RE: Those Crazy Americans

RE: Those Crazy Americans (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Aswad -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 3:29:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD It is clearly wrong because his theory does not explain the spike in crime in the 70s. That's insufficient in itself to invalidate the hypothesis, as there's nothing to indicate babies are a significant source of crime in themselves. Babies actually being born and growing up, however, can be a significant source of crime when the parents are unable to provide good socioeconomic conditions for the children and/or are unable to rear the children well, both of which tend to be common with unwanted pregnancies. These children end up being less constructive additions to society than the ones that were planned and wanted, by parents with the time, resources and network to give them a good start in life. If memory serves, there has been a steady drop in crime since the 70s, not matched by any previous drop. In Norway, the rise in crime stopped in the 60s, when it became possible to apply for an abortion, and the drop in crime began in the 80s, when abortions became fully elective, leading to a marked increase in abortions among people with poor socioeconomic backgrounds (they were previously the primary applicant group, but also the primary group to have applications turned down). This matches with everything else we know about crime. As such, the hypothesis seems to merit closer study. IWYW, — Aswad.

Zonie63 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 5:29:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad If memory serves, there has been a steady drop in crime since the 70s, not matched by any previous drop. In Norway, the rise in crime stopped in the 60s, when it became possible to apply for an abortion, and the drop in crime began in the 80s, when abortions became fully elective, leading to a marked increase in abortions among people with poor socioeconomic backgrounds (they were previously the primary applicant group, but also the primary group to have applications turned down). This matches with everything else we know about crime. As such, the hypothesis seems to merit closer study. In the United States, according to this site, violent crime rates actually spiked in the late 1980s/early 90s, and then started its downward trend from 1991. Crime steadily increased from 1960 until 1991, when it started to go down. I suppose it's a possibility that abortion rates might have something to do with it, but there could be other factors as well. By the 1980s, the public was increasingly growing weary of crime and was becoming more security conscious. The people clamored for tougher laws, tougher sentences, more police, and more prisons. Neighborhood watch groups sprung up all over the country. TV shows like "Cops" and "America's Most Wanted" were quite popular and increased public awareness about crime. People started putting alarms on their houses and cars, along with bars on their windows. Private security firms were booming. Public schools implemented more security, with some schools even having metal detectors. Retail stores started putting in shoplifter detectors, and security guards became far more commonplace. Security technology improved, and surveillance cameras were everywhere. Measures like the "Three Strikes" law became popular, and the incarceration rate increased in the 1990s: [image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png/800px-U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png[/image] So, one could argue that keeping criminals in prison might contribute to a lower crime rate. Or maybe McGruff really did take a bite out of crime. [image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/McGruff.jpg[/image]

Politesub53 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 5:37:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 I`ll refer you to the last sentence on my comment.... I ignored that part of your quote because it doesn't matter who you're accusing. Let's get back to the question you're evading: When was this alleged claim made? By who? With a link. K. Dont you read the forums then ?

Kirata -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 6:14:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Dont you read the forums then ? Oooo, another unsubstantiated drive-by claim. You had a link but you forgot to include it, right? K.

Kirata -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 6:24:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 from what i have read, as men get older, they "calm down" and become less violent.. so I wonder if some of the drop has to do with boomers getting older and the fact that there are so many so have an effect on stats.. Could be a factor, I suppose. Theories abound. Here's another one. Another hypothesis suggests reduced lead exposure as the cause; Scholar Mark A.R. Kleiman writes: "Given the decrease in lead exposure among children since the 1980s and the estimated effects of lead on crime, reduced lead exposure could easily explain a very large proportion—certainly more than half—of the crime decrease of the 1994-2004 period. A careful statistical study relating local changes in lead exposure to local crime rates estimates the fraction of the crime decline due to lead reduction as greater than 90 percent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Crime_over_time K.

Aswad -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 6:49:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 So, one could argue that keeping criminals in prison might contribute to a lower crime rate. That graph is one of the most depressing things around that I've seen about the US, save for debt and credit statistics. What's the average time to release for the folks you arrested back in '94? IWYW, — Aswad.

