Is it really expensive to implement?

I don't know how expensive enforcing laws is, but crime is really expensive. It destroys lives, property values, tourism and quality of life.

When people have control over whether laws are enforced where they live, they usually choose to enforce them rather than let everything go to hell.

Yes it is very expensive. There are about 40,000 policemen in NYC. Then again, there were lots of cops in old days too -- but they weren't managed very well.

Back in the 80's, it was crazy. I grew up in a good neighborhood in Queens. The NYPD hid the drunks and incompetents in precients that served safer neighborhoods in those days. One day, a car almost hit my friends playing stickball in the street, then proceeded to go down the block and empty an Uzi into a guy at a bus stop. (Life Lesson: Don't piss off Columbian drug dealers.)

So my dad calls the cops. He dials 911, and the cop asks "Are they still shooting?" and hangs up when my dad says "Uh, no". He ended up pulling the fire department call box out on the street, and the firemen called for cops over the radio.

They did it without a budget increase. The book "The Blue Ocean" describes the strategy. IIRC, they shifted resources from other kinds of crime-fighting to combat visible crime.

Sometimes expense is a matter of resource allocation (my apologies for bringing the "drug war" into this thread).

I suspect there is more crime when resources are more focused on violating rights than on protecting them.

It is also a great excuse for podunk "Great Communicator" loving sherifs to implement American Fascism.

As much as I love how safe NYC is, I don't want it to turn into Singapore.

I believe that with the increased efficiency in identifying and prosecuting small offenses, punishment should be modulated down accordingly.

Crime happens when the risk of getting caught times the cost of punishment is lower than the benefit of the crime. If you increase the risk of getting caught, you may safely (in fact, you should) decrease the cost of being punished.

How immediate and certain the response to crime appears to be affects the perception of risk.

And even when there's no cop around, other things influence this perception. If there are a lot of people around and things are orderly and many visual cues contribute to the perception of order, the perception of risk is greater.

This calculation of course needs to take into account the limited rationality of humans, and the time value of rewards and punishments.

I always say that working with Vulcans is much easier...

I'd rather take action against the people causing problems than force everyone else to the costs of the problems they cause.

For example, people throwing plastic bags everywhere. Now were trying to restrict the freedom of people who don't litter rather than holding responsible those causing the problem.

what is it with Singapore? <br> I am curious.

They still cane people there. Like smart ass American kids that steal street signs.

I actually think that's not a bad idea! I want to read this book:

http://chronicle.com/article/In-Defense-of-Flogging/127208/

You're aware that the author is trying to point out the inhumanity of the American justicial system, more than actually defending flogging? (From your link: "Certainly In Defense of Flogging is more about the horrors of our prison-industrial complex than an ode to flogging".)

It probably is interesting, though.

it's safe to the point of being sterile. (this is a personal opinion, not a fact)

Death sentence for minor infraction. Only minor exaggeration. Oh, an your vote is numbered, careful who you vote for.

You're not alone - if I had to pick one word to describe Singapore it would also be "sterile".

Gibson is a great writer, but what's "wrong" with Singapore is not what he describes. If you wonder what Singapore would be as a democracy, look at Switzerland.

And there's nothing "wrong" with law and order like in Switzerland. Chaos like in Hong Kong only seems romantic until you become a victim of violent crime. Then all of a sudden its not cute anymore.

Could not agree more. Having lived and worked in Singapore (and Zurich) I can honestly say that for the vast majority of people it is a great place to live. Singaporeans and expats all acknowledge that yes, it is more strict than the US or Australia, but unless you enjoy things like vandalizing cars, selling drugs, or stealing street signs you can live exactly how you like, with the added peace of mind of knowing that you have a near zero chance of being the victim of violent crime.

I am guessing (perhaps incorrectly) that most of the people who talk about what is "wrong" with Singapore have either only been there once for a few days or have never been and only base their opinion of the place on the story about the American kid who got caned.