Marquette Crime Reports

[lawdog77]

We've been through this already. You're wrong.

"We found four states, as well as nine cities and counties, where there is existing data on public safety from before and after the adoption of pretrial reforms. All but one of these jurisdictions saw decreases or negligible increases in crime after implementing reforms. The one exception is New York State, where the reform law existed for just a few months before it was largely rolled back."

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/11/17/pretrial-releases/

Well if we got rid of all laws, crime would be at 0%

Serious question though, what would be an acceptable  number/% of people committing crimes while on pre-trial release?

[Pakuni]

Well if we got rid of all laws, crime would be at 0%

Serious question though, what would be an acceptable  number/% of people committing crimes while on pre-trial release?

I don't think there is such a thing ...  and I find your question to be as serious as "When did you stop beating your wife, lawdog77?"
Serious question, though, are you opposed to all forms of pretrial release?

[lawdog77]

I don't think there is such a thing ...  and I find your question to be as serious as "When did you stop beating your wife, lawdog77?"
Serious question, though, are you opposed to all forms of pretrial release?

Why is it not a serious question? Your linked article touts this stat:

New York, for example:
Public safety: The city's new criminal activity rate, which measures the rate at which people commit new crimes while awaiting trial, is 10%. This puts it on par with Washington, D.C. which is often used as a model of pretrial reform success.

My question, is that an acceptable rate ?

[Pakuni]

Why is it not a serious question? Your linked article touts this stat:

New York, for example:
Public safety: The city's new criminal activity rate, which measures the rate at which people commit new crimes while awaiting trial, is 10%. This puts it on par with Washington, D.C. which is often used as a model of pretrial reform success.

My question, is that an acceptable rate ?

It's a cheap, transparent rhetorical trick trying to get me to say I'm OK with a certain level of crime. And actually irrelevant to the discussion, as I have seen no evidence to show that people out on cash bail are less likely to reoffend than those out on recognizance or some other form of pretrial release.

Now, please, answer my question ... are you opposed to pretrial release?

[Pakuni]

so this is all just a figment of our imaginations?  Chicago? houston? st louis? philadelphia?  milwaukee? 

    car jackings are out of control, kids respect no one

Most of these places you list have a cash bail system.

[lawdog77]

It's a cheap, transparent rhetorical trick trying to get me to say I'm OK with a certain level of crime. And actually irrelevant to the discussion, as I have seen no evidence to show that people out on cash bail are less likely to reoffend than those out on recognizance or some other form of pretrial release.

Now, please, answer my question... are you opposed to pretrial release?

If you remove the ellipse, I will.

No, I'm not. I was just simply asking the question to the group. Is there an acceptable amount ? For example if people out on bail for certain crimes had a very low % of skipping trial and low % of committing additional crimes,(say under 1%), have those crimes be ROR.

[rocket surgeon]

   "Is it possible that our high rate of incarceration contributes to the current level of crime? I think it is likely."


  i disagree.  i don't believe you can conflate the 2 here. 


  "So is negative reinforcement the only way to address crime? My personal experience is that threatening people into making good choices rarely works and rewarding people for making good choices is usually a lot more effective."

  not the only way, but rewarding "is USUALLY a lot more effective"?? 

  ok, some dude commits a crime so he can be rewarded for NOT doing it again??  to pay people NOT to do something that is wrong?  hey, i didn't steal something today...pay me.  i haven't raped anyone recently-better pay up or i might just have to lose all self control??

     maybe in SOME cases, rewarding can be effective, but sounds like you do not like the idea of imprisonment.  what do we do about those who make our society unsafe?  don't we deserve to live safe without worry that our cars won't be taken from us?  our women will not be raped?  our children will not be abused? 

i think we have instituted programs where prisoners of certain crimes can "earn" their way out by following certain set standards

we have f'd up our society to the point where crime has run rampant without regard for human life and property.

rudy giuliani as mayor of new york 1994-2001 cleaned up that city by enforcing our laws, not by rewarding the criminal

[Uncle Rico]

   "Is it possible that our high rate of incarceration contributes to the current level of crime? I think it is likely."


  i disagree.  i don't believe you can conflate the 2 here. 


