More cops isn't necessarily the right answer, especially when you're trying to get the community involved. It's a step in the right direction, however, and hopefully as Mayor he gets the cloying gentrified masses swallowing up the CD into the act of cleaning up their own neighborhood.

I mean, we know neighborhood watch programs work, we know they aren't that expensive, and we know they can be up and running within weeks.

I can't find Mallahan's policy document - can you point me to it?

Thanks.

Cops aren't the only answer, but they're a part of the answer. When people have to wait hours for an officer to investigate a burglary that just happened, it's an indication that we don't have enough officers to go around.

Neighborhood Watch programs need police to staff up to levels where they will actually respond to calls from the Neighborhood Watch program.

Banning guns in parks is stupid. If I have a CCW permit, why shouldn't I be able to? Gangbangers never have registered guns, so they are committing a felony just carrying a gun most of the time. That law would only really affect law abiding citizens.

2. Engagement. Police cannot solve the crime problem alone. We need people in neighborhoods to be an active partner in public safety. To accomplish this, we need to give neighborhood leaders a real seat at the table on public safety issues and policies. We need to fully listen to them and help them design policies and play a role in carrying them out.

Just we need! Another committee!

@3,@4: I understand, and I fully support beefing up the force. I'm just wary of a plan that forgoes any mention of a robust neighborhood watch program. I grew up in a violent neighborhood where shootings happened 6 nights out of 7 a week, and it stayed like that until we got a neighborhood watch program. From coordinated efforts like turning on all outside lights whenever a commotion was heard to walking groups, it really did its job.

Ok, I'll give his plan a B. I especially like the idea for drug and mental health courts. And I would love to see an actual community policing plan to be put into place. Maybe we can hope for, perish the thought, cops walking the beat?

More cops is the answer.

And don't give the department discretionary money that they will just waste on high tech toys and cool looking cars and motorcycles and crap like that (I'm looking at you, Dodge Charger Hemi with a trunk too small to carry basic cop gear and Harley-Davidson FLHGLHXTMOUSE that costs a fortune to maintain and weighs 9,000 pounds and can't turn). Make them hire cops and make them ride Japanese or German motorcycles. And drive Ford LTD Crown Vics, god damn showboats. Jesus, is this a TV show or a police force?

And how come the WA State Patrol has enough sense to wear modern, full-body protective riding gear while the SPD rides around in Marlon Brando leather jackets or shirt sleeves like they wore on CHiPs? Do our cops seriously think they're on TV? But I digress.

Neighborhood watches are bad. The are especially bad in Seattle because they only add more seats at the table for the Seattle Process to grind all action to a halt, and they empower NIMBYs to demand irrational resource distribution based not on proven need but on who sqeals the loudest (I'm looking at you www.myballard.com and the crime hysteria you spread just to boost ad impressions).

Banning guns in parks is stupid.

If we can't make families with kids feel unsafe due to adult kooks with guns roaming around in parks, how can we keep park costs down?

I mean, seriously, more kids and families with kids in parks will lead to a reduction in TV watching and video game playing and then MSFT and Nintendo will have reduced revenues and fewer drugs will be prescribed for ADHD and kids won't get obese.

(stares blankly at gun nuts)

@9 for Slog comment of the year. Right the fuck on.

Late, but at least it looks good. Focusing on drug and mental health court should help move people out of jail and into treatment. It will take state and federal efforts to keep dangerous offenders in treatment long term/permanently (think Kalebu).

I think McGinn's all-volunteer campaign has been slow to organize policy statements on a lot of things. They're erring on the side of creating thoughtful policies and collecting information. Time is running out, and I'm glad to see that they're moving forward. It also seems like they're not terribly astute at publicity, which will hopefully change. They've been organizing non-media events, which helps shape policy but leaves them open to (valid) criticism that no one knows what they're doing.

Well, I actually feel better about supporting McGinn after seeing that he was able to respond fairly quickly when someone called him out. Nothing terribly original, but there are some real policy commitments, and Mallahan isn't doing any better in this department (nor would Nickels have, honestly).

There is really no simple way to be the law and order candidate. Giuliani did it, but Sidran following essentially the same playbook couldn't. Part of the problem is that high-crime neighborhoods tend to feel both under-served and over-hassled by the police. While increasing police presence may be a good way of reducing crime, promising to do so may also be a way of getting fewer votes.

@13 says "They've been organizing non-media events, which helps shape policy but leaves them open to (valid) criticism that no one knows what they're doing."

So tell me, what is Mallahan doing? Do you know?