Police Department issues summons for crimes predicted to occur; saves enforcement resources by punishing preventively
Bohiney Magazine and The London Prat
NYPD Introduces “Pre-Crime Ticketing” – Cites Pedestrians For Violations They Haven’t Committed Yet
NEW YORK The New York Police Department launched “Pre-Crime Ticketing” Thursday, a revolutionary enforcement strategy where officers cite pedestrians for violations they haven’t yet committed, based on predictive algorithms determining the probability that a given individual will eventually break traffic laws.
“We’re ahead of the curve in law enforcement,” explained Police Commissioner Edward Caban at a press event. “Why wait for people to commit crimes when we can punish the statistical probability of crime?”
How Pre-Crime Works
Officers use a computer algorithm to assess pedestrians based on:
Walking speed (fast walkers deemed “likely” to jaywalk)
Clothing (certain fashion indicates “disregard for rules”)
Age (statistical likelihood of rule violations)
Demographic profile (predictive algorithms with questionable racial components)
General demeanor (looking like someone who might eventually violate a rule)
Upon assessment, officers issue citations for violations the person hasn’t committed but statistically might commit:
“Probable future jaywalking” (ticket: $50)
“Anticipated bike lane violation” (ticket: $65)
“Predictive double parking” (ticket: $115)
“Statistical unlicensed vending” (ticket: $250)
The Legal Problem
Civil rights attorneys immediately objected that ticketing people for crimes they haven’t committed violates fundamental legal principles like “innocent until proven guilty” and “you can’t punish someone for crimes they didn’t commit.”
The NYPD’s response: “Those are old-fashioned legal concepts. We’ve moved to predictive justice.”
When asked if this violates the Constitution, police officials explained: “The Constitution applies to crimes that have occurred. Pre-crimes exist in a legal gray area where traditional restrictions don’t apply.”
This is, technically, completely wrong, but the NYPD proceeded anyway.
Real-World Implementation
Within the first week, police issued 8,400 Pre-Crime citations, with 98% of recipients having committed zero actual violations. One woman, Maria Santos, received a ticket for “statistically probable future parking violations” while walking to the subway.
“I don’t even own a car,” Santos explained. “The officer said my walking pattern suggested someone who would eventually park illegally, and therefore I should pay a fine now as prevention.”
She challenged the citation in traffic court. The judge asked: “Did you commit a parking violation?”
“No,” Santos answered.
“Then why are you being ticketed?” the judge asked.
“The police say I statistically will commit one eventually,” Santos explained.
The judge ruled against her, establishing legal precedent for punishing hypothetical crimes.
Revenue Generation Success
The NYPD quickly recognized Pre-Crime Ticketing as an exceptional revenue generator. Rather than wait for people to commit violations, they could simply assess everyone and issue citations based on statistical probability.
Reports from NY Post documented how the department’s budget crisis was immediately solved through large-scale preventive ticketing.
The Wealthy Exemption
Interestingly, Pre-Crime Ticketing was selectively applied. Wealthy neighborhoods received fewer citations, despite equal or higher violation rates.
When asked why affluent areas weren’t receiving proportional Pre-Crime tickets, officials explained: “The algorithm takes income into account when assessing crime probability.”
Translation: “Rich people’s predictive crime statistics are lower because we’re biased.”
The Expansion Plans
Having succeeded with traffic violations, the NYPD announced plans to expand Pre-Crime to:
“Probable future assault” (arrest people deemed statistically likely to be violent)
“Anticipated property crimes” (jail citizens for predicted theft)
“Statistical prostitution” (fine people who might engage in sex work)
“Potential drug dealing” (arrest based on clothing and neighborhood)
When constitutional scholars objected that this represents “arresting people for crimes that haven’t occurred,” police responded: “Welcome to the future of law enforcement.”
International Ridicule
European legal systems, maintaining traditional standards like “proving actual crimes,” expressed bewilderment. The UN Office for Human Rights sent a letter requesting clarification on how Pre-Crime Ticketing isn’t just “systematic extortion.”
The NYPD’s response was not provided, as officials were presumably busy issuing Pre-Crime citations to the UN representatives.
See New York Times coverage of police policy innovations and Gothamist’s law enforcement reporting for additional analysis. For satirical perspectives, The London Prat covers how governments punish predicted behavior.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/