Crime Down in L.A., Local Newspaper Baffled
When the crime experts are baffled, I’m here to help.
The Los Angeles Times reported last week that crime in the city of Los Angeles has dropped for the tenth straight year. As is often the case, criminologists are at pains to explain why. Note that there are always ready explanations when crime goes up. You simply point to whatever socioeconomic malady that happens to be occurring and blame it for any concurrent rise in the crime rate.
Recession? Crime goes up.
Housing slump? Ditto.
Rise in unemployment? Uh huh. You get the idea.
It all fits in nicely with the poverty-causes-crime meme accepted as gospel by many on the Left and even some on the Right.
But here in Los Angeles the economic news has been even worse these past few years than it has been in the country as a whole. Though it’s been trending downward lately, the unemployment rate in L.A. has been above 9 percent for four years. And though the real estate market has begun to rebound, home prices in some areas of Southern California are still far below the highs seen back in 2006. If hard economic times did indeed cause crime to rise as we’ve so long been told, one would expect Los Angeles to have seen some correspondingly bleak crime figures. And yet crime has continued on this ten-year downward trend. How to explain it?
An expert consulted by the Times was perplexed. “The fact that [crime in] Los Angeles has continued to decline, especially when several factors haven’t been as good as they could be — it’s remarkable, frankly,” U.C. Irvine criminologist Charis Kubrin told the Times. “I’m puzzled.”
I’m not.
Mentioned in the story are some possible explanations for this decline, though an important one is not fleshed out. “Sociologists and criminologists,” says the Times, declining to name any, “say other likely factors include strict sentencing laws that, until recently, increased the number of people in prison; demographic shifts; and sociological influences.”
“Demographic shifts”? Note how that seemingly innocuous term is tucked in there without explanation. Which demographic groups are shifting, to where, and to what effect? The use of this term cries out for further analysis. None is provided, perhaps for reasons that will soon be apparent.
It is widely known but rarely mentioned that crime is higher among some demographic groups than others. Indeed, it’s considered impolite to talk about such things, but facts are facts, and some facts bear discussion when pondering those demographic shifts. In Los Angeles, as in the country generally, blacks commit more crimes per capita than Latinos, who commit more crimes than whites. Thus, in those parts of Los Angeles where Latinos have supplanted blacks, crime has gone down accordingly.
When I first started working as a patrol officer in South-Central Los Angeles in the early ‘80s, there were relatively few Latinos living anywhere south of Adams Boulevard, and the farther south one went, the fewer Latinos one encountered. But the biggest demographic shift that has occurred during my career with the LAPD has been the steady influx of Latinos into neighborhoods that were once all but exclusively black. The decline in crime – particularly violent crime – that has accompanied this transformation is not a coincidence.
Africanized “Killer” bees……… Africanized “Killer” humans. Wonder what the connection is? What might account for violence and aggression of any particular variety of a species?
Genetics?
I don’t think black people are naturally violent. A better term would be Americanized “Killer” Africans.
Except it is not an American phenomenon in the black population here. It is worldwide. I wish Interpol still disseminated their data to the public, they had a really poignant study on this very thing.
However that data is no longer available. Wonder why?
I know it is not PC to talk about it, but truth is truth. Besides, why would we think genetics matter in say what wheat we grow but does not matter in humans. truth is it does and racial groups have genetic traits that go far deeper than skin color.
Correlation does not imply causation.
That’s not to say your statistics about violence are wrong – just that the situation might not be as simple as “black=violent.”
Perhaps Bugs. But lacking substantive evidence/data to explain this worldwide proclivity of blacks for violence on something else… like poverty, it is improper to construct a more intricate explanation, just for the sake of being PC.
Sure, black doesn’t equal violent. Black skin = indigenous peoples of sub-Saharan Africa. Indigenous peoples of sub-Saharan Africa are genetically weak in impulse-control as well as inheriting an average IQ of 70. Unintelligent people with poor impulse-control = violent people.
In the case of Negroes – the correct answer is “Yes it does”.
Why are you very heavily invested in lying about centuries of historical record, and reality?
I wonder how many of those luscious, very black people who come from India commit crimes.
They are qualified by their melatonin, but I think their crime rates are probably well below “white”.
I wish I knew.
They think of themselves as caucasian. I wouldn’t be surprised.
I also know many actual Black Africans. They don’t want our blacks back, either. They have no use for them.
The problem with African humans civil behavior, is the same thing that is a benefit to African men’s physique, testosterone.
Sperm production in humans (really, all mammals) is slowed and or stopped by heat. This is why male gonads are external, the heat of 98.6 is too much for proper sperm production. Africa is commonly above this temperature, thus requiring more testosterone for proper sperm production in the hot environment.
Too much testosterone causes too much interpersonal violence in a society. Too much for a society to advance past a certain point. Ask any black man about his big Dick and more muscles then white men, they wont argue those points, but what causes bigger dicks and more muscles?? More testosterone.
Unless thinned out by dilution in lessor testosterone populations, black populations tend to lose social cohesiveness at about 10% concentration as shown in American life in general.
That could well be the reason. It is still a genetic trait. And the facts worldwide show the higher violence rate in said populations.
Unlike Nigerians, Kenyans tend to skew skinny.
In Asia, the tropical people did not seem to be heavily muscled.
Living in some ‘neighborhooods’ is horrible. I have had that experience. However its pretty much a fact that a black engineer is not going to be the guy robbing the pizza delivery man.
What about a gun buy back program? Can’t change people but i know a bargain when i see one!
Did she give him sex in the car,
or wait until they got home?
Someday she will probably get the shaft,
and it won’t be on his back seat.
You mean like O.J. was convicted of murder? Or Eric Holder was destroyed by his last-minute bogus pardon recommendations submitted to B.J. Clinton? Sorry, amigo, justice in America today operates on a double-standard.
