Lion of the Blogosphere

Crime is rising again

As reported by the NY Times, “cities across the nation are seeing a startling rise in murders after years of declines.”

Among some experts and rank-and-file officers, the notion that less aggressive policing has emboldened criminals — known as the “Ferguson effect” in some circles — is a popular theory for the uptick in violence.

“The equilibrium has changed between police and offenders,” said Alfred Blumstein, a professor and a criminologist at Heinz College, Carnegie Mellon University.

Yes, of course that’s the reason. That, and the ending of stop-and-frisk policing which puts the fear of the law into the criminal element.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 1, 2015 at 9:40 am

Posted in Crime

75 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Haven Monahan is putting LEAD into the WATER SUPPLY of these cities. What will he do next?

    Fiddlesticks

    September 1, 2015 at 10:23 am

  2. Lion – You need to put more of these articles on your blog, to convince your other readers, that America is doomdom.

    However, I could safely say that the Southwest (minus Alabama and Texas) will be immune to this dysfunctionalism for quite sometime. Anyplace with a White/black segregation paradigm means one thing. More crime, and more hate crime!

    JS

    September 1, 2015 at 10:41 am

    • Alabama is not remotely in the Southwest.

      Concerned Citizen

      September 1, 2015 at 2:08 pm

      • Yes and only the western part of Texas is similar to the Southwest. In terms of square miles it is a very large part of Texas but in terms of population not so large.

        Jim

        September 2, 2015 at 10:48 am

      • It was really foolish for me to even call Alabama, part of the Southwest. Blame it on Lion, when he posted about the racist sorority of the U of Alabama, where we talking about the ladies of the Southwest.

        JS

        September 2, 2015 at 12:30 pm

  3. Ot; now that you quit your job im having a great time reading these frequent posts during lunch break while my coworkers jabber in Spanish

    Jumpinjackfash

    September 1, 2015 at 12:19 pm

  4. Well there’s no evidence that stop-and-frisk reduced crime in the first place, so it’s remarkable that now, rolling it back has all of these ‘disastrous’ consequences.

    We cannot conclude from the current investigation that SQF has no impact on crime in New York. But we can be more certain that, if there is an impact, it is so localized and dissipates so rapidly that it fails to register in annual precinct crime rates, much less the decade-long citywide crime reductions that public officials have attributed to the policy.”
    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418825.2012.712152?journalCode=rjqy20#.VJSYwl4AF4

    “That, and the ending of stop-and-frisk policing which puts [resentment of authority] into the [ordinary citizens].”

    If you want people to believe middle class values aren’t just nonsense that may as well apply to Martians, you need to treat them like ordinary middle class citizens.

    swank

    September 1, 2015 at 12:58 pm

    • “If you want people to believe middle class values aren’t just nonsense … you need to treat them like ordinary middle class citizens.”

      Indeed. Therefore I predict that if only there were places where blacks could be able to leave among one another and away from the mistreatment of whites, crime would plummet in such hypothetical places.

      Dan

      September 1, 2015 at 2:42 pm

      • Olympia Fields has one of the lowest crime rates in the Chicago metropolitan area, and it is also noteworthy as one of the wealthiest “majority black” communities in the United States.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_Fields,_Illinois

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 6:23 pm

      • Having “one of the lowest crime rates in the Chicago metro area” is not setting the bar too high. Besides the town is barely majority black (52%) and the median age is 50.

        Bernie

        September 1, 2015 at 9:46 pm

      • The violent crime rate is also far below the national average.

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 11:38 pm

    • That’s how police treat white guys.

      The U.S. has the highest WHITE incarceration rate.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
      But sure, keep going hoss

      swank

      September 1, 2015 at 3:34 pm

      • The cop tells the guy three times to get his hands out of his pants. Still, the guy sees a cop with a gun pointed at him and digs into his pants. I guess the cops are supposed to know the guy has no gun?

