4 ms·

And yet, somehow, over the last 20 years the crime rate in the US has dropped tremendously. Crime rates in all Western countries have dropped over the last

And yet, somehow, over the last 20 years the crime rate in the US has dropped tremendously. Crime rates in all Western countries have dropped over the last 20 years. More interestingly, the crime rate in the US does not significantly differ from that in other countries[1]. Even taking the statistics from [1] at face value (they are probably skewed by various different definitions for 'crime'), The Netherlands has the same crime rate as the US, yet the prison population is six times smaller (per capita)[2]. Considering the various other Western countries doesn't make that better. Your assertion that the US suffers from --criminality in some American cultures-- seems unfounded. [1] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-t... [2] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-prisoners-per-capita http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-pris...

philwelch 16y ago
This is where the lack of controlled experimentation makes the data harder to read. To match the Dutch imprisonment rate, the US would have to release some 84% of its prison population, or in other words, to not have imprisoned those people to begin with. But if we did that, the crime rate would be different because, presumably, at least some of those people would have gone on to commit crimes! I'll readily concede that at least half, maybe 60% of the US prison population is only locked up for drug offenses, and that legalizing drugs by the end of this week won't affect the rates of other crimes[1]. 84% seems high. [1] I couldn't easily find any good breakdown of what all these people are imprisoned for, and would appreciate it. That said, as much I'm in favor of drug legalization, drug possession and sale is still a crime, and it's also a crime in nearly every other country you're comparing crime rates to.
- true_religion 16y ago
  You can reduce the prison population by giving out smaller prison terms.
- barrkel 16y ago
  That makes your argument circular: you suggest that the US has higher criminality and this justifies the larger prison population; but faced with statistics that show it's not particularly higher, you now suggest the criminality would be higher if the prison population were lower. In other words, the prison population is large because there are more criminal actors; and there are more criminal actors, because there is a large prison population.
  - philwelch 16y ago
    It's easy to make it look like that when you ignore leading and lagging indicators. Someone might be in prison today because of a crime they committed in 1990. Obviously, their being in prison has nothing to do with the 2010 crime rate and a little bit to do with the 1990 crime rate. In 1990, the US did have higher criminality! My point, though, was that it's not a controlled experiment to compare the US and the Netherlands. It would be a controlled experiment to compare the US to an alternate universe US where, for whatever reason, we didn't incarcerate 84% of the current US prison population. The US imprisons maybe six times as many people, per capita, as a Western European country. The question is why. Obviously, actual criminality has to play into this, unless the US wrongfully convicts many times more innocent people than Western European countries do. Longer sentences also play into this, though--it will obviously increase the prison population (or, more precisely, stop it from decreasing) but it will also decrease the crime rate by preventing prisoners from committing crimes in open society.
    - jchrisa 16y ago
      I'd suggest that our living arrangement (get isolated from community, earn and spend money to purchase a simulacrum of what community used to provide) has a lot to do with the bleakness of American life, and bleakness is probably a bigger predictor of criminality than anything else. If you want to fix the US, go back 60 years and fight highway and auto subsidies.
      - jdminhbg 16y ago
        Given that crime rates are vastly higher in walkable urban settings than sprawling suburbs, I'd suggest that highway subsidies are a poor indicator of crime rates.
- speleding 16y ago
  Of course, possession and use of drugs is not a crime in the Netherlands (selling them is illegal for hard drugs and soft drugs above a certain quantity). That explains away part of the difference. If you consider fewer things to be crimes then you have less criminals. Dutch laws are also more tolerant on things like prostitution (if not forced), euthanasia (if properly executed), underage drinking (not in a bar), and a few others. A clear side effect of being in prison is that you are more likely to get the wrong friends and less chance of a job which leads to more crime. Rinse & repeat. That explains away a lot of the rest.
  - Confusion 16y ago
    However, I picked The Netherlands from the list because it was closest to the US and has a higher crime rate than Germany, France, Canada, etc. You can substitute any of those in my argument and it still holds.
matthijs 16y ago
Taking a look at the definition of Crimes per capita it states: "Note: Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence. Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population.". According to the crime statistics for The Netherlands the rape victims rate is 0.8% versus 0.4% for the united states [1] (its definition being: "People victimized by sexual assault (as a % of the total population)". However looking at the rapes per capita[2] The Netherlands has 0.1 per 1000 vs 0.3 for the US. Additionally the murder rate in the US is about 5 times higher than in The Netherlands[3]. The Dutch rate is without attempts, but still I doubt if it would get even close to that in the US. [1] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_vic-crime-rape-victims http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_vic-crime-rape-vic... [2] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona...