In Los Angeles, as in the country generally, blacks commit more crimes per capita than Latinos, who commit more crimes than whites.
That actually runs counter to the overall demographic and crime trends in the US.
Minorities as a percentage of the population has been increasing at the same time that crime has been declining. These are multi-decade trends nationally, in CA and in LA. Is the author seriously claiming that whites are a larger percentage of LA’s population now than they were 15 years ago? Or that the absolute number of blacks has declined in some proportion to the actual absolute drop in the number of violent crimes.
It seems to me that the decline in crime has multiple causes. A few not widely discussed being:
The replacement of cash with digital money makes muggings and street theft less lucrative for criminals.
Increased gun ownership makes crime riskier for criminals.
Increased surveillance, from cameras literally everywhere, and self surveillance of social media, have limited the anonymity fuels criminal behavior.
Minorities /= all blacks.
“Is the author seriously claiming that whites are a larger percentage of LA’s population now than they were 15 years ago?”
The population of LA is north 3 million. The author quoted someone who estimated the illegal alien population at around 750,000. Given another 10% that would put the Latino population at around 1 million. I would gander that the white population of LA mirrors that of the voting population in 2012: just under 72% of the population of LA is white.
White is still the majority race in this country given the fact that the white population has had about a 200 year head start on all other ethnic and racial groups in this country.
Now, onto your points:
“The replacement of cash with digital money makes muggings and street theft less lucrative for criminals.”
You have no proof to determine if this is the case. Random muggings need not even concern robbery.
“Increased gun ownership makes crime riskier for criminals.”
This might be true in gun loving Texas but not in gun hating California which has some of the more stringent gun laws in the nation.
“Increased surveillance, from cameras literally everywhere, and self surveillance of social media, have limited the anonymity fuels criminal behavior.”
Increased surveillance does not necessarily curtail crime. We all have seen the plethora of robberies whereby the criminals’ faces are shown. Also there has been an explosion of people recording themselves committing crimes and posting them to YouTube (who had to crackdown on this) or on other nefarious sites that encourage lawless behavior to be recorded.
Your post hasn’t disproven the author’s thesis but it was a nice attempt to change the subject.
White is still the majority race in this country…
Never claimed otherwise.
But the assertion that …” in the country generally, blacks commit more crimes per capita than Latinos, who commit more crimes than whites.” Runs counter to the facts that:
The percentage of the population of the US that was ‘white’ has dropped from 87% in 1990 to 74% in 2010.
At the same time that the violent crime rate has dropped from 732 per 100,000 in 1990 to 386 per 100,000 in 2011. The author contends that some of that decline is an artifact of under reporting by illegal aliens. However, the murder rate has declined from 9.4/100k to 4.7/100k which is a larger percentage drop.
It’s unfortunate that actual facts don’t fit your racist narrative, but they don’t.
You know, if someone disagrees with you, it doesn’t automatically make that person a raaaaaaacist (even if he’s conservative; I know, right?). Sometimes (sit down, this might be a shocker!), it’s that you don’t have quite as many facts at your disposal as your opponent.
My reading of his post is that he thinks race drives crime rates. Which sound racist to me. And I’m a conservative too.
@Josh -
You style yourself a conservative but I think you’re either just stupid or trolling. Per capita, young black males are a walking, talking crime wave and that is irrefutable. And if you think that is a racist statement, I invite you to take your cracker a** for a walk down Martin Luther King Boulevard in practically any town or city in America. Well, except mine; when the PC crowd forced us to have an MLK street in a city with practically no blacks other than those stationed here temporarily with the military, we put it way out in what was then the boondocks running through the woods and muskeg swamps; not much crime there but there is the ocassional moose or bear that could cause you some harm.
@Art Chance
Your response does not offer an explanation for the drop in crime in LA since the African American population is roughly the same as it was twenty years ago.
LOL. I was called a racist. I thought Blacks couldn’t be racist?
But you didn’t disprove a word I said. Thus I must be dismissed as a racist. THANKS!!!!
Josh – why did Israel practically catapult out the thousands of Black African slaves….errr…”workers” they imported?
This little gem of a story didn’t get a word of play in the JUSA media…hhhhmmmm….but Israelis rioted for weeks, and rounded up Black Africans into camps, and hurled them out faster than they brought them in.
Why?
“The replacement of cash with digital money makes muggings and street theft less lucrative for criminals.”
“You have no proof to determine if this is the case. Random muggings need not even concern robbery.”
As one nationally known jurist of yesteryear has left for us: “And, for those situations in cases for which I do not have facts, experienced judges use the logic of the situation–I’ve never known it to fail.“: Cash–or other item of value–is well-known to provide the best incentive for crime of all kinds–but first, for those involving mugging.
And, of course, while a random mugging need not always concern robbery, but to seek for and to employ the exceptional instance as though against accepted fact that, were a successful contradiction, is illogical.
To reasonable minds, the simplest logic shows that, the replacement of cash with digital money does indeed make muggings and street theft less lucrative—and consequently less of an incentive—for criminals.
And in this way, in the area where I live—being greatly restricted to get cash by simple mugging—some of the criminal mind, have taken to haunting the ATMs in hopes of some such possible benefit from their attacks, . . .
“Increased gun ownership makes crime riskier for criminals.”
“This might be true in gun loving Texas but not in gun hating California which has some of the more stringent gun laws in the nation.”
The: “gun-loving Texas” strikes me as a kind of attempt toward reduction in level of thought, . . . beside offering a thrust in trivialization and aspersion.
But however those things might be, as occurred in one battle between the Nazis and the Soviets–the Nazis finding say, three-fifths of the opposing soldiers to be without rifles and ammunition—would reasonable minds suppose that, any German soldier approached and killed in but small sense of risk to his own life?
