Talk:CompStat: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:When someone criticizes CompStat to the point of making it look like all it's about is gathering a few meaningless statistics and asserting that it probably had nothing to do with NYC's 70% decline in violent crime in the 1990's, then sorry, that's not "objectivity," it's espousing a point-of-view that is not by any stretch of the imagination backed by facts. (Generally, the critics tend to be Guiliani haters who still can't come to terms with the fact that even an arrogant jerk like Rudy was able to do a great job cleaning house. Keep your political views out of your "objectivity" in the future.) |
:When someone criticizes CompStat to the point of making it look like all it's about is gathering a few meaningless statistics and asserting that it probably had nothing to do with NYC's 70% decline in violent crime in the 1990's, then sorry, that's not "objectivity," it's espousing a point-of-view that is not by any stretch of the imagination backed by facts. (Generally, the critics tend to be Guiliani haters who still can't come to terms with the fact that even an arrogant jerk like Rudy was able to do a great job cleaning house. Keep your political views out of your "objectivity" in the future.) |
||
:Not to mention the idiocy of the criticism: 1) The training and deployment of around 5,000 new better-educated police officers -- the deployment of those 5,000 new police officers was based upon the crime statistics gathered through CompStat. 5,000 cops aren't just thrown anywhere, they get sent to the high crime precincts and get sent on patrol in the problem areas of said precincts. |
|||
2) Police decision-making being devolved to precinct level -- This is precisely what CompStat is all about - holding precinct commanders accountable! I'm not sure how this critic/"scholar" turned that one into an argument against CompStat. |
|||
At this stage, this article should be deleted just for lacking functionality. It is also has a look and feel that differs greatly from any other wikipedia article on topic. Generally, I am all in for general authorship and collaborative works, but whoever is working on this article needs to stop! |
At this stage, this article should be deleted just for lacking functionality. It is also has a look and feel that differs greatly from any other wikipedia article on topic. Generally, I am all in for general authorship and collaborative works, but whoever is working on this article needs to stop! |
||
Revision as of 19:44, 5 February 2006
I have merged the COMPSTAT article with this CompStat article and updated links so that all to go to this article. There is debate among law enforcement agencies, as to whether it's COMPSTAT, CompStat, COMSTAT, etc. The New York Police Department website [1] inconsistently uses both COMPSTAT and CompStat. --Kmf164 00:36, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
I must point out in protest that this article is far too critical of CompStat. More objective review of this article should be in order. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.187.40.157 (talk • contribs)
- Thanks for the comments. I have to agree with you. We definitely welcome you to contribute to the article and make it more Neutral. You may edit from your IP address, though there are benefits to creating an account for editing. --Kmf164 20:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Was the point of merging the 2 articles to make it so boring that no one would be interested in even reading it: It's verbose, has no quick summary and lacks any analysis. What criticism that existed has been excised and replaced with the apparent refrain (and almost whiny), "this article is far too critical" in the discussion section. Well, criticism is a part of being objective. Don't mistake objectivity with blandness.
- When someone criticizes CompStat to the point of making it look like all it's about is gathering a few meaningless statistics and asserting that it probably had nothing to do with NYC's 70% decline in violent crime in the 1990's, then sorry, that's not "objectivity," it's espousing a point-of-view that is not by any stretch of the imagination backed by facts. (Generally, the critics tend to be Guiliani haters who still can't come to terms with the fact that even an arrogant jerk like Rudy was able to do a great job cleaning house. Keep your political views out of your "objectivity" in the future.)
- Not to mention the idiocy of the criticism: 1) The training and deployment of around 5,000 new better-educated police officers -- the deployment of those 5,000 new police officers was based upon the crime statistics gathered through CompStat. 5,000 cops aren't just thrown anywhere, they get sent to the high crime precincts and get sent on patrol in the problem areas of said precincts.
2) Police decision-making being devolved to precinct level -- This is precisely what CompStat is all about - holding precinct commanders accountable! I'm not sure how this critic/"scholar" turned that one into an argument against CompStat.
At this stage, this article should be deleted just for lacking functionality. It is also has a look and feel that differs greatly from any other wikipedia article on topic. Generally, I am all in for general authorship and collaborative works, but whoever is working on this article needs to stop!