PDA

View Full Version : Impact of Foreclosures on Crime



Sergeant T
06-15-2008, 01:21 PM
The Impact of Single-Family Mortgage Foreclosures on Neighborhood Crime. (http://www.chicagofed.org/cedric/files/2005_conf_paper_session1_immergluck.pdf)

Link shamlessly copied from John Robb's site (http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/), who seems to always go all Forth Turning (http://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Turning-William-Strauss/dp/0767900464/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213534242&sr=1-1)with every new data set. The paper is limited but worth a quick read. Having sat through the classes and worked the street, I think it's a 'chicken & egg' arguement. Criminals have all the time and numbers to shape their environment into whatever they want within governement tolerances. I also tend to get queasy when someone offers up an equation in a study to help explain the problem, but I know economists can't help themselves when it comes to equations.

davidbfpo
06-15-2008, 07:24 PM
My experience in the UK, in an urban area blighted by the collapse of its manufacturing sector was that unemployment rose (approx. 30% for adult males and higher for youth). Private home ownership was relatively low, local authority and private landlords dominated.

Violent crime did not rise, nor anti-social behaviour, but dishonesty in all fields did. Instead of stolen goods being sold to handlers or "fences", goods could be sold in door to door sales and orders even taken before the theft. Local stores, especially those selling alcohol, tobacco, chemists, electrical goods and clothes were hit repeatedly. As the local barricades, crime prevention measures went up organised raiding went further afield. Oh yes vehicle crime went up.

"Sink" estates, not always publically owned, detiorated.

Today the same area has adult unemployment less than 5% (although the definition has changed so much it is meaningless) and youth unemployment or not in training is a staggering 38%. Massive public spending on housing improvements, smaller amounts on education and training. Some manufacturing has survived, but there has not been a single private sector investment.

Violent crime is up, often attributed to drug dealing; anti-social behaviour is persistent in the "sink" estates, dishonesty has shrunk and local shops can survive.

Anyway just a viewpoint from over the Atlantic and I'm not an economist.

davidbfpo

Jedburgh
10-10-2008, 07:24 PM
Geography & Public Safety, Oct 08: Foreclosures and Crime: A Geographical Perspective (http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/files/RIC/Publications/GPS-Vol1_iss3.pdf)

This third issue of Geography and Public Safety (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/maps/bulletin.htm) examines how the nationwide home foreclosure crisis has affected crime, police practice, and public policy. Articles show that geographic information systems (http://gislounge.com/) can assess how foreclosures influence crime trends and improve city cleanup of graffiti and blight. Additionally, the issue describes the tenets of the broken windows (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/198203/broken-windows) policing theory, and how this theory explains why police and public planners must react quickly, before crime has a chance to escalate

slapout9
10-10-2008, 08:03 PM
Outstanding...Thanks for posting.

Bill Moore
10-13-2008, 05:51 AM
Interesting post, and I suspect this is the tip of the iceberg of bad things to come if we don't stabilize our economy. While I agree with the parallels to the broken glass theory, I think there is more to it. First, the social-economic-political system that these folks bought into failed them, so they are vulnerable to being recruited by gangs and other criminal elements. Far fetched? You may recall that several senior citizens have been (and may still be) involved in transporting illegal drugs due to personal economic duress, and this was before the current crisis. You now have a vulnerable and angry population that can be mobilized by an equally angry politician (a Hitler double). It is more than broken glass equaling an increase in punks on the streets, it is the failure of a system and folks looking for viable alternatives. I see many parallels to insurgency issues.

slapout9
10-13-2008, 10:22 AM
Interesting post, and I suspect this is the tip of the iceberg of bad things to come if we don't stabilize our economy. While I agree with the parallels to the broken glass theory, I think there is more to it. First, the social-economic-political system that these folks bought into failed them, so they are vulnerable to being recruited by gangs and other criminal elements. Far fetched? You may recall that several senior citizens have been (and may still be) involved in transporting illegal drugs due to personal economic duress, and this was before the current crisis. You now have a vulnerable and angry population that can be mobilized by an equally angry politician (a Hitler double). It is more than broken glass equaling an increase in punks on the streets, it is the failure of a system and folks looking for viable alternatives. I see many parallels to insurgency issues.

