Not Entertainment

[Jester]

The more I look at the Wiki data, the more I think it is projected from prior years.

Almost all population data is either census, or projections from a census. Is there any particular reason not to trust them, in a way that is relevant to our results?

(Edit: Ah! You're talking about the Dutch murder rate! No, that's not projected, though I don't know the wiki's source. But my calculated rate of 0.95 isn't from there - it's your own number of 157 murders divided by the population. Don't like that number? Maybe try these - they're about the same, 164 in 2007 and 159 in 2006, coincidentally yielding a rate of almost exactly 1/100k.)

(Your link gives me "Pagina niet gevonden." I don't have any Dutch, but I think I can figure that one out. My link is to the same site.)

So, how do we trust the unusually low numbers reported past 2006.

By what reasoning are they "unusually low"?

-Jester

[kandrathe]

The more I look at the Wiki data, the more I think it is projected from prior years.

Almost all population data is either census, or projections from a census. Is there any particular reason not to trust them, in a way that is relevant to our results?

(Your link gives me "Pagina niet gevonden." I don't have any Dutch, but I think I can figure that one out.)

So, how do we trust the unusually low numbers reported past 2006.

By what reasoning are they "unusually low"?

I found another link comparing US drugs vs Netherlands Drugs... Irrelevant, except the chart at the bottom of the page, listing 1.51 / 100,000 as a 1999 to 2001 average. The EU crime statistics in detail (table 2) show up through 2007, with an average of 1.06. To cut it over ten years, yes, I can see that. To cut it in half over ten years is a tougher one to swallow.

[Jester]

I found another link comparing US drugs vs Netherlands Drugs... Irrelevant, except the chart at the bottom of the page, listing 1.51 / 100,000 as a 1999 to 2001 average. The EU crime statistics in detail (table 2) show up through 2007, with an average of 1.06. To cut it over ten years, yes, I can see that. To cut it in half over ten years is a tougher one to swallow.

Those numbers look fine. In fact, they appear to be identical to the ones used in my edited version above.

They tell pretty much the same story - the murder rate in The Netherlands is somewhere around 1.0 right now. It was around 1.32 in 1998, peaked at 1.5 in 2003, and has been more or less dropping ever since. At no point is there any "cutting in half". At most, it has dropped by a third. I see no reason to doubt these statistics - and even if there were, there is no better reason to doubt the low numbers than the high ones.

Perhaps these last couple years have been anomalously low for The Netherlands, but they've been even lower for Minnesota, which has traditionally seen murder rates more around 2.2, or higher - if you're doubting that a murder rate can halve in that time frame.

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

I hope you were being sarcastic. The most likely scenario is that, like what happens with remote kill switches now, the car will pull off the road, and turn off the engine and refuse to restart for X time and / or until the breath sensing unit is re-used. Pulling off the road to avoid a drunk driver is still a very viable option and one that I personally have used successfully before.

Of course, if you happen to be doing the speed limit in relatively heavy traffic in the innermost lane of a multi-lane highway with no shoulders, it will kill you trying to pull over. Or, if you're crossing a bridge, it will put you in the drink.

For some obscure reason, I feel troubled about having a device that is first cousin to the PC that periodically locks up or otherwise misbehaves in charge of my life. I'm probably just too cautious, after all, computers are almo . . . BRB, need to reboot my TiVo

--Pete

[kandrathe]

Perhaps these last couple years have been anomalously low for The Netherlands, but they've been even lower for Minnesota, which has traditionally seen murder rates more around 2.2, or higher.

The current Minneapolis PD has done a *very* good job, and I don't live in the city. They've implemented an effective community outreach and policing strategy, with more officers on foot in the troubled neighborhoods. Whodathunkit... A more visible police presence results in less crime, and lower crime rates through discouraging it and defusing escalations.

[Jester]

The current Minneapolis PD has done a *very* good job, and I don't live in the city. They've implemented an effective community outreach and policing strategy, with more officers on foot in the troubled neighborhoods. Whodathunkit... A more visible police presence results in less crime, and lower crime rates through discouraging it and defusing escalations.

