Go to qualitypolicing.com

Tag: causes of crime

  • Shootings up in NYC

    Shootings are up 20 percent this year. Bratton is blaming marijuana. I doubt it. But maybe. I’m certainly willing to consider the idea. Most liberals, I find, never ever consider the idea that their advocacy might have unintended consequences, like more young black men getting murdered.

    That said, Bratton pointed to drug dealers getting killed. That was illegal last year and remains illegal this year. So I’m not certain how not arrested people for small scale marijuana possession really changes anything. (For public safety or Broken Windows, that is. It certain matters for the guy getting arrested or not.) If the increase is as Bratton describes it, these killings seem more like old-fashioned Prohibition killings than decriminalization killings.

    But… it could be that criminals are more brazen in response to less aggressive policing. And maybe some robber smoking a joint last year would have gotten stopped by the po-po. But not so in 2015. I’m not saying that is the reason. But it’s possible.

    Here’s the story in the Times. Worth reading if you’re into this kind of thing.

  • High security walls may increase violent crime.

    This is interesting, albeit about South Africa. But the basic idea is this:

    Walls are actually making things worse. “No one can see what is happening in
    your home so no one can help,” she told the [South African] Daily News.
    They keep people from being each other’s natural lookout. And they are an even bigger barrier to social cohesion, in a country that needs it a lot.

    Further, Marks told Quartz that high walls not only fail to curb crime, they attract criminals—once inside, the criminal is as isolated as the homeowner, free to do as they please.

  • “Why aren’t more Christians speaking out against Lindsey Blansett?”

    Lindsey Blansett killed her 10-year-old son by stabbing him and bashing him a rock so he could “go to heaven” rather than face a life full of “suffering and pains.” I haven’t heard anybody blame Jesus Christ for this woman’s actions. But I’d bet she was driven by her own mistaken perception of Christian ideology. I suspect that she considered herself a Christian. But Christians don’t stab and bash their children with rocks. An effective shortcut to heaven? That, I can safely say, is a misreading of the Bible.

    So where are the Christian priests condemning Blansett’s actions? To date, I have seen no statement from Bartholomew, His Most Divine All-Holiness and Ecumenical Patriarch of the Greek-Orthodox Church. Does this mean 23-million Greek Orthodox, myself included, secretly condone Blansett’s actions? Of course not. Some times homicidal people are just crazy.

    I mention this because it really is no different than blaming all Muslims (or Islam itself) when self-proclaimed “Islamic” terrorists kill people. We don’t blame all Jews (or Judaism itself) for the actions of Baruch Goldstein. Nor do we blame Christianity for Lindsey Blansett. See, when you kill innocent people, you’re not a good follower of any religion. That really should go without saying.

    Merry Christmas!

  • Better Policing Equals Less Crime

    This is a no-brainer to many, but a lot of people — usually those who don’t like police — still deny or diminish it: cops matter. And national trends are the result not some crime-related miasma but of the collective work in individual cities and neighborhoods.

    Camden, NJ, is worth paying attention to. I haven’t been following it too closely, but what I do know (in part due to my colleague John DeCarlo) is very interesting. Then:

    In January 2011, the state slashed the budget for the city’s police department by nearly 23 percent. The police union was dissolved after half of the uniformed officers were let go. The department – criticized by some as incompetent and ineffective – was then reconstituted as a county-run enterprise. But until new recruits could be brought on, the city suffered under the draconian cuts. There were nights when only 12 officers patrolled the entire nine square miles of the city.

    And now:

    The city – frequently labeled “America’s Most Dangerous” – has recorded as of Friday the fewest homicides in a year going back to at least 2010.

    In addition, during the first six months of 2014, the number of gunshots in the city fell nearly 50 percent over the previous year….

    Despite two fatal shootings in quick succession this week, the number of killings is less than half of that two years ago. By Halloween 2012, Camden had buried 55 victims. This time last year, it had 43. As of Oct. 31, the city had seen 24. In 2010, at this point, there were 30.

    …

    By civilianizing or outsourcing every job that does not require a gun or a badge, the county-run force bolstered the number of boots on the ground.

    Police walking beats are supplemented with “virtual patrols” by civilians, who monitor 120 surveillance cameras bolted to light poles. An additional 40 to 60 private security guards, sporting yellow-and-blue vests, roam the business district, calling in reports to the command center.

    Of course some people still complain, but haters are always gonna hate.

