[Summit] Overnight parking (was Re: Summit Digest, Vol 113, Issue 22)
Nathaniel W. Turner
nate at houseofnate.net
Tue Aug 26 15:59:59 CDT 2014
Thank you both for the thoughtful responses.
I suppose I'll have to read through the list archives some time for more
historical background on this topic.
On 08/26/2014 01:33 PM, Dean W wrote:
> Hi Nate,
> I think Francisco did a great job of answering the question, and I
> share his perspective. I would also add that more cars on the street
> overnight present more opportunities for cover when walking around at
> night. If a potential criminal is casing a house or pedestrian, and a
> police officer or other on-looker happen by, parked cars present cover
> to hide.
> I am sure I'll get responses to this saying that "we live in a city",
> "don't be alarmist", etc. I agree, and I am not actually concerned
> that we have too much property theft or violent crime. I am just
> reducing the facts to a basic level: more cars = more cover. This is
> just one of the problems I personally see with the Overnight Parking
> program, which again, was NOT passed by City Council, and is - in fact
> - an "indefinite pilot program" (oxymoron) enacted by mayoral
> executive order.
> My thoughts only.
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:58:35 -0500
> From: Francisco <pacolovera at hotmail.com
> <mailto:pacolovera at hotmail.com>>
> To: "Nathaniel W. Turner" <nate at houseofnate.net
> <mailto:nate at houseofnate.net>>,
> "summit at sna.providence.ri.us
> <mailto:summit at sna.providence.ri.us>" <summit at sna.providence.ri.us
> <mailto:summit at sna.providence.ri.us>>
> Subject: Re: [Summit] Overnight parking (was Re: SNA Meeting
> addressing area crime, Crime Watch, & Overnight Parking)
> Message-ID: <BLU181-W44CF8C4ED7DFD6B7EB9D4D1DF0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> You are correct. The parking ban would not deter crime during the
> daylight hours or through the time that parking was allowed (up to
> 1 am?) What I heard directly from a former police chief in
> Providence is that as a patrol man if you see a car parked in
> front of someone's house at late hours you can easily assume that
> the car either does not belong to the neigborhood (best case
> visitor or forgeful homeowner) and write down the plate. If a
> crime in the area is committed, you have at least one lead. With
> many cars on the street it becomes more labor intensive to do a
> scope of all the streets and check every single car wihtou a
> sticker every day. I totally concur with you, the parking ban does
> not help to deter crime during the day when most people are at work
> Also, as neighbors, I agree with you, we can tell when there is a
> new car in the neigborhood. Which again, requires eyes on the
> street. These may not happen when people are not necessarily
> looking (at work or at night) If it wasn't for my neighbor who
> feeds her baby at 4 am, we would have no lead whatsoever on the
> recent break ins.
> As a recent victim of one of these crimes, I am oversensitive to
> cars (especially unfamiliar ones) on my street.
> Conclusion, removing the parking ban has its pros and cons. More
> effective policing at night is one of the cons. We, as neighbors,
> decide the weigh in the pros and cons and request a solution (re:
> parking ban) on each block. After all, we are in a democratic
> Francisco J. Lovera
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Summit