Online posts have listed the names and salaries of health insurance executives and "Wanted" signs have been posted in Manhattan, according to the bulletin.
NYPD barely bats above 50% for murder arrests in a ‘good’ period - not convictions. 33% is abysmal given their absurd budget and frankly unconstitutional practices like stop and frisk.
Within the U.S. criminal justice system, criminal cases can be cleared (or closed) one of two ways. The first is through arrest… The second way a case can be closed is through what is called exceptional means, where law enforcement must have either identified the offender, gathered enough evidence to arrest, charge, and prosecute someone, identified the offender’s exact location, or come up against a circumstance outside the control of law enforcement that keeps them from arresting and prosecuting the offender
I think the amount of resources expended is absolutely valid criticism. There are active kidnappings that have less mobilization than this fucking circus - there are times people are still alive and end up dead because cops couldn’t give a fucking damn… especially if we open the can of domestic abuse.
Now of that I have no doubt. I was just saying the idea that only rich people’s murders get solved is just not true. But apparently I misunderstood what the person I was replying to was saying.
Are you saying there aren’t a lot of murderers in prisons?
And people really think murderers only get caught if they only murder rich people?
Because otherwise I don’t understand the downvotes. I can provide so many examples of poor people getting murdered and the murderer going to prison. Is there really a claim that doesn’t happen?
Again, the cops spend nowhere near the amount of resources on such murders, but that doesn’t mean that they all go unsolved.
Are you saying there aren’t a lot of murderers in prisons?
Definitely not. Simply that prisons generally aren’t filled with a majority of murderers.
people really think murderers only get caught if they only murder rich people?
You’re getting downvoted because this a bizarre extrapolation from my original comment. A ghost gun with a silencer, very little unintentional evidence, and a clean getaway is a hell of a case to crack. They barely managed it even with all the resources they used, and I have my doubts that Luigi is just a scapegoat. If you or I were killed like this, our murderer would not be caught.
Then I apologize for assuming you had the full context before engaging the way I did. You deserved to get a chance to understand before you got dog piled.
this is the internet and courtesy is generally considered a bad thing
I want to be the change with this perspective, so I hope that only the downvotes were the outcome of this misunderstanding!
You’re correct and I think your original statement was pretty fair - but “All the time” and other soft indications like that - serve poorly when we’re discussing something as serious as murder. Most murders go unsolved and while a very significant number of murders are resolved if you happen to be talking to someone who has intimate knowledge of a family member or friend being murdered “all the time” is likely to come across as cavalier.
Our language gets weird around strongly emotional events (you’ll get a similar response if, at a friends’ wedding you comment “You know, most marriages end in divorce” even if it’s objectively the truth).
So written by a person with a little bit of ASD and has similarly put their foot in their mouth in the past.
If you were killed in the same manner as Thompson, your killer would never be found.
Regular old people get murdered all the time. Sometimes in targeted assassinations. The killers get caught all the time.
The cops spend nowhere near this amount of resources, obviously, but saying the killer would never be found is nonsense.
Prisons are not filled with murderers who have only been convicted of murdering the wealthy.
NYPD barely bats above 50% for murder arrests in a ‘good’ period - not convictions. 33% is abysmal given their absurd budget and frankly unconstitutional practices like stop and frisk.
I think the amount of resources expended is absolutely valid criticism. There are active kidnappings that have less mobilization than this fucking circus - there are times people are still alive and end up dead because cops couldn’t give a fucking damn… especially if we open the can of domestic abuse.
There’s also a non zero chance the police kill a 911-caller/victim/hostage/bystander.
I agree. It is completely valid. I thought My post suggested it.
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/crime-without-punishment-new-york/
Seems like it’s pretty much a coin flip. Also (to no one’s surprise) you get a much better chance of them catching your murderer if you’re white.
Now of that I have no doubt. I was just saying the idea that only rich people’s murders get solved is just not true. But apparently I misunderstood what the person I was replying to was saying.
That’s still part of the problem with the justice system and prisons generally aren’t filled with murderers.
Are you saying there aren’t a lot of murderers in prisons?
And people really think murderers only get caught if they only murder rich people?
Because otherwise I don’t understand the downvotes. I can provide so many examples of poor people getting murdered and the murderer going to prison. Is there really a claim that doesn’t happen?
Again, the cops spend nowhere near the amount of resources on such murders, but that doesn’t mean that they all go unsolved.
Definitely not. Simply that prisons generally aren’t filled with a majority of murderers.
You’re getting downvoted because this a bizarre extrapolation from my original comment. A ghost gun with a silencer, very little unintentional evidence, and a clean getaway is a hell of a case to crack. They barely managed it even with all the resources they used, and I have my doubts that Luigi is just a scapegoat. If you or I were killed like this, our murderer would not be caught.
It wouldn’t have hurt if someone had explained that to me earlier rather.
But then this is the internet and courtesy is generally considered a bad thing in my experience.
Then I apologize for assuming you had the full context before engaging the way I did. You deserved to get a chance to understand before you got dog piled.
I want to be the change with this perspective, so I hope that only the downvotes were the outcome of this misunderstanding!
Thank you. I am glad you agree with me on courtesy. I hope more people do.
You should look up the stats before making wild statements.
https://www.npr.org/2023/04/29/1172775448/people-murder-unsolved-killings-record-high
Which statement did I make that was wild? Because none of that contradicts anything I said.
I never made the claim that all or even most murders get solved.
This you?
“All the time” and “every time” are not even close to the same thing.
So again, your link doesn’t contradict what I said.
There are constant murder trials. Do you deny that fact?
You’re correct and I think your original statement was pretty fair - but “All the time” and other soft indications like that - serve poorly when we’re discussing something as serious as murder. Most murders go unsolved and while a very significant number of murders are resolved if you happen to be talking to someone who has intimate knowledge of a family member or friend being murdered “all the time” is likely to come across as cavalier.
Our language gets weird around strongly emotional events (you’ll get a similar response if, at a friends’ wedding you comment “You know, most marriages end in divorce” even if it’s objectively the truth).
So written by a person with a little bit of ASD and has similarly put their foot in their mouth in the past.