San Lumen wrote:Canadensia wrote:
In regards to the latter, not yet.
As for the former, yes, I'm aware. But the reports still indicate that morale has gone down, and if Chicago is any indication of what happens when police are ostracized for doing their job that means high-risk neighbourhoods will be avoided entirely during patrols, thus increasing crime rates.
And neither article gives hard evidence of morale being down.
I'm inclined to believe the head of the police union knows what they're talking about when they say that morale has gone down.
There is no evidence of neighborhoods being ignored. The police don't get to pick and choose what neighborhoods they serve.
In Seattle? No, not at present.
In Chicago? Yes, they most certainly have. Much of the city has been utterly abandoned by the Chicago police, to the point where they only go in to problem neighbourhoods when they're specifically instructed or otherwise legally obligated to do so. It's gotten so bad to the point where the University of Chicago has hired on its own private police force just to ensure its campus/general area gets policed properly.
Why? You might ask.
Well the answer is very simple. The Chicago police were lambasted by both the general populace and city council for patrolling predominantly black and problem neighbourhoods, so the police got sick and tired of doing a thankless job and decided to stop patrolling these areas entirely. Now crime has skyrocketed, because police very much do get to choose which streets they'll patrol and how often; and if they get shat on by their own city council for going above and beyond the call of duty, then they'll do the bare minimum and allow their local government to reap what they sow.