>In the long run, solving crimes is preventing them because crime (especially serious violent crime) is Pareto-distributed. How does that work? If you are sayi

>In the long run, solving crimes is preventing them because crime (especially serious violent crime) is Pareto-distributed. How does that work? If you are saying because the violent criminals are now in jail, that's completely discounting new generations. >That's great for the survivors but tends to mask the scale of the violence, as a lot fewer of those victims would have survived without Dauphin helicopters. Ya, I'll buy that. >This sounds like a statement about one possible way to divide the population into histogram bins in 2023 rather than a comparison of population structure between 1950 and 2023. I linked both population trees somewhere. >Since 1950, the most murder-prone fraction of the population (men in their 20's) has decreased by about 10%. You need to provide some data for that, I don't see how that's possible since it's not accounting for baby boomers or for population growth (unless you mean as a percentage). GenX was quite a small generation, but the Millennia's are quite large. Great conversation though!