Bill, I don't think that is far fetched at all. Nobody is talking much about the criminal effects a recession/depression will/would have. But they will soon if things don't straighten up.

jmm99
10-13-2008, 05:38 PM
Hi folks,

Currently, there are at least three recents threads here (SWC) on the "financial crisis", including this one. The other two are:

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=6089

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=4283

By now, almost everyone realizes we have a problem - and governments worldwide are reacting. The problem is that reactive tactics may end up being more deadly than the problem itself. E.g., how do you react to an ambush ? We have had no training for this kind of ambush.

By way of general background, a source to linked articles, by those who have been predicting this mess, can be found here "The Depression Reader":

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/recession-reader.html

Kind of telling that the title refers to a "depression" and the url refers to a "recession". Truth is, at present, we simply do not know.

The particular problem here (in this thread) is a dangerous one because we do not know how our population will react today - as opposed to in the 1930's. IIRC, while foreclosures were a problem then (various foreclosure moratoria acts were passed), the overall crime rate did not increase that much - Bonny and Clyde aside. Slap, you may have some stats on that which are more precise; and I will not be bothered that my recollection is wrong.

My point is that the US people in the 1930's were not used to government "safety nets" and, frankly, were used to a lot more privation than my generation which grew up in the 1950's. Just about a mile from here is Quincy Hill (a mining location, which shut down in the 1930's). The people up there had their backs to the wall. So, what did they do (help from Welfare and WPA was not enough) ? They got together and shared their resources (a pig from one, veggies from others, and shine from them with stills). Not a very sophisticated bunch, those folks from Quincy Hill; but they survived.

Whether it will get that bad, I do not know. If it does, we will be into John Robb territory, where he has just posted:


Monday, 13 October 2008
GG RADAR: Early October 2008
Interesting mind food:
.....
Defensive strategies for communities: slow foreclosures/evictions. Chicago has a watered down version of this. Phili is in the lead. The key factor: drive as deep a wedge between the dysfunctional global economy and your community as possible. Keep people in their homes as long as possible. If you don't, you risk hollowing out your community. ....

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/

This ties in with Robb's theory of "resilient communities" as an answer to many problems.

There is another "foreclosure" that is of larger concern - and that is the amount of US government paper that is out there. That ranges from a dollar bill (a Federal Reserve Note), through the range of various Treasury instruments up to 30-year bonds. Now, some of my friends at LewRockwell call this "fiat money" (not backed by gold, etc.); but it is really not. In practical effect, it is backed by the present and future income stream and the present and future assets of the US (not only those owned by the government, but those owned by you and me). That is another, less tangible danger.

Besides the one trillion or so that the US will inject into the system, France and Germany will inject another trillion or so; UK has already moved in that direction; and Iceland is bankrupt - that from the AM news before I got here. So, there will be lots of government paper hanging out there.

PS - Slap. Lew Rockwell and the Mises Institute have offices in Auburn, Alabama. Should that affect my judgment of them ?

slapout9
10-13-2008, 07:28 PM
PS - Slap. Lew Rockwell and the Mises Institute have offices in Auburn, Alabama. Should that affect my judgment of them ?


All things from Alabama are good, but anything from Auburn is suspect:) Von Mises put me to sleep.
John Robb has been very accurate in his forcast on the economy. Except for me,us,(SWC) he is the only one talking about the security issues with mass foreclosures. Could get really nasty out there. Hate to say it but Bill Lind has written about the Insurgency coming home to America...he might be right:eek:

120mm
10-13-2008, 08:02 PM
Hi folks,

By now, almost everyone realizes we have a problem - and governments worldwide are reacting. The problem is that reactive tactics may end up being more deadly than the problem itself. E.g., how do you react to an ambush ? We have had no training for this kind of ambush.


Exactly. I think the US government has come to the point where they will do everything, up to and including permanently ruining our economy, in order to prevent even a slight economic downturn.

