U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-23-2012, 08:29 AM
 
16,438 posts, read 18,510,024 times
Reputation: 9490

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
That isn't any more enlightening than saying "Then everyone decided to stop."
It not really such an oversimplification. The Boomers are a huge demographic "bump" and caused the increase in crime to a great extent, and are causing the "unexplainable" decrease in crime now. Those dependent on funding for police departments won't agree of course. It's all about their great efforts. Another big factor is that the nature of crime itself is changing. Only stupid criminals use violence anymore. Identity theft and computer crime is where it is happening today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2012, 08:30 AM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,046,755 times
Reputation: 14878
Seeing how drugs and free love were not inventions of the 60's ,or even the 20th century for that matter, I don't know what either has to do with the price of tea in China. It is common knowledge, or should be, that cocaine, opiates and marijuana were commonly used throughout the 19th century and lessor known to most is that free love moments were the hallmark of 19th century utopians and the nascent feminist movement.

It seems to me that the advent of political correctness, historical revisionism, and mythicization of American history which has led to the current state of historical amnesia began and ended in a period between the second world war and the mid-1960's which leads to the kinds of the "Fall of Rome" pronouncements such as this thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2012, 08:54 AM
 
16,438 posts, read 18,510,024 times
Reputation: 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Seeing how drugs and free love were not inventions of the 60's ,or even the 20th century for that matter.
I don't think it was the Hippies fault.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2012, 09:23 AM
 
14,777 posts, read 34,490,118 times
Reputation: 14278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
It not really such an oversimplification. The Boomers are a huge demographic "bump" and caused the increase in crime to a great extent, and are causing the "unexplainable" decrease in crime now. Those dependent on funding for police departments won't agree of course. It's all about their great efforts. Another big factor is that the nature of crime itself is changing. Only stupid criminals use violence anymore. Identity theft and computer crime is where it is happening today.
The first problem with this supposition is that the curve, at least the one I posted is based on the "crime rate", meaning crimes per 100k Americans. Therefore it is already controlled for in terms of population, so peaks and valleys in population don't matter.

The next problem then is explaining why it is continuing to decrease during the "echo boom" of the Millenials, born ~1980-2000.

If your supposition holds correct, the crime rate rose on the shoulders of the "Boomers" being born approximately from 1945-1965. That means during the increase and then peak of the curve, the oldest Boomers were 20 at the beginning of the upswing and the youngest were 30 when it peaked out.

The oldest Millenials are currently in their 30's and the youngest are closing in on their teen years, with the majority of the group currently being 18+. However, there is no corresponding increase in the crime rates.

In terms of total population, which as I pointed out doesn't really have an impact on the "crime rate" since it is controlled for population, there are about 68 million Millenials versus 76 million Boomers, so only about a 10% difference and certainly a large enough "boom/peak" to have skewed things if that actually had anything to do with it.

Personally, I think it is all simply cyclic and while I don't buy S&H wholesale, there is a lot in their theories that makes sense, this kind of observation being one of them. So, there wasn't anything "wrong" or "different" in America that caused the spike in crime rate, it was simply the attitude of Americans at the time towards tearing down the high societal institutions that had dominated from 1945-63 or so. What has changed since then to lower the crime rate is our perception of society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2012, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
36,948 posts, read 17,425,944 times
Reputation: 16782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
It not really such an oversimplification. The Boomers are a huge demographic "bump" and caused the increase in crime to a great extent, and are causing the "unexplainable" decrease in crime now. Those dependent on funding for police departments won't agree of course. It's all about their great efforts. Another big factor is that the nature of crime itself is changing. Only stupid criminals use violence anymore. Identity theft and computer crime is where it is happening today.
Now what are you saying? Increases in population cause even greater leaps in crimes per capita? If the population increases by 20%, then crimes goes up by 30%

Huh? I think you were better off with the "boomers grew out of it"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2012, 01:57 PM
 
Location: The Port City is rising.
8,593 posts, read 10,293,732 times
Reputation: 2338
Quote:
Originally Posted by questioner2 View Post
Historians: was 1965 the start of the downward spiral in American society?
the reform movement to deal with alcohol abuse and related problems was really picking up momentum by the 1840's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2012, 02:48 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,046,755 times
Reputation: 14878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Now what are you saying? Increases in population cause even greater leaps in crimes per capita? If the population increases by 20%, then crimes goes up by 30%

Huh? I think you were better off with the "boomers grew out of it"
Also left out of the equation is the rapid post war urbanization of the U.S.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2012, 05:15 PM
 
Location: Iowa
2,586 posts, read 2,887,211 times
Reputation: 3062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Yeah? So then what happened in the early '90's which caused the trend to reverse itself? President Clinton authorized a return to warrantless search and seizures? He enouraged the Klan to crack down on minorities once more? He had the FDA go around and collect everyone's birth control devices?

Your thesis seems to rest entirely on applying your personal political philosophy to any situation, whether it makes sense or not.

Before I reply to this, I want to thank Bideshi for the rep and kind words, but I was not born until the mid 60s so I do not have direct memory of those times. However, I did notice in my studies of the civil rights era, that blacks were terrified to go to the courthouse and vote, even after they were given the green light to do so. If they were that scared just to cast a ballot, then I cannot imagine them being involved in great amounts of criminal activity, at least against whites. And criminal activity against whites was more likely to get reported and make it on the books for crime statistics. Segregation also made it very difficult for minority criminals to expand their horizons, as they would be easily identified in white neighborhoods, detained and questioned. The fear factor among minorities was definitely there to deter crime in those days, and I believe it was very effective. When the fed broke down the ritual of jury nullification, the fear factor was gone and the klan became impotent.