And who–able to think so–could not then extrapolate to generalize for individual situations as must be of necessary consideration in anticipation for any intended robbery–in private home, or otherwise?
And the simple logic of gun ownership concerning risk and sense of safety as touching incidents between robbers say, and their intended victims in TX or in CA, the learned “Chris Bolts Sr” is unable to apprehend and understand why that logic is naturally generalized to any geographical location, . . . because, it derives from and draws upon such things as are empowered to act without respect to location or local regulation?
“Increased surveillance, from cameras literally everywhere, and self surveillance of social media, have limited the anonymity fuels criminal behavior.”
“Increased surveillance does not necessarily curtail crime. We all have seen the plethora of robberies whereby the criminals’ faces are shown. Also there has been an explosion of people recording themselves committing crimes and posting them to YouTube (who had to crackdown on this) or on other nefarious sites that encourage lawless behavior to be recorded.”
For me, next stop 70, as but one example from my decades of association and engagement with criminal minds, in a certain situation not long ago, one such responded to me: “I can’t–the cameras, . . .”.
And have you never heard–or, read–the expression: “We all work better when we know someone cares–when someone is watching.”, . . . and perhaps then thought on why that is so–what the consequential results and what the differences might be to varying patterns of conduct?
Strange comments, . . . I would say that, while our dear “Chris Bolts Sr”‘s comments appear to be mere rationalizations in a twisted kind of logic, his writing is glib enough to suggest one in position to use the tools of educational experience, . . . but in a way which lends itself in damage to the as yet unlearned, . . . hence, constitutive perhaps, of an intellectual menace in Society, . . .
Its a simple fact, easily verified.
Blacks commit more crimes than hispanics, who commit more crimes per white.
The number of black murderers/ number of black people is multiples more than white murderers/number of white people.
You can look it up. the factor is so large as to be upsetting. so its understandably not a popular fact. no one knows what to do about it.
So explain why crime rates have fallen by 50% over the last two decades.
It’s unfortunate that actual facts don’t fit your racist narrative, but they don’t.
Nor do they fit your specious Lefty drivel and obfuscations.
The fact that minorities have increased as a percentage of the overall US population at the same time that crime stats have been declining in no way, shape or form serves to invalidate the author’s statement that “in the country generally, blacks commit more crimes PER CAPITA than Latinos, who commit more crimes than whites”.
If 1 out of 10 blacks commits crimes while only 1 of 20 Latinos commits crimes, then blacks commit more crimes PER CAPITA than Latinos.
And if 1 of 20 Latinos commits crimes while only 1 of 50 whites commits crimes, then Latinos commit more crimes PER CAPITA than whites.
Percentages of overall population…increases here…decreases there…none of it has any bearing whatsoever on the cold, hard FACTUAL numbers.
So explain why crime rates have fallen by 50% over the last two decades.
He doesn’t have to…because it’s immaterial to the FACT that – PER CAPITA – blacks still commit more crimes than Latinos, who still commit more crimes than whites…regardless of what percentages of the overall population each group comprises.
Go float your red herrings elsewhere.
Dunphy’s column is clearly asserting that the decrease in crime is caused by a relative decrease in the black population.
An assertion that may feel right; but in fact is not supported by an objective analysis of the drop in crime in LA or the US.
For his point to be valid the population of blacks would have to have dropped by more than 50% in absolute terms, which has not happened, because crimes are down by that much.
It may be valid to say that crime rates in the black community have dropped substantially and caused the overall decline in crime (a point that I am not making, but which would be statistically sound), but that’s not what he said.
It is pointless to argue with him because he is on a high moral horse that he intends to ride. Anyone who lives near a large city knows which neighborhoods to avoid especially at night and if he wants to believe his own drivel then let him wander into one of these ‘hoods after dark. The author makes a valid point of speculating that Latinos displacing Blacks is probably a major factor in crime reduction. However, I think a large part of the lower crime rate in the Latino community is due to the large percentage of illegals there and the reluctance of the locals to involve police in their disputes. I am sure that absent gang activity Latinos are most assuredly
less prone to violence than Blacks. They do not have the deep seated anger towards the “Man” and Whites that Blacks do.
Another aspect of demographics is age. Young males commit more crimes than anyone else, and as the Baby Boomers get older and fewer children are born, there are fewer people in this demographic.
This response will probably not satisfy you, however, it will give you some things to think about. Stating the obvious, all crimes are committed by criminals. The overwhelming majority of these crimes are committed by those with a history of criminal activity. Historically, homicides increase during times of criminal instability, with virtually all of the victims being criminals and those who happen to be in the wrong place at that inauspicious time. From the time Al Capone arrived in Chicago until he was acknowledged as the “BOSS” it was a very dangerous place. After his coronation, things quieted down. Should there be concern in LA?
As far as demographic go, according to the FBI, the leading cause of death for young (15 to 30 years old) blacks is homicide, at the hands of other young blacks. Incidentally, Bill Cosby makes the same point in his book, “Come On People!” Blacks make up about 12.5% of the US population, but commit nearly the same number of homicides as whites, that make up about 75% of the US population? Why is this the case? I haven’t a clue. Bill Cosby believes he knows. Judging from the reaction to his book, neither Blacks nor Liberals are interested in investigating.
I would say that from what I know, black and latino gangs generally do not play nicely. Part of the reduction of crimes and the demographic shift may involve the black gangs losing out to the latino gangs. The resulting reduction in turf wars would also cause a corresponding reduction in violent crimes between the two groups.
@aharris, I seem to have given the wrong impression. The settlement of the Chicago situation was conducted with Thompson, Smith & Wesson, Mossberg . . . The killing settled down because Capone’s rivals were dead. Playing nice was not part of the deal. Capone was every bit as violent as the Black and Latino gangsters, but much more precise.
