When you say that you would “expect to pay less taxes” if citizens are performing police work is an interesting argument. It reminds me of an equilibrium problem. Status-quo could be maintained if decreasing tax money for law enforcement balanced citizen participation, but most people want things to improve so there needs to be an increase in “resources”. Maybe the most important resource is the officers themselves. They just need to do a better job. Could be through better training, work ethic, policing strategies, use of funds etc. We agree that the police are ineffective and that’s why they try these “start snitching” programs in the first place.

I guess what interests me the most about this type of situation is people’s willingness to tolerate those who disobey social order. People that live in a society sacrifice a certain amount of free will in exchange for protection from others imposing their will on them. So why would citizens not report crimes on their own? When they don’t report these violations to the authorities then they get what they tolerate (for the most part), so it means that either they don’t care that the law is being broken (e.g. most people don’t mind speeding) or its more important for them not to report the crime (got something better to do, or maybe they fear repercussion). Regardless I think that the burden should be on both the citizens and the cops.

I feel like the existence of law enforcement naturally polarizes people into a citizens vs. cops scenario. I think that people like to push their limits (very animalistic if you ask me) and they are fascinated by those who push the limits further than they do. I think its an internal desire to maximize their benefit from the social contract……..but maybe this is a discussion for another day!

Whether or not a person being reported is a criminal, their display of wealth cannot qualify as evidence to a crime if the reporter didn’t see a criminal transaction taking place. “Drug money” is labeled so only if there is evidence linking the confiscated money to the sale of drugs. If someone sees an individual receive a huge gold medallion in exchange for a bag of weed, they can report the seller to the police and describe him as the guy wearing the huge gold medallion. In this scenario, there is no need for the program being discussed because an actual crime was witnessed.

People can say they know that this person or that is involved in criminal activity, but the due process of law requires that probable cause be presented before any police action is taken. The display of wealth is not a crime, nor is it justified cause for the search of a dwelling, or the seizure of property.

The program being implemented by this police department really just speaks to the ineffectiveness of that department. As a citizen, if I am stepping in to perform police work by reporting suspicious activity, I would expect to see a decrease in the amount of taxes I paid to the state during the time that that program is in effect. Police have a primary function: to maintain order within a community by keeping the criminal element at bay. Any police department that can’t do that job within reason isn’t worth the money they are paid.

The point is that displays of wealth don’t provide solid evidence of criminal activity, and thus, they should not be used for that purpose by either the citizens or the police. People will report a crime if they witness actual criminal activity. The fact that some people in Baltimore embrace a no-snitching culture is evidence that the police are not doing a good enough job in the first place protecting city’s neighborhoods. If a person witnesses a crime but is afraid to report it, we can derive that the criminal officiates over the city more effectively than the police do, and a community with that type of hierarchy has greater problems than their citizens’ display of wealth.

The sign also clearly states that it is intended for “someone you know” who is a criminal. It doesn’t say call the cops on any random person with a nice car so it neither discourages wealth accumulation or display for the average citizen. Just for criminals.

There is definitely room for misinterpretation though. If people forget about the “life of crime” and the “someone you know” parts and start calling the police on everyone who displays wealth.

And as far as being a money making scheme I highly doubt it. Why go through all of the trouble of creating this program when they could simply just write more tickets or raise parking fines neither of which cost any money to the state? (or just increase sales tax Maryland-style!) I also like how the article converts into dollars to make it seem like more money. The reality is that in the UK you get the same amount of good for one pound as you do in the US for one dollar (with some exceptions like gas). For example a bigmac meal would cost $6 or 6 pounds. So the UK police will get the same amount of use out of 250,000 pounds as we would 250,000 dollars. While this still might sound like a lot of money note that the Baltimore police department spent 35 Million just in overtime pay in 2006 (the quickest stat i could find) so in the grand scheme of things the money earned is probably not the motivating factor behind this program.

I do agree with you on some things though. If they are just raiding people’s homes because they seem to be living above their means then that is unacceptable. But if they are using the excessive money as a signal to investigate further then that’s just prudent police work. They should later observe a crime before arresting the person. I don’t know if that’s happening here or not. The article is vague. It says “X # of people were arrested because of the bling lifestyle” but it could just mean that X # of people were “Snitched” on because of bling and were later arrested.
I would hope that the later were true because like you say displaying wealth should not be a crime.

I think the idea behind the program is sound. What this program is asking people to do is to assist police officers in upholding the law. A practice that is frowned upon under many situations here in the US. Especially here in Baltimore, where “stopping snitching” is the culturally accepted thing to do. This program wants to reverse (or maybe prevent? i don’t know how the UK citizens feel about snitching) this destructive way of thinking. The reality is that people in the communities know what is going on better than the police do. And if they don’t want to turn in a known lawbreaker then they get what they deserve.