Views, opinions and thoughts on Plainfield Public Schools by a concerned resident and former PPSD parent. If you think that what has been written here today is important, please pass it along.
*Formerly published as the Crescent Times
I would imagine that the same group that had the previous meeting. The flyer came my way through the Police Department's neighborhood association reach out program. If you need more information I suggest you get in touch with Officer George Rivera. Hope this helps.
I think people should attend this meeting. I think that more police on the street is better than an unproven system, which may simply be a gimmick to make us feel better. We shall see.
I would also feel safer if we had a police chief and not some political hack, Hellwig, running the police department. Please go to the meeting and voice your opinion.
And, I would suggest that a good tally of who is in favor and who is not be kept. There is a perception that the people in wards other than the 4th are against this. If you were at the council meeting where this was first proposed, most of the people who spoke about proceeding cautiously were in the 1st ward.
I guess we can go and find out what the meeting is all about. I personally will go because any information I get about this is a lot more than what I have at this moment. On the brighter side, the meeting will aloud us to see people face to face and act like a community who is concerned about an issue. We should have more meetings like this, after all, we do have plenty of issues. And we should volunteer food and drinks for these meetings. You know? Like a community's pot-luck where people gather to talk issues even if solutions are not found immediately. Let's just not bring another $20K bill to the city! Thanks!
The event is being held by the original group that assembled at Jefferson School on October the 19th. It is not sponsored by the city or any other political entity, although Council members will present at the event.
The panel will include members of the City council, resident representation from each of the 4 wards that make up the city, and most importantly teens and young adults from throughout the city. We are reaching out to ensure perspective from the hispanic community as well.
We are seeking Shotspotter representatives to provide empirical data(FBI Crime Statistics)that shows a direct correlation between the installation of ShotSpotter and a increase in suspect apprehension producing a reduction in crime. We will continue our efforts to secure their presence.
It will moderated by the organizers of the original Jefferson School community meeting. There will be a question answer period for the public and follow-up questions will be allowed.
The forum was created to give city residents an opportunity to discuss other viable crime reduction and community enhancement strategies. Because shotspotter was and is positioned to consume $1,000,000 that could be used to fund programs that (in the sponsors opinion) more effectively address the causes of crime, we felt the need to act. That final vote is scheduled to be held by the City Council as early as Monday October 4th.
We believe community based strategies would not only be more effective than shotspotter in reducing crime but save the taxpayer hundreds of thousands dollars. Our approach increases the expectations and opportunities for the families, teens, and young adults that collectively determine the quality of life in all of our at risk neighborhoods.
ANON 10:48 and 11:17. I believe there will be a couple council people that will be there. Every councilperson voted yes for shotspotter so that means both pro and con will be on hand. Also they will be able to provide answers to the public. But according to what little I know its a community forum for the people, for it or against it.
It appears to me this is the an opportunity for the public and kids for once! to voice their opinion on things that concern safety and quality of life issues. ShotSpotter which I think is a big waste of money in my opinion is one of the possible solutions to one of the problems we have in Plainfield, crime. It's not going to put anybody to work! If you are for ShotSpotter come to the thing and say so I can respect that. I hope you bring some other suggestions too like how we can have more businesses in our community.
I think people would be interested in the statistics of this and any other shot spotter installations.
For example:
1. How many incidents were registered on the system?
2. What percentage of the registered incidents were unfounded due to a car backfiring, fireworks, thunder or other loud noises.
3. What percentage was then found to be actual, verifiable gun shots.
4. Of the verified gun shot reports - how many led to an actual arrest and conviction?
5. Of the actual arrest, what percentage was a result of gang vs. gang shooting.
6. Can the radio signals used by these sytems interfere with other wireless devices such as wireless security cameras.
7. How easy will it be to figure out that if a person acrually wanted to shoot someone, they could just arrange for that to be done in an area not serviced by the system.
8. What would be the cost of installing cameras instead of a system like this where you can now have video evidence of something instead of responding to an area where gun shots were heard.
9. Responding to a report of gunshots is like responding to a barking dog call. You can be there in under a minute but when you get there - there's nothing to be found.
12 comments:
Who is sponsoring this?
8:52,
I would imagine that the same group that had the previous meeting. The flyer came my way through the Police Department's neighborhood association reach out program. If you need more information I suggest you get in touch with Officer George Rivera. Hope this helps.
