Any policeman can tell you which recidivists need to be taken out on their patch to reduce crime. As you describe, we'd put one or two burglars away and crime on our division would drop by 40%. Ditto street robberies. The one crime where displacement is tough, though, is drugs importation. That really is whack-a-mole.
Sadly, crime-fighting as I knew it was denounced as unfair, socially-unjust and racist. Usually by people who lived in low-crime areas and could afford burglar alarms. Instead, police were diverted into social work, 'community engagement' and, ultimately, dancing the Macarena.
Police officers used to say 'the public get the police they deserve', which is a play on the old Peelite saw 'The Police are The Public, and The Public are The Police.' I used to believe that, but now I'm no longer in the police I realise 99% of people want robust policing, sentencing and (yes) rehabilitation. 1% of opinion-formers, however, do not. And these elites have more say than they should have.
Ignore them. People wonder why we end up with 'populists' - it's because we give too much credence to the so-clever-they're-stupid brigade. Especially academics who specialise in crime and policing, most of whom do a pretty good impression of a fifth column working for the criminal fraternity.
I agree with everything you've said, people have been pointing out the example of El Salvador where the president has locked up all the crims and crime has plummeted and noted that if you set all the UKs best academics at the problem they would take years to produce a very complex set of reforms that would be impossible to implement and might reduce crime by a tiny amount, whereas the common sense approach of locking up all the worst people works immediately!
Always find it weird that most books routinely refer to 'moral panic' or crime being a race dogwhistle, but urban crime in America increased *massively* in the 60s, homicide rates in NYC and Chicago trebled in a decade.
I would have thought high profile riots on an annual basis, political assassinations and of course large protests would have added to this popular sense of general chaos beyond those directly experiencing significant levels of crime in large cities.
You write of the young Lee Kuan Yew being gobsmacked at London’s high level of civilization (an unattended table with newspapers and money) around 1950. What has changed to make urban honesty boxes impossible now?
I’m reminded of Robert Putnam’s work on diversity and social capital: ‘And in perhaps the most surprising result of all, levels of trust were not only lower between groups in more diverse settings, but even among members of the same group.’
I believe Putnam makes this point, the US has been a diverse society for over 150 years, especially in urban areas. Irish, Italians, Germans, Poles, Croats and so forth all had their neighborhoods but they often worshiped at the same church (and in the same language) on Sunday. There was a glue that held society together but began to fall apart after the War.
Liam Foley—Indeed. Analysing the glue, the groups you mention were white Christians.
In 1924, Representative William N Vaile of Colorado said: ‘[The United States] is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different.’
In 2013, Lee Kuan Yew was interviewed by <i>Forbes</i>: ‘He also gives U.S. immigration practices a failing grade, declaring that “multiculturalism will destroy America.”’
The Singapore comparison is instructive. At around the time Lee Kuan Yew was marvelling at an honesty box in London, Sg itself was a den of iniquity, gang violence, illegal gambling, prostitution and opium use. So what changed? LKY himself realised that a safe society was a key element of his economic proposition for the city state, attracting foreign capital and highly skilled international labour. The result was a draconian crackdown on crime in the 80s and 90s, and the famous ban on chewing gum became the emblem of Sg's approach to crime. He did not have much time for the progressive approach, and I can confirm that the sheer safety of the place is an absolutely joy.
Great piece. I had a personal experience that is in line with this. Many years ago, in New York I felt a hand reach behind me and grab my wallet from my pocket. I raced after the man who had done it and began hitting him with my umbrella, yelling for him to give me back my wallet. He escaped me, but two undercover police who were nearby chased after him and cornered him between two parked cars. When they took us to the police station, they showed me his record. He had 52 PAGES listing his prior arrests. In fact, he had been arrested and released that morning! Interestingly, not a single one was violent. He stole and pickpocketed every day. That was his full-time occupation. I later testified against him before a grand jury. I don't think he served any jail time though as the case was never prosecuted and taken to trial. He simply pled guilty and paid a fine.
It is little wonder that police officers are so fed up with their lot - when what ‘should’ feel like a positive outcome (apprehending the criminal) results in the courts refusing to incarcerate the offenders. Public anger is inevitably aimed at the police...except when they take the knee or offer water to protesters glued to the road. Feeling appreciated is so rare that it is tempting to join the virtue signalling just to feel a little public approval now and again. Of course the anger is misplaced anyway because incarceration is not an option when we don’t have enough prison accommodation, and no funds to build them. Much sentencing is after all just the creative use of options by the judiciary to ‘accommodate’ the lack of prison accommodation available.
That car crash was tragic? You are more kind than I!
Three strikes and you're out in the U. S. was a good idea, badly executed. We should bring back a form of it. Seems like every murderer and rapist has a rap sheet a mile long already. Just put them away!