  "So is negative reinforcement the only way to address crime? My personal experience is that threatening people into making good choices rarely works and rewarding people for making good choices is usually a lot more effective."

  not the only way, but rewarding "is USUALLY a lot more effective"?? 

  ok, some dude commits a crime so he can be rewarded for NOT doing it again??  to pay people NOT to do something that is wrong?  hey, i didn't steal something today...pay me.  i haven't raped anyone recently-better pay up or i might just have to lose all self control??

     maybe in SOME cases, rewarding can be effective, but sounds like you do not like the idea of imprisonment.  what do we do about those who make our society unsafe?  don't we deserve to live safe without worry that our cars won't be taken from us?  our women will not be raped?  our children will not be abused? 

i think we have instituted programs where prisoners of certain crimes can "earn" their way out by following certain set standards

we have f'd up our society to the point where crime has run rampant without regard for human life and property.

rudy giuliani as mayor of new york 1994-2001 cleaned up that city by enforcing our laws, not by rewarding the criminal

And now Rudy should be in jail!

[The Sultan]

  seems like the people in charge don't know the difference between who is a risk to society and who isn't.  reading your prison policy article, it begins with having too many "criminal systems".  too many chefs stirring the soup.  centralize the criminal justice system.  come up with a grading system for each person.  i'm hoping we have some experts doing this.  juveniles are not committing juvenile crimes. 

   anyone who is deemed to be able to live in our society and follow the laws, gets out of prison/jail-

     remain alcohol and drug free
     finish some level of education and become gainfully employed
     NOT BREAK LAWS
  break these laws, go back to end of line and back into prison



have levels of security depending on the crime and/or evaluation formed by committee

   hold judges, police and parole boards accountable for who they release.  if they release someone who commits any crime that involves great bodily harm(rape, murder, physical injury) they serve some sort of punishment to be determined. 

You say some good things here, but a few thoughts...

**If alcohol and legal drugs weren't part of their problem, why should they be forced to abstain now?
**Being gainfully employed is good, but may not be possible.  The full safety net should be available to them like any other citizen.
**Any law?  Or just a repeat of the past offense or something similar.

And you will ALWAYS have people let out of jail who commit felonious acts.  It is simply unavoidable.  So punishing those who let them out, but didn't have anything to do with them committing the acts, makes no sense.

[wadesworld]

  seems like the people in charge don't know the difference between who is a risk to society and who isn't.  reading your prison policy article, it begins with having too many "criminal systems".  too many chefs stirring the soup.  centralize the criminal justice system.  come up with a grading system for each person.  i'm hoping we have some experts doing this.  juveniles are not committing juvenile crimes. 

   anyone who is deemed to be able to live in our society and follow the laws, gets out of prison/jail-

     remain alcohol and drug free
     finish some level of education and become gainfully employed
     NOT BREAK LAWS
  break these laws, go back to end of line and back into prison



have levels of security depending on the crime and/or evaluation formed by committee

   hold judges, police and parole boards accountable for who they release.  if they release someone who commits any crime that involves great bodily harm(rape, murder, physical injury) they serve some sort of punishment to be determined. 

trying to determine WHY people commit crimes is so multifaceted, you would be setting up a system that will fail-bad families, alcohol/drug abuse, education, upbringing, mental health...some of these things are not curable.  bottom line is whatever we are doing today is not working.  recidivism is a big reason, but you say we have too many in prison?  either we have the wrong people in prison or we don't have enough people in prison because crime is out of control in many areas.  juvenile crime is way up.  childrens behavior in schools is abhorrent with teachers feeling helpless.  if bad behavior is not punished, you WILL get more of
it. 
   if the crime is not addressed, it will be deemed acceptable and it is not.

I would assume you would be in favor of gun manufacturers and gun stores being punished when armed robbery and murder are carried out.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

   "Is it possible that our high rate of incarceration contributes to the current level of crime? I think it is likely."


  i disagree.  i don't believe you can conflate the 2 here. 