For all the various talk on the right about "tough on crime" and the left about "address the causes", it's pretty clear from the studies done that the one big variable that affects crime directly is police presence. They don't have to be harsh, they don't even necessarily have to be numerous - but they have to be out there for everyone to see.

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

. . . - but they have to be out there for everyone to see.

Does frequenting the local donut shop count?

--Pete

[kandrathe]

. . . - but they have to be out there for everyone to see.

Does frequenting the local donut shop count?

Perhaps there are not enough donut and coffee shops in bad crime areas. But, which left first, the shops or the cops? No shops, no cops. No cops, no shops.

[LavCat]

. . . - but they have to be out there for everyone to see.

Does frequenting the local donut shop count?

Perhaps there are not enough donut and coffee shops in bad crime areas. But, which left first, the shops or the cops? No shops, no cops. No cops, no shops.

We had a problem in our area when a police officer stole a candy bar from the local convenience store.

[kandrathe]

We had a problem in our area when a police officer stole a candy bar from the local convenience store.

Next thing ya know, they'll be dealin' out of the trunk of their cruiser. Sometimes the profession attracts the wrong kind of people, mostly those that seek abuse of power in the form of laxness, criminality, or by being overly severe. Much like any position of responsibility.

[kandrathe]

For all the various talk on the right about "tough on crime" and the left about "address the causes", it's pretty clear from the studies done that the one big variable that affects crime directly is police presence. They don't have to be harsh, they don't even necessarily have to be numerous - but they have to be out there for everyone to see.

Agreed. Focusing on harsher prison terms doesn't curb the cultural propensity for criminality, especially with youth who often don't connect actions with consequences. Crime is very much a local problem. One of the best strategies in Minneapolis was one that New York started. Essentially, the city council would target an entire crime ridden area as a zone of renewal, then purchase the properties on entire blocks, tear everything down, and build fresh. It was like attacking a cancer with major surgery, and it works. The criminals would have to move and rebuild their operations, but by doing this over, and over, each time crimes grip would be less and less. They would lose their customer base. Eventually, without a safe haven, it was mostly dispersed and gone.

[Nystul]

Clearly then the best way to fight crime is to have city council buy up the ghetto and convert to donut shops. Doubly effective!

[--Pete]

Hi,

Perhaps there are not enough donut and coffee shops in bad crime areas. But, which left first, the shops or the cops? No shops, no cops. No cops, no shops.

Effectively, the cops left first. Or, to put it more accurately, their presence did. It happened when beat cops were put into cars. The beat cop was there. You'd be in an alley with some of your friends discussing some mischief or other, and then you'd notice that he was about ten feet away, with a look on his face that said, "Talk about it all you want, but if you do it, you'll deal with me." It's not like a patrol car could sneak up on you all quiet like. Hell, a patrol car probably wouldn't even go into an alley -- at most, maybe, shine a light down it. Thinking about shoplifting, tagging, some other vandalism? Figure you can get away before the cops show up? And there's the beat cop, standing right in front of the store, rocking back and forth on his feet. Fantastic deterrent.

I no longer remember the name of the cop who had the 2nd Ave and 28th St beat, but I did know it then. And I can still visualize his face and hear him say, "Hey, you kids. Break it up and go play some stick ball or something." We weren't particularly good, but he was one of the reasons we didn't go completely bad.

Sometimes the profession attracts the wrong kind of people, mostly those that seek abuse of power in the form of laxness, criminality, or by being overly severe.

It's generally true that he who would want to be a cop shouldn't be allowed to be a cop. However, that's why there's laws and rules and groups to enforce both. Like IA and the press. So if the cops fail, yes it is their fault. But it is also the fault of those who should be guarding the guardians. And, ultimately, it is our fault for preferring pap and entertainment to news.

Crime is very much a local problem.

Yeah, really. The poverty in Colombia, Mexico, and Afghanistan have nothing to do with the illegal trafficking of drugs. The hatred of the Jews and therefor the Americans who support them in the Middle East is not connected wit the *two* attacks on the WTC. Strictly, like every other problem you see, a local problem. I'm beginning to think it's not a political stance. You simply have myopia.

