CONCORD, CA (Aug. 19, 2021) — There were 488 people (at least I hope they were people, though I always suspect Russian trolls are hiding in the ether of the Internet) responding to the latest shotgun blast of questions on multiple topics but mostly drones.
Here is a recap of some, though space will not allow me to get all of them in one shot.
“I do not trust the Concord police to use drones responsibly.”
12 percent, strongly agree.
29, neither agree nor disagree.
13, strongly disagree.
This sets up and corresponds to the answers on: “I oppose all police changes unless there is an independent of staff/council oversight board with authority to fire police and issue subpoenas.”
As well as: “All highway entrances and exits in Concord should have a camera and license plate reader.”
However, when you start to get into details, the hard-core opposition seems to shift or melt.
“Given the current structure of police in Concord, I support the additional use of drones in cases of active crime scenes, missing persons, fires, documenting crime scenes and court-approved searches or warrants.”
70 percent, yes.
13, not sure.
It should be noted that the Concord police indicated that this is exactly their intent.
The community is just about equally split on whether the use of a drone at a public outdoor political event will reduce the freedom of speech, with 36 percent agreeing and 39 percent disagreeing. Considering the plethora of cameras in phones and the like, I find this interesting.
However, there is a strong belief that the use of drones will have no effect on the chance of a riot breaking out at a political event, as 17 believe it and 47 percent disagree it will have a reduction effect.
On other issues
“In thinking of the job that the district attorney in Contra Costa is doing, I am:”
3 percent, very satisfied.
53, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.
17, very dissatisfied.
Seeing that those with a direct opinion have a more than 2 to 1 unfavorable view puts a lot of pressure on the upcoming political campaigns to get to those 53 percent who have not made up their minds. Look for this to become a focus of attention in the beginning of next year.
“What do we do with homeless encampments who will not go to the shelter or transitional housing or a formal regulated encampment site?”
3 percent, nothing; leave them where they are.
22, have no idea.
52, force them to move off of private or public land.
23, other ideas.
More than 110 folks offered other ideas, some of which echoed harsher terms than simply moving them off. The catch phrase for those in the majority above might be: “Get help or get out.”
A current thread in about 20 percent of the responses showed that people did not understand the question, since they answered things like “Send them to tiny homes or a formal encampment” when the question dealt with what to do with those who refuse that. Maybe I have to work on a clearer question.
I will go over more of the responses next month. In the meantime, send your suggested topics and neutral questions to EdiBirsan@gmail.com.
The opinions expressed herein or up there in print are the sole opinions of Edi Birsan and are not related to anyone seeking to find the Holy Grail of Journalism or plagiarize a failing composition from English 101 in a Graustark College of Alien Studies.