        Bernie

        September 1, 2015 at 6:29 pm

      • Save your apologetics. If you can’t see that there’s a problem with an unarmed man being gunned down for being a little lippy, then fair enough.

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 7:14 pm

      • He was not “gunned down for being lippy.” He was told three times to stop digging in his pants and he didn’t do so. Even though a cop had a gun pointed at him. If this is your best argument you have no argument.

        Bernie

        September 1, 2015 at 9:34 pm

      • You assume the cop “needed” to have his gun out and aimed at someone’s back.

        Like I said, save the apologetics.

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 11:37 pm

      • Yeah, if they guy is walking away and fumbling in his pants for something what do you expect? Save your apologetics for criminals and cop killers. Again, you put up the video and it doesn’t even support your claim.

        Bernie

        September 2, 2015 at 9:07 am

      • it does support my claims. It wouldn’t matter what video I put up, you would rationalize it. THAT is the fundamental point. And you rationalize it because, as I have already said, you would rather see whites suffer than even entertain minorities benefitting. Southern Strategy through and through.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 11:56 am

    • Handling blacks and hispanics with kid gloves will make them law abiding?

      Jumpinjackfash

      September 1, 2015 at 5:09 pm

      • By “kid gloves” do you mean respecting the rights protected by the U.S. constitution?

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 6:49 pm

      • Olympia Fields “notable resident R. Kelly” lolol

        Let me guess, he “patrols” the neighborhood to make sure the teen girls make it home by curfew.

        ATC

        September 1, 2015 at 8:09 pm

      • We need more nice Flower Children like swank to patrol the hood. Police departments could stop hiring bullies and give those jobs to nuanced peace lovers who would show ’em how it’s done.

        ATC

        September 1, 2015 at 8:22 pm

      • “By ‘kid gloves’ do you mean respecting the rights protected by the U.S. constitution?”

        Awwww Swanky! Seems like you haven’t been around much lately (I was wondering why it’s been so pleasant). But you’ve come roaring back with one of your patented ostensibly-Olympian-yet-meaningless comments. It’s a real knack, I gotta admit.

        peterike

        September 1, 2015 at 8:42 pm

      • The program has IN FACT been found to violate the constitution. Given already expansive and broad SCOTUS interpretations for exceptions to the 4th amendment, that’s pretty incredible.

        So in imolicitly expressing a desire to reinstitute an unconstitutional program, “kid gloves” must refer to treating blacks and Hispanics like citizens with constitutional rights.

        I leave you to continue pretending the world is just.

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 11:45 pm

      • The Constitution allows police to arrest criminals.

        Bernie

        September 2, 2015 at 10:31 am

      • The Constitution is actually very un-specific about what it allows. It’s mostly about what Supreme Court justices in the 1960s made up.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 12:06 pm

      • What SCOTUS has made up since the 60’s have been mostly exceptions to the 4th amendment and broad deference to police authority. So if a program is ruled unconstitutional now, it is probably pretty bad.

        But you say it’s vague and no one has any clue. Alexander Hamilton described the proper conduct of a law enforcement official: While I recommend in the strongest terms to the respective officers, activity, vigilance and firmness, I feel no less solicitude that their deportment may be marked with prudence, moderation and good temper. . . They will bear in mind that their countrymen are freemen, and as such are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of domineering spirit. They will, therefore refrain, with the most guarded circumspection, from whatever has the semblance of hautiness, rudeness or insult. If obstacles occur, they will remember that they are under the particular protection of the laws and they can meet with nothing disagreeable in the execution of their duty which these will not severely reprehend. . . This reflection, and regard to the good of the service, will prevent at all times a spirit of irritation or resentment. They will endeavor to overcome difficulties, if any are experienced, by a cool and temperate perseverance in their duty — by address and moderation rather than by vehemence and violence.”

        That does not describe modern policing at all.

        The program violates both the 4th and 14th.

        But you believe the constitution is “unspecific” about a state of affairs where the best advice out there for dealing with cops includes “piss yourself.”

