Predictive Policing
Predictive Policing
Compare and contrast the application of information technology (IT) to optimize police departments’ performance to reduce crime versus random patrols of the streets.
A comparison and contrast of the application of information technology to optimize police performance versus an unaided and random effort at patrolling the streets would mostly reveal the benefits to an IT supported approach as opposed to an unsupported approach. When comparing the two approaches what police departments may initially find after implementing an IT system (i.e., predictive policing) meant to help solve crime is that many of their previous understandings and hunches will simply be validated by the IT system. The police may already be focusing their efforts within an area that an IT system/predictive policing effort may identify as an area of focus for the police department. That type of result will only reaffirm that the police department is indeed focusing its efforts in the right area. This type of result has the benefit of confirming the police departments’ efforts allowing them to expand upon those same efforts.
When contrasting the two approaches, many police departments may be surprised at relationships and areas of focus that were previously overlooked by the police department as an area of importance in their policing efforts. That newly discovered area or relationship between information would then require greater attention and policing effort from the police department. Just as importantly, with that new understanding, many police departments would then be able to allocate their resources in a far more cost effective manner than had been done prior to implementing the IT/predictive policing system.
Describe how COMPSTAT, as an information system (IS), implements the four (4) basic IS functions: (a. Input, b. Processing, c. Output, d. Feedback).
Input: The input function of COMPSTAT as an information
Compare and contrast the application of information technology (IT) to optimize police departments’ performance to reduce crime versus random patrols of the streets.
A comparison and contrast of the application of information technology to optimize police performance versus an unaided and random effort at patrolling the streets would mostly reveal the benefits to an IT supported approach as opposed to an unsupported approach. When comparing the two approaches what police departments may initially find after implementing an IT system (i.e., predictive policing) meant to help solve crime is that many of their previous understandings and hunches will simply be validated by the IT system. The police may already be focusing their efforts within an area that an IT system/predictive policing effort may identify as an area of focus for the police department. That type of result will only reaffirm that the police department is indeed focusing its efforts in the right area. This type of result has the benefit of confirming the police departments’ efforts allowing them to expand upon those same efforts.
When contrasting the two approaches, many police departments may be surprised at relationships and areas of focus that were previously overlooked by the police department as an area of importance in their policing efforts. That newly discovered area or relationship between information would then require greater attention and policing effort from the police department. Just as importantly, with that new understanding, many police departments would then be able to allocate their resources in a far more cost effective manner than had been done prior to implementing the IT/predictive policing system.
Describe how COMPSTAT, as an information system (IS), implements the four (4) basic IS functions: (a. Input, b. Processing, c. Output, d. Feedback).
Input: The input function of COMPSTAT as an information