philwelch 16y ago

This is where the lack of controlled experimentation makes the data harder to read. To match the Dutch imprisonment rate, the US would have to release some 84% of its prison population, or in other words, to not have imprisoned those people to begin with. But if we did that, the crime rate would be different because, presumably, at least some of those people would have gone on to commit crimes! I'll readily concede that at least half, maybe 60% of the US prison population is only locked up for drug offenses, and that legalizing drugs by the end of this week won't affect the rates of other crimes[1]. 84% seems high. [1] I couldn't easily find any good breakdown of what all these people are imprisoned for, and would appreciate it. That said, as much I'm in favor of drug legalization, drug possession and sale is still a crime, and it's also a crime in nearly every other country you're comparing crime rates to.

true_religion 16y ago
You can reduce the prison population by giving out smaller prison terms.
barrkel 16y ago
That makes your argument circular: you suggest that the US has higher criminality and this justifies the larger prison population; but faced with statistics that show it's not particularly higher, you now suggest the criminality would be higher if the prison population were lower. In other words, the prison population is large because there are more criminal actors; and there are more criminal actors, because there is a large prison population.
- philwelch 16y ago
  It's easy to make it look like that when you ignore leading and lagging indicators. Someone might be in prison today because of a crime they committed in 1990. Obviously, their being in prison has nothing to do with the 2010 crime rate and a little bit to do with the 1990 crime rate. In 1990, the US did have higher criminality! My point, though, was that it's not a controlled experiment to compare the US and the Netherlands. It would be a controlled experiment to compare the US to an alternate universe US where, for whatever reason, we didn't incarcerate 84% of the current US prison population. The US imprisons maybe six times as many people, per capita, as a Western European country. The question is why. Obviously, actual criminality has to play into this, unless the US wrongfully convicts many times more innocent people than Western European countries do. Longer sentences also play into this, though--it will obviously increase the prison population (or, more precisely, stop it from decreasing) but it will also decrease the crime rate by preventing prisoners from committing crimes in open society.
  - jchrisa 16y ago
    I'd suggest that our living arrangement (get isolated from community, earn and spend money to purchase a simulacrum of what community used to provide) has a lot to do with the bleakness of American life, and bleakness is probably a bigger predictor of criminality than anything else. If you want to fix the US, go back 60 years and fight highway and auto subsidies.
    - jdminhbg 16y ago
      Given that crime rates are vastly higher in walkable urban settings than sprawling suburbs, I'd suggest that highway subsidies are a poor indicator of crime rates.
speleding 16y ago
Of course, possession and use of drugs is not a crime in the Netherlands (selling them is illegal for hard drugs and soft drugs above a certain quantity). That explains away part of the difference. If you consider fewer things to be crimes then you have less criminals. Dutch laws are also more tolerant on things like prostitution (if not forced), euthanasia (if properly executed), underage drinking (not in a bar), and a few others. A clear side effect of being in prison is that you are more likely to get the wrong friends and less chance of a job which leads to more crime. Rinse & repeat. That explains away a lot of the rest.
- Confusion 16y ago
  However, I picked The Netherlands from the list because it was closest to the US and has a higher crime rate than Germany, France, Canada, etc. You can substitute any of those in my argument and it still holds.

matthijs 16y ago

Taking a look at the definition of Crimes per capita it states: "Note: Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence. Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population.". According to the crime statistics for The Netherlands the rape victims rate is 0.8% versus 0.4% for the united states [1] (its definition being: "People victimized by sexual assault (as a % of the total population)". However looking at the rapes per capita[2] The Netherlands has 0.1 per 1000 vs 0.3 for the US. Additionally the murder rate in the US is about 5 times higher than in The Netherlands[3]. The Dutch rate is without attempts, but still I doubt if it would get even close to that in the US. [1] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_vic-crime-rape-victims http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_vic-crime-rape-vic... [2] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona...