5 ms·

Except this trend has been the case even before the pandemic. As crime was dropping precipitously since the 2000s people continued insisting crime was increasi

Except this trend has been the case even before the pandemic. As crime was dropping precipitously since the 2000s people continued insisting crime was increasing.

hx8 3y ago
This doesn't address the parent comment's entire point. It's possible that the trend of 'lighter policing' leads to less reported crimes but not actually fewer crimes has been going on since the 2000s.
- Retric 3y ago
  There’s many ways to validate crime statistics. For example insurance claims are linked to the number of property crimes independent of what police report. More broadly violent crime has been falling for literally thousands of years. There’s various short term bumps in the rate, but the general trend is down across all societies. The past was simply vastly more dangerous than we are used to.
  - explaininjs 3y ago
    Only if you make insurance claims. I’ve had many things stolen and I’ve never made any claims. Or filed any reports.
    - vore 3y ago
      Sure, but what matters is if they track the actual crime rate right? If you’ve never made any claims then you’ve never been a significant data point to begin with.
      - explaininjs 3y ago
        I fear you’re Goodharting this into oblivion. The only endgame of “people who don’t make claims aren’t significant” is police becoming so inept as to never secure property or arrest thrives (already there), and insurance companies having such massive premium hikes on-incident as to make filing claims net-negative in all but the most egregious cases (approaching there).
        Retric 3y ago
        The most egregious cases are where you get the best data from insurance. But different metrics work for less violent crimes. You can validate the decline of pickpockets in the rates people replace their driver’s licenses etc.
    - Retric 3y ago
      That’s always been the case for minor crimes, but people will make a claim if their house burns down or a car is stolen.
      - explaininjs 3y ago
        How happy should we be if people in-mass give up on the police and light property crime increases by 1000%, reports of such are eliminated, but car theft stays constant and the overall numbers decrease? That is the direction we are headed.
        gavinray 3y ago
        This is wholly irrelevant and I don't want to "uhm, ackshually" here but just fyi it's "en masse" though everyone knows what you mean
        Retric 3y ago
        Car theft, arson, etc are down dramatically not just flat. https://www.statista.com/statistics/191216/reported-motor-vehicle-theft-rate-in-the-us-since-1990/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/191216/reported-motor-ve... Motor vehicle theft per 100k people 1990: 657 vs 2021: 268. That’s a 60% drop, even with the recent spike. Which is why you always hear crime rates compared across short periods, they wouldn’t seem bad by historic standards. Your proposal around light property crime is simply wrong. You don’t need to trust police statistics for validation pickpockets used to be endemic in NYC to the point where people chained their wallets to their pants. Things have fallen so far we see cultural norms changing. That isn’t to say every city or every year sees an improvement but the long term trends are really clear. Granted the existence of cellphones means they get stolen, but that’s more than offset by car radio theft practically disappearing.
        somenameforme 3y ago
        Beware of cherry picked data. It's not statista doing it, but whoever they sourced their data from choosing to start at 1990. Here [1] are the same data (from the FBI) from 1960, instead of 1990. 1990 was not a historical rate, but the result of an exceptionally sharp spike in crime that began in 1960. In 1960 motor vehicle theft rates were 183. The statista table (which goes until 2021 instead of 2019 from my source) shows today they're at 268 and trending upwards. I really wish I could find data prior to 1960, but I guess you probably end up with a poor signal:noise ratio at some point. Those data are all from the same source, so have meaningful comparability. In any case, the long term trends are anything but clear. Crime rates currently look something like an eccentric sine wave. People in 200 years sure will have it easier, data wise. [1] - https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
  - hx8 3y ago
    Don't you need a police report to file an insurance claim for stolen property?
    - lazyasciiart 3y ago
      They never make insurance claims because … they’ve given up on the police?
      - hx8 3y ago
        > insurance claims are linked to the number of property crimes independent of what police report. I'm stating that these two variables (insurance claims) and (police reported crimes) aren't independent variables but actually closely linked.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - somenameforme 3y ago
    > "More broadly violent crime has been falling for literally thousands of years." El Salvador is such an extremely interesting study in violent crime. Until recently El Salvador had one of the highest homicide rates in the world. In recent times it has plummeted precipitously (>90% over the past decade) and in 2023, they may very well end up with a lower overall homicide rate than even the US. What happened was a complete crackdown on gangs. [1] After declaring an emergency scenario, their government 'temporarily' suspended certain rights, and greatly empowered law enforcement. Anybody who even looked like a gang member was rounded up and thrown into prison. And instead of placing gang members together where they often manage to conspire even within prison, they eliminated all mobile service in the prisons and locked down the cells with members of different gangs placed in cells together. Happy times ensued, undoubtedly. In short it's been the effective end of civil and human rights, yet it's been extremely effective at lowering crime. This system is far from ideal, because there's zero doubt that some, more or less, innocent individuals have suffered severe consequences at the hands of the government. Yet the overwhelming majority of criminals are also being eliminated, saving their innocent would-have-been victims. And, in the past, this sort of treatment of antisocial elements would have been perfectly normal. When you look at studies of violent crime in the past, the evidence is hazy at best. You can find studies to say whatever you want, and then other studies to point out the flaws in those studies. Ultimately I think the vivid imagery we have, of the past as being especially violent, is because it's a set piece of practically all 'historic' media we consume. But the factual and logical support for it seems far less clear. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_gang_crackdown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_gang_crackdown
    - archagon 3y ago
      “It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.”
- spamizbad 3y ago
  I actually don't understand the logic of lighter policing resulting in fewer reported crimes. I can see it possibly resulting in police discovering or interrupting fewer crimes, and I can see it resulting in fewer arrests, but the idea that you're not going to report a burglary because your local politician is seen as soft on crime doesn't make sense to me - for starters, you'll need that police report to make an insurance claim. What I can see causing a drop in reported crime is a lack of trust between police and a community - people may choose not to get the police involved out of fear they will make the situation worse, overreact, or may deem the punishment too harsh.
  - MattGaiser 3y ago
    People are fickle. I know people who won't apply for rebates as "the government would never give money to little people." Hundreds of dollars a form away and they just don't.
  - drawnwren 3y ago
    I was robbed 3 times in SF. The first time was your run of the mill vehicle break in. Police clearly gave no fucks and weren’t going to do anything. Other two were in person. Stuff wasn’t insured. I didn’t bother with reports.
  - sologoub 3y ago
    If you don’t expect the police to do anything about it, why file a formal report? It’s possible to even go to the station, speak with the on duty officer, find out that they’ll basically do nothing and decide to not waste any more time on that. Such a conversation will not show up in any statistics, ditto an equivalent phone call. For substantial losses, insurance claims make more sense. If it’s something that’s close in cost to the deductible and you expect your insurance premiums to go up after a claim, most people would not even submit that - there is not much pay off and higher premiums to worry about. So a lot of these costs are basically absorbed by the victims and statistics end up looking better than they should. In my general area, 20-30 years ago, I’d sometimes forget to close the front door when I left (as in wide open, visible from the street). Nothing ever happened. A year ago, I forgot to lock the car at night - interior got ransacked and turned upside down. There wasn’t anything of value in there, but it sure left me feeling a lot less safe…
ixtli 3y ago
This is hard to quantify so people will insist it’s not happening. But I have seen it too: there’s a set within America which insist it’s getting more dangerous regardless of which way the trend line points.
Spooky23 3y ago
As many places adopted compstat like programs in that timeframe, you should be wary of statistics that aren’t tied to verifiable or insured events. I’d trust auto theft and homicide and ignore the rest. Understanding context around police reporting is key.