    Meanwhile…

    Vallejo [California] has struggled for years. Crippled by high pension costs and public-employee salaries, it filed for bankruptcy in 2008. Things didn’t get much better after the city emerged from Chapter 9 in 2011: Crime was bad and the city’s police department was perpetually short-staffed. There were 10 murders in 2010, 14 in 2012, and 24 in 2013.

    Obviously both cities cannot simply be reflective of some “national trend.”

  • Reporter fired for politically incorrect editorializing

    With regards to the killing of Jersey City Police Officer Melvin Santiago, Fox News TV reporter Sean Bergin no longer has a job after editorializing on-air:

    It’s important to shine a light on this racist mentality that has so contaminated policing and America’s inner-cities. … The underlying cause for all of this, of course, is America’s racist criminal justice system that makes it impossible for young black men to succeed. It’s nearly impossible to cover the issue in-depth and accurately when surrounded by stark raving conservatives who masquerade as journalists.

    Just kidding.

    Bergin didn’t say that. And he didn’t work for Fox. The truth is, if he had said that, it’s very unlikely he would have been fired. He was fired for editorializing in a conservative manner, based on his what he’s seen as a reporter.

    What Bergin actually said on-air was:

    We were besieged, flooded with calls from police officers furious that we would give media coverage to the life of a cop killer. It’s understandable. We decided to air it because it’s important to shine a light on the anti-cop mentality that has so contaminated America’s inner cities. This same, sick, perverse line of thinking is evident from Jersey City, to Newark and Patterson to Trenton.

    It has made the police officer’s job impossible, and it has got to stop. The underlying cause for all of this, of course: young black men growing up without fathers. Unfortunately, no one in the news media has the courage to touch that subject.

    Do I agree with this? Not one-hundred percent, but he certainly brings up a fair issue. Is what he said overly simplistic? Of course. But let’s not set the bar too high for local TV news. This sure beats another cute animal video. And don’t give me that “reporters shouldn’t have an opinion” bit. Or “there’s a time a place for everything.” This was a great time and place to express his opinion on a major problem.

    Bergin later told The Blaze(and then it was picked up by the AP and other news sites):

    I broke the rules, but I broke the rules because I was doing the right thing. You can’t fix a problem if you don’t talk about the problem. The truth is, 73 percent of African-American children grow up without fathers. It’s a topic that needs to be handled delicately — and really, this situation could have been used as a way to explore that.

    Now that 73 percent figure isn’t true and a reporter should know better than to throw around misleading statistics. (There’s a big difference between not having legally married parents living together at time of birth and “growing up without a father.” Regardless, the comparable figure for whites is 29 percent.) But still, Bergin’s greater point is valid: there’s a problem here; we need to talk about it and get to the bottom of it.

    Bergin went on:

    “I’m in these housing projects all the time, and it’s all for the same thing: black men slaughtering each other in the streets. Why is this happening?” he continued, adding that it’s nearly impossible to cover the issue in-depth and accurately when surrounded by “stark raving liberals who masquerade as journalists.”

    OK, strike two again Bergin for using the phrase “stark-raving liberal.” But I’ll give him credit for this: his opinions come from actually visiting the homes and neighborhoods where the violence happens. He sees bad things happening and actually cares. Before you criticize him, ask yourself if you care. Think about the last time you’ve done anything in a high-crime neighborhood other than lock your car doors.

    As I wrote in Cop in the Hood:

    If you really want to learn about the ghetto, go there. There’s probably one near you. Visit a church; walk down the street; buy something from the corner store; have a beer; eat. But most importantly, talk to people. That’s how you learn. When the subject turns to drugs and crime, you’ll hear a common refrain: “It just don’t make sense.”

    Bergin did all this. Reality, as cops well know, isn’t always politically correct. And you don’t have to like what what he says to defend his right to say it.

  • Gun Guys, by Dan Baum

    Gun Guys, by Dan Baum

    I finished reading Gun Guys, and it’s very good.

    Here’s Dan Baum talking about his book on the BBC. And here he a more in-depth interview with Dan Baum on KMO’s C-Realm Podcast (which just happens to have been recorded in my basement). [Update: and here is Baum in the New York Times.]

    Baum makes the point that nothing productive with gun policy unless anti-gun people actually listen to gun guys. And he presents his case from a “liberal Jewish gun-loving” perspective. This book isn’t a defense of the NRA, since the NRA represent but a small minority of gun owners (something like 4 million of 100 million gun owners). But rather an attack on the gut-level reaction so many liberals have against gun, without considering (or worse, mindlessly dismissing) the thoughts, feelings, and needs of hundreds of million of non-criminal gun owners.

