“What is interesting is that according to 2007, FBI statistics there were 1.4 million violent crimes committed. Of those 1.4 million crimes, only 1,512 were reported as hate crimes motivated over a sexual orientation bias. A majority of those “Hate Crimes against Homosexuals” were crossed words, threats and pushing. Of those 1,512, Sexual orientation biased “Hate Crimes” only 247 were aggravated assaults and included 5 deaths. Hate Crimes against blacks numbered 3,434 resulting in 968 assaults and 1 death. Based on what I know to be true as far as false reports go I wonder how many of these hate crimes really even existed. Of the 1.4 million violent crimes in 2007, only 9,535 total, were hate crimes and only 9 deaths resulted.”
The kernel density estimation (KDE) is a method being used by many police organizations today that uses “Hot Spots” of criminal activity to target actual crime in real time. The article cited above is just one of so many headlines which suggest that America is one step closer to becoming a real life “Minority Report”. Based on the report written by Matthew S. Gerber titled “Predicting Crime Using Twitter and Kernel Density Estimation”; Law Enforcement and government entities may now be using twitter to make arrests on crimes. The ramifications of this would completely nullify the fourth amendment of the constitution, which requires law enforcement entities to attain a warrant based on probable cause to investigate a crime or to make an arrest.
“This article presents research investigating the use of spatiotemporally tagged tweets for crime prediction. We use Twitter-specific linguistic analysis and statistical topic modeling to automatically identify discussion topics across a major city in the United States. We then incorporate these topics into a crime prediction model and show that, for 19 of the 25 crime types we studied, the addition of Twitter data improves crime prediction performance versus a standard approach based on kernel density estimation. We identify a number of performance bottlenecks that could impact the use of Twitter in an actual decision support system. We also point out important areas of future work for this research, including deeper semantic analysis of message content, temporal modeling, and incorporation of auxiliary data sources. This research has implications specifically for criminal justice decision makers in charge of resource allocation for crime prevention. More generally, this research has implications for decision makers concerned with geographic spaces occupied by Twitter-using individuals.”
The government will now prevent crime by acting on potential crimes that have not yet occurred. This is officially the introduction of Pre Crime or Thought Crime. This is a rather interesting report that goes on to talk about this Pre crime and Thought Crime predictive algorithm by citing methods already being used by whom Mr. Gerber refers to as “decision makers”. These methods include but may not be limited to the following:
· Crime Prediction using Historically High Crime Hot Spots
· Crime Prediction using Social Media
· Data and Meta Data Collection
· Analytical Approaches using models and formulae
· Historical Crime Density
· Twitter Messages
Thanks to Total Information Awareness and NSA, FBI and DHS data collection and spying via Patriot Act and other liberty damaging legislation; we are all now subject to being the victim of random Precognitive Crime Prediction methodology. This is freightening.
The Fourth Amendment is overrated
According to a recent article in a popular Police Magazine (Police Mag), the Fourth amendment is an impedance The article written by Devallis Rutledge goes on as follows.
“You have to reign in your natural hunter's instinct and take the time to get a search warrant. There's the affidavit of probable cause to compose, the warrant form to fill out, maybe a review by the local prosecutor, and then finding a magistrate to submit the package to for approval. It's a hassle.
But it's a hassle the Constitution imposes, if your investigation has led you to a residence, garage, barn, outbuilding, warehouse, office, storage locker, package, vehicle, boat, or other place protected by the Fourth Amendment. The constitutional protection "against unreasonable searches and seizures" has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court to mean that a search warrant is necessary to make searches and seizures "reasonable" unless the circumstances justify application of one or more of the recognized exceptions. (Katz v. U.S.)
Because warrantless searches and seizures are presumed to be unreasonable, the general rule-of-thumb is to try to get a warrant whenever possible. On the other hand, if you can seize evidence without engaging in a search, you don't need either a warrant or any exception. Therefore, the initial inquiry in determining whether you need a search warrant is whether you can seize the evidence without making a "search."
What a joke. Again, this goes back to the whole “Warrior Cop” mentality. It is absolutely ridiculous. If these so called “Hunter / Warriors” want to be real bad asses, and operate under martial authority, they should “Man Up” and join the armed forces. We are seeing a trend in American society of bully cops imposing their own brand of justice void the discretion of Constitutional values. This will ultimately end disastrously should the trend get much worse. See the article (HERE). Please feel free to contact the Police Mag with criticism and complaints (HERE).
Hate Crime is Pre Crime is Thought Crime
In 1984 Redux this writer talks about the DHS and Justice Department use of mass criminalization of the populous with the DHS Rightwing Extremist Report, HR1913 and HR2647. These combined give the government lots of leeway to label people as thought criminals. However, the most recent revelations about government spying has brought forward worries and fears that we may be guilty of crimes and expose ourselves to unjust government retaliation over how we express ourselves online and in private phone messages and conversations. The two latest pieces of legislation to hit are S.2219 submitted 8 April, 2014 and HR3878, submitted 15 January, 2014.
Both of these pieces of legislation redefine Hate Crime to being a crime of thought and expression and call for the FCC and other government entities to troll the internet for thought criminals.
“To require the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to update a report on the role of telecommunications, including the Internet, in the commission of hate crimes.”
“This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Hate Crime Reporting 5 Act of 2014’’.
“subsection (a) shall—
18 ‘‘(1) analyze information on the use of tele19
communications, including the Internet, broadcast
20 television and radio, cable television, public access
21 television, commercial mobile services, and other
22 electronic media, to advocate and encourage violent
23 acts and the commission of crimes of hate, as de24
scribed in the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C.
25 534 note);”
The Bill goes on to request the redefinition of the First Amendment. The bill does not however define the term “Hate Crime” as it would pertain to this bill. This is scary because it is open ended and susceptible to political correctness. The Term Hate Crime is a completely subjective term the left choose to redefine as needed.
“To require the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to update a report on the role of telecommunications, including the Internet, on the commission of hate crimes.”
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Hate Crime Reporting 5 Act of 2014’’.
Both of the above bills reference (28 USC 25 534 note) Which states a Hate Crime as:
“Under the authority of section 534 of title 28, United States Code, the Attorney General shall acquire data, for each calendar year, about crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, gender and gender identity, [emphasis added] religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, including where appropriate the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism of property.”
All of this leaves the average Joe or Jane susceptible to the redefinition of what the administration considers a Hate Crime. All of this of course is based on the closed loop between the White House, Justice Department, DHS and the mainstream media hacks of the progressive movement. Beware America you have been warned. We now live in a country where you may be charged for a crime and arrested before it is ever committed; based on an interpretation of metadata.
Closing quote from 1984 Redux the Chapter on “The DHS Extremist Report, The New Hate Crimes Law and HR2647”
“The Federal Government would have the right to step in, to supersede a State’s decision, and try an individual of the same crime twice if the outcome is not appeasing to the victim party or the government. This legislation could make it an offense to simply state an opposing opinion to anyone of a different or opposing religion or sexual preference and turn random crimes into a hate crime. Essentially this legislation is a form of thought policing by putting the crime into the eye of the beholder. The New Hate Crimes Bill would take us one step closer to a Totalitarian government controlled society. This bill takes political correctness to a complete new”