One of the best strategies in Minneapolis was one that New York started. Essentially, the city council would target an entire crime ridden area as a zone of renewal, then purchase the properties on entire blocks, tear everything down, and build fresh. It was like attacking a cancer with major surgery, and it works.

Bullcrap. I lived in NYC when they started doing that. The family of a Puerto Rican friend of mine moved into one of those projects. I'd occasionally spend the night at their place. At first it was nice. Then came the graffiti on the walls, the petty vandalism, the stench of urine and vomit in the stairwells, the broken hall lights, the bags of garbage rotting in the halls, the broken elevators that took months to fix (in a ten or so story apartment complex), the toughs that started demanding 'protection'. There's a reason why 'the projects' has come to be synonymous with 'ghetto' or 'slums'.

Of course, the crime rate in the year immediately following the opening of the projects was lower for that area than was the year immediately before the 'slum clearance'. And so, the spin cycle claimed a victory. If so, it was a Pyhrric victory at best.

The criminals would have to move and rebuild their operations, but by doing this over, and over, each time crimes grip would be less and less. They would lose their customer base. Eventually, without a safe haven, it was mostly dispersed and gone.

What cleaned up NYC (assuming you can call that cesspool clean in any sense of the word) was Rudy Giuliani's get tough on crime campaign. And about the only real long term effect that really had was to reclaim the Times Square district.

The solution to crime? Like poverty, it seems to be a permanent problem. Police presence helps. Decriminalizing self destructive behavior would help. Cynically in that if drug use is not a crime, crime rates would go down. But realistically, if the police, judiciary, and penal systems weren't so flooded with drug offenses, perhaps they could devote more effort to real crimes. Redoing our judicial system so that it is more accurate, more impartial, and more based on finding the truth and administering justice than it is in some legal gamesmanship would help a lot. And making jails a place that everybody, not just the weak, dreads would help also.

The patient has multiple organ failures, and you're focusing on a wart.

--Pete

[Jester]

The family of a Puerto Rican friend of mine moved into one of those projects. I'd occasionally spend the night at their place. At first it was nice. Then came the graffiti on the walls, the petty vandalism, the stench of urine and vomit in the stairwells, the broken hall lights, the bags of garbage rotting in the halls, the broken elevators that took months to fix (in a ten or so story apartment complex), the toughs that started demanding 'protection'. There's a reason why 'the projects' has come to be synonymous with 'ghetto' or 'slums'.

Architectural choices appear to have a major impact on crime by encouraging or discouraging various types of community development. The big self-contained 10 story apartment blocks that characterize the projects (and not coincidentally, the USSR) are a major cause of deterioration. They prevent foot traffic, make policing very difficult, and encourage insular, gang-friendly communities. They create badly enforced commons, or, in your terms, urine and vomit in the stairwells and broken elevators.

If the projects had been built differently, they might not have ended up so badly. I don't think they really understood that at the time. In retrospect, however, the pattern seems clear.

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

Architectural choices appear . . .

Perhaps. I think it has more to do with "you can take the boy out of the slums, but you can't take the slums out of the boy." The same architectural styles on the Upper West Side are some of the safest and most expensive residences in NYC. Single family residence neighborhoods range from crime infested slums to family friendly areas even though the economic conditions are often the same in each. But the amount of crime seems to be inversely related to the number of neighborhood watch signs (and people).

If the projects had been built differently, they might not have ended up so badly. I don't think they really understood that at the time. In retrospect, however, the pattern seems clear.

Maybe, maybe not. But projects have been around since the late nineteenth century. They've mostly failed, and in the same way. I'm speaking of the 1950s. Half a century should have been more than enough to learn. Most politicians have never heard of Santayana, much less understand him.

--Pete

[LavCat]

We had a problem in our area when a police officer stole a candy bar from the local convenience store.

Next thing ya know, they'll be dealin' out of the trunk of their cruiser. Sometimes the profession attracts the wrong kind of people, mostly those that seek abuse of power in the form of laxness, criminality, or by being overly severe. Much like any position of responsibility.