YN -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 9:11:18 AM)
There is serious and peer=reviewed evidence that the prohibition of leaded additives to automobile fuel has lowered the violence rates. quote: At first it seemed preposterous. The hypothesis was so exotic that I laughed. The rise and fall of violent crime during the second half of the 20th century and first years of the 21st were caused, it proposed, not by changes in policing or imprisonment, single parenthood, recession, crack cocaine or the legalisation of abortion, but mainly by … lead. I don't mean bullets. The crime waves that afflicted many parts of the world and then, against all predictions, collapsed, were ascribed, in an article published by Mother Jones last week, to the rise and fall in the use of lead-based paint and leaded petrol. It's ridiculous – until you see the evidence. Studies between cities, states and nations show that the rise and fall in crime follows, with a roughly 20-year lag, the rise and fall in the exposure of infants to trace quantities of lead. But all that gives us is correlation: an association that could be coincidental. The Mother Jones article, which is based on several scientific papers, claimed causation. I began by reading the papers. Do they say what the article claims? They do. Then I looked up the citations: the discussion of those papers in the scientific literature. The three whose citations I checked have been mentioned, between them, 301 times. I went through all these papers (except the handful in foreign languages), as well as dozens of others. To my astonishment, I could find just one study attacking the thesis, and this was sponsored by the Ethyl Corporation, which happens to have been a major manufacturer of the petrol additive tetraethyl lead. I found many more supporting it. Crazy as this seems, it really does look as if lead poisoning could be the major cause of the rise and fall of violent crime. Yes, lead poisoning could really be a cause of violent crime

tj444 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 9:29:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: YN There is serious and peer=reviewed evidence that the prohibition of leaded additives to automobile fuel has lowered the violence rates. sorta makes ya wonder what other chemicals, pollution, food ingredients, etc (either on their own or in various combinations) affects the body & mind.. we are living in one big experiment.. but.. then what is the cause of extreme violence in other countries (like parts of the African continent)?

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 9:38:07 AM)
I am going to say no, Many countries have lower crime rates and a much lower rate of incarceration. Our rate of incarceration for petty offenses is an assault on democracy and liberty... Notice how that spike coincides with the escalation of the war on drugs? it is total hogwash.

YN -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 10:30:36 AM)
In many less developed nations, gasoline is and has been used for many other things than automobile fuel. Gasoline stoves are common, and even today poor people especially the young, use it as an intoxicant in many places. And leaded paint is still common world wide. As for other substances, either individually or in combination, things such as steroids, mercury, and so forth are known to cause troubles in those exposed to them, the research into many other chemicals is ongoing, and in the primary stages. And how a tool using animal would act and what damage would be done cannot be studied with laboratory animals, an intoxicated or mentally deranged rat is far less efficient at mayhem and far more apt to die or suffer adverse consequences than it's peers, while an similarly affected human can operate automobiles, machetes, revolvers, etc., without inhibitions and be considerably more dangerous than his peaceful and unaffected neighbors.

Politesub53 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 5:01:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Dont you read the forums then ? Oooo, another unsubstantiated drive-by claim. You had a link but you forgot to include it, right? K. No more drive by than your normal drivel. Try this from the line about John Lotts book. Its the first line so even you should be able to spot it. John R. Lott, Jr.: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. << Implicit enough

BamaD -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 6:59:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD It is clearly wrong because his theory does not explain the spike in crime in the 70s. That's insufficient in itself to invalidate the hypothesis, as there's nothing to indicate babies are a significant source of crime in themselves. Babies actually being born and growing up, however, can be a significant source of crime when the parents are unable to provide good socioeconomic conditions for the children and/or are unable to rear the children well, both of which tend to be common with unwanted pregnancies. These children end up being less constructive additions to society than the ones that were planned and wanted, by parents with the time, resources and network to give them a good start in life. If memory serves, there has been a steady drop in crime since the 70s, not matched by any previous drop. In Norway, the rise in crime stopped in the 60s, when it became possible to apply for an abortion, and the drop in crime began in the 80s, when abortions became fully elective, leading to a marked increase in abortions among people with poor socioeconomic backgrounds (they were previously the primary applicant group, but also the primary group to have applications turned down). This matches with everything else we know about crime. As such, the hypothesis seems to merit closer study. IWYW, — Aswad. Actually there was a hugh spike in crime as the baby boomers reached the violence prone ages and has declined as we aged. If the decrease in crime is to be atributed to this dressed up eugenics theory what accounts for the spike? Abortion rates had not changed in decades. Demographics had chaged and violence rates changed with them as predicted.