I think people should attend this meeting. I think that more police on the street is better than an unproven system, which may simply be a gimmick to make us feel better. We shall see.
I would also feel safer if we had a police chief and not some political hack, Hellwig, running the police department. Please go to the meeting and voice your opinion.
And, I would suggest that a good tally of who is in favor and who is not be kept. There is a perception that the people in wards other than the 4th are against this. If you were at the council meeting where this was first proposed, most of the people who spoke about proceeding cautiously were in the 1st ward.
There is no sponser. This is suspect. Will there be any experts there? Will Police, admin and people from Shotspotter be there?
5:02,
I guess we can go and find out what the meeting is all about. I personally will go because any information I get about this is a lot more than what I have at this moment. On the brighter side, the meeting will aloud us to see people face to face and act like a community who is concerned about an issue. We should have more meetings like this, after all, we do have plenty of issues. And we should volunteer food and drinks for these meetings. You know? Like a community's pot-luck where people gather to talk issues even if solutions are not found immediately. Let's just not bring another $20K bill to the city! Thanks!
Is this really a meeting or a rally? Nan has already lobbied against this, so this is no longer "informational".
This is really a political rally against Sharp Shooter.
The event is being held by the original group that assembled at Jefferson School on October the 19th. It is not sponsored by the city or any other political entity, although Council members will present at the event.
The panel will include members of the City council, resident representation from each of the 4 wards that make up the city, and most importantly teens and young adults from throughout the city. We are reaching out to ensure perspective from the hispanic community as well.
We are seeking Shotspotter representatives to provide empirical data(FBI Crime Statistics)that shows a direct correlation between the installation of ShotSpotter and a increase in suspect apprehension producing a reduction in crime. We will continue our efforts to secure their presence.
It will moderated by the organizers of the original Jefferson School community meeting. There will be a question answer period for the public and follow-up questions will be allowed.
The forum was created to give city residents an opportunity to discuss other viable crime reduction and community enhancement strategies. Because shotspotter was and is positioned to consume $1,000,000 that could be used to fund programs that (in the sponsors opinion) more effectively address the causes of crime, we felt the need to act. That final vote is scheduled to be held by the City Council as early as Monday October 4th.
We believe community based strategies would not only be more effective than shotspotter in reducing crime but save the taxpayer hundreds of thousands dollars. Our approach increases the expectations and opportunities for the families, teens, and young adults that collectively determine the quality of life in all of our at risk neighborhoods.
We hope to see you there.
10:48 is right.
This is not a true townhall meeting since no one with answers will be there.
There will be only questions. Code for "we are against it".
It is more a political rally then a town-hall meeting.
ANON 10:48 and 11:17. I believe there will be a couple council people that will be there. Every councilperson voted yes for shotspotter so that means both pro and con will be on hand. Also they will be able to provide answers to the public. But according to what little I know its a community forum for the people, for it or against it.
It appears to me this is the an opportunity for the public and kids for once! to voice their opinion on things that concern safety and quality of life issues. ShotSpotter which I think is a big waste of money in my opinion is one of the possible solutions to one of the problems we have in Plainfield, crime. It's not going to put anybody to work! If you are for ShotSpotter come to the thing and say so I can respect that. I hope you bring some other suggestions too like how we can have more businesses in our community.
I wonder why people say this technology is unproven. A simple Google search turns up lots of examples of its working. For example, this week: ShotSpotter in Action: 2 Charged in Shooting Death of 21-Year-Old" http://kstp.com/news/stories/s1771835.shtml
I think people would be interested in the statistics of this and any other shot spotter installations.
For example:
1. How many incidents were registered on the system?
2. What percentage of the registered incidents were unfounded due to a car backfiring, fireworks, thunder or other loud noises.
3. What percentage was then found to be actual, verifiable gun shots.
4. Of the verified gun shot reports - how many led to an actual arrest and conviction?
5. Of the actual arrest, what percentage was a result of gang vs. gang shooting.
6. Can the radio signals used by these sytems interfere with other wireless devices such as wireless security cameras.
7. How easy will it be to figure out that if a person acrually wanted to shoot someone, they could just arrange for that to be done in an area not serviced by the system.
8. What would be the cost of installing cameras instead of a system like this where you can now have video evidence of something instead of responding to an area where gun shots were heard.
9. Responding to a report of gunshots is like responding to a barking dog call. You can be there in under a minute but when you get there - there's nothing to be found.
Post a Comment