I had more trouble than I expected searching to discover how this event played out. The best I could find was this. My recollection from the newspaper at the time was that the store eventually dropped the theft charges.

Then again I grew up in Philadelphia, the city where the mayor bombed and burned down a city block and then had a scandal with the rebuilding effort.

[kandrathe]

Architectural choices appear to have a major impact on crime by encouraging or discouraging various types of community development. The big self-contained 10 story apartment blocks that characterize the projects (and not coincidentally, the USSR) are a major cause of deterioration. They prevent foot traffic, make policing very difficult, and encourage insular, gang-friendly communities. They create badly enforced commons, or, in your terms, urine and vomit in the stairwells and broken elevators.

If the projects had been built differently, they might not have ended up so badly. I don't think they really understood that at the time. In retrospect, however, the pattern seems clear.

Yeah, I wasn't really talking about "the projects" like tenement cell blocks. Mostly, on a given block they would tear down about a dozen strip bars, pawn shops, and adult establishments. There were some run down seedy rooms for rent upstairs as well, that mostly dealt in another illicit trade. Managed and legally operated, such as in Amsterdam, or Las Vegas it maybe works, but this type of illegal free for all becomes a cesspool of human misery. It was Guliani's success perhaps that inspired the changes here, but more the broken windows theories than merely the "get tough" zero-tolerance attitude. Although, you need both carrots and sticks. But, I feel we've gone too far. In the USA, we have far too many people incarcerated.

[kandrathe]

Effectively, the cops left first. Or, to put it more accurately, their presence did. It happened when beat cops were put into cars. The beat cop was there. You'd be in an alley with some of your friends discussing some mischief or other, and then you'd notice that he was about ten feet away, with a look on his face that said, "Talk about it all you want, but if you do it, you'll deal with me." It's not like a patrol car could sneak up on you all quiet like. Hell, a patrol car probably wouldn't even go into an alley -- at most, maybe, shine a light down it. Thinking about shoplifting, tagging, some other vandalism? Figure you can get away before the cops show up? And there's the beat cop, standing right in front of the store, rocking back and forth on his feet. Fantastic deterrent.

Absolutely.

Crime is very much a local problem.

Yeah, really. The poverty in Colombia, Mexico, and Afghanistan have nothing to do with the illegal trafficking of drugs. The hatred of the Jews and therefor the Americans who support them in the Middle East is not connected wit the *two* attacks on the WTC. Strictly, like every other problem you see, a local problem. I'm beginning to think it's not a political stance. You simply have myopia.

Drug Cartels feed from local issues, but they are organized by international illegal corporations. Our problems in the middle east have more to do with our national addiction to war, than they do to the Arab street. 9-11 was nothing new. I can recount countless times in history when a foreign national (or even a small group) penetrated the illusion of the border security of another nation to wreak unimaginable havoc on the society. But, I'd hazard to guess that 99.99% of crime is done by people in or near the area where they live. Read up on our local Somali problems... This terrorism problem is local.

The solution to crime? Like poverty, it seems to be a permanent problem. Police presence helps. Decriminalizing self destructive behavior would help. Cynically in that if drug use is not a crime, crime rates would go down. But realistically, if the police, judiciary, and penal systems weren't so flooded with drug offenses, perhaps they could devote more effort to real crimes. Redoing our judicial system so that it is more accurate, more impartial, and more based on finding the truth and administering justice than it is in some legal gamesmanship would help a lot. And making jails a place that everybody, not just the weak, dreads would help also.

Yes, I agree. If only our criminal system would put more emphasis on crimes harming others and also figure out what they wanted to accomplish (prevention, redemption, punishment, justice), then maybe they'd make better progress. Then, if they really need to interpose themselves into "helping people that hurt themselves", then pitching them in with the violent murderers and rapists seems to be about the last thing that would help. We should not spend our effort or money for "crimes" which merely offend some people (e.g. sexual deviance).