Except this trend has been the case even before the pandemic. As crime was dropping precipitously since the 2000s people continued insisting crime was increasing.

hx8 3y ago

This doesn't address the parent comment's entire point. It's possible that the trend of 'lighter policing' leads to less reported crimes but not actually fewer crimes has been going on since the 2000s.

Retric 3y ago
There’s many ways to validate crime statistics. For example insurance claims are linked to the number of property crimes independent of what police report. More broadly violent crime has been falling for literally thousands of years. There’s various short term bumps in the rate, but the general trend is down across all societies. The past was simply vastly more dangerous than we are used to.
- explaininjs 3y ago
  Only if you make insurance claims. I’ve had many things stolen and I’ve never made any claims. Or filed any reports.
  - vore 3y ago
    Sure, but what matters is if they track the actual crime rate right? If you’ve never made any claims then you’ve never been a significant data point to begin with.
    - explaininjs 3y ago
      I fear you’re Goodharting this into oblivion. The only endgame of “people who don’t make claims aren’t significant” is police becoming so inept as to never secure property or arrest thrives (already there), and insurance companies having such massive premium hikes on-incident as to make filing claims net-negative in all but the most egregious cases (approaching there).
      - Retric 3y ago
        The most egregious cases are where you get the best data from insurance. But different metrics work for less violent crimes. You can validate the decline of pickpockets in the rates people replace their driver’s licenses etc.
  - Retric 3y ago
    That’s always been the case for minor crimes, but people will make a claim if their house burns down or a car is stolen.
    - explaininjs 3y ago
      How happy should we be if people in-mass give up on the police and light property crime increases by 1000%, reports of such are eliminated, but car theft stays constant and the overall numbers decrease? That is the direction we are headed.
      - gavinray 3y ago
        This is wholly irrelevant and I don't want to "uhm, ackshually" here but just fyi it's "en masse" though everyone knows what you mean
      - Retric 3y ago
        Car theft, arson, etc are down dramatically not just flat. https://www.statista.com/statistics/191216/reported-motor-vehicle-theft-rate-in-the-us-since-1990/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/191216/reported-motor-ve... Motor vehicle theft per 100k people 1990: 657 vs 2021: 268. That’s a 60% drop, even with the recent spike. Which is why you always hear crime rates compared across short periods, they wouldn’t seem bad by historic standards. Your proposal around light property crime is simply wrong. You don’t need to trust police statistics for validation pickpockets used to be endemic in NYC to the point where people chained their wallets to their pants. Things have fallen so far we see cultural norms changing. That isn’t to say every city or every year sees an improvement but the long term trends are really clear. Granted the existence of cellphones means they get stolen, but that’s more than offset by car radio theft practically disappearing.
        somenameforme 3y ago
        Beware of cherry picked data. It's not statista doing it, but whoever they sourced their data from choosing to start at 1990. Here [1] are the same data (from the FBI) from 1960, instead of 1990. 1990 was not a historical rate, but the result of an exceptionally sharp spike in crime that began in 1960. In 1960 motor vehicle theft rates were 183. The statista table (which goes until 2021 instead of 2019 from my source) shows today they're at 268 and trending upwards. I really wish I could find data prior to 1960, but I guess you probably end up with a poor signal:noise ratio at some point. Those data are all from the same source, so have meaningful comparability. In any case, the long term trends are anything but clear. Crime rates currently look something like an eccentric sine wave. People in 200 years sure will have it easier, data wise. [1] - https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
- hx8 3y ago
  Don't you need a police report to file an insurance claim for stolen property?
  - lazyasciiart 3y ago
    They never make insurance claims because … they’ve given up on the police?
    - hx8 3y ago
      > insurance claims are linked to the number of property crimes independent of what police report. I'm stating that these two variables (insurance claims) and (police reported crimes) aren't independent variables but actually closely linked.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- somenameforme 3y ago
  > "More broadly violent crime has been falling for literally thousands of years." El Salvador is such an extremely interesting study in violent crime. Until recently El Salvador had one of the highest homicide rates in the world. In recent times it has plummeted precipitously (>90% over the past decade) and in 2023, they may very well end up with a lower overall homicide rate than even the US. What happened was a complete crackdown on gangs. [1] After declaring an emergency scenario, their government 'temporarily' suspended certain rights, and greatly empowered law enforcement. Anybody who even looked like a gang member was rounded up and thrown into prison. And instead of placing gang members together where they often manage to conspire even within prison, they eliminated all mobile service in the prisons and locked down the cells with members of different gangs placed in cells together. Happy times ensued, undoubtedly. In short it's been the effective end of civil and human rights, yet it's been extremely effective at lowering crime. This system is far from ideal, because there's zero doubt that some, more or less, innocent individuals have suffered severe consequences at the hands of the government. Yet the overwhelming majority of criminals are also being eliminated, saving their innocent would-have-been victims. And, in the past, this sort of treatment of antisocial elements would have been perfectly normal. When you look at studies of violent crime in the past, the evidence is hazy at best. You can find studies to say whatever you want, and then other studies to point out the flaws in those studies. Ultimately I think the vivid imagery we have, of the past as being especially violent, is because it's a set piece of practically all 'historic' media we consume. But the factual and logical support for it seems far less clear. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_gang_crackdown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_gang_crackdown
  - archagon 3y ago
    “It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.”
spamizbad 3y ago
I actually don't understand the logic of lighter policing resulting in fewer reported crimes. I can see it possibly resulting in police discovering or interrupting fewer crimes, and I can see it resulting in fewer arrests, but the idea that you're not going to report a burglary because your local politician is seen as soft on crime doesn't make sense to me - for starters, you'll need that police report to make an insurance claim. What I can see causing a drop in reported crime is a lack of trust between police and a community - people may choose not to get the police involved out of fear they will make the situation worse, overreact, or may deem the punishment too harsh.
- MattGaiser 3y ago
  People are fickle. I know people who won't apply for rebates as "the government would never give money to little people." Hundreds of dollars a form away and they just don't.
- drawnwren 3y ago
  I was robbed 3 times in SF. The first time was your run of the mill vehicle break in. Police clearly gave no fucks and weren’t going to do anything. Other two were in person. Stuff wasn’t insured. I didn’t bother with reports.
- sologoub 3y ago
  If you don’t expect the police to do anything about it, why file a formal report? It’s possible to even go to the station, speak with the on duty officer, find out that they’ll basically do nothing and decide to not waste any more time on that. Such a conversation will not show up in any statistics, ditto an equivalent phone call. For substantial losses, insurance claims make more sense. If it’s something that’s close in cost to the deductible and you expect your insurance premiums to go up after a claim, most people would not even submit that - there is not much pay off and higher premiums to worry about. So a lot of these costs are basically absorbed by the victims and statistics end up looking better than they should. In my general area, 20-30 years ago, I’d sometimes forget to close the front door when I left (as in wide open, visible from the street). Nothing ever happened. A year ago, I forgot to lock the car at night - interior got ransacked and turned upside down. There wasn’t anything of value in there, but it sure left me feeling a lot less safe…

ixtli 3y ago

This is hard to quantify so people will insist it’s not happening. But I have seen it too: there’s a set within America which insist it’s getting more dangerous regardless of which way the trend line points.

Spooky23 3y ago

As many places adopted compstat like programs in that timeframe, you should be wary of statistics that aren’t tied to verifiable or insured events. I’d trust auto theft and homicide and ignore the rest. Understanding context around police reporting is key.