DescentBB

i was just reading through soem stuff online. and inamongst perusing the statistics showing that crime in USA has declining for the last decade... i came across an interview with a criminologist.

as in, a person who actually studys crime and criminology. and knows what's going on.
you'll get no "it's all sheep, wolves and sheepdogs" idiocy from this guy's ilk.

one particular point stood out to my eyes, you could see that other points were leading up to it, and this point was the crux:

(it would be a good idea to read the rest of the interview, since it lead upto this point. points like "there are studied reasons that crime is the way it is, we DO know what's going on".)

QUESTION: How has crime been politicized of late?

ELIOTT CURRIE: One of the most unfortunate things about the way we talk about crime in the United States today is that in a sense politics has trumped science when it comes to our public debate, so that an awful lot of people who were in positions of some influence and authority no longer talk about what's true when it comes to crime or what our evidence tells us, our research tells us, but what they think the public wants to hear. And they tend to believe, although they're not necessarily right about this, they tend to believe that the public is quite punitive and only wants to hear talk about getting tougher and tougher on crime. They don't think the public will sit still for explanations of the causes of crime. They don't think the public is interested in the prospects for the rehabilitation of criminals or the development of prevention programs. And so we don't have a real debate about those things. Instead we have politicians vying with one another to see who's going to be the toughest. And that extends, of course, all the way up the political ladder to the very top. And I think what that does is really eviscerate the debate about crime in our society today.

If you take my own state of California for example where we have a number of harsh criminal justice policies that have been passed in recent years, including our famous or infamous "three strikes and you're out" law, I don't believe that there is a single criminologist in the United States that I could name who really believed that that law would have a very beneficial impact on our crime problem, and who was not quite worried, in fact, about the negative impact that it would have on our criminal justice system. But virtually none of that concern passed into the level of political debate. And indeed you could go to the halls of the legislature in Sacramento and you could sit legislators down, you could ask them if they had paid any attention to the research on this matter. And they say they knew about the research, but they couldn't possibly talk about it in the political climate today.

One of the things that is part of the myth of crime control in the 1990s is that the public is uniformly punitive about crime. It turns out if you look at the more careful opinion surveys that have been done about crime in the last several years you see that the public is much, much more flexible, much, much more interested in a variety of approaches to crime and its control than we imagine it to be.

i think this is very true. for example, you can't talk about drug reform in politics, it's tying a political noose around your neck.

is this what we've degraded to as a society? where politics is nothing but a game or SURVIVOR... killing off anyone who stands out.

There is a popular notion that is being birthed that claims that all can be reformed and there is no "real" right and wrong. That is only varying shades of gray and grayer.

It's becoming increasingly difficult or rather unpopular to call anything evil, except for the most horrid acts. And even then mainstreams doesn't call it that. It's "shocking" or "unthinkable". But evil? Then the issue of absolutes and right and wrong must be dredged up again.

I refer this to the mainstream media and those who wish to shape our understanding and view of the world. I really think that average Joe/Jane isn't thinking this way wholesale... yet. The next generation will tho. My Grandkids as adults.

In a world that is getting faster and more consumed with instant gratification, and ultra selfishness, being a Victim of environment (socially)or having a disease (like alcoholism ...which is really a disorder not a disease by definition.) will replace right and wrong. It will be a matter of rehabilitation and treatment or self improvment. "fault" will be locked up in a truck of memories and tucked away in the attic with the rest of antiques.

In regards to the article, I agree Roid. This guy has his finger on it. I have seen nothing on TV that would make me believe that crime is declining, although I HAVE seen it reported on the news a number of times over the last year or so. It really is laughable. What really disturbs me is the yonger age and form of which crimes are taking in increased frequency. This is just in "little" Portland Oregon. we have Just over 2 million in the metro area. A FAR cry from the Major cities in the rest of our country.

And the cause? or perhaps the fault? ... that's a tough one. I don't believe that it's one or two things. I think it's a large number of variables and differing combinations there of.