Oh, no, I know precisely what you mean. Capone had to kill off his rivals, and there was a corresponding spike in violent crime while those turf wars raged. After Capone had settled himself at the top of the pile, things did not get any nicer; they just got less obviously violent.
Understand, that I am using “nice” as a euphemism.
The latino and black gangs have or had the same issue. They fought over turf just as bitterly. And now that the latino gangs are coming out on top, the obvious violent crimes are becoming less, but crime overall isn’t likely going away, it’s just changing its face to other nterprises.
Oh, no, I know precisely what you mean. Capone had to kill off his rivals, and there was a corresponding spike in violent crime while those turf wars raged. After Capone had settled himself at the top of the pile, things did not get any nicer; they just got less obviously violent.
Understand, that I am using “nice” as a euphemism.
The latino and black gangs have or had the same issue. They fought over turf just as bitterly. And now that the latino gangs are coming out on top, the obvious violent crimes are becoming less, but crime overall isn’t likely going away, it’s just changing its face to other enterprises.
An assertion that may feel right; but in fact is not supported by an objective analysis of the drop in crime in LA or the US.
And which “objective analysis” – EXACTLY – are you citing? Your completely unsubstantiated and subjective musings about crime reductions being attributable to “digital money”?…or perhaps the “self surveillance of social media”?
For his point to be valid the population of blacks would have to have dropped by more than 50% in absolute terms, which has not happened, because crimes are down by that much.
Wrong again, on many levels. One of which being because you’re making the assumption that the ONLY possible reason crime could drop by 50% would be due to a 50% drop in the TOTAL black population, when in fact, the only drop that need occur is in the CRIMINAL black population. And over the span of 20 years, there are myriad explanations for the reduction of that CRIMINAL black population – e.g. deaths, changes in drug preferences amongst drug users, increased incarceration rates, lower teenage pregnancy rates, etc, etc. And no matter how many times you try to twist the author’s words and intention in order to suit your own political purposes, his “point” throughout the article is this:
This whole exchange is part-n-parcel when it comes to dealing with Lefties – i.e., you create an “argument” out of thin air…you then assign that argument to your opponent…then you argue against it. IOW: straw men.
Like I said before, go try it somewhere else.
Crime rates have decreased because of an aging population and a dramatically increased incarceration rate over the last two to three decades. There might be some correlation to the fact that about 70% of those incarcerated are non-white.
I agree that is a large part of the decline.
In other words, it’s not because in those parts of Los Angeles where Latinos have supplanted blacks, crime has gone down accordingly.
“Drastically increased incarceration rate”. Boom, you got it. I scrolled through to see if someone mentioned that.
Three strike laws have quite a bit to do with keeeping violent felons off the street.
Since no one else seems willing to answer a very simple question, I will:
First is the simple surface number crunching.
Let us say, just for example, that the crime rate in 1990 was blacks 1:10, Latinos 1:20, whites 1:50.
Let us say that the number of whites drops by 13% from 1990 to 2010.
Let us say, again just for example, that the crime rate in 2010 is blacks 1:20, Latinos 1:40, whites 1:100.
VOILA!
Minority population has increased while overall crime rate has dropped, and yet more crimes are still being committed per capita by minorities.
As long as the separate group per capita rate drops in a reasonably proportional manner, the proportions of the different groups can change to favor the more criminally inclined group while still leading to an overall drop in crime.
That explained, we should then consider other demographic factors, such as age.
If there has been some shift in age distribution within those groups, say as a result of abortion as suggested by people who produced Freakonomics, then you could even more easily get a drop in overall crime rates even while continuing to have a rise in demographic proportions by race. Of course that opens its own can of worms, so of course people avoid discussing it.
Not liking a fact does not make it false. And knowing a fact doesn’t make you a racist, unless you apply your prejudice against someone before they have a chance to prove themselves.
At one time I lived in a very scary neighborhood. It was so bad the pizza guys would not deliver.
I think you know what the neighborhood looked like. And dont judge people for being honest if you have no experience.
In other words there is a big difference between PREjudice and POSTjudice.
you have never lived in a poor black neighborhood.
if you had you would know that for whatever the reason something is bad wrong their.
I’ve lived in scary white neighborhoods and scary hispanic ones.
Crime rates have dropped in spite of shrinking percentages of whites in the population for two reasons:
Our population has aged dramatically over that period as even minorities have tended to much smaller family sizes. Crime is a youth thing. It requires a lot of aimless energy.
Incarceration rates have shot way up. The secret of NYC’s crime turnaround was locking up a whole lot of (mostly black and Hispanic) young males up in prison.
There may be several factors contributing to fewer reported crimes. First, many PDs won’t take a crime report unless the loss is $1,000 or more. Second, if the victim is unwilling to prosecute many cops will “kiss it off” and file a “miscellaneous service-no crime” report. Third, some minority cops don.t want the brother in trouble and will either talk the victim out of filing a complaint or water down the level of the crime to a misdemeanor. Fourth, some lazy or racist cops don’t feel that certain crimes are worthy of prosecution and so don’t file crime reports on them. Fifth, some PDs have unwritten policies which motivate officers to look the other way when confronted with black on black crime.Sixth, the percentage of officers who are minorities is vastly larger than when I began in 1955. Some minority officers avoid arresting their own kind as often as they can. Example: 200 blacks riot, wreck a store, steal thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, injure 30 people and the local pd reports it as a misdemeanor disturbance, no arrests made.Crime is really worse than ever. It is just not properly reported anymore. “Fast and Furious” was a gigantic criminal acheme perpetrated by vicious criminals, including POTUS and his Atty. Gen. When was it so reported?
No, he’s not saying there are more whites. He’s saying there are more hispanics, who commit less crimes than blacks.
