Violent Crime Rate Goes Up for First Time in 15 Years

[solvs]

Violent Crime Rate Goes Up for First Time in 15 Years Following Massive GOP Cuts for Law Enforcement

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alerts/120

The rate of violent crime in America increased last year for the first time since 1991, according to a new FBI report. The increase coincides with dramatic cuts to state and local law enforcement funding by Republicans each year since President Bush took office. The $2.3 billion recently approved by the House amounts to nearly half of the $4.5 billion appropriated in 2001.
My God, is anything going right lately? The deficit is spiraling out of control, and yet all of these much needed programs are still being cut. Lots of talk of terrorists and drug runners and illegal immigration while the real problems get ignored and America is once again less safe.

I cannot understand how people continue to defend this government, considering just how bad things are getting.

[princealfie]

Going down the tubes like the ex-Roman Empire eh?

[Desertrat]

I gues it's the sociologist-boffins who study demographics. Anyhow, some eight or ten years back this rise was predicted. It mostly has to do with the number of young males in the age group of 16 to 24. The numbers in that group declined in (IIRC) the late 1980s and in the 1990s. It is now rising. I vaguely recall that the rise was anticipated to begin a couple of years back...

'Rat

[pseudobrit]

I hear violent crime rates in the USA are down when compared to Iraq.

[solvs]

I vaguely recall that the rise was anticipated to begin a couple of years back...
I vaguely recall a few years ago people touting drops in violent crime as proof that our gov was doing things right. Their budgets have been slashed year over year, so crime starts going back up and what do they do? Blame it on other factors. Slash the budget some more. Put a hiring freeze on law enforcement. I rarely see a cop around here anymore, never see the highway patrol, even though both are desperately needed. Kinda expected this to get more play in the MSM, as we heard about crime all the time in the media a few years ago, even while it was going down. Considering you're more likely to get hurt by local crime than terrorism or any of the other things they've all been talking about (plus the whole healthcare thing, but that's a whole nother issue that's being ignored), you'd think it'd be more important to bring up.

Sorry, but this is another thing that gets neglected that shouldn't be by a gov that claims to care so much for our safety and protection. If it was going up, and it's been predicted for years, why not do something about it? Why ignore it and continue to cut the budget? Again? Wouldn't your excuse make it worse 'rat that they've once again ignored something everyone knew was coming?

[miloblithe]

If it was anticipated, why didn't they do anything to prepare for it?

Wait, that kind of sounds like it applies to a whole lot of other things this administration has done wrong...

[Ugg]

I gues it's the sociologist-boffins who study demographics. Anyhow, some eight or ten years back this rise was predicted. It mostly has to do with the number of young males in the age group of 16 to 24. The numbers in that group declined in (IIRC) the late 1980s and in the 1990s. It is now rising. I vaguely recall that the rise was anticipated to begin a couple of years back...

'Rat

I agree that demographics play a large part in crime rates, but it's not the only factor involved, the unemployment rate is another.

[solvs]

I agree that demographics play a large part in crime rates, but it's not the only factor involved, the unemployment rate is another.
But that's not Bush's fault either remember. Unemployment is down (on paper) as is the economy (on paper). I'm sure it's somehow Clinton's fault. Or Osama's.

[Foxglove9]

But that's not Bush's fault either remember. Unemployment is down (on paper) as is the economy (on paper). I'm sure it's somehow Clinton's fault. Or Osama's.

You said it perfectly :D

[solvs]

You said it perfectly :D
Thank you. But you'd be amazed at how many people actually believe that stuff.

[Desertrat]

Ugg, a question stemming from, "...the unemployment rate is another."

How do you reconcile that with the comparative violent crime rates of the Great Depression era? We had 25% unemployment, then, and little in the way of social welfare programs. The rate of violent crime was lower, then, than now.

Certainly poverty plays a part, as do the incarceration policies of judges and juries. (Longer sentences mean prisoners are older when released. The older the ex-con, the less the likelihood of violence.) Any increase in the number of gangs contributes--particularly since much of their membership is within the subject age group. The largest single factor, as near as I can tell from reading statistical studies and suchlike, is the demographics.

'Rat

[Ugg]

Ugg, a question stemming from, "...the unemployment rate is another."

How do you reconcile that with the comparative violent crime rates of the Great Depression era? We had 25% unemployment, then, and little in the way of social welfare programs. The rate of violent crime was lower, then, than now.

Certainly poverty plays a part, as do the incarceration policies of judges and juries. (Longer sentences mean prisoners are older when released. The older the ex-con, the less the likelihood of violence.) Any increase in the number of gangs contributes--particularly since much of their membership is within the subject age group. The largest single factor, as near as I can tell from reading statistical studies and suchlike, is the demographics.

'Rat

What percentage of American workers were "employed" on the family farm? I think it was quite a high number, 30-40% maybe? Sorry, can't find a link but there's a big difference between your daddy providing you with a job, a roof over your head, food and pocket money and today's job climate.

Guns were also expensive, cars still somewhat uncommon and much of the population lived in rural areas and the 'burbs were in their infancy. Also, Americans tended to know their neighbors and weren't nearly as transient as the post-war generation was. Drug use was also uncommon. All these reasons and more are why we as a nation weren't as violent in the 20s. Actually, the great depression probably led to the breakdown of what's known as civil society.

Do those statistics take a peak at pre wwii life in the US? It would be very interesting to see how things were back then. I think you also have to remember that there was a fair amount of vigilante justice back then and crimes were relative to the race and gender and religion of the person they were committed against.