To ignore the fact that illegals in the southwest had a significant role in the 30 year US spike in crime, is like burying your head in the sand. I'm sure a very large portion of crime in states such as California were committed by illegals, probably more than blacks in that state, and maybe Texas as well. I'm sure that applies today for the spike in Arizona, in more recent times. Too many illegals, not enough sheriff Joe's.

As to why the overall spike decreased in the mid 90's, I can only make a guess that it's because the economy was booming and jobs were plentiful, and paid better than petty crime. Perhaps the minority revenge factor had tapered off by then, as those that had been oppressed were getting past their prime, and new attitudes were coming to light. The opportunity was finally there for all minorities to advance themselves, if they wanted to. The crack epidemic of the 80's was fading and that may have had an effect. They started cracking down on meth at that time, as well.

I also wanted to mention in my first post, that the prison system was not the same after the 60's, as it was before the 60's. The opportunity to father children via conjugal visits in the boom boom room was not there back in 50's. They did not have TV, air conditioning, good food, weight rooms, or any of that stuff back then. In fact, sometimes they worked on chain gangs like in the movie "Cool Hand Luke" and they were not screaming "Attica, Attica, All or Nothing" as they would have been knocked upside the head.

The demographics within the prisons were different, as the general population on the outside was 90% white, the population on the inside was at least 60 to 80% white. So it was probably not as fun to be a minortiy in prison back then, as they did not control the game in there. Some of the prisons were segregated as well. But when the demographics changed as we got into the 70's and minorities started committing more crimes and getting caught, the game changed. After the 60's, a 5 year sentence for a white guy meant 5 years in a cell with Bubba, and thus, whites were beginning to have a very unequal experience in there, compared to the minorities that had gang support, as it was almost a right of passage to do time in there. I think this had an effect on would be white criminals tuning into "Scared Straight" in 1978......that the punishment for crime was not worth the rewards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2012, 02:21 AM
 
Location: Earth
17,449 posts, read 22,948,866 times
Reputation: 7246
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford View Post

To ignore the fact that illegals in the southwest had a significant role in the 30 year US spike in crime, is like burying your head in the sand. I'm sure a very large portion of crime in states such as California were committed by illegals, probably more than blacks in that state
You would be very wrong about the latter part.

Part of the reason why nobody cared about illegals coming in was because white California saw them as preferable to blacks, because poor blacks committed violent crimes disproportionate to their share of the population. In fact prior to the Central Americans coming in during the late '70s and '80s there were relatively few crime problems involving Hispanic immigrants. If you want to get a picture of how attitudes were in the '80s, watch the movie Colors. In that film, even the Hispanic gangbangers are depicted with some sympathy and the general Hispanic community is shown as being as a whole just as decent as whites, while the blacks are depicted as subhuman savages in a way that would have made D.W. Griffith proud. (These are not my views, I'm just relating what the common views in that time were. If the C-D California forum had existed back then, it would have been overwhelmingly antiblack, even more so than today, and anti-Latino, even anti-illegal, posts would have been far fewer in number. Describing the existence of racist attitudes is not endorsing them.)

I grew up in a neighborhood which at the time was mostly non-Hispanic white with some Hispanics and some Asians, but at most one or two blacks, not more than that. Less than a mile away was a neighborhood which had a large black population, which was about half black and half Hispanic with virtually no whites. It was a no-go area and once gangs got bigger it got much, much worse. Black gangs were far more violent than any other type of gang.

CA whites at that time were far more bothered by blacks - sadly the anger and fear they felt from black criminals wound up hurting decent black people.

Fortunately, race relations are much better in CA now then they were then, albeit class relations are worse. That is another topic.

I can't speak for Texas as I never lived there.

Quote:
I'm sure that applies today for the spike in Arizona, in more recent times. Too many illegals, not enough sheriff Joe's.
Sheriff Joe did nothing to fight crime in Phoenix, although he did a good job of lining his own pockets with payoffs, shakedowns, and bribes and becoming a very wealthy man. But that is a different topic.

Quote:
As to why the overall spike decreased in the mid 90's, I can only make a guess that it's because the economy was booming and jobs were plentiful, and paid better than petty crime. Perhaps the minority revenge factor had tapered off by then, as those that had been oppressed were getting past their prime, and new attitudes were coming to light. The opportunity was finally there for all minorities to advance themselves, if they wanted to. The crack epidemic of the 80's was fading and that may have had an effect. They started cracking down on meth at that time, as well.
Meth started flourishing right as crack was declining. The meth crackdown happened several years later. And it didn't work. But that's another topic.

Quote:
After the 60's, a 5 year sentence for a white guy meant 5 years in a cell with Bubba, and thus, whites were beginning to have a very unequal experience in there, compared to the minorities that had gang support, as it was almost a right of passage to do time in there. I think this had an effect on would be white criminals tuning into "Scared Straight" in 1978......that the punishment for crime was not worth the rewards.
Why do you think whites didn't have the gang support? Why do you think white gangs declined outside of the NE and Chicago? There were more white ghettos in the '70s than today. In the '90s and '00s most of the remaining white ghettos either gentrified or became at least racially mixed, but in 1978 they were still plentiful. Not so much in CA but in other states. Given the same circumstances whites are just as prone to crime as any other group. Why did those circumstances change?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2012, 05:18 AM
 
Location: The heart of Cascadia
1,328 posts, read 2,538,159 times
Reputation: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
That isn't any more enlightening than saying "Then everyone decided to stop."
The young Boomers were starting to enter middle age by the early 90s. That's why. Older people do not commit crime at the same frequencies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top