    A take-away point is that guns are here, like them or not. We can pass all the pointless laws we want, but if we want a safer and less violent America, we need to have an engaging, serious, and rational conversation about guns. Gun Guys does that. How does it make sense to advocate restricting something when the people advocating such restrictions have no idea what they’re talking about? For instance, if the goal is fewer guns, how does it make sense to push for laws that result in a boom in gun sales?

    I do think Baum places a bit too much of the onus on people who don’t like guns. It doesn’t seem to much to ask for a less violent America. Even an America with fewer guns (not that those two are necessarily related–the past two decades have seen less restrictive gun laws, more guns, and a reduction in violence). But to say something isn’t politically feasible is different than saying something isn’t a good and even noble goal.

    Baum stretches credibility a bit when he makes the analogy that hating gun owners is akin to being racist or anti-semitic. But he’s right in that such mindless hatred is often based in ignorance and fear of people the hater makes no effort to get to know. But what about the mindless and ignorant fear of gun owners who think their guns are going to be taken away or feel an irrational need to protect themselves from some criminal class of people? From my perspective, too much of “gun rights” is linked to “state’s rights” and “protecting a way of life” and fear of some “them” taking over America. Until there is serious discussion about repealing the 2nd Amendment, why such paranoia about an assault on freedom? I mean, I love the 1st Amendment, but I’m not shouting objectionable things in the street to protect my 1st Amendment rights. Why? Because they’re not in jeopardy!

    There’s also the point (not in the book) that guns are not freedom. Guns protect freedom. We should be worried about our freedoms being taken away (warrantless searches, mass incarceration, indefinite detention without due process, Presidential-ordered assassinations of US citizens). Having guns without freedom is, to paraphrase Bill Maher, like being in a titty-bar filled with bouncers but no strippers!

    Regardless, Baum makes the essential point that simply hating guns and people who own them is counterproductive from any anti-gun or anti-violence perspective. Most guns are not the problem. Most gun owners are not the problem. And until gun-control people get that through their thick liberal heads, nothing productive will ever happen. Certainly this book is a great starting point to any rational discussion on guns and gun policy. It’s also a good read.

    At its core (and in its title), Gun Guys is a road trip. Who doesn’t like a road trip? Baum takes the reader on an adventure while he talks to as many gun owners and stops in as many gun shops and gun shows as possible. Entertaining and educational! What more could one ask for?

    Now buy his book and read it. You’ll be happy you did.

  • No Excuse for Shooting

    Can we please stop using being teased and bullied, no matter how bad, as an excuse to kill yourself or others? I can’t help but wonder if there’s a link between the criminalization of bullying, a culture (on the left andthe right) that embraces victimhood (not to mention guns), and mass shootings.

    If you are going to kill, can’t you at least kill just the bullier?

  • Please stop acting like “idiots and assholes”

    The solution to all crime? Philadelphia Mayor Nutter hits the nail on the head: “The first way to stop this kind of stuff is for young people to home, where they’re supposed to be home, and for adults not to act like idiots and asshole out in the streets of our city.”

    Kind of like in 2008 when he saidafter the Phillies won the World Series, “You can be joyous, you cannot be a jackass.” Fair enough.

    [thanks to Alex]

  • Kill kill kill

    If the state can censor sexfrom the eyes of children, why can it not censer violence? Isn’t sex better than violence? It certainly is more fun.

    I guess I’ll have to read the Supreme Court’s decision…

    And consider this: perhaps the more violent video games of the past few decades have actually contributed to the dropin crime. I’m not saying it has, but it’s a hypothesis I’d be very willing to consider.

  • Poverty doesn’t equal crime

    James Q. Wilson writes some good stuff on crime in the Wall Street Journal. But this worries me:

    Culture creates a problem for social scientists like me, however. We do not know how to study it in a way that produces hard numbers and testable theories. Culture is the realm of novelists and biographers, not of data-driven social scientists. But we can take some comfort, perhaps, in reflecting that identifying the likely causes of the crime decline is even more important than precisely measuring it.

    Culture doesn’t create a problem for social scientists like me. If social scientists can’t deal with culture, who can? It’s time for sociologists to step up to the plate. And it’s time to take qualitative methods more seriously.