Also, those who enter a country illegally and then commit violent crimes should be candidates for the death penalty. (Note I said "should." I do not expect such common sense.)
Ed mentions about not locking bikes in Singapore - might it also be relevant to mention that Singapore also has some fairly tough corporal punishment using a rattan cane. Might this deter the relatively few criminals early on, before they have committed enough crimes to put them into prison. Wouldn't that reduce anti-social crime and expensive prison?
The power law of crime is absolutely real, but America absolutely does have a unique incarceration system.
The top 4 countries by incarceration rates (per 100K population): United States — 629, Rwanda — 580, Turkmenistan — 576, El Salvador — 564. To put that into perspective, Russia and Brazil have incarceration rates of about 350 people per 100K population. France, Australia, England, France, Spain, Mexico, and Egypt all have rates less than 1/4 of ours. (Egypt and Mexico? Really? Yes.)
A small number of people do commit a high percentage of crimes. However, we appear to have a larger percentage of such people and we incarcerate them longer than comparable countries. You can argue the latter is good or bad or maybe just a response to the former. But it certainly is unique.
** ‘Overall, most victims and suspects with prior criminal offenses had been arrested about 11 times for about 13 different offenses by the time of the homicide. **
Note "victims and suspects with prior criminal offenses." It is underemphasized that many murder victims in the United States are themselves career criminals, including some of the most famous figures.
I'd put more emphasis on moderate but more certain punishment of "first" crimes, even "minor" ones like low level shoplifting, illegal firearm possession. But this will be costly.
When something is considered anti-social only a very small number will engage in it but when it becomes acceptable and even a way of life the number balloons and 'everybody is at it'. Take marital infidelity for example. It's estimated that a quarter of married men in England and a fifth of married women have been unfaithful. Adultery has lost much of its stigma and as a result has become a lot more common. If we soften attitudes to property crime it will only make it more common.
Excellent article. Amazing to realise how much of our understanding of the past, even recent past is dominated by leftist propaganda. That they are able to do it on events in living memory is testament to their power
Any policeman can tell you which recidivists need to be taken out on their patch to reduce crime. As you describe, we'd put one or two burglars away and crime on our division would drop by 40%. Ditto street robberies. The one crime where displacement is tough, though, is drugs importation. That really is whack-a-mole.
Sadly, crime-fighting as I knew it was denounced as unfair, socially-unjust and racist. Usually by people who lived in low-crime areas and could afford burglar alarms. Instead, police were diverted into social work, 'community engagement' and, ultimately, dancing the Macarena.
Police officers used to say 'the public get the police they deserve', which is a play on the old Peelite saw 'The Police are The Public, and The Public are The Police.' I used to believe that, but now I'm no longer in the police I realise 99% of people want robust policing, sentencing and (yes) rehabilitation. 1% of opinion-formers, however, do not. And these elites have more say than they should have.
it would be immensely popular but face strong resistance from academia in particular.
Ignore them. People wonder why we end up with 'populists' - it's because we give too much credence to the so-clever-they're-stupid brigade. Especially academics who specialise in crime and policing, most of whom do a pretty good impression of a fifth column working for the criminal fraternity.
I agree with everything you've said, people have been pointing out the example of El Salvador where the president has locked up all the crims and crime has plummeted and noted that if you set all the UKs best academics at the problem they would take years to produce a very complex set of reforms that would be impossible to implement and might reduce crime by a tiny amount, whereas the common sense approach of locking up all the worst people works immediately!
There’s certainly a reason Richard Nixon was so electorally successful in ‘68 and ‘72.
Always find it weird that most books routinely refer to 'moral panic' or crime being a race dogwhistle, but urban crime in America increased *massively* in the 60s, homicide rates in NYC and Chicago trebled in a decade.
I would have thought high profile riots on an annual basis, political assassinations and of course large protests would have added to this popular sense of general chaos beyond those directly experiencing significant levels of crime in large cities.
When you see the rapid and often unwanted social change it was aside you can see why the Democrats struggled so much from the mid 60s until the 90s.
Carter presidency really only due to Watergate, not a rejection of social conservatism.
You write of the young Lee Kuan Yew being gobsmacked at London’s high level of civilization (an unattended table with newspapers and money) around 1950. What has changed to make urban honesty boxes impossible now?
I’m reminded of Robert Putnam’s work on diversity and social capital: ‘And in perhaps the most surprising result of all, levels of trust were not only lower between groups in more diverse settings, but even among members of the same group.’
http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/
I’d probably add to that the decline in Christian belief.
I believe Putnam makes this point, the US has been a diverse society for over 150 years, especially in urban areas. Irish, Italians, Germans, Poles, Croats and so forth all had their neighborhoods but they often worshiped at the same church (and in the same language) on Sunday. There was a glue that held society together but began to fall apart after the War.
Liam Foley—Indeed. Analysing the glue, the groups you mention were white Christians.
