Comments on: Boise’s Top Copper Wants Your Opinion

By: Interested Citizen

Interested Citizen — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 18:39:06 +0000

Your best “target rich” areas for deploying your best technologies include the Canyon County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, the Nampa PD, and the Nampa Mayor Tom Dale’s office.

By: Zippo

Zippo — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 00:16:08 +0000

Chief,

This sort of action is very good police work. It’s the kind of action that just does not happen in many a large police force anymore. If you can continue to motivate your troops to engauge in “good deed” and “small stuff” police work like this, you are on the right track:

http://www.jrn.com/kivitv/news/Stolen-purse-thrown-out-in-front-of-patrol-car-234273151.html

By: Rifter

Rifter — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:59:50 +0000

@Foothills Rider: As the editor said, there is detection and prevention. In my opinion, detection, and reprimanding one person is not nearly as powerful as having several people see a police car, and take stock of what they are doing, and behave better. I have read reports that people being REMINDED of police presence gets them to behave better, for longer periods of time.

Is catching one guy that is a bit above the speed limit on an open stretch of road as good as getting several drivers to slow down in a busier road?

Does hiding out to detect speeders, do anything to deter the kids debating on doing something illegal out of stupidity?

I am one that believes a police presence to remind us to be good is FAR more valuable than a secret police that instills fear and intimidation by surprise attacks.

Even you mentioned that putting dummy police vehicles in plain view gets people to change their behaviors. I think police cruisers should be based on this concept, as well.

By: Bill McCrory

Bill McCrory — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:19:20 +0000

See my Whitecaps blog post dated August 26, 2005, titled The Technology Tornado - Criminal Justice Meets the Wizard of Oz. After more than eight years, it's likely some of the embedded links are dead.

By: Rick

Rick — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:11:19 +0000

Chief, a question what points do you disagree with?

By: Foothills Rider

Foothills Rider — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:58:40 +0000

DF….and placing empty, dummy police vehicles in plain view, in key locations, also gets folks to think/change behaviors.

By: Chief Mike Masterson

Chief Mike Masterson — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:35:48 +0000

Thank you to all who took the time to share their views and particularly to those who gave their views on technology. As you know, I tend to participate occassionally in non-traditional forums like the BG as a way to hear from the people I serve and learn their perspectives on policing issues of importance to our community.

I do value civil discourse but I don’t’ argue and have been known to end a conversation on occasion with, “ I respect your opinion but we may ultimately have to agree to disagree.”

Thanks for the feedback.

By: give it a rest

give it a rest — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 06:37:24 +0000

“Technology”? The FEDS have access to anything this agency may need in the future. For now,all the technology the BPD requires is some tape recorders to record the drunks at 6th and Main, the few bicyclists who tend to lie about just about everything, and apparently police sgts who have no understanding of 4th amendment rights or police procedure. Enough of this KRAP.

By: Foothills Rider

Foothills Rider — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:26:53 +0000

from RIFTER:
” I also miss the old blue/white cars. They were easier to spot, which ALSO meant, people behaved better around them.”

I disagree with this premise. Why should you behave “better” only when you can see (better) who is watching you, and hence change your behavior? In this light, I would rather have totally unmarked vehicles, capturing you doing stupid/illegal things because you think no one is there to see you.

EDITOR NOTE–Thus the age-old question: Crime PREVENTION or crime DETECTION. Those radar speed signs showing “YOUR SPEED,” certainly get folks to slow down.

By: Rifter

Rifter — Tue, 12 Nov 2013 23:39:38 +0000

Here is my take on the questions asked:

LPR: You bring up several good uses for it. My issue is data retention. Pre-load license plates for those people you are searching for (Sex offenders, warrants, stolen cars). No data retention for any plate that is not pre-loaded.

No cameras, period. If there is not an officer there to make the call, no ticket.

I have no problem with using a drone how you described. A convict in the area, fly the drone. Someone missing, get it in the air fast. And by drone, I am guessing you are talking about a heavier-duty RC airplane, basically.

If there is not a reason to have the drone up, don’t put it up. Don’t let it fly over to “just see” what is out there. If there is not a target for it to find, don’t put up, period.

Two issues. 1) Nothing that doesn’t have a person in control, and observing with their own eyes, in real time.

2) Nothing that is not targeted. I do not want the police going for fishing expeditions. Targeted response only. The only area that I waiver a bit, is license plate scanning… but that is only for targeted plates in the system, and has an officer controlling it.

As others have said, I would like all officers fitted with video cameras as well as audio recorders. For their protection as well as ours.

I do like the suggestion of removing black cars, as well. Make your cars look inviting, as if you want to be part of our community. I also miss the old blue/white cars. They were easier to spot, which ALSO meant, people behaved better around them.