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 12:22 pm

      • Hamilton was talking about well-behaved white people. Back then, the blacks were slaves. There were no ghettos.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 3:55 pm

      • The Constitution allows police to arrest criminals.

        One cannot be a “criminal” until one has been judged to have committed a crime. The constitution and the common law generally allow arrests upon probable cause that a crime has been committed, with the attendant presumption of innocence applicable from stop to detainment to custody to trial.

        Treating ordinary citizens as if they are already criminals violates that basic presumption.

        Incidentally, the presumption of innocence is one of those “vagaries” of the constitution that flows from amendments 5 and 6 and that applies to every state through the 14th.

        Every circumstance is not exigent, and many exigent circumstances are created by the officers themselves.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 1:51 pm

      • The cops know who’s criminal and who isn’t. They aren’t as stupid as you think they are. Some guy in the ghetto who is wearing gang attire and acting like he’s up to no good is NOT an “ordinary citizen.”

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 3:59 pm

      • Hamilton was talking about well-behaved white people

        The violent crime rate among whites in those times was much higher than it is today by all best estimates.

        At around the time Hamilton wrote what he wrote, white violent crime approximated black crime today. So the people to who he applied his words were as violent as modern blacks.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 4:09 pm

      • Also the murder rate was higher then NOT because of people behaving badly but because they didn’t have modern medicine and ambulances and 911. What today would just be an aggravated assault would back then be a murder.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 5:37 pm

      • The cops know who’s criminal and who isn’t.

        No they don’t. Random stops turn up hit rates that approximate so-called ‘cop instinct.’

        They aren’t as stupid as you think they are.

        Yes they are. http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836
        They also don’t have a particularly dangerous job.

        Some guy in the ghetto who is wearing gang attire and acting like he’s up to no good is NOT an “ordinary citizen.”

        The constitution does not say or imply that “well, if they have clothes you don’t like this document doesn’t apply.”

        Broken windows does NOT work. Community policing WORKS.

        If you’re really about pushing “middle-class values,” then you need to treat people like they are ordinary citizens who can benefit from those values. It’s a two-way street.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 4:17 pm

      • Just because the person isn’t carrying a gun doesn’t mean that the cops instincts were wrong, it means that the criminal element is afraid to carry guns because they know they might be stopped and frisked.

        I went on a police ride along once, the copy wasn’t a dummy. He was a college graduate. Not brilliant, but his IQ as above 100.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 5:29 pm

      • oops, *to whom.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 5:03 pm

      • it means that the criminal element is afraid to carry guns because they know they might be stopped and frisked.

        Can you point to any FACTS to back that up?

        Everything I have seen suggests that stop-and-frisk does not have any real impact on crime.

        I went on a police ride along once, the copy wasn’t a dummy

        The one cop you went on a ride along with is not all police officers in the country.

        Another fun factoid about US law enforcement: “the United States outdoes India when it comes to custodial rapes of women by law enforcement personnel”. I suspect it is ‘reported’ rapes. But then again such rapes are underreported in the US, too.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 5:47 pm

      • “Everything I have seen”

        You are intentionally seeking out liberal sources so you can feel good about your liberal beliefs and not be challenged.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 8:20 pm

      • NOT because of people behaving badly but because they didn’t have modern medicine and ambulances and 911

        No, “medical care” does not explain all of the drop. 9-1-1 wasn’t even around until 1968. Slice it up any way you want, people were much more violent when Hamilton wrote what he wrote. Even monsieur “precious” himself, Steven Pinker believes this hypothesis to be unlikely.

        Tough pill to swallow, but swank is right.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 7:32 pm

      • “people were much more violent when Hamilton wrote…”

        You don’t know that based on one graph. Violence is a much broader concept than just the homicide rate, and the homicide rate was higher then because a wound that would be treated at a hospital today was fatal back then.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 8:25 pm

      • The incarceration rate today is possibly ten times higher than it was back then. If it was so violent back then, how come so few people were in prison?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 2, 2015 at 8:33 pm

      • You are intentionally seeking out liberal sources

        You have no sources. Just handwaves and poisoning the well.