” In Los Angeles, as in the country generally, blacks commit more crimes per capita than Latinos, who commit more crimes than whites.
That actually runs counter to the overall demographic and crime trends in the US.
”
Crime rates have been declining in many parts of the world. That does not change the fact that blacks commit more crime, than hispanics/latinos who commit more crime than whites on a per capita basis.. This is an indisputable fact.
The Authors point is that when you displace a more violent race.. blacks with a far less violent race, in this case hispanics/latinos then the crime rate falls.
Here is some data on South La. From 1990 to 2005-09: Latinos increase by 16.7% Blacks decrease by 16.4% whites stayed within 1% point over that time.
Maybe the reduction in the crime rate is a combination of the huge influx of hispanics into Los Angeles and all of the deaths that were a result of gang violence over the past 20 years? Seems like the black gangs have lost the gang war and the hispanics are taking over the disputed “turf,” making the need for major numbers of gang killings less necessary. Sort of like the old days when one faction of the mafia took over a neighborhood and things quieted down as that gang ran everything within that neighborhood. If the major gang wars are over, you will have fewer shootings as the hispanic gangs consolidate their hold on more and more neighborhoods after having killed all of their competition. Only problem is, who is going to control all of the more powerful hispanic gangs?
In the late 80′s and into the 90′s one would sometimes find articles about the Latino gangs saying they wanted to drive blacks, and everyone else, out of neighborhoods they wanted to control. These articles quoted gang members and others. Didn’t see them very often nor in the headlines because it went against the PC assumptions of the Left that only whites would act like that (which, if applied to white liberals and their all rich white enclaves, it would be true).
Doesn’t criminality vary with the proportion of young people in the demographic?
To an extent. Prime crime age tends to be between 12 and the mid-20′s. However, this is affected by things like being raised by a single mother, where they live, etc.
Yes, but when you control for that you still get blacks of said age group committing more crime than latinos of any age group to …
See the book by Colin Flaherty, White Girl Bleed A lot
Might want to pick up a copy of Freakanomics, written by two statisticians a few years back. In it, presumably without bias, they took raw data on many subjects and took a stab at definitively, not guessing, answering some questions about our society and economy. They do a rather good job of making a correlation between abortions and crime. Put simply the people more inclined to crime were not born to commit the crimes. Since roughly 52% of murders are associated with blacks (Sorry I have nothing against african americans, I work with many every single day, it’s just a FACT they have, perhaps due to racism or poverty I don’t know, more crime in their culture) that does explain the reduction in crime over the past few decades according the the Freakanomics eggheads (I saw their interview and they sure didn’t sound in the least bit like wild eyes conspiracy freaks, just vanilla scientists doing what nerds like to do). Abortions generally have been on the rise in all demographic arenas. No comment here on abortions, just stating the facts as I know them sir.
Thanks
Great, death sentences for a felony!
Sure cuts down the rate of recidivism. Dracon would be smiling.
Isn’t it just as likely that crime rates are down because fewer people are reporting crimes, either because they are illegals themselves and/or can’t speak English, or because they have no faith in the cops to investigate and solve crimes?
Crime has “fallen” in Canada in part because it has become obvious that the police are just overpaid union bureaucrats with guns, waiting for their pensions to kick in while spouting politically correct nonsense and repeated arresting victims, not perps.
Take my friend Mark from Caledonia, for example:
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/prime-time/867432237001/spences-diet-of-delusion/2071419270001
“Crime has ‘fallen’ in Canada in part because it has become obvious that the police are just overpaid union bureaucrats with guns, waiting for their pensions to kick in while spouting politically correct nonsense and repeated arresting victims, not perps.”
Yeah I found this out the hard way when a DPS officer told me there was no chance in hell that he or any of his colleagues would ever find the perpetrator who hit my car and ran. I always had a low expectation of cops being there when I needed them but this all but confirmed to me that there is no way that cops could ever really stop crime let alone prevent it from occurring.
As Benjamin Disraeli said there are lies, damned lies and police officers who don’t give a damn.
South LA is safer with the Mexicans.
You can walk around South LA all day long and not have a problem. That was not the case back in the day.
I live right next door in HP.
Although I have to add that as one commenter noted, another reason the Canadian crime rate is relatively low is that, well:
http://www.colbycosh.com/old/november02.html#iaag
Yeah. Well, no kidding Kath.
Compare American crime statistics sans blacks; American education statistics sans blacks; American abortion statistics sans blacks; American wedlock statistics sans blacks, and I will not need to tell you which way the wind blows.
As it ever has been.
They had NO culture 150 years ago, aside from kill or be killed. We stem from a culture 3000 years old; Indians stem from a culture 4000 years old; Chinese stem form a culture 6000 years old.
WHAT THE HELL DO YOU EXPECT?
The Bell Curve tells us they are not really civilised; just a relative few, are. The rest are something a tad short of Human. “‘BAMAPHONE!!!!”
And they all live in Harlem or Detroit, or Chicago, or St. Louis, or Philadelphia. The Garden Spots of the whole world. They have never been civilised. They have not learned enough of policy and government to vote.
Why do we let them?
The other possibility for the recent spike is the results of the early release of many criminals from California’s detention system, under court order. This L.A. Times story from September notes the prison population is down by 30,000 from three years ago. That’s about a 20 percent cut in the prison population, well above any drop you’d predict in that span from fewer crimes being committed and/or prosecuted.
Those inmates have to have gone somewhere, and while it would be nice to think they would settle in the neighborhoods where the judges to make the ruling live — or in tony parts of the state with the highest percentage of political donation to Democratic politicians who created this situation in the first place — odds are they went back to their old neighborhoods, which would more than likely be the places where the crime rates were the highest to begin with. If that’s the case, and if more prison releases are orders, you should continue to see spikes in crime rates in lower income areas, radiating out into other sections of the city and state if the criminals see that nothing is being done to solve the new problem.
