The U.S. crime rate is still dropping, FBI data shows. Q4 2023 had 13% drop in murder, 6% drop in violent crime

[The Barbarian]

It would be interesting to see a comparison between the drop in violent crime in 2023 and whether the crime rate dropped at the end of prohibition.

Yes, it would. (Babarian checks) There is this...

Prohibition: US homicide and suicide rate 1900-1950 | Statista

Once described by US President Herbert Hoover as "a great social and economic experiment", we now know that Prohibition was ultimately a failure, that led to increased crime and violence and gave way to a new era of mafia and mob influence in the United States.

www.statista.com

Turns out, it did. Legalizing alcohol did seem to reduce violent crime.

Drugs have become mostly legal in the past few years.

It wasn't a sudden thing and it was almost exclusively marijuana. This has been going on since 2014 on the federal level.

Those drugs, particularly marijuana were major economic crops in South America. A collapse of that huge industry could be fueling the current surge at the border.

The surge is mostly Central Americans. Do you have some checkable numbers on weed being imported here from Central America?

The Cartels, and yes, there are American drug cartels comprised of American citizens in places like Chicago, are very reminiscent of the Mobs of the prohibition era.
Just a thought.

So maybe legalization of weed has led to less violence? If so, why did it wait so long after it began to be legalized, rise after Trump was elected, and then fall drastically thereafter?

 

[The Barbarian]

removed nothing.

I notice 2023 is missing. The year when violence declined most dramatically. So there is that.

Khadafy was horrible and so was Saddam , do you support the lie that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction?

He did. Poison gas, for example. He wasn't dumb enough to use them on western forces. Mostly his own people. The mess in Iraq was due to the neocon idea that we could rebuild Iraqi society. The smart thing to have done, assuming we needed to go to war with him in the first place, was not to destroy the political structure of Iraq, leaving a vacuum for terrorists. We should have called the surviving Baathist leaders into a meeting, explained to them what Saddam did to get us to attack, and tell them what they need to do to avoid that happening again. Then, we should have left.

As bad as Khadafy was even junkyard dogs get old & tired & had become irrelevant in the area of terrorism.

Khadafy's government was responsible for the Lockerbee terrorist attack. Hundreds died. If he had not been removed, it would have gotten worse.

 

[QvQ]

Turns out, it did. Legalizing alcohol did seem to reduce violent crime.

Legalizing marijuana has the same reduction.
Prohibition and the Drug Wars created certain conditions
1) A romantic "outlaw" culture
2) A incarceration rate that was resented because the "outlaw" culture made the substances glamourous.
3) A criminal class with prison records that damaged the ability to enter polite society, hence continued drug dealing being the only career option
4) Resentment of the police
5) Organized crime, even down to street gangs in Chicago, were funded by bootleg liquor and then by marijuana.

Rival Gangs in Chicago and Cartels differ only in size and geography:
The violence between individuals and gangs has been funded and fueled by drugs profits.
There are the turf wars for market shares.
Then there is violation of the criminal code within the groups such as theft, snitching.
If person is cheated in a drug deal the only recourse is vigilante action, individually or collectively.


The collapse of the "speak easy" "Al Capone" alcohol era was abrupt, as prohibition ended abruptly
The collapse of the drug culture has been slower, as States have been legalizing marijuana over a longer period.
Marijuana is still illegal at the Federal level.

Furthermore, as the economy of the drug culture collapses, there would be an increase in property crimes as the income from drugs diminished. So a reduction in violent crime and the rise in property crimes would be predictable.

 

[The Barbarian]

The collapse of the "speak easy" "Al Capone" alcohol era was abrupt, as prohibition ended abruptly
The collapse of the drug culture has been slower, as States have been legalizing marijuana over a longer period.
Marijuana is still illegal at the Federal level.

And yet during this long period of decriminalization, violent crime dropped continuously, only to rise after Trump was elected and then to drop by a record amount under Joe Biden.

Furthermore, as the economy of the drug culture collapses, there would be an increase in property crimes as the income from drugs diminished. So a reduction in violent crime and the rise in property crimes would be predictable.

It's always easier to "predict" after the fact....

 

[QvQ]

t's always easier to "predict" after the fact....

Here is a report from 2018.
"The rate and number of the most recent FBI statistics of crimes are for 2018. They show that crime has declined since Trump became president,"

Violent crime increased in 2020 but given that people were suddenly locked up together, without outside jobs, friendly support or diversions, that would be expected.

To cite 2020 as the Big Trump Crime Wave is misleading and disingenuous.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

non sequitur

So? How much of that was done by the rightists pretending to be ANTIFA and BLM?

