Chicagoist: CPD Strategy to SF?

Navin

Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:35:28 -0600

Please report to the Ministry of Love for reeducation.

guest

Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:39:42 -0600

The "second generation" of cameras do not have the big CPD box and blue light. It just so happens that the second generation also expanded into the slightly-less dangerous neighborhoods.

Ferdy

Tue, 25 Sep 2007 09:20:49 -0600

"they've made 1,407 arrests, including at least five homicides" That's what I like. Just cause the guy's dead doesn't mean he should get away with breaking the law. Arrest him!

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 22:51:03 -0600

San Francisco. Not San Fransisco.

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:20:35 -0600

i'd guess that the camera in your neighborhood is used as a deterrent as well as to solve crimes. where as the one at rush/division is more likely used to solve them. the city also doesn't want tourists to think they're in a dangerous area that needs police cameras. also, the cops drive down side streets in violent neighborhoods all the time

morydd

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:52:34 -0600

Having one of these things at the end of my block has done very little to affect crime on my block. Of course, it is positioned such that it can't actually get a view down this block. I can't help but think that if the police actually spent time in the neighborhoods rather than racing by on the main streets, that might have an impact. Although the police don't bother showing up if you call, the locals with scanners do, usually with rocks to throw through your windows. I also find it intersting that the camera at the end of my block has a flashing blue light and a CPD logo, while the almost identical setup at Rush and Chicago is painted the same black as the lightpole on which it is mounted. Is it a different system, or just a different way of handling the "bad" hoods?