        You don’t know that based on one graph.

        I have the court holding. I have the constitution’s plain language. I have a founding father’s statement of principle. I have the best available data on historical violent crime.

        You have: a ride along experience and general speculation.

        Violence is a much broader concept than just the homicide rate

        More speculation. Generally historians agree that violent crime in the United States has fallen in the last few centuries. By a lot.

        A growing body of historical evidence indicates that the recent increase of serious crimes against persons and property in European nations, and perhaps also in the United States, has followed a much longer downward trend and thus that serious crime appears to have followed a U-shaped curve.
        https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=119356

        If it was so violent back then, how come so few people were in prison?

        Is this a serious question?

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 8:49 pm

      • Can the moderator please give ‘swank’s clown show the hook?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        September 2, 2015 at 11:24 pm

      • Can the moderator please give ‘swank’s clown show the hook?

        TUJ can’t spar on h^2 or the facts concerning this (framing “you should not subject US citizens to a program that has been found to be unconstitutional” as a “clown show” is ridiculous)….so he pulls the tried and true card: censorship.

        swank

        September 3, 2015 at 1:41 am

      • It’s not censorship because your views are common and hardly censored anywhere. It’s about maintaining a civil community of commenters who have something interesting to say, and it’s not really interesting to read stuff I could just read at the SPLC website if I really wanted to read that.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 3, 2015 at 8:43 am

    • How exactly does stop and frisk put “resentment of authority” into ordinary citizens? Certainly if someone does not have illegal weapons or drugs it is a minor inconvenience compared to the body count we are seeing in places like Baltimore now.

      Bernie

      September 1, 2015 at 6:35 pm

      • “How exactly does stop and frisk put “resentment of authority” into ordinary citizens?”

        It’s because the liberal media has TOLD them to be resentful about it.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 1, 2015 at 6:38 pm

      • The constitution is “the liberal media,” apparently.

        Vera’s study reaffirms what has long been considered a hidden cost of violating the Fourth Amendment. “Far from making it easier to preserve order,” NYU’s Stephen J. Schulhofer wrote in More Essential Than Ever: The Fourth Amendment in the Twenty First Century, programs like stop-and-frisk “usually have the opposite effect, because they do so much to weaken the mutual trust that sustains the stability of a law-abiding society.”
        http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/09/how-stop-and-frisk-creating-generation-young-people-who-dont-trust-police/6961/

        Everyone’s just making it up! Highest white incarceration rate in the developed world and unarmed WHITE people being shot all around the country. Figment of the liberal media. Yeehaw!

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 6:47 pm

      • “programs like stop-and-frisk ‘usually have the opposite effect, because they do so much to weaken the mutual trust that sustains the stability of a law-abiding society.’ ”

        Ummm, no. Actually, massive immigration and racial/ethnic mixing do the most to “weaken the mutual trust that sustains the stability of a law-abiding society.”

        Stop-and-frisk is required long after “mutual trust” has gone out the window. But typically for a college professor, this numb-nutz gets everything backwards.

        peterike

        September 1, 2015 at 8:40 pm

      • May I suggest swank’s comments be sent to the spam bin? His comments add nothing and drag the comment section off track.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        September 1, 2015 at 9:06 pm

      • This is a legitimate request.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 1, 2015 at 10:54 pm

      • Innocent people are not “being shot all around the country.” People who attack cops or resist arrest are sometimes being shot. Moreover, saying that stop and frisk “weakens trust” does not make it so. If you have such a massive crime/murder rate in places like Baltimore it makes sense to use stop and frisk even if it really did “weaken trust.”

        Bernie

        September 1, 2015 at 9:38 pm

      • This is a legitimate request.

        Everything I say is legitimate.