My personal belief is that Humanism and the homoginizaton of morals is a large factor and thus filtering down through a miriad of social venues. Most specifically the home. Life Starts and is learned in the home. Media and other outside influences take thier toll. (We all know how brutal school can be.) but even that in large part can be detured in the homes with some perseverance by the parents. ... and that isn't easy. Keeping my daughters head in the game, so to speak, and not let her think that she can run over whomever she pleases as she feels has been a real challenge. Parenthood is NOT for the faint of heart or the slacker. And guess where the "Me" generation lands in that.

And there is nothing that government can do to fix the crime problem. It's a community issue that needs preventative medicine, not stitches and a band-aid later. ... but of course there is the reality of those that have already chosen to throw thier lives away to crime of some sort and what to do about it.

Roid, I take issue with your assesment that the Sheep, Sheepdog and Wolves analogy is "idiocy"!
And the writer of your article has some credibility problems with me because of this part of his work:

"If you take my own state of California for example where we have a number of harsh criminal justice policies that have been passed in recent years, including our famous or infamous "three strikes and you're out" law, I don't believe that there is a single criminologist in the United States that I could name who really believed that that law would have a very beneficial impact on our crime problem, and who was not quite worried, in fact, about the negative impact that it would have on our criminal justice system."

I'm not a fan of uniform sentencing laws which three-strikes-and-your-out kind of goes hand in hand with because of the potential to lose the redeemable offenders in the mix *BUT* you don't need to be a criminologist to know that criminals usually are repeat offenders and they don't magically stop at three offenses...
So the three-strikes-and-your-out program obviously *does have a very beneficial impact* if you consider all the fourth and subsequent offenses by all the thousands of criminals it snared have been stopped!
That adds up to a lot of crime prevented!

I get the impression from that line of his that the rest of it will be laced with his slant on things which in my mind is clearly not very honest and can't help but wonder what his motive is.
I realize the point I focused on is not the main thrust of his article but it sends up a red flag for me, I'll read the rest later and come back to eat humble pie if I'm wrong but it sure looks like he's got an axe to grind.

hopefully it won't tell you anything you don't already know.
i didn't pick that guy as the cream of the crop, he got the privilege because he was one of the first things i clicked on in google. i have since read more, and it seems to carry the same message.

i did start by just reading the australian government's yearly criminal report.
http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf ... enDocument
(but i don't think you'll be interested in that)

ie, when confining google to search australia only*, this criminologist's personal webpage was the first thing i clicked on. he says the same thing. that crime trends are entirely predictable, our societys are actually not falling apart at the hands of criminals, and the political and media fearmongering is doing nothing but harm (abiet that harm is still quite predictable ).

eg: explanation for some common crime trends you may have noticed.
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~born1820/screwth1.htm
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~born1820/screwth2.htm

i hope this will inspire discussion.


(* strangely when you search google for "crime trends" , or "crime trends criminology" it's dominated by australian websites. i'm not entirely sure why this is.)

roid wrote: (* strangely when you search google for "crime trends" , or "crime trends criminology" it's dominated by australian websites. i'm not entirely sure why this is.)

Well, Australia was born as a prison

At least as far as the white folks were concerned ...

The juxposition I see is Britain. With all the laws they have and the extreme de-weaponising of honest citizens....why is their crime rising? Morality?
Lax enforcement of existing laws? Thinking crimminals have more basic rights than the main population? You tell me.

i wish i could say i knew woodchip, but i'm not an expert, i do however listen intently to what they have to say. i wouldn't know where to start in the UK, it's quite different to australia, and of course VASTLY different to the USA.

the UK loves it's trash media. i'd like to suggest that the Tory Party thrives on the influence of trash media (as well as inputing it's own reactionary trash politics), but i'm sure most popular partys do likewise whenever they get the chance.

just reading that somethingawful.com forum thread, one could start to draw lines of cause and effect similar to the ones in that aussie criminologist's website. we could have some amateur fun i suppose.
if you wanna start it off with some UK figures, initial theorys and whatnot in another thread we'll have some fun eh.