Police Test Predictive Policing Program

Law enforcement agencies in metropolitan areas are initiating a predictive policing demonstration test. Is the planned Office of Science and Technology, (OST) "Predictive Policing Demonstration and Evaluation Program" simply data dredging? These live tests in communities are required to be in compliance in protecting civil rights and confidentiality protection but so was the ditched FBI's Carnivore Surveillance System.

The 'thought police' of science fiction are now being named 'predictive policing', which is a complicated lie to throw away the constitution by using counterfeit scientific sounding phrases such as "probability mapping software that seismologists use to predict earthquakes."

"It is not possible to predict earthquakes with any degree of accuracy."^[suite101] Seismologists use, "hazard assessment maps which can estimate the probability that an earthquake of a given size will affect a given location over a certain number of years"^[wiki], and not individual's action of a time span of minutes.

Pop Tarts, bad weather and Walmart are not scientific tools and they don't compare with the sophisticated instrumentation that detects seismic excitation with satellites beaming a micro-Doppler FM LASER to the earth.

Big city police agencies are planning to conduct multi-year testing that may raise constitutional questions. These pilot test programs that the police are planning to using are based on technology that is no better that Punxsutawney Phil, the weather-predicting rodent.

A successful game theory prediction uses very sophisticated algorithms but the most important factor is intelligence and not information. Bad data in still means bad data out even if a quantum computer is used. Quantum theory is still in it's infancy and using quantum information technology is still very far into the future for everyday real-life use.

Is it a legitimate policing rationale to enforce gut feeling? No. Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific and articulable facts. Does having a sophisticated statistical math program pass the de facto legal standard in the United States? No, because probabilities are neither specific nor articulable.

Statistics only makes logical sense in large groups over extended time span, therefore this 'preventive policing' through data mining will most likely erode civil liberties. In the editorial, 'Which is the true LAPD?' - " Ayres found racial disparities in stops, frisks, searches and arrests even after controlling for local crime rates" ^[latimes]

In Christopher Cudworth's article, "Pop Tarts: !he Indispensable Food for America", he cites a 12.12.2008 article from Education Week that, "Walmart studied prehurricane sales and discovered shoppers stock up on Pop-Tarts before a hurricane."^[ac.com]

Stocking the shelves with pre-natural disasters staples may include Pop Tarts but the number one prehurricane staple was beer. If the number one item that sold above water, batteries and Pop Tarts is beer, then why isn't the title of this article isn't called 'Beer, Bad Weather and Walmart'? It is because using a American food icon for kids instead of beer for a policing anecdote gives this Orwellian pilot test program the appearance of being harmless towards civil liberties. This test policing program is akin to George Or well's 1984 thought police on steroids.

John Morgan defines 'predictive policing' as, "Any policing strategy or tactic that develops and uses information and advanced analysis to inform forward-thinking crime prevention." ^[ncjrs]

In summation, this program is in place in order for the police to intervene before or during the actual crime. This won't be the case because in a demo study in LA Compton, sensors were distributed to triangulate gun shot locations and plot out the direction and speed of the getaway cars. During this pilot test program, the police "waited for backup" and would still be reactionary response no matter how up to the second the streaming information is.

The predictive policing program is a high- tech 'gut feeling' not based on facts but trends and an individual is not a statistic.

RESOURCES

Christopher, Cudworth, "Pop Tarts: !he Indispensable Food for America" 01.05.2009
Los Angeles Times, "Opinion, Policing Practices"10.31.2008
NCJRS, NIJ FY 09 Predictive Policing Analytic and Evaluation Research" 11.20.2009
Suite 101, Earthquakes Impossible to Predict accurately" 04.07.2009
Wikipedia, "Earthquake Prediction" 09.13.2010