Crime and punishment - problems at the intersection of sciences

This post is the answer to the article “Increasing security in two clicks” by the respected Albrt . I first wanted to write a comment, but then I estimated the size and decided to publish it as an article.
I would like to look at the proposed concept from a slightly different critical angle, talking about some realities of being and sharing thoughts about why such “bright” projects can cause serious problems.

The idea is not new, and thanks for developing it to an interactive service, but the approach and its lightness gave me mixed feelings - on the one hand everything is fine, cool, come on, but on the other - somehow naive, simple and without a hint of legal aspects. It seemed to me a little not serious.

Spherically and in a vacuum, I am with you, for your project, the dream is rather utopian, but it is the dreams that come true that often give the best result.
In this regard, there are several BUT that can not be discounted, and bohdan4ik has already outlined the main points , but let me go through the thesis on your article (believe, not for malice, but adequacy for) and pay attention to, perhaps, obvious social and ideological moments, if the service promises to be more social, as well as ask a few questions:

The number of witnesses to any incident will increase dramatically. Increased crime detection. Crime will decrease

The number of witnesses has little effect on detection and crime rates.
')

Potential criminals will quickly realize that it has become much more difficult to commit a crime and go unnoticed. They are aware of the increased risks. This will reduce crime.

For a criminal who is going to commit a crime, which is a risk in itself, such a concept as risk has no sign. There is only one indicator - the achievement of a mercenary goal.

People will start helping each other in emergency situations, and this will change their attitude towards each other and will begin to change the very atmosphere in society from fear to trust.

Relations between people, as it is not regrettable, are mainly based on egocentric principles and no tool or rules can change this, except for education.

As for the "Making work" law enforcement agencies - not every law makes them work, why did you decide that this service, located outside the legal field, can do this?

The commission of a crime against a person or his property is often a criminal act and is prosecuted in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, in accordance with applicable law.
Accordingly, your service must comply with this order and be deeply integrated not only into the social, but also into the legal component. And cooperation with the executive branch is difficult, not rewarding, and, most importantly, almost useless. Let me share the personal experiences of "Batman" and "Victims":

Victim

In the city of "H" an attempt was made by an armed attack by an organized group of persons with the aim of seizing other people's property.
From the testimony of the victims: At about 21:20, my cousin walked the dog. Three unfamiliar young people approached us and, threatening with a knife, demanded to give them outer clothing. Being physically well prepared, one of the victims tried to repel the attacker, but was wounded with a knife in the arm area. Then the dog was given the command of an attack ...
The dog is a trained rottweiler. 5 years.
The result - a brother slightly injured in the arm, I have multiple bruises, abrasions. We crushed them well, but their numerical advantage and knife outweighed them. I had to call the dog for help and call the police. The dog helped - 1 body at once, two more during the week. It was only thanks to the efforts of his father, an experienced criminal lawyer, that my brother managed to avoid three years in prison.

Batman

In the same city, I prevented the robbery of a girl.
Returning late in the evening from friends (noted by the DR), I saw two young thugs (14-16 years old) who somehow suspiciously “wiped” the girl is clearly not their social circle. Having caught up with NMI, I heard demanded from her jewelry and money. I decided to stand up for the girl and drew their attention to myself (what can two teenagers do to me ??? Ha.)
The girl quickly orientated and managed to escape, and I had to take the fight with the "twelve" juvenile scumbags right next to my house. I broke one of my jaws, knocked one out, beat several well (bruises, abrasions, and one broken nose), but I could not resist against bits and fixtures. A month in the hospital, constant visits by investigators, and now I’m already sewn to st. 114 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - the year of life.

Now I will explain - as I said earlier, a crime - the concept is legal, and any opposition will necessarily be associated with the law, whether you want it or not.
It does not matter in what way or with the help of what means the crime was prevented - if there is a crime - there must be punishment. And then the first stone - the victim. If there is no victim, there is no business, well, or at least, there is a “hanger”, which our software dislike very much.

Implementation issues

Even if we imagine that technically everything is filed and works flawlessly - a number of difficulties arise at the interface of jurisprudence and technology.
In this case, what is the primary signal? What is the entry point to the “Crime Prevention” procedure?
If it is, for example, a “message to others” who, in theory, should come up and prevent a crime, or at least become witnesses in the case, but cannot be such because “not everyone has seen it” or “not at all have seen. "

To initiate proceedings in fact, it is necessary to carry out a number of procedures, starting with the filing of the appropriate application. Your service can only act as indirect evidence, and then with a stretch.
If there are many witnesses around with the application, but the victim is not a participant in the project - what should be then? Who is the entry point?

If we imagine that receiving a message about a crime “nearby” gives a person the legal status of a “witness”, and pressing the “alarm button” to “victims”, then we get a priori many witnesses who do not understand whether they saw and saw at all, as well as it may not be converted due to the lack of reliable "witnesses" or "evidence".
As a result, the person hoped for the help of others and the service, and as a result - no one, Hoping to prove something in court, but the data on the “uncertified” servers cannot be evidence, and can only pass as indirect, despite the fact that there sfotana mug criminal at the time of the attack.

Do not forget about the fact that the storage and accumulation of such information also carries a certain threat.
1 - This is the personal data of the people who will have to be protected.
2 - The threat of illegitimate compromise of citizens
3 - Considering the current legislation and the manners of ordinary people, it is possible that the “alleged criminals” of other project participants or third parties may be wrongfully prosecuted.

I believe that such projects should be implemented, and I support the author, but they need to be raised to the federal level. After all, if it comes to crime and punishment, then you need to be approached with extreme caution and responsibility. A formal procedure must be agreed upon, which means that changes are necessary in individual legal documents. And we all know not by hearsay what this can lead to.

The unofficial procedure, in this context, should not be made public at all in order to avoid legal prosecution for committing an offense.
And here I want to remember the help of my uncle, mentioned earlier: “If necessary, defend yourself, but in such a way that nobody will see for a long time. And go quickly. ”Otherwise, the victim can quickly turn into an accused.

Perhaps you would think that the article is too gloomy and critical, and everything is not so scary and fatal, but I want to warn everyone against such considerations, because if we write innocuous service it is one thing, but if we do something that affects the safety of others people - we are obliged to approach this project very seriously and take into account ALL possible results, and calculate not only potentially useful, but also potentially dangerous consequences, even though they seem “unreal” to us.
187-FZ was also considered unreal, and science fiction writers even wrote books ...

PS: Accepted title adjustments