this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
172 points (98.3% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7217 readers
350 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
172
An Early Warning That Policing May Be in Decline | Police departments across the country are solving far fewer crimes than they did before 2020. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
59 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

While headlines tend to focus on falling clearance rates in large liberal cities, the decline occurred nationwide in both red and blue cities, counties and states. The violent crime clearance rate, for example, fell considerably between 2019 to 2022 in big cities, which tend to be led by Democrats, as well as in small cities and suburban and rural counties, which tend to be led by Republicans.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 36 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

It's not necessarily the case though that fewer crimes are being actually "solved," in the most precise sense of the term.

It could be that the current heightened interest in police oversight and focus on investigation of (and huge lawsuit payouts as a consequence of) wrongdoing by the police has made it less likely that people will be railroaded/framed for crimes they didn't actually commit, so the rate at which crimes are marked as solved has declined, even as the rate at which they actually are solved hasn't.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's definitely a big chunk of the drop in case clearance rates since the 1960s. It's not as clear that there have been actual changes to police honesty recently though.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It struck me after I posted that that modern technology and investigative techniques would also contribute to such a decline.

It's undoubtedly more difficult to falsely convict someone (whether deliberately or not) in the era of GPS, cell phone records, video surveillance and DNA tests.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There's a famous example of how improvements in understanding of burn patterns resulted in concluding that a bunch of people were falsely convicted for arson:

Due to the extensive publicity the case received, and because the murder charge carried a potential death sentence, the prosecution hired Lentini and John DeHaan, who had coauthored a fire investigation textbook, to evaluate other theories of how the fire may have started. One possible explanation was that one of the children, playing with matches, had ignited a sofa.

Fortunately, two doors down from the Lewis’ residence was an almost identical house. Lentini and DeHaan received funds and permission to furnish that house with the same type of furniture and carpeting as in Lewis’. Then they wired the structure with sensors, lit the sofa on fire and recorded the results. Within minutes the house was an inferno, due to a flashover. A flashover occurs when a burning object generates hot combustible gasses that ignite and engulf an entire area in flames.

To the general amazement of everyone involved, Lentini and DeHaan discovered the same burn marks on the floor of the test house that prosecutors thought indicated arson. But rather than having resulted from a liquid accelerant, the marks were caused by flashover. Prosecutors quickly dropped the charges. “That case opened my eyes,” Lentini said. “There were all these rules of thumb you can find in the literature at the National Fire Academy that are just wrong.”

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Don’t credulously accept the testimonies of expert witnesses. Examples of “the science” proving years later to have been pseudoscience abound.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

While this certainly sounds plausible, even rational and perfectly logical, it's also the exact sort of argument that could easily be spurious. Now, i'm not making that accusation (nor do mean to imply it), but do you happen to have any data backing up this assertion?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Eh?

I said that it's "not necessarily the case that" one thing and "it could be that" something else.

Logic and plausibilty are all that's necessary.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

when asking for evidence, i didn't expect equivocation and, "it's just a guess, bro," hand-waving in response-- see, this is why i was skeptical and asked.

Logic and plausibilty [sic] are all that’s necessary.

no. evidence is necessary. otherwise, it's just speculation, and that's just not good enough.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (14 children)

What the fuck are you on about?

It's not necessarily the case though that fewer crimes are being actually "solved," in the most precise sense of the term.

It could be that the current heightened interest in police oversight and focus on investigation of (and huge lawsuit payouts as a consequence of) wrongdoing by the police has made it less likely that people will be railroaded/framed for crimes they didn't actually commit, so the rate at which crimes are marked as solved has declined, even as the rate at which they actually are solved hasn't.

That's everything I said, right there. What part of it are you not understanding?

evidence is necessary. otherwise, it’s just speculation

Of course it's fucking speculation! What the fuck else did you think it was?!

i didn’t expect equivocation

It would be equivocation if there was a disjunct between the intended meaning of what I said at one point and the intended meaning of the same thing at some other point.

But I've been entirely consistent in what I've said. The disjunct is between what YOU thought I meant and what I actually said, and that's your fucking problem - not mine.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] jordanlund 27 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Portland Police collects 1/4 of a billion dollars every year.

For that:

They don't respond to 911 calls:

https://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2022/08/31/mayor-calls-rebukes-portland-police-bureaus-claims-of-understaffing-bullshit/

They don't do traffic enforcement:

https://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2022/08/31/mayor-calls-rebukes-portland-police-bureaus-claims-of-understaffing-bullshit/

They don't have a gang/gun violence taskforce:

https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/06/09/mayor-ted-wheeler-agrees-to-disband-the-portland-police-bureaus-gun-violence-reduction-team/

Even the bike theft team is gone (after having one of their own bikes stolen).

https://www.kgw.com/video/news/local/the-story/portlands-bike-theft-task-force-eliminated/283-7de1f9a1-6f89-40b0-99c9-cb3f54125c89

So what are they doing with 1/4 billion a year?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 11 months ago

Stockpiling tear gas in case people complain.

[–] AbouBenAdhem 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I dunno, it looks like it’s pretty much in line with the long-term trend for the past 60 years. It’s also interesting that crime has been generally declining over those same periods (both long-term and short-term), suggesting that catching and punishing offenders isn’t as big a factor in reducing crime as most people assume.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Mango 5 points 11 months ago

They're also making up crimes. First hand account here.

[–] KeefChief13 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Why solve when you could shoot

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Why do actual work when you can collect overtime by hanging out at a crime scene with your buddies for an hour or two?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

The comments here should be good. All well thought out and reasonable. munching popcorn

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Best warning I have ever had. More of this please. Pigs don't solve crimes anyway.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The exact causes of the decline in arrests are difficult to pinpoint, but the timing is clearly tied to the summer of 2020, suggesting that changes in policing and America’s dwindling confidence in law enforcement since the killing of George Floyd played a role.

Low morale and extreme stresses in the departments have led to high levels of resignations among older and more experienced officers and significantly fewer recruits to replace them.

It also means significantly longer response times, leaving clues to grow stale and witnesses to disappear before officers arrive.

For a long time, conventional wisdom pointed to factors beyond the control of law enforcement — such as whether a witness was present or whether physical evidence was left behind — as the primary drivers of solving crimes.

But newer research from a criminologist, Anthony A. Braga, presents a clear connection between the amount of investigative resources dedicated to a crime and the likelihood of its being solved.

Civilians can respond to low-level incidents that don’t require an officer, take reports over the phone and aid investigators in solving cases.

The original article contains 1,069 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 83%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This is by percent, but not by total volume.

This could easily mean that crime is on an incline.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

They directly say that this is not the case.

[–] Anticorp 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The solve rate for rape is 25%? That's horrifying. What the fuck? We have more tools available to solve crimes now than ever before in history. Get off your asses and give people some justice!

[–] Cypher 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

There are many issues with this, mostly that a large number of victims don’t immediately seek help and because of the delay (often months or years) cant have a rape kit done.

This reduces the evidence available for finding and prosecuting the offenders.

[–] yesman 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If women aren't submitting rape kits, how come so many forensic labs have huge backlogs of untested kits?

[–] Cypher 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Huh, the US seems to have a backlog which is what I assume you’re referring to, Im not familiar with the specifics so can’t comment on the cause.

Older data in this example but it’s similar enough to more recent data Ive seen elsewhere, and has a better sample size.

https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system

Only 31% of rapes are reported and of those 77% are eligible for rape kits.

That’s remarkably similar to the 25% of cases where the rapist is successfully convicted according to the claims above.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›