I think I wrote about the trial I was on the jury for a while back. The guy they wanted to convict of a 1st degree felony, was really a heroine addict who stole his own van and slept in it because the law had him barred from sleeping in his own bed (restraining order by the land lord). He was charged with felony witness tampering (a phone call from jail to his common law wife of 10 years), possession of heroine (he was loaded in the back of the van), grand theft for the van (he paid for in her name), and about a half a dozen other misdemeanors.

They wanted the sword of Damocles over his head to force him into a treatment program (e.g. the noble cause). That is how our criminal justice system becomes abused like Nazi police state to force people to do what very well may be in their own best interest. For this type of case, we need a better way other than having to heap a ton of offenses to coerce the miscreant into some treatment program. Damned inefficient. Meanwhile... The guy is certainly engaged in other anti-social behaviors... Maybe petty theft, and probably dealing drugs.

[Jester]

Mostly, on a given block they would tear down about a dozen strip bars, pawn shops, and adult establishments. There were some run down seedy rooms for rent upstairs as well, that mostly dealt in another illicit trade. Managed and legally operated, such as in Amsterdam, or Las Vegas it maybe works, but this type of illegal free for all becomes a cesspool of human misery. It was Guliani's success perhaps that inspired the changes here, but more the broken windows theories than merely the "get tough" zero-tolerance attitude. Although, you need both carrots and sticks. But, I feel we've gone too far. In the USA, we have far too many people incarcerated.

It's tough to separate out the role Giuliani played from other potential causative factors. I think he did less than people think he did, and instead is receiving credit for the overall decline in crime, seen in many cities, at the end of the crack boom. (Or possibly the first legalized abortion generation, if you believe Levitt.) But the extra boots on the ground involved in harassing squeegee guys and arresting people with tattoos and weird haircuts no doubt reduced crime.

What makes me somewhat skeptical of this kind of "swamp draining" is that its unit of analysis seems to be the territory, rather than the crime itself. Simply moving crime from point A to point B by demolishing point A is not a net advantage, but if you were only looking at the one neigbourhood, it might well appear to be a success.

-Jester

---

I think I wrote about the trial I was on the jury for a while back. The guy they wanted to convict of a 1st degree felony, was really a heroine addict who stole his own van and slept in it because the law had him barred from sleeping in his own bed (restraining order by the land lord). He was charged with felony witness tampering (a phone call from jail to his common law wife of 10 years), possession of heroine (he was loaded in the back of the van), grand theft for the van (he paid for in her name), and about a half a dozen other misdemeanors.

He should go to jail for possession of the heroine. Kidnapping is illegal!



-Jester

[kandrathe]

It's tough to separate out the role Giuliani played from other potential causative factors. I think he did less than people think he did, and instead is receiving credit for the overall decline in crime, seen in many cities, at the end of the crack boom. (Or possibly the first legalized abortion generation, if you believe Levitt.) But the extra boots on the ground involved in harassing squeegee guys and arresting people with tattoos and weird haircuts no doubt reduced crime.

I guess it's the setting of the norm. If you set the norm that there is no graffiti, no bums hustling/begging, and no broken down ugliness permeating the environment, then maybe people begin to take some pride in keeping things looking good.

What makes me somewhat skeptical of this kind of "swamp draining" is that its unit of analysis seems to be the territory, rather than the crime itself. Simply moving crime from point A to point B by demolishing point A is not a net advantage, but if you were only looking at the one neighborhood, it might well appear to be a success.

I agree in part, that when you squeeze one area, the ooze goes somewhere else. But, I think that if you keep pressing, and creating intolerance for it, it weakens and eventually becomes dispersed throughout a larger area, perhaps so much that it become aberrant and not normal. That actually happened in Minneapolis. The epicenter of homicide would move as efforts were increased to reform that area. But, when you look at the homicide pins in the map now, you'd see less of a clear geography.

He should go to jail for possession of the heroine. Kidnapping is illegal!

Possession is not kidnapping. Yet, he is no hero, and as such, has no right to have a heroine. Staying with him is heroic enough.

Darn spell checker! It catches me when I misspell, but not when I misspell to another word!