In 1924, Representative William N Vaile of Colorado said: ‘[The United States] is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different.’
In 2013, Lee Kuan Yew was interviewed by <i>Forbes</i>: ‘He also gives U.S. immigration practices a failing grade, declaring that “multiculturalism will destroy America.”’
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/02/13/singapores-lee-kuan-yew-talks-americas-strangths-and-weaknesses/?sh=d61386b33d3b
The Singapore comparison is instructive. At around the time Lee Kuan Yew was marvelling at an honesty box in London, Sg itself was a den of iniquity, gang violence, illegal gambling, prostitution and opium use. So what changed? LKY himself realised that a safe society was a key element of his economic proposition for the city state, attracting foreign capital and highly skilled international labour. The result was a draconian crackdown on crime in the 80s and 90s, and the famous ban on chewing gum became the emblem of Sg's approach to crime. He did not have much time for the progressive approach, and I can confirm that the sheer safety of the place is an absolutely joy.
Great piece. I had a personal experience that is in line with this. Many years ago, in New York I felt a hand reach behind me and grab my wallet from my pocket. I raced after the man who had done it and began hitting him with my umbrella, yelling for him to give me back my wallet. He escaped me, but two undercover police who were nearby chased after him and cornered him between two parked cars. When they took us to the police station, they showed me his record. He had 52 PAGES listing his prior arrests. In fact, he had been arrested and released that morning! Interestingly, not a single one was violent. He stole and pickpocketed every day. That was his full-time occupation. I later testified against him before a grand jury. I don't think he served any jail time though as the case was never prosecuted and taken to trial. He simply pled guilty and paid a fine.
I'm sure he's learned his lesson and stopped offending.
It is little wonder that police officers are so fed up with their lot - when what ‘should’ feel like a positive outcome (apprehending the criminal) results in the courts refusing to incarcerate the offenders. Public anger is inevitably aimed at the police...except when they take the knee or offer water to protesters glued to the road. Feeling appreciated is so rare that it is tempting to join the virtue signalling just to feel a little public approval now and again. Of course the anger is misplaced anyway because incarceration is not an option when we don’t have enough prison accommodation, and no funds to build them. Much sentencing is after all just the creative use of options by the judiciary to ‘accommodate’ the lack of prison accommodation available.
That car crash was tragic? You are more kind than I!
Three strikes and you're out in the U. S. was a good idea, badly executed. We should bring back a form of it. Seems like every murderer and rapist has a rap sheet a mile long already. Just put them away!
Also, those who enter a country illegally and then commit violent crimes should be candidates for the death penalty. (Note I said "should." I do not expect such common sense.)
Ed mentions about not locking bikes in Singapore - might it also be relevant to mention that Singapore also has some fairly tough corporal punishment using a rattan cane. Might this deter the relatively few criminals early on, before they have committed enough crimes to put them into prison. Wouldn't that reduce anti-social crime and expensive prison?
The power law of crime is absolutely real, but America absolutely does have a unique incarceration system.
The top 4 countries by incarceration rates (per 100K population): United States — 629, Rwanda — 580, Turkmenistan — 576, El Salvador — 564. To put that into perspective, Russia and Brazil have incarceration rates of about 350 people per 100K population. France, Australia, England, France, Spain, Mexico, and Egypt all have rates less than 1/4 of ours. (Egypt and Mexico? Really? Yes.)
A small number of people do commit a high percentage of crimes. However, we appear to have a larger percentage of such people and we incarcerate them longer than comparable countries. You can argue the latter is good or bad or maybe just a response to the former. But it certainly is unique.
** ‘Overall, most victims and suspects with prior criminal offenses had been arrested about 11 times for about 13 different offenses by the time of the homicide. **
Note "victims and suspects with prior criminal offenses." It is underemphasized that many murder victims in the United States are themselves career criminals, including some of the most famous figures.
I'd put more emphasis on moderate but more certain punishment of "first" crimes, even "minor" ones like low level shoplifting, illegal firearm possession. But this will be costly.
When something is considered anti-social only a very small number will engage in it but when it becomes acceptable and even a way of life the number balloons and 'everybody is at it'. Take marital infidelity for example. It's estimated that a quarter of married men in England and a fifth of married women have been unfaithful. Adultery has lost much of its stigma and as a result has become a lot more common. If we soften attitudes to property crime it will only make it more common.
lock em up!
Excellent article. Amazing to realise how much of our understanding of the past, even recent past is dominated by leftist propaganda. That they are able to do it on events in living memory is testament to their power
Does the UK have anything resembling the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) law that the Americans have?
Always seems to me that there we need something like it to deal with “families known to the police”.
Well the good news is that we'll have a Labour government next year so this bugbear of yours will finally be resolved.
Presumably there are new criminals coming of age every day to take the place of the 0.1 pct we should be incarcerating