        By now you should know that.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        September 1, 2015 at 11:22 pm

      • My original comment directly addressed a point in the OP and raised a valid counter-point.

        There is not much, if any evidence that stop and frisk had a significant impact on crime. The program was in fact ruled to be unconstitutional. These are facts.

        Everyone assumes without evidence that compliance with the constitution is impossible or unfeasible because certain ethnic groups exist: further proof that HBDers do wish to deny rights to certain groups. It doesn’t get much clearer than that. So the previous statements about HBD and rights having little to do with one another is indeed false.

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 11:53 pm

      • Yes Bernie the U.S. having the highest WHITE civilian death toll (by far) at the hands of police among all developed countries must mean nothing: they’re all guilty! Systematic and in fact unconstitutional programs executed by PDs must decrease crime and increase trust despite no evidence of either existing.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 12:07 pm

    • Lol, so you point us to a cherry picked study that limits what is considered crime to show stop and frisk had no effect. My study indicates your trolling and sophistry skillz are 4/10 on the xvo trollphistry scale.

      XVO

      September 1, 2015 at 8:02 pm

      • Please point to evidence of the contrary.

        swank

        September 1, 2015 at 11:54 pm

      • Swank,

        Really, this all sounds like a bunch of hippy dippy nonsense. If “stop and frisk” had no effect on the crime rates in New York City, then what did cause the crime rates to drop? Please don’t bring up some correlation/causation argument. Give me the competing confounding variable or variables with more explanatory power than “stop and frisk” or “broken windows.”

        There is also a missing factor in evaluating this incidences. What brought police to the scene in the first place? Until I hear a recording from dispatch, I am not going to trust these edited version of events.

        map

        September 2, 2015 at 10:40 pm

      • The fact that the program was found to be unconstitutional is hippy dippy nonsense?

        Or the fact that several empirical analyses found that stop and frisk had no discernable impact on crime is hippy dippy nonsense?

        I don’t need to offer a competing anything. A theory stands and falls on its own merits.

        To the extent I have one, my “theory” is that police should follow the constitution when dealing with United States citizens.

        swank

        September 2, 2015 at 11:12 pm

      • It’s a reasonable search and seizure and therefore constitutional.

        And last year we had the lowest crime rate in a really long time (two or three decades?) so agressive policing was working. Crime is rising this year because they stopped the stop-and-frisk.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 3, 2015 at 12:59 am

      • It’s a reasonable search and seizure and therefore constitutional.

        Must be why section V. A of the opinion is bolded and titled “The City Is Liable for Violations of Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment Rights.” They must mean the kinds of violations that are also “reasonable searches and seizures.”

        Or, in the real world: courts ruled that it isn’t and that it goes beyond what’s allowed by Terry.

        And last year we had the lowest crime rate in a really long time (two or three decades?) so agressive policing was working.

        The first does not imply the second, especially in light of the empirical (ignored, obviously) analyses.

        swank

        September 3, 2015 at 1:32 am

  5. Didn’t the Democrats lose a record number of seats in the last Congressional election? It looks like those losses are going to continue… hopefully including the presidency.

    The Mt. McKinley is icing on the cake. Is there any more that Obama could do to sabotage his own political party? You’ve got to wonder what the Clinton’s think of his lack of team spirit.

    Lowe

    September 1, 2015 at 2:42 pm

    • I don’t care much about McKinkley, but it looks like the people of Ohio are angry. Obama’s radical obsessions are apparently more important than winning a swing state.

      Actually, I suspect McKinley thing was done to gauge response to upcoming removal of Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill.

      WRB

      September 2, 2015 at 2:39 am

      • Obama’s move comports with the reality on the ground. But the left also wants to expunge the name Columbus, as in Columbus Day.

        The stupid dolts don’t realize that every instance of the word “Columbia” (nation of Columbia, District of Columbia, the Columbia River, Columbia University, millions of Columbian people, Columbia Records, Columbia sportswear) all honor the man. Everything on that list is loved by the left, the dummies. In the same way that Brittania is the Latinized version of Britain.