AP finds most arrested in protests aren’t leftist radicals​

AP finds most arrested in protests aren't leftist radicals

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump portrays the hundreds of people arrested nationwide in protests against racial injustice as violent urban left-wing radicals.

apnews.com

"Some of those facing charges undoubtedly share far-left and anti-government views. Far-right protesters also have been arrested and charged. Some defendants have driven to protests from out of state. Some have criminal records and were illegally carrying weapons. Others are accused of using the protests as an opportunity to steal or create havoc."

"Some". So they actually have no idea, and they are carefully defining "leftist radicals" to exclude the large majority of violent protesters.



"Very few of those charged appear to be affiliated with highly organized extremist groups, and many are young suburban adults from the very neighborhoods Trump vows to protect from the violence in his reelection push to win support from the suburbs.

Attorney General William Barr has urged his prosecutors to bring federal charges on protesters who cause violence and has suggested that rarely used sedition charges could apply. And the Department of Justice has pushed for detention even as prisons across the U.S. were releasing high-risk inmates because of COVID-19 and prosecutors had been told to consider the risks of incarceration during a pandemic when seeking detention.


"In one case in Utah, where a police car was burned, federal prosecutors had to defend why they were bringing arson charges in federal court. They said it was appropriate because the patrol car was used in interstate commerce.

Not to say there hasn’t been violence. Other police cars have been set on fire. Officers have been injured and blinded. Windows have been smashed, stores looted, businesses destroyed.


Of more than 300 arrested, there are about 286 defendants, others had charges dropped. Some live in cities like Portland and Seattle where local prosecutors declined to bring some protest-related charges.

Some of those facing charges undoubtedly share far-left and anti-government views. Far-right protesters also have been arrested and charged. Some defendants have driven to protests from out of state. Some have criminal records and were illegally carrying weapons. Others are accused of using the protests as an opportunity to steal or create havoc."

 

[JustOneWay]

"Some". So they actually have no idea, and they are carefully defining "leftist radicals" to exclude the large majority of violent protesters.

It is naive to think they were not out there causing damage while pretending to be a "leftist radical" Some! LOL

Leaked Documents Show Police Knew Far-Right Extremists Were the Real Threat at Protests, Not “Antifa”​

Leaked Documents Show Police Knew Far-Right Extremists Were the Real Threat at Protests, Not “Antifa”

An analysis of leaked law enforcement documents reveals an obsession with “antifa” despite evidence of threats of violence to police and protesters.

theintercept.com

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

It is naive to think they were not out there causing damage while pretending to be a "leftist radical" Some! LOL

Leaked Documents Show Police Knew Far-Right Extremists Were the Real Threat at Protests, Not “Antifa”​

Leaked Documents Show Police Knew Far-Right Extremists Were the Real Threat at Protests, Not “Antifa”

An analysis of leaked law enforcement documents reveals an obsession with “antifa” despite evidence of threats of violence to police and protesters.

theintercept.com

Yes, they declined to call all those who got into violent protests as "leftist radicals", thereby making the claim that the crowd wasn't mostly "leftist radicals". When you don't like the facts, just change the terminology. We have been watching this nonstop in the past few years.

Instead these people just got caught in mob actions like looting, rioting, setting fires, and taking over blocks of Portland and the Portland Courthouse. And most were released. They certainly were not hunted down like everyone who even appeared near the Capitol Building on Jan 6, a process that is still going on 3 years later by the obsessed.

 

[Lukaris]

Khadafy's government was responsible for the Lockerbee terrorist attack. Hundreds died. If he had not been removed, it would have gotten worse.

Above from post 62.

Lockerbie happened at the end of 1988. Khadafy. That was probably the height of his antics. Khadafy remained a complicated & enigmatic; at times a thug & other times, actually pragmatic. He actually opposed jihadist, world terrorism & became more centered on African politics.

Rebuilding links with the West​

In 1999, Libya began secret talks with the British government to normalize relations.[380] In September 2001, Gaddafi publicly condemned the September 11 attacks on the US by al-Qaeda, expressing sympathy with the victims and calling for Libyan involvement in the US-led War on Terroragainst militant Islamism.[381] His government continued suppressing domestic Islamism, at the same time as Gaddafi called for the wider application of sharia law.[382] Libya also cemented connections with China and North Korea, being visited by Chinese President Jiang Zemin in April 2002.[383] However, relations with China became strained in May 2006 due to a visit to Tripoli by Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian.[384][385][386]Influenced by the events of the Iraq War, in December 2003, Libya renounced its possession of weapons of mass destruction, decommissioning its chemical and nuclear weapons programs.[387] Relations with the US improved as a result.[388] British Prime Minister Tony Blair visited Gaddafi in March 2004;[389] the pair developed close personal ties.[390] In 2003, Libya paid US$2.7 billion to the families of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing as it was the condition the US and UK had made for terminating the remaining UN sanctions. Libya continued to deny any role in the bombing.[391][392] In 2009, Gaddafi attempted to strong-arm global energy companies operating in Libya to cover Libya's settlement with the families of the victims of Lockerbie.[393]