BINGO!!!
Lib Judges: why don’t we just burn them?
As some of the commenters have pointed out, it is also the case that crime rates tend to vary with the age distribution in the population. Most crimes are committed by younger folks. As their percentage in the population declines, so does crime.
However, that does not invalidate Mr. Dunphy’s observations–they are not mutually exclusive.
Reporting of crime statistics by government agencies just has to be as reliable as unemployment statistics and the extremely reliable information pumped out by the CBO and dozens of other agencies.
Even though the careers of politicians and police leader are based on whether crime goes up or down, the data itself is as reliable as gold.
So we can discount data manipulation as a factor. Government never lies.
Captain Bernice Abram of Carson is retired as of today:
http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_22304757/bernice-abram-embattled-former-carson-sheriffs-captain-retires
“‘Bamaphone!!!!”
I have a swell idea. Let’s build a really expensive subway train system so that unemployed and illegal residents of south LA who are currently riding bicycles because they can’t afford cars can more easily reach the rest of the city, where they will find greater opportunities for personal fulfillment. And who can then more easily jump on a train home and fade away into the briar patch from whence they came. Imagine the resulting income equality that would come from these possibilities!
The murder rate in many large cities follows an increase in its black population. Chicago in 2012 suffered 535 murders thanks to its black population. Detroit, Birmingham, Memphis, Camden, Gary, Oakland and others suffer the same problems. As the black population goes up, so does the crime rate. Of course, this is not reported by our socialist media. This might start a thought process in the people being victimized and then things would begin to change in an adverse manner for the socialist/marxist.
Maybe the “medical” marijuana outlets help, too?
The thing is, the peak in violent crime came during the relatively affluent 1980s, and even if there was some recession circa 1991, it was still a whole lot better than today. But today the “safety net” is much more generous, an enterprising welfare recipient can have more disposable income than most middle-class workers. And just maybe the social styles have changed too, trendier to be cool in video games and on Facebook and less on the streets.
So even with this on top of the demographics, not to mention the lockup rates, the overall numbers remain a bit of a mystery. I suppose it is just “all of the above” and maybe four or five other miscellaneous factors. But it is a good thing overall, right?
Crime drops have different causes in different parts of the country. In LA, it’s a factor that blacks are a smaller percentage of the population. In NYC it is largely because the stop-and-frisk policy makes it harder for criminals to carry illegal guns. Everywhere but California, a lot had to do with the increase in imprisonment. In the free states, muggings and carjackings are reduced due to shall-issue concealed handgun permit laws and stand-your-ground laws.
It would seem easy enough to test the thesis about which Josh is seemingly in persistent ideological denial. If a certain demographic displacement in Los Angeles (i.e. African Americans by Latinos) is not a substantial factor in the reduction of reported crime figures–because, as Josh implies, only a racist would posit that African Americans commit a higher per capita share of reported crimes than Hispanics or Caucasians–then one should expect to see no corresponding increase in the rate of crime in communities where displaced Angelenos who are African American have recently resettled in significant numbers. One might consider the Lancaster or San Bernardino areas to see whether increases in violent crime in those communities (since, say, circa 1992) has any statistical correlation to the concurrent increase in local African American populations.
The black population of LA has declined by about 15% since 1990. The murder rate as declned by 75%. There is clearly some factor involved other than black exiting the city.
Furthermore, violent crime rates in CA have decline by 54% in the same time frame matching the national decline even as the minority population increased in absolute terms. So the theory that more minorities = more crime is clearly not historically accurate.
“Despite the fact that California has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, the US Department of Justice predicts that Californians will purchase 725,000 rifles, pistols and shotguns in 2012, which is nearly twice the number they purchased five years ago.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/27/california-gun-sales_n_1710996.html
Officer Dunph is correct — just take trip down storied Cenral Avenue.
Now that black males are in the minority, they are a heck of a lot more polite.
Can we thank Florencia in any way for the peaceful streets of South LA?
It’s not the race which matters. It’s the percentage of single mothers in a race. Blacks have greater propensity to crime, because they are more likely to be raised by single moms.
It is a proven fact, that when you analyze crime by single motherhood of the perps, the difference in race completley disappears. Black, white, brown, yellow, red, green-with-purple-polka-dots, the crime rate is the same by race. An oriental raised by a single mom is exactly as likely to be a sociopath as is a black. It’s just that orientals have the lowest rate of single moms, so they have the lowest rate of crime.
Ann Coulter has writeen much about this, and she has linked the various studies which prove this fact.
Well, the rate of single motherhood is going up, so why is the crime rate going down? Abortion. Single women tend to get abortions. People are also having less children, so the percentage of the population in the 12-24 range is lower. Also, more women are being put into jail. These are the same women who are most likely to be the lousy mothers and have sociopathic kids.
It’s the single moms, stupid. Oh, and it is the same single women who vote so heavily for Democrats. End no-fault divorce, and a lot of our society’s problems will go away.
I wonder if the parents of little monster who shot up Newtown, CT had a no-fault divorce?
You may be on to something. I agree with you that this is the bottom line. I can not site any statistics but the single “baby momma” regardless of race is the culprit. Thank you LBJ and Democrats.