Interesting. You don't think that when someone is incarcerated it impacts the financial security of their families? Or their own financial security when they get out? My guess is that there is a correlation between those who are financially insecure and those who commit crimes.

  "So is negative reinforcement the only way to address crime? My personal experience is that threatening people into making good choices rarely works and rewarding people for making good choices is usually a lot more effective."

  not the only way, but rewarding "is USUALLY a lot more effective"?? 

  ok, some dude commits a crime so he can be rewarded for NOT doing it again??  to pay people NOT to do something that is wrong?  hey, i didn't steal something today...pay me.  i haven't raped anyone recently-better pay up or i might just have to lose all self control??

Do you really think that's what I was suggesting? Did I say anything about rewarding criminals? What if we made other paths to financial security more viable and rewarding so that people don't turn to crime in the first place?

     maybe in SOME cases, rewarding can be effective, but sounds like you do not like the idea of imprisonment.  what do we do about those who make our society unsafe?  don't we deserve to live safe without worry that our cars won't be taken from us?  our women will not be raped?  our children will not be abused? 

i think we have instituted programs where prisoners of certain crimes can "earn" their way out by following certain set standards

we have f'd up our society to the point where crime has run rampant without regard for human life and property.

rudy giuliani as mayor of new york 1994-2001 cleaned up that city by enforcing our laws, not by rewarding the criminal

I'm not against imprisonment for violent offenders. You rape someone, you abuse a child, or you use weapon to steal car, you should go to prison. But we have hundreds of thousands of non-violent offenders in prison in this country. Those are the ones that I question prison being the right intervention for. I also think a system that focuses entirely on tertiary prevention (responding to crime after it has already happened) is doomed to fail. There needs to be at least equal focus (I would argue a greater focus) on primary and secondary prevention.

[21Jumpstreet]

Desperate people do desperate things. Let's find out what is causing their desperation and minimize it as much as possible.

[Spotcheck Billy]

  don't we deserve to live safe without worry that our cars won't be taken from us? 

That's what auto insurance is for.

[The Sultan]

'
don't we deserve to live safe without worry that our cars won't be taken from us?  our women will not be raped?  our children will not be abused?

What do you mean by "deserve?"  Deserve implies that it living in a crime free society is a reward of some sort.

It would be wonderful if cars weren't taken from us, women not be raped and children will not be abused, and we should strive to have that happen.  But I don't understand how we "deserve" those outcomes.

[jesmu84]

Improve economic conditions for everyone and crime decreases. Magic

[warriorchick]

Back on topic...

Here is a very comprehensive summary of the safety situation at Marquette:

https://today.marquette.edu/2022/04/common-safety-questions-answered/?fbclid=IwAR0mmD9xScTWjAC8hRKwllYD-1DVxwJriVFkaOhLB0niEyUV2lwSCldd8AU

[Pakuni]

Improve economic conditions for everyone and crime decreases. Magic

The irony is that some here would rather spend $30K-$40K a year to keep someone in prison, but are outraged over spending a fraction of that on programs that are proven to reduce crime, i.e. early education, juvenile intervention, child care, etc.

[WellsstreetWanderer]

if there were programs that were efficient and worked nobody would object but they seem ineffective and
money holes .  Meanwhile crime is rampant and serial offenders are apprehended and released.  A neighbor just had the catalytic convertor stolen despite a lock. Second loss this year for them. i see where there are daily violent attacks in NYC, dozens of car break-ins in SF for example. This is not the definition of a civilized society. I'm just hoping to see the reintroduction of Common Sense. Plenty of room for compassionate treatment under the law but civil society exists for the protection and betterment of the  law abiding

[The Sultan]

if there were programs that were efficient and worked nobody would object but they seem ineffective and
money holes .  Meanwhile crime is rampant and serial offenders are apprehended and released.  A neighbor just had the catalytic convertor stolen despite a lock. Second loss this year for them. i see where there are daily violent attacks in NYC, dozens of car break-ins in SF for example. This is not the definition of a civilized society. I'm just hoping to see the reintroduction of Common Sense. Plenty of room for compassionate treatment under the law but civil society exists for the protection and betterment of the  law abiding

I'm surprised you even manage to leave the house without panicking. 

