I see, we are talking about two different things apparently.

It's called evidence-based medicine and we are talking about evidence-based policy. In this case to specifically deal with inner city violence.

I was saying, somewhat tongue in cheek, that the reason physicians all rely on the AHA for guidelines for treating hypertension is for liability reasons. Evidence based or not, if they follow the common community guidelines, it helps protect them from personal liability if something goes wrong.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

This is when you said something about the federal government (you contended that the money for solutions had to come from somewhere above the local level), and it's the post from which this entire line of discussion has followed.

"Seems like the solution is local but it needs money from somewhere. What is the problem with it coming from the feds* vs. the state? Aren't we all Americans who are in this together? " - Post 39

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Maybe, but I think most of them are just looking for the most effective way to treat their patients' conditions. That's not really something you can figure out on your own. Of course, there is an art to medicine and any physician going to have their own experiences and insights but you've got to have evidence based guidelines to operate within and that requires some sort of higher level organization to come up with and disseminate the information. It's just not something individual physicians or even groups of physicians can do. They don't have the resources or time to do it.

I don't care if it's the feds, the state, some independent organization, etc. I'm just saying evidence based policy would be a good thing, which is essentially what the articles posted are saying and it's just not realistic for every locale to develop it's own best practices for whatever the issue is, because like physicians they don't have the resources or time to do this. Of course once you know what you should be doing to get the good outcomes, implementing it will require local tweaking.

OK, it's not like I was advocating for that but it seems ridiculous to me if the feds are the solution to shoot yourself in the foot based on principle. If there is some other means of gathering evidence-based solutions to problems and getting them adopted then I'm all for that. Whatever it takes.

Relying on the local govt. to come up with the solutions just doesn't seem realistic. Of course some will come up with the solution, and then the question is how do we get every other local govt. to know a solution exists and implement it?

I don't know if local is the right echelon, or if it's county, or State, etc. I would prefer to address problems as locally as is possible, and only move to the federal level if required. Jumping directly to the federal level is how we have allowed the federal government to become so entrenched in local daily policies, which is not the model we're supposed to be following.

As to your question, law enforcement agencies share information in all sorts of ways. There are journals, websites, conferences, etc on a regular basis. Agencies have websites. Municipalities crow about their successes in newspapers, articles, etc. Places that have problems look to other places to see if they have similar problems and/or if they've found successful strategies. It's not like these localities live in complete isolation from one another and are unable to share information.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)