is why I stay, but after 14 years in the City, i'm tired of the bullsh*t and am thinking about other places if we move...although living outside the city limits seems unfathomable to me.
urban_dilettante wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:36 pm
pattimagee wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:42 pm
Our police departments are too old-school to do stuff like Persistence Surveillance... I think it'd be a great tool though...
i mean, if they can make it work in Dayton, OH and Juarez, Mexico I think we can figure it out. besides, i believe the actual monitoring is done by trained PS employees who then relay info to the police.

BellaVilla wrote: Well how can they prevent any crime? Police are a purely reactive force
you can't necessarily prevent a particular car jacking but if you have real-time, recorded aerial surveillance footage a la Persistent Surveillance you can track the criminals back to their nest. this tech has been used to take down drug cartels in Mexico. it's strategic policing versus reactive policing.
Got any sources on this being effective? It would make a lot of sense to do something like this. I imagine they have highly capable cameras with crazy resolutions so that you can identify a person and track them to a house, especially with multiple angles. Has there been a public push or a push by the mayor to get something like this done?
I'm not going anywhere, but I agree with the frustrations. I don't even read the articles about the crime anymore. I don't report gunshots unless I'm certain they were and they sounded close. I don't check on the neighborhood Facebook page to see if people are talking about the gunshots I heard (and they usually aren't... anymore.)

It is disheartening.

Our election system gave us a law and order candidate. Maybe her plans will work out. But I'm not optimistic.
I'm discovering "good" for St. Louis isn't necessarily all that great.

When good is defined by the amount of carjackings and gun shots you hear is lower in your preferred neighborhood than in another, that isn't exactly comforting.

I realize some crime comes with city living and I can accept that, but 4 carjackings in as many days, robberies at gunpoint, endless car break-ins and theft, beatings in the street, it feels like there are about 300,000 criminals in STL. It is rare that a day goes by that I don't hear of someone's car being broken into in my neighborhood. It's always something.

I was fuming after the carjackings in Shaw with NO visible police presence before or after the carjackings. I've lived in Shaw for 4 years and can probably count the times I've seen a normal patrol on one hand.

I, too, want to live in an urban environment...which is why I stay, but after 14 years in the City, i'm tired of the bullsh*t and am thinking about other places if we move...although living outside the city limits seems unfathomable to me.
I plan on staying but I agree with your sentiment. My worry is that the alderman or police aren't going to turn this into action. There's a neighborhood meeting planned for Monday. The alderman and police will be there. People will vent. They'll say some stuff about checking your surroundings when leaving your vehicle. Keep an eye out. We will try to catch these guys but can't be in every place at every time. But what comes next? Usually its nothing. That's what annoys the hell out of me. The inaction.
flipz wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:31 am
Got any sources on this being effective? It would make a lot of sense to do something like this. I imagine they have highly capable cameras with crazy resolutions so that you can identify a person and track them to a house, especially with multiple angles. Has there been a public push or a push by the mayor to get something like this done?
i'm not aware of much in the way of stats. the service is still extremely contentious b/c "surveillance" and, as far as I know, has only been used on a trial basis in a couple of US cities so far. Dayton supposedly experienced a 30% reduction in crime during the year that it was used there. there are a number of news articles linked from their website, and you can Google a few articles about Baltimore. This one from the Sun describes the results as promising:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryla ... story.html

The very good Radiolab episode that discusses their successes in Dayton and Juarez is also linked on their website:

https://www.pss-1.com/

flipz wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:31 am
Has there been a public push or a push by the mayor to get something like this done?
not to my knowledge. and when i bring it up to my alderperson she seems disinterested. says it won't fly because "surveillance". the thing about PSS, though, is that the cameras ARE NOT high-resolution. they can't identify people's faces or read license plates. the technology works in conjunction with eyes on the ground/time-stamped, ground-based observations.

i do intend to write to the BOA and mayor and ask them to bring the company here for a presentation (which the company does). perhaps they would be more persuaded if we could get enough signatures...
kipfilet wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:36 pm
I've lived in several cities in Europe and in the US and I have never felt so unsafe and discouraged as in STL. If I hated this place, this would not be an issue - but I really like the city, its charm and its untapped potential. That's why I feel so frustrated. I apologize for the rant.
join the club and no apologies necessary. i often say that i'm not going anywhere either, but the thought crosses my mind on an almost daily basis having also lived on the east coast for over a decade. but i grew up here and i care deeply about this place and i can't just watch it burn from afar. however, i also fear for my spouse, who is not from here. we bought a rehab home in one of the south side's more "transitional" neighborhoods and it worries me when he walks to Schnucks during the day or takes the dogs to the park. if things don't improve in 5 to 10 years i can't promise we won't head back east.

our city "leaders" need to swallow their f*cking dynastic pride, admit they don't know what the f*ck they're doing, and try something new. And Lyda needs to put her f*cking foot down on the PD and get them to do their f*cking job. YOU JUST GOT YOUR F*CKING RAISES AND YOUR PENSIONS ARE INCREASING BY MILLIONS EVERY YEAR. STOP TELLING US ABOUT HOW YOU'RE SHORT STAFFED AND DOING EVERYTHING YOU CAN AND TELL US WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO DIFFERENTLY TO ADDRESS THE F*CKING CRIME.

i also apologize for the rant. this city...
They won't. I'm sorry, but they have zero reason to. Nobody in power has any incentive to actually act to improve things. Ergo, they won't.

Lyda's next 3.5 years will be all about doing whatever she feels needs to be done to get re-elected. She won with one of the most ridiculous margins this city has seen. If a single black candidate had dropped out, Krewson most likely would have lost. She's under intense pressure to not piss off anyone. She feels confident that her base of St. Louis Hills/Princeton Heights/etc will not abandon her, but she cannot afford to piss off the police at all. She cannot afford to piss off south city progressives either. So what will happen? Nothing. Nothing except blame shifting, because that is all she can do without pissing off a massive set of people and almost guaranteeing her a loss in 3.5 years.

The police will not do anything. They were just handed a raise on a platter after decades of not doing anything and running a joke of a department. Why the hell would they act now? They have no incentive to. In 2 years they will come crying and pouting with their hands out yet again for more money, and the dumbass, status-quo-above-all-else, dont-rock-the-boat voters will give it to them. Like they always do. I see it every time there is another ridiculous election for more money for the public sector.

People say "oh, I voted for it THIS time, but no more!", a few years pass, and then wash and repeat. No, stop lying. You've already voted for it over and over again, and you will continue to.

The state needs to step in, because the city structure is hopelessly broken. There is no fixing it. Admit it and start asking for outside help.