[ZiggysFryBoy]

I'm surprised you even manage to leave the house without panicking.

We can't all live in the mean streets of Depere.

[GOO]

The irony is that some here would rather spend $30K-$40K a year to keep someone in prison, but are outraged over spending a fraction of that on programs that are proven to reduce crime, i.e. early education, juvenile intervention, child care, etc.

Ding, ding ding, we have a winner. 9 to 1 payback. Not that complex. But we are Americans, if it takes years to see the positive effects we won't do it. If it means spending up front, people will complain (fee would see it as an investment with great returns).  Really too bad.

Also, for lower income kids, they'd see a 13 point IQ increase on average. I'm told it can be the difference between graduating high school or college for a lot of financially disadvantaged kids.  Makes too much sense.

[Pakuni]

if there were programs that were efficient and worked nobody would object but they seem ineffective and
money holes .

I literally just listed three types of programs that are proven to reduce crime.
In the meantime, there may be no government money holes this side of the defense budget larger than the prison system.

  Meanwhile crime is rampant and serial offenders are apprehended and released. 

Crimes per 100,000 in the U.S.

1965 = 2,449.0
1970 = 3,984.5
1975 = 5,298.5
1980 = 5,950.0
1985 = 5,207.1
1990 = 5,820.3
1995 = 5,274.9
2000 = 4,124.8
2005 = 3,900.5
2010 = 3,350.4
2015 = 2,885.1
2020 = 2,346.0

Can we stop with the silly, and easily proved false, claims that crime is suddenly "rampant" and "out of control." Crime rates are at their lowest levels since the mid 1960s, and half what they were through the 80s and 90s.
Yes, crime has ticked up slightly over the past few years (hint: pandemic), but we're still significantly safer than we've been at any time in the past 50 years.

Sources:
https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/home

[jesmu84]

I literally just listed three types of programs that are proven to reduce crime.
In the meantime, there may be no government money holes this side of the defense budget larger than the prison system.

Crimes per 100,000 in the U.S.

1965 = 2,449.0
1970 = 3,984.5
1975 = 5,298.5
1980 = 5,950.0
1985 = 5,207.1
1990 = 5,820.3
1995 = 5,274.9
2000 = 4,124.8
2005 = 3,900.5
2010 = 3,350.4
2015 = 2,885.1
2020 = 2,346.0

Can we stop with the silly, and easily proved false, claims that crime is suddenly "rampant" and "out of control." Crime rates are at their lowest levels since the mid 1960s, and half what they were through the 80s and 90s.
Yes, crime has ticked up slightly over the past few years (hint: pandemic), but we're still significantly safer than we've been at any time in the past 50 years.

Sources:
https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/home

I wonder if those claiming that there's a significant increase in crime will post data/sources as you have been doing.

[rocky_warrior]

I wonder if those claiming that there's a significant increase in crime will post data/sources as you have been doing.

4ever posts his sources at least once every 2 weeks.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

if there were programs that were efficient and worked nobody would object but they seem ineffective and
money holes .  Meanwhile crime is rampant and serial offenders are apprehended and released.  A neighbor just had the catalytic convertor stolen despite a lock. Second loss this year for them. i see where there are daily violent attacks in NYC, dozens of car break-ins in SF for example. This is not the definition of a civilized society. I'm just hoping to see the reintroduction of Common Sense. Plenty of room for compassionate treatment under the law but civil society exists for the protection and betterment of the  law abiding

Here are your Crime Rates per capita by state. Hint: The leaders aren't your liberal boogey men of NY and CA. Not that facts can penetrate the echo chamber of Faux & Friends.



https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/crime-rate-by-state?msclkid=5bb80bf2b6f211eca45e837dec733b34