3 ms·

> "The problem with "throwing the book" at gang members is that it doesn't work." Then how would you explain El-Salvador? They went from the homicide capital o

> "The problem with "throwing the book" at gang members is that it doesn't work." Then how would you explain El-Salvador? They went from the homicide capital of the world in 2015 to the 8th safest place in the world [1] in less than a decade. And "all" that they did was dramatically bumped up the penalties for gang membership, round up gang members, and threw them in militarized prisons as opposed to the typical gang reinforcement retreats. Crime dramatically plummeted and you ended up with a president with an approval rating upwards of 90%. From my perspective in modern times we've trialed both soft and hard systems on crime. The soft systems in general have had very poor results except in places that already had no issues with crime (e.g. Norway), whereas the hard systems have demonstrated phenomenally positive outcomes. Places like the US have a major problem with things like privatized prisons that create a commercial incentive for incarceration, but I think these are tangential to the topic. [1] - https://news.gallup.com/poll/650516/global-safety-starts-slip.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/650516/global-safety-starts-sli...

akerl_ 1y ago
That entire article is about whether people "feel" safe. It doesn't seem to have any stats on whether or not they are actually safe. But back to the actual thread: the majority of gang violence is against other gangs. This is unlike other high-crime areas (for example, places with high rates of carjacking) where criminals are targeting people just moving through the area.
- somenameforme 1y ago
  Here [1] is their homicide rate. Overall criminality has declined proportionally as well. The numbers continue to decline as well. In 2025 it looks like they're looking at an overall homicide rate of ~1.3. I think perceptions of criminality is a very important metric because it controls for the possibility of numbers being juked. If everybody thinks crime is going up, but the numbers say it's going down, then it's possible there's some sort of collective delusion. But it's also possible that the numbers are being juked, or that various biases (like declines in rates of reporting) are driving a numeric decline in crime even as crime rates climb. [1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/696152/homicide-rate-in-el-salvador/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/696152/homicide-rate-in-...
  - akerl_ 1y ago
    > I think perceptions of criminality is a very important metric because it controls for the possibility of numbers being juked That’s a wild idea. Collective perception is juked by default. You’re basically trying to use vibes as a check on data.
    - somenameforme 1y ago
      Not really. In modern times I think we are increasingly missing the point of why we started collecting all of these data to begin with. And that's to aim at giving everybody a more pleasant life. And that is going to be determined solely by their own subjective experience and perception. Of course you're right that subjective experience will be biased, but it will usually be biased in a relatively fixed way. And so changes in this overtime create arguably the most valuable measurement that exists. Like during the previous administration, trying to brow beat people into believing that the economy was awesome because 'look at these totally-not-fake numbers' was just so dystopic. So for example, we tend to overestimate threats rather than underestimate them. Yet in El Salvador we now have the overwhelming majority of people (at the 8th highest rate in the world) say they feel safe walking alone at night. That is just an extremely informative datum. I'd also add that people's actions are based on their perceptions. Gallup hits on this in a reasonable way in that survey linked earlier: --- "In our uncertain world, it’s not enough to make sure that people are safe. They also need to feel safe. When people feel safe, they devote time and energy to learning opportunities and to their relationships with their families, communities and workplaces. Feeling safe fosters trust in these relationships. This trust forms a foundation for collaboration, cooperation and social development, which makes communities more resilient to challenges such as natural disasters, economic downturns, political conflicts or health crises like the recent pandemic." ---

akerl_ 1y ago

That entire article is about whether people "feel" safe. It doesn't seem to have any stats on whether or not they are actually safe. But back to the actual thread: the majority of gang violence is against other gangs. This is unlike other high-crime areas (for example, places with high rates of carjacking) where criminals are targeting people just moving through the area.

somenameforme 1y ago
Here [1] is their homicide rate. Overall criminality has declined proportionally as well. The numbers continue to decline as well. In 2025 it looks like they're looking at an overall homicide rate of ~1.3. I think perceptions of criminality is a very important metric because it controls for the possibility of numbers being juked. If everybody thinks crime is going up, but the numbers say it's going down, then it's possible there's some sort of collective delusion. But it's also possible that the numbers are being juked, or that various biases (like declines in rates of reporting) are driving a numeric decline in crime even as crime rates climb. [1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/696152/homicide-rate-in-el-salvador/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/696152/homicide-rate-in-...
- akerl_ 1y ago
  > I think perceptions of criminality is a very important metric because it controls for the possibility of numbers being juked That’s a wild idea. Collective perception is juked by default. You’re basically trying to use vibes as a check on data.
  - somenameforme 1y ago
    Not really. In modern times I think we are increasingly missing the point of why we started collecting all of these data to begin with. And that's to aim at giving everybody a more pleasant life. And that is going to be determined solely by their own subjective experience and perception. Of course you're right that subjective experience will be biased, but it will usually be biased in a relatively fixed way. And so changes in this overtime create arguably the most valuable measurement that exists. Like during the previous administration, trying to brow beat people into believing that the economy was awesome because 'look at these totally-not-fake numbers' was just so dystopic. So for example, we tend to overestimate threats rather than underestimate them. Yet in El Salvador we now have the overwhelming majority of people (at the 8th highest rate in the world) say they feel safe walking alone at night. That is just an extremely informative datum. I'd also add that people's actions are based on their perceptions. Gallup hits on this in a reasonable way in that survey linked earlier: --- "In our uncertain world, it’s not enough to make sure that people are safe. They also need to feel safe. When people feel safe, they devote time and energy to learning opportunities and to their relationships with their families, communities and workplaces. Feeling safe fosters trust in these relationships. This trust forms a foundation for collaboration, cooperation and social development, which makes communities more resilient to challenges such as natural disasters, economic downturns, political conflicts or health crises like the recent pandemic." ---