3 ms·

You are grouping shoplifters with muggers. These are meaningfully different. A shoplifter ideally wants to snatch and go. They are in the business of fleeing,

You are grouping shoplifters with muggers. These are meaningfully different. A shoplifter ideally wants to snatch and go. They are in the business of fleeing, partially because they know they won't be confronted. The most likely outcome is that they have someone shout at them or maybe get pushed. The mugger is not this situation. The mugger has to give someone a reason to comply - that means a threat of violence. The mugger doesn't want to use that threat (they want the stuff) but they need the threat and need to be perceived as serious. Often muggers are new to criminality so they are jumpy, irrational and likely to accidentally apply violence. Among concealed carriers, one of the hot topics is the situation of an armed mugging. While the mugger doesn't want to harm you, the risk of accidental harm is very real and muggings "fail" and end up as stabbings/shootings all the time. No small amount of time is wasted discussing how concealed carriers should respond to this threat - and I'll let you youtube your own security footage of this happening. The gang situation is an unfortunate one. I'm sorry your coworker had that happen to them, and it's been a growing issue in Austin.

vlovich123 4y ago
I think you totally misread what I wrote. I told you about a mugging I witnessed first hand that happened on Muni. The mugger was not using a weapon. Anyway, I was trying to show that the broken windows theory is flawed. The broken windows theory suggests that if you stop shoplifting and other trivial crimes it’ll also prevent more violent crimes. That’s unlikely to be the case and the research done so far has not found any supporting evidence for this theory.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  > the research done so far has not found any supporting evidence for this theory. You are incorrect. Research is favorable with caveats: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022427815576576 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/002242781557657... You may be conflating it with a VERY misreported meta analysis, the 2019 Daniel T O'Brien et al. which found BWT theory does not impact *mental health* of a neighborhood. He also normalized for SES which BWT is probably a direct predictor of (basically social funding). > The mugger was not using a weapon. https://www.statista.com/statistics/251914/number-of-robberies-in-the-us-by-weapon/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/251914/number-of-robberi... If you get mugged, that mugger almost certainly has a weapon. That you saw the exception does not alter the stats.

vlovich123 4y ago

I think you totally misread what I wrote. I told you about a mugging I witnessed first hand that happened on Muni. The mugger was not using a weapon. Anyway, I was trying to show that the broken windows theory is flawed. The broken windows theory suggests that if you stop shoplifting and other trivial crimes it’ll also prevent more violent crimes. That’s unlikely to be the case and the research done so far has not found any supporting evidence for this theory.

vorpalhex 4y ago
> the research done so far has not found any supporting evidence for this theory. You are incorrect. Research is favorable with caveats: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022427815576576 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/002242781557657... You may be conflating it with a VERY misreported meta analysis, the 2019 Daniel T O'Brien et al. which found BWT theory does not impact *mental health* of a neighborhood. He also normalized for SES which BWT is probably a direct predictor of (basically social funding). > The mugger was not using a weapon. https://www.statista.com/statistics/251914/number-of-robberies-in-the-us-by-weapon/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/251914/number-of-robberi... If you get mugged, that mugger almost certainly has a weapon. That you saw the exception does not alter the stats.