Whatever Khadafy was a person & leader, he had ceased to be a threat to overall world stability. As I have given links previously, his removal did nothing but destabilize millions of people so your assessment is weak.

 

[stevil]

Why does the public think it's going up? “There is definitely more disorder in cities than there was five years ago," said one expert. “People confuse disorder and crime."

New FBI data confirms previous indications that crime in the U.S. declined significantly in 2023, continuing a post-pandemic trend and belying widespread perceptions that crime is rising.

Probably because there is a Democrat running the white house and Right wing media personalities are pushing the lie about increases in crime.

 

[Lukaris]

From post #50:

As a conservative, I am unsure of where to go as things stand. The war in Ukraine started when the current POTUS was vice and was at least contained under Trump.

Trump was no doubt grateful to his boss for holding off on the invasion until Biden was president. But it hasn't gone so well for him.


Trump, “grateful to his boss” ( i.e. Putin), this is about as unsubstantiated as it gets. You have your permanent opinion that the unsubstantiated Russia gate affair involves Trump. Ideologues will insist that investigations like Russia gate or Uranium One are truths that fit their agenda. It is evident that dirty deeds are being done but who knows the guilty parties? All I know is that chaos in Ukraine preceded Trump & revived after Trump.

 

[Estrid]

Particularly but not limited to America has a right wing element that inculcates the population into fear, doomsaying and end times-esques narratives. People are hard wired to experience fear and anxiety and it's so easy for fear-mongers to sell it.

As if the left is any better

 

[Estrid]

Probably because there is a Democrat running the white house and Right wing media personalities are pushing the lie about increases in crime.

There's an enormous increase is certain
types of crimes.

 

[iluvatar5150]

As if the left is any better

The left certainly has its faults, but that fear-based ideology tends to resonate more with folks on the right, so those sorts of messages on the left are often kind of self-limiting. The left may, for example, have media outlets that are as breathlessly partisan as Fox News or OAN or The Federalist or whatever, but they don't have remotely the marketshare of more reasonable mainstream sources.

 

[Estrid]

The left certainly has its faults, but that fear-based ideology tends to resonate more with folks on the right, so those sorts of messages on the left are often kind of self-limiting. The left may, for example, have media outlets that are as breathlessly partisan as Fox News or OAN or The Federalist or whatever, but they don't have remotely the marketshare of more reasonable mainstream sources.

I hope you are right.

 

[QvQ]

he left certainly has its faults, but that fear-based ideology tends to resonate more with folks on the right, so those sorts of messages on the left are often kind of self-limiting. The left may, for example, have media outlets that are as breathlessly partisan as Fox News or OAN or The Federalist or whatever, but they don't have remotely the marketshare of more reasonable mainstream sources.

The Left media promotes fear and loathing of an amorphous, liberal defined "racist" 'white supremacist" army of rabid gun toting maga republicans who pose an existential threat to democracy and all liberals.
These maga creatures of the left's imagining are used to stir up the left.
The Right does fear crime but it is the ordinary garden variety, such as getting mugged on the subway, having their daughters raped and murdered or getting carjacked in broad daylight.
It is the left that fears irrationally.
Is it rational that my brother, a flaming liberal, believes some group of "trump maga republicans" who are "somewhere else, lurking about," just waiting to strike when Trump gets back in power. He believes CNN talking points, never realizing his neighbor and his other family members are getting mighty tired of his absolute inability to see that he has met the enemy and they are "us."
Many of my liberal friends express the same fears. It is time to stop that "right wing domestic terrorist" fear mongering and get real about crime.

 

[hislegacy]

Has anyone looked into the effect of District Attorney's not pursuing charges on the reporting.

Crime will drop when crimes are not prosecuted - that is a given.

EXAMPLE:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/06/us/alvin-bragg-manhattan-district-attorney-crimes-prosecution/index.html

“Police officers don’t want to be sent out to enforce laws that the district attorneys won’t prosecute,” PBA president Patrick Lynch said in a statement to CNN. “And there are already too many people who believe that they can commit crimes, resist arrest, interfere with police officers and face zero consequences.”​

​

in his own words:

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Day-One-Letter-Policies-1.03.2022.pdf

The following policies and procedures are effective immediately. A. CHARGING 1. The Office will not prosecute the following charges, unless as part of an accusatory instrument containing at least one felony count: a) Marijuana misdemeanors, PL §§ 222.30 and 222.50. b) The act of refusing to pay the fare for public transportation under Theft of Services, PL §165.15(3). c) Trespass, PL §§ 140.05, 140.10, 140.15, unless the trespass is a family offense pursuant to CPL § 530.11, accompanies any charge of Stalking in the Fourth Degree under PL § 120.45, or is approved by an ECAB supervisor. d) Aggravated Unlicensed Operation, VTL § 511.1. Note that any vehicular collision resulting in any physical injury should be pursued as an act of reckless driving, reckless endangerment, negligent or reckless assault, failure to yield, or any other applicable statute. This policy addresses only criminalization of a failure to pay fines and does not address the criminalization of dangerous driving. Also, this charge may be prosecuted as part of any accusatory instrument containing a charge of Vehicle and Traffic Law 1212, 1192, or 511.2. e) Any violation, traffic infraction, or other non-criminal offense not accompanied by a misdemeanor or felony. f) Resisting Arrest, PL § 205.30, except for the act of resisting arrest for any crime not included on this declination list. g) Obstructing Governmental Administration in the Second Degree, PL § 195.05, other than for the act of significantly physically interfering with the lawful arrest of another​

​

If you are not comitting felony level crimes - you are not charged with misdemeanors. - even resisting arrest.

I wonder why misdemeanor crime is dropping? - not because they are happening less, but because they are no longer charging people with the crime.

 

[DaisyDay]

As far as perceptions go, especially in NYC, there's a lot of people there who remember the much safer/cleaner time in the city from 1994-2001. For all of Rudy's present-day faults and looniness, his administration did clean up the city quite a bit. So for people in the age range where they grew up there in 90's (and don't remember how bad the 70's/80's were there)...the present day situation in NYC probably does seem like it's way worse than they remember the city being 15-20 years ago.

I grew up in NYC during the 70s and 80s and left mid-90s. Attributing the drop in crime to Rudy and his administration seem specious when you consider that the crime rate of NYC dropped the same amount as other large but Rudyless cities. While infrastructure maintenance was far better, his approach to crime was to concentrate on locking up young minorities through Stop and Frisk, enforcing draconian drug laws (15 years minimum for carrying four ounces of marijuana first offense) and coming down super hard on minor offenses (Broken Window policy) - to his credit, as a prosecutor, he did indict and convict white collar criminals as well.

 

[DaisyDay]

Legalizing marijuana has the same reduction.
Prohibition and the Drug Wars created certain conditions
1) A romantic "outlaw" culture
2) A incarceration rate that was resented because the "outlaw" culture made the substances glamourous.
3) A criminal class with prison records that damaged the ability to enter polite society, hence continued drug dealing being the only career option
4) Resentment of the police
5) Organized crime, even down to street gangs in Chicago, were funded by bootleg liquor and then by marijuana.

Rival Gangs in Chicago and Cartels differ only in size and geography:
The violence between individuals and gangs has been funded and fueled by drugs profits.
There are the turf wars for market shares.
Then there is violation of the criminal code within the groups such as theft, snitching.
If person is cheated in a drug deal the only recourse is vigilante action, individually or collectively.


The collapse of the "speak easy" "Al Capone" alcohol era was abrupt, as prohibition ended abruptly
The collapse of the drug culture has been slower, as States have been legalizing marijuana over a longer period.
Marijuana is still illegal at the Federal level.

Furthermore, as the economy of the drug culture collapses, there would be an increase in property crimes as the income from drugs diminished. So a reduction in violent crime and the rise in property crimes would be predictable.

One benefit from decriminalizing, while heavily regulating, drugs is that there should be far fewer fentanyl accidental deaths. All these fentanyl deaths being blamed on cartels and immigrants are easily prevented by Americans simply not buying and using illegal drugs voluntarily. No one is forcing US citizens to take these drugs so putting the responsibility entirely on foreigners is absurd and worse than useless.

If street drugs are regulated and dispensed then the users would know what is in them and how dangerous they are instead of buying a pig in a poke. Mitigating harm would be the goal.

 

[Desk trauma]

One benefit from decriminalizing, while heavily regulating, drugs is that there should be far fewer fentanyl accidental deaths.

That would be legalizing, not decriminalizing.