Obviously the rate of violent crime is affected by a great many things. The largest single factor in the decline of violent crime may actually be the advent of unleaded gasoline—the amount of tetraethyl lead and the rate of violent crime correlate very well, and there is a solid neurological explanation of just how lead might increase violence. As far as racial questions play a role, I have three thoughts:
1. Black people are prosecuted far more vigorously than white people and sentenced to much longer sentences. You have to look very hard to find a white kid in prison for possession of pot. If you’re black, though, it’s a big deal. There’s nothing subjective about these claims. The stats on who gets rousted by the cops, who gets charged for drug offenses, and the disparity of sentences between blacks and whites are publicly available. Once black kids are in the system, the price they pay for the next offense goes ways down since they have already been labelled and relegated to the status of felons. (Note to wingers: if you really want to increase the severity of punishments in the U.S., the obvious thing to do is to work to make life better in inner cities. A middle class guy in the suburbs is devastated by a month in jail because even that brief incarceration wrecks his life. A high school drop out has far less to lose. So let’s get really vindictive on those black asses and improve their lives!)
2. Black people brought a couple of unfortunate things with them from the South during the exodus after WWII: levels of education even lower than those for poor whites and the tendency to violence that goes along with an honor culture. Black gang members act a lot like poor whites, but they can’t get away with as much. Oddly poor blacks have many of the same values as the crazier conservatives, e.g. machismo, a taste for vengeance, an overvaluation of personal loyalty. In other words, black populations have a higher murder rate for the same reason that Southern states have a higher murder rate. It’s not genetic—the descendents of free blacks in the Northeast and elsewhere have a very different cultural set. For example, unlike poor blacks and many Southerners, they value and respect education.)
3. Historically, very few black urban communities have had control over their own policing—in many cases, the courts are controlled by the counties, especially the prosecutors who, far more than judges or juries, are the real authority in the American criminal justice system and reflect the political values and interests of the suburbs. And whoever has been in charge, the level of policing has been inadequate in inner cities for a very long time. A rational policing system lowers the amount of crime and violence. Our system merely increases the number of people in prison. That’s not the same thing. In this land of public squalor and private splendor, we just don’t spend a high enough proportion of our wealth on public services like cops on the beat. As a result, the harried police forces operate like occupying armies trying to put down an insurgency instead of public servants. L.A. has been like that for a long time.
I hate to admit it, but I agree with everything you said here. It’s unfortunate that you’re an anti-Semite.
Much to agree with here, except for the snark about “crazy conservatives”. There are no crazy conservatives. When a person actually becomes crazy, the qualities of being conservative, liberal, monarchist, anarchist, and so forth cease to have any relevant applicability. Crazy is a category unto itself. A “crazy conservative” could only mean a crazy person who is crazy in a traditional way. There are crazies whom lefties like to say are conservative for propaganda reasons, just as lefties like to classify certain varieties of socialists as “rightists” in order to whitewash socialism’s dismal record. Finally, machismo, vengeance, and overvaluation of personal loyalty have absolutely nothing to do with conservatism, at least the American kind. It might apply to ancient Roman conservatives, whose modern descendants might include Sicilian crime families, but I think in all our discussions it goes without saying that we use the term “conservative” to mean “American conservative”, which means someone strongly attached to the notion the existence of all government is justified solely by the extent to which it protects the liberties of the people (not their wealth, or health, or retirement benefits).
By crazy conservative I mean to indicate Tea Party members, John Birchers, Birthers, Secessionists, followers of Glenn Beck, militia members, etc. I’m not trying to add a category to the DSM, though there is a strong flavor of paranoia on the hard right. It seems to me that the extreme groups on the American right, though diverse, do have certain common features. Unlike some other conservative movements, for example, the American hard right has a populist flavor. In that respect, it resembles other forms of reactionary populism such as the various European fascisms and some of the contemporary fundamentalist movements around the world, which also have no use for aristocratic values and are obviously powered by a tremendous amount of resentment against the privileges and pretensions of more traditional elites.
In my experience, Conservatism, even conservatism of the less crazy variety, does emphasize authority, personal honor, loyalty over other values, at least that’s what I got from reading the National Review over all these years—I assume that Bill Buckley and Dirbyshire weren’t kidding. The right-wing taste for tales of vigilantism and revenge in movies and TV shows, not to mention the worshipful attitude of Conservative pols to the military, must mean something.
Everybody: In spite of the fact that Jim Harrison makes sense in his original post above, please take him with a grain of salt. He has an opinion on every topic, thinks he knows everything about everything and thinks he has the solution to all of the world’s problems.
The guy is what Thomas Sowell might call a self-anointed messiah. He’s also an ignorant anti-Semite.
All that Tea Partiers want to do is to defend and uphold the US Constitution. They do not want the gargantuan monstrosity that we have now at the Federal level, with no end in sight in its appetite to devour the private sector.
If that is crazy, then count me in.
So, Americans who want the country to live within its means are ‘crazy’, hmmmm? Tell ya what, Mr. Harrison, when conservatism was the predominant ideology in the country the execution of children in a public school was an unimaginable nightmare. When conservatism was the predominant ideology in America the country was not ‘led’ by a man fathered, born of and mentored by self admitted Communists, whose ideology is directly opposed to the Constitution. When conservatism was the predominant political ideology in the country, the country was NEVER teetering on the precipice of insolvency. Hopefully you comprehend the point I’m making, but, just in case, leftist policies have failed MONUMENTALLY, any way you slice it.
Now, I have been accused of being more than a little to the right of Attila the Hun, but that is a mistake. I am to the right of Dracon of Athens. And my cure for crime in LA and elsewhere, works. And has been proven throughout the ages.
Devildogger: Please don’t take Jim Harrison seriously. He has vehement opinions on topics he knows nothing about (but thinks he’s very knowledgeable on), he believes that civilized and successful people and countries are intrinsically evil and he has a vicious hatred of Jews and Israel. He is simply too ignorant to understand how ignorant he is.
Since you mention Draco, I gather your “solution” to everything is the final solution. Figures.
I find it rather amusing that a neo-Nazi like Jim Hitlerson would talk about the final solution. Hitlerson sympathizes with people, countries and ideologies that openly express their intent to annihilate the entire Jewish people, in other words carry out a 21st century final solution.
