I hate that this has to be an all or nothing conversation. There is a path where technology can deliver benefits without significant harm to individual privacy.

San Francisco has turned the tide on smash and grab crime through license plate readers and drone response. New Hampshire requires law enforcement agencies to delete unflagged license plate data within three minutes of collection. These two conditions can exist at the same time, in the same place, if we don’t allow the narrative to be pulled toward either extreme. Unfortunately that’s very tough to accomplish in today’s political climate in the US.

▲

goda90 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The best deterrent to crime is to make people not want to commit crime in the first place. Education. Social cohesion. Prosperity. Safety nets.

▲

kbos87 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don’t disagree, but effective enforcement of the law as it is written has to play a role. There is a kernel of truth behind the broken windows theory of policing. When it’s widely known that the law can’t be reliably enforced, crime escalates, and quality of life deteriorates.

▲

peab 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sure, but that takes generations to change, unfortunately

▲

pizzafeelsright 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Executed people cannot commit crimes. Educate that theft means repayment or death. The rest follows.

	▲	laimewhisps 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No property on earth is equal to that of a human life. Want to lower property crime? Decrease wealth inequality. It's amazing to me how people who make far more than the average person get so worked up over property crime. I can afford to replace anything of mine that's stolen, it's literally not that big of a deal.

▲

Ajedi32 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Depends on how much you trust the government's ability to restrain itself once the capability for mass surveillance is out there and widely deployed.