BamaD -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 7:05:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 from what i have read, as men get older, they "calm down" and become less violent.. so I wonder if some of the drop has to do with boomers getting older and the fact that there are so many so have an effect on stats.. Could be a factor, I suppose. Theories abound. Here's another one. Another hypothesis suggests reduced lead exposure as the cause; Scholar Mark A.R. Kleiman writes: "Given the decrease in lead exposure among children since the 1980s and the estimated effects of lead on crime, reduced lead exposure could easily explain a very large proportion—certainly more than half—of the crime decrease of the 1994-2004 period. A careful statistical study relating local changes in lead exposure to local crime rates estimates the fraction of the crime decline due to lead reduction as greater than 90 percent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Crime_over_time K. This theory is included in Frekonomics also has the flaw that it does not explain the crime spike. While I agree that banning lead paints no doubt led to healthier children it does not explain why, in an ealier time when lead use was even more common (for example in toys) the crime rates were not sky high.

Zonie63 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 7:09:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 So, one could argue that keeping criminals in prison might contribute to a lower crime rate. That graph is one of the most depressing things around that I've seen about the US, save for debt and credit statistics. What's the average time to release for the folks you arrested back in '94? IWYW, — Aswad. I think murderers are eligible for parole after 7 years, although I'm not entirely certain of that. As I recall, the Three Strikes law was designed to keep habitual criminals in prison, as opposed to the "revolving door" of recidivism.

BamaD -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 7:10:52 PM)
quote: No more drive by than your normal drivel. Try this from the line about John Lotts book. Its the first line so even you should be able to spot it. John R. Lott, Jr.: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. << Implicit enough Unfortunatly he then followes it up with facts. He only claims a 2-5%% difference which in no way takes credit for the 50% crime reduction we have seen. Saying somthing helps is not the same as claiming that it is the sole determining factor.

BamaD -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 7:11:58 PM)
quote: As I recall, the Three Strikes law was designed to keep habitual criminals in prison, as opposed to the "revolving door" of recidivism. That was exactly the idea.

Zonie63 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 7:41:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 I am going to say no, Many countries have lower crime rates and a much lower rate of incarceration. Our rate of incarceration for petty offenses is an assault on democracy and liberty... Notice how that spike coincides with the escalation of the war on drugs? it is total hogwash. I agree, although my main point was that, as people became more aware of crime and took proactive measures to prevent it, that may have led to a downturn in the crime rate. I think criminals seek out easy targets, and if the easy targets are fewer and further between, then that may also lead to a lower crime rate. With the eye in the sky and Big Brother's cameras all over the place (not to mention the prevalence of cellphone cameras nowadays - something we didn't have in the 1980s), a lot of crime is dealt with that way. I'm not sure that the war on drugs has contributed to a lowering of the crime rate, although I can see that it's likely a factor in the rising incarceration rate. The fallout of the war on drugs seems to have indirectly led to the various gang/cartel wars we've been seeing.

BamaD -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/9/2013 8:23:25 PM)
quote: think criminals seek out easy targets, and if the easy targets are fewer and further between, then that may also lead to a lower crime rate. With the eye in the sky and Big Brother's cameras all over the place (not to mention the prevalence of cellphone cameras nowadays - something we didn't have in the 1980s), a lot of crime is dealt with that way. Agreed plus more potential victims are armed.

Aswad -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/10/2013 3:01:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 I think murderers are eligible for parole after 7 years, although I'm not entirely certain of that. Here, they receive a sentence of up to 21 years, out of which 14 would be served as the minimum, with the last 4 years or so including a sort of layover programme to reacclimatize them to society (which may or may not include time in normal society in the daytime), and the option of retaining them indefinitely if they're considered to be at high risk of recidivism. The parole arrangement you're talking about seems counterintuitive to me. In any case, it doesn't quite answer the question of what the average time to release is. Also, I'm curious as to the actual crime rate for serious crime, as opposed to the incarceration rate. quote: As I recall, the Three Strikes law was designed to keep habitual criminals in prison, as opposed to the "revolving door" of recidivism. If you want to reduce recidivism, look into the Scandinavian model instead. The numbers speak for themselves. Also, abandon the War on Drugs, which breeds crime and quite directly fuels the Mexican civil war. IWYW, — Aswad.

Politesub53 -> RE: Those Crazy Americans (5/10/2013 3:11:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: No more drive by than your normal drivel. Try this from the line about John Lotts book. Its the first line so even you should be able to spot it. John R. Lott, Jr.: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. << Implicit enough Unfortunatly he then followes it up with facts. He only claims a 2-5%% difference which in no way takes credit for the 50% crime reduction we have seen. Saying somthing helps is not the same as claiming that it is the sole determining factor. How much plainer do his words have to be ? Largest drop in violent crime Edits to add......Your 2-5% drop is per annum. So in ten years thats a 20-50% drop, so lets not play stupid with maths unless its your strong point.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875