You’re stating that blacks are prosecuted more vigorously than whites…uh.. which ” era” of our criminal justice system are you talking about?…blacks/ whites/ others get the same treatments…where things are different is the recidivism..some do the same things over and over and expect different results.
Jim Hitlerson is what Larry Elder would call a victicrat.
You didn’t name the planet on which you live. It surely isn’t Earth! Crime has not been reduced. It is no longer reported by politically correct cowards and sometimes cops wrongly motivated. How motivated is an officer who risks his life arresting a crook only to find that 30,000 of those crooks have just been released from prison so the state can spend more money on its tincuppers?
Mr. Malone makes a good point and should note that the sexual immorality which drives his thesis is much higher in the black population than in the white or asian.Thus a much higher percentage of single moms.
Political pretensions notwithstanding, there are very few whites who move into black neighborhoods. The dangers are apparent. And it might be instructive to see what percentage of each of the races are currently confined, at all levels of confinement. It will be black, hispanic, white and asian, in that order.
Jack,
You should be careful. Remember what happened to John Derbyshire when he wrote similar heresies at Taki’s Magazine. National Review banned him for life. Now, PJM is clearly more gutsy and open minded than NR, but still, few in the mainstream are ready to hear this. You are like Galileo, upending the prevailing worldview with a truth that most people are not ready to accept.
It’s lead that doing it. See http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline. And before you laugh and dismiss it out-of-hand, please explain why a correlation of lead and crime rates holds internationally.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc anyone? Besides, anything you read in Muthajones that is true is strictly the result of an accident. Leftist propaganda is their goal.
Statistics tell us that OVER 60% of all the violent crime and OVER 50% of all the murders in the USA are committed by Black ‘Youths’ (think Trayvon Martin) between the ages of 15 and 25. So what is more dangerous Black ‘Youths’ or guns . In my opinion the USA could cut crime at a stroke by ‘controlling’ Black ‘Youths’ and the poisonous disfunctional family culture they come from.
Statistics also tell us that the ethnic IQ for Blacks is the lowest of any ethnic group. So quite clearly a misogynistic absentee father culture and a low IQ makes Blacks more prone to impulsive violence which is by far the most prevalent form of violence committed. Black ‘Youths’ who commit the MAJORITY of America’s violent crimes and murders form less than 2% of the population. Control them and America’s reputation as a violent Country will be well on the way to being solved.
I’ll take a completely different tack on this topic, just because of some research that I have stumbled into. The link below takes you old copies of “The American Missionary” in 1870. Scroll down about half way and you will begin to get the monthly editions. If you skim through these, you will get re-introduced to some of the raw realities of Reconstruction, the Freedmen’s Bureau etc. You get to read reports from these straight-laced, generally tee-totaling missionary-teachers, down South to “do good.” They encounter hard-drinking whites and blacks, unending hostility from the whites, including an emerging Klan, “primitive” Christianity and almost complete illiteracy in the blacks. When I read these accounts, I was reminded what a long way we have come since 1870. There are many other conclusions one might also draw, but you an make your own:
http://books.google.com/books?id=G3bOAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=susan+clapp+stoughton&source=bl&ots=hLHm-E3RSZ&sig=4kIKj30iFChxBOq23Aqk08lNHfg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1UXnULieB8Xv0QHeyoGYDg&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=susan%20clapp%20stoughton&f=false
Actually, you don’t have to scroll down. The first edition starts right away. One quote that sticks in my mind comes from an old black man, who when asked how he is doing, says “not so good,” (I will skip the dialect).
The missionary: “But don’t you know that you are free?”
The old man: “Not really, I still have to work.”
This comment makes one consider work ethics and where they come from. If you have had generations of people who worked as slaves, work comes closer to feeling like slavery than it does for populations who have not been slaves. That’s probably a piece (just one of many) of the “problem.” Many other pieces will spring to mind if you put in a few minutes to read some of this stuff. I curious to hear other’s reactions, especially Art, who knows (or knew) the South well.
“The old man: “Not really, I still have to work.””
Hahaha. Thank heavens for Obama. He has put a stop to a lot of this particular form of slavery.
Sorry, Dwight, I forgot to signature the above.
Did you read any of the link?
The city of San Jose, California is experiencing a huge increase in the murder rate due to the recent influx of hispanics. The mayor actually made a statement few weeks ago claiming that he could not understand why the murder rate had skyrocketed. Really?? Elephant in the room! The sons of hispanic immigrants are joining gangs at an amazing rate. You can’t even drop your kids off to play basketball at a park without the fear that they’ll be beaten to death by gang members.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/south_bay&id=8904332
Fair enough, but 3/7 of the assailants in this example have Anglo names. Is this a mixed crew, some of VDH’s bobby martins gone bad (halfsies), or non-latinos forced into the gang?
“The notable exception has been Hollenbeck Division, on the city’s east side, where Part I (i.e. serious) crime is up 19 percent from a year ago. Residents of that area will not find encouragement in the way the LAPD has chosen to respond to this. Many in the department, myself among them, would attribute the greater part of this increase in crime to the disruptions thrust upon that station’s rank-and-file cops by a commanding officer who, to put it as mildly as I can, is lacking in many fundamental qualities of leadership. Yet, for reasons perhaps explained here, she has continued to advance up the promotional ladder.”
Affirmative Action is *not* a victimless crime.
Crime has been falling since the 3 strikes law was passed. Career Criminals commit most of the crime. If you put them in jail no more crime. It works. Hopefully the changes in the law the voters approved does not change this dynamic. We had a good thing going but they decided to fix what was working.
This article fails to acknowledge, however, that crime has gone down nationally, and African Americans as a population have not shrunk anywhere nearly as much as crime has fallen.