Talk:CompStat

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. --Aude 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. —The preceding unsigned comment was 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. --Aude 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!

I removed a large portion of the intro as it was too long and too biased. I will post below what I removed.

Initially designed to quickly detect crime trends and assign personel as needed, CompStat, has degraded into a numbers game. Each Commanding Officer is held accountable for any increase in crime no matter how small, and are often threatened and intimidated in front of their peers at CompStat meetings. To avoid this humiliation, many have resorted to illegally downgrading index crimes to produce the results needed. There are a number of ways they go about this. One of which is simply reclassifying the crime. Felony Assaults are easily listed as Misdemeanors by carefully wording the report, a Robbery will be downgraded to a Grand Larceny by omitting any indication of force used by the perpetrator, Rape is often classified as "Investigate Aided", Burglary becomes Criminal Mischief to a door and no further investigation takes place, and most commonly, Grand Larcenies where property is simply stolen becomes a "Lost Property" report as long as the victim can not identify the thief.

Another way to avoid taking a crime number is to inconvienience the victim to the point where they no longer want to file a complaint. This is often done quite skillfully and the victim never realizes they have been victimized again by the NYPD. The responding supervisor, one hand picked by the Commanding Officer for just this sort of job, ensures the victim that a "full investigation" will be completed. Questions will be asked in extreme detail. An exstensive search of the area will be conducted to kill as much time as possible. If this delay hasn't detered the often time strapped victim, they are then told, even for the most minor of reports, that they will have to return to a police facility to be interviewed by Detectives. They are then told the Detectives are on another call and another two hours may pass. Eventually, the victim askes to be excused, thanks the officers for the time and effort they have made, and leaves without making an official report. The case is closed as "refusal to make report".

NYPD Commanders are promoted and rewarded with choice assignments based on these results and the entire rank structure benefits by their manipulations. When the numbers say crime is down in a particular area, businesses are more likely to open, visitors spend more money there, apartment rents can be increased, tax revenue for the city is made. The department looks good. The Commishioner appears effective. The Mayor gets re-elected. It's the dirty little secret inside the NYPD. It's the secret they don't want you to know.

Good call on the removal, although please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Ford MF 01:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

- newbie to wikipedia, reviewing compstat page, trying to figure out if "compstat" is a process of doing anlysis, or of it is an integrated software package.