        Dan

        September 2, 2015 at 11:31 am

      • Why don’t they leave the old bills alone? If they want to honor, say, Pocahontas, they should just come up with a new denomination, like $3 or $4. Would anyone object to this? I

        Yakov

        September 3, 2015 at 12:35 am

      • Яков,

        You are too pragmatic and you don’t realize how evil these people are (sort of like Russians, who in 1915 did not realize how evil Bolsheviks can be.) They want nothing less than a total remodeling of society, which requires removing the old culture and installing a new one. Old symbols must go, all of them! They are True Believers building a Utopia, they do not believe in such thing as middle ground (except for temporary, tactical compromises.) Eventually, they will come for the Amish and the Orthodox Jews, too.

        WRB

        September 3, 2015 at 9:38 am

  6. There are a number of Republicans (Rand Paul, Christie, Hucklebuck, Rubio, Perry) talking about “criminal justice reform,” which means soft on black crime. For some strange reason, these specimens are not gaining any traction in the polls. If Trump wins, the GOP will have a huge issue (crime) to campaign on against Hillary.

    Bernie

    September 1, 2015 at 3:37 pm

    • Because “criminal justice reform” is BS. BBB, we have to keep them under control. Not fun, not pretty, but necessary.

      Soap

      September 1, 2015 at 9:11 pm

  7. I also don’t believe in drugs. For years I paid my people extra so they wouldn’t do that kind of business. Somebody comes to them and says, I have powders; if you put up three, four thousand dollar investment – we can make fifty thousand distributing. So they can’t resist. I want to control it as a business, to keep it respectable. I don’t want it near schools – I don’t want it sold to children! That’s an infamia. In my city, we would keep the traffic in the dark people – the colored. They’re animals anyway, so let them lose their souls.

    Soap

    September 1, 2015 at 9:10 pm

  8. “They’re animals anyway, so let them lose their souls.”

    Ah! I finally remembered where I’d heard that before. It was an utterance from one of the old-time Mafia capos, like from the ’70s, with reference to the money to be made in heroin and mitigating the societal downside: keep it in the ghetto.

    You’re a ringer (like Swank only more so).

    aandrews

    September 2, 2015 at 12:22 am

    • (Do you hang out at Abagonds, too?)

      aandrews

      September 2, 2015 at 12:37 am

    • Isn’t that from The Godfather? Maryk, you wouldn’t happen to know?

      Glengarry

      September 2, 2015 at 11:54 am

      • Yessss. Still…it *is* an old movie…like, from the ’70s…lol.

        aandrews

        September 2, 2015 at 2:46 pm

    • I’m as fraudulent as Baltimo’.

      Soap

      September 2, 2015 at 9:47 pm

  9. I would expect crime to keep rising. “Prison reform” is very trendy now, even among many Republicans. Look for shorter sentences and a whole lot more criminals out on the streets. We are definitely going through a soft on crime period right now, similar to the 1970s.

    Jay Fink

    September 2, 2015 at 5:20 pm

  10. These blacks are merely pawns. They’re savages from The Stone Age so there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell they’ll ever be law abiding. Release a few into neighborhoods, and the mayhem might convince some braindead idiots to support gun control or pay for more machine guns and armored vehicles for cops. In Mayberry, the Sheriff doesn’t need a gun and his deputy can be a goofball with one bullet in his pocket. But in Bell Curve City where the sun shines brighter than most of the people in the Winter, you need Judge Dredd, Robocop and Armored Cars roaming the streets just to go out during the day. Whether it the War on Terror tm or that friendly neighborhood black power terrorism, its all for one reason and one purpose. The Police State that can finally set up Utopia. Where the Rich are as rich as Richie Rich and everyone else has the comfortable life of the serf.

    Joshua Sinistar

    September 7, 2015 at 11:34 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: