Invisíveis Vigiados: Agentes Públicos de Segurança e Sua Interação Com os Indivíduos em Situação de Rua
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O artigo analisa as percepções dos agentes das forças públicas de segurança sobre os indivíduos em situação de rua em uma metrópole brasileira. Tal análise mostra-se essencial para verificar a adequação/inadequação dos parâmetros de atuação do Estado em relação a essa população vulnerável. Realizou-se pesquisa qualitativa, descritiva por meio de estudo de caso com a Guarda Civil Municipal de Belo Horizonte (GMBH) e a Polícia Militar de Minas Gerais (PMMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brasil, utilizando-se 18 entrevistas semiestruturadas. Os achados de pesquisa reforçam a discricionariedade como núcleo inerente à atividade das forças públicas de segurança na lide com as pessoas em situação de rua, a partir de um viés preconceituoso e estigmatizante, centrado em um policiamento de cunho tradicional, estruturado a partir de práticas repressivas e de sujeição criminal. O estudo evidenciou ainda uma atuação de cunho “higienista” por parte dos agentes públicos de segurança, de fiscalização e controle das pessoas e do espaço urbano, geralmente voltados para interesses de atores com maior voz no contexto social (comerciantes, agentes imobiliários, residentes etc.) e não às necessidades das populações vulneráveis. Por sua vez, enquanto os agentes da GMBH denotam maior grau de imersão e apreensão do contexto urbano, os policiais militares atuam visando a persecução do “inimigo”, não obstante o ethos policial guerreiro permear a ação de ambas as forças públicas de segurança. O estudo contribui para desvendar a ação policial no trato com populações vulneráveis em um contexto urbano marcado por desigualdades apontando para a necessidade de aprimoramento na formação policial. The article examines the public security officers’ perceptions of homeless individuals in a Brazilian metropolis. Such analysis is essential to verify the adequacy/inadequacy of the State's parameters of action about this vulnerable population. The authors performed a qualitative and descriptive research through a case study, with the Municipal Civil Guard of Belo Horizonte (GMBH) and the Military Police of Minas Gerais (PMMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil, using 18 semi-structured interviews. Research findings reinforce discretion as a core inherent in the activity of public security forces when dealing with homeless people, from a prejudiced and stigmatizing bias centered on traditional policing, based on repressive practices and criminal subjection. The study also highlighted a “hygienist” approach by the public security, inspection and control officers on people and urban space, usually focused on the interests of agents with a greater voice in the social context (traders, real estate agents, residents etc.) and not on the needs of vulnerable populations. On the other hand, while GMBH agents denote a greater degree of immersion and concern for the urban context, military police act to pursue the “enemy”, despite the warlike police ethos permeating the action of both security forces. The study contributes to uncovering police action needs when dealing with vulnerable populations in an urban context marked by inequalities, showing the need for improvement in police formation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".