The Clinton/Greenspan micro-management and illusion that they could command the economy has developed into a continuum when the same incompetent hacks, like "Hank" Paulson who created the conditions for this mess are now in charge of dictating how we are to clean it up, "if we know what's good for us".

Words cannot express the loathing I feel for these hacks....

davidbfpo
10-13-2008, 09:35 PM
A few weeks ago a (UK) Home Office report suggested that some in UK government considered an economic downturn would lead to a crime wave: http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5iNqVbeYJEKbQPBiSky2diQPeF__w

The Home Office and the UK government landed in the mire over this.

davidbfpo

Ken White
10-13-2008, 09:41 PM
but every economic downturn brings a rise in the crime rate; just that simple. Can't change that by not mentioning it. Better in fact to remind people it will occur and prepare everyone for reality.

reed11b
10-14-2008, 03:45 AM
Seems like that is the message the despised "liberal intellectual elite" have been trying to spread for years. I would add that bolstering the middle-class has greater economic gains then enriching the rich.
Reed

P.S. I am a firm believer in the broken window theory, and believe it has a great deal of relevance in COIN.
Reed

jmm99
10-14-2008, 03:43 PM
Just to keep things straight about broken windows.

1. There is the broken window policing strategy - deterring broken windows prevents other more serious crimes.

2. There is the broken window economic fallacy - wow, look at all of the work that is created when the broken window is replaced. The fallacy is that capital has to be put into the replacement window work, and you only end up with the same window. The capital could have been used for innovation, etc.

Interestingly enough, the two situations are somewhat linked if you think about it. Prevent broken windows and you have more capital for other things. That is assuming that the added cost of policing is less than the cost of replacing the broken window - Slap has to be a relatively cheap date. :D

slapout9
10-14-2008, 04:56 PM
jmm99, that was cold man really cold.

According to SBW doctrine the government should buy up a bunch of houses that are being foreclosed on and GIVE them to Wounded Veterans and let them form a neighborhood watch group (give them a police radio set). Want be anymore crime in that community.

Ron Humphrey
10-14-2008, 05:02 PM
jmm99, that was cold man really cold.

According to SBW doctrine the government should buy up a bunch of houses that are being foreclosed on and GIVE them to Wounded Veterans and let them form a neighborhood watch group (give them a police radio set). Want be anymore crime in that community.

Worked for the Romans:D

At least for a while:wry:

jmm99
10-14-2008, 08:02 PM
Since the OP's article has a couple of articles from NC, here is a NC view.


Crime & Punishment

Incarceration alone will not solve North Carolina's crime crisis. We must also focus on preventing crime by addressing the conditions that give rise to it. That does not mean increasing government spending on jobs programs or social programs. There is no historical relationship between crime rates and either poverty, joblessness, or government social spending. Crime rates during the Great Depression were much lower than they are today.

http://www.johnlocke.org/agenda2004/crimepunisment.html

The article adds (in bold): "The real cause of crime is not a poverty of resources but a poverty of values." That statement is arguable (IMO), since I believe there is an interplay between the two:

poverty of resources <> poverty of values

As an example, take a trip through 25th and Locust in Milwaukee (as it existed about 15 years ago, when I last drove through it) - basic ghetto environment and one of Milwaukee's high crime areas, with over-crowded housing owned by slumlords living in Tosa or further west.

Anyway, the article does have a good graph (attached) which shows that general prosperity does not mean lower crime rates. Of course, correlation does not necessarily prove causation.

As to prosperity and crime, we have this from the inventor of the broken windows policing theory:


JAMES Q. WILSON: Between 1963 and the early 1970s, the rate of violent crime more or less tripled in the United States. By violent crime, I mean murder, manslaughter and robbery. So we had a tripling of the crime rate at a time when the country was, by and large, prosperous, in which the unemployment rates even among African-American adolescents was quite low.

http://www.pbs.org/fmc/segments/progseg13.htm

On the other hand, we have this (from a more "progressive" website):


The Second Great Experiment

Reliable statistics on incarceration in federal and state prisons in the United States date back to 1925—at the time Debs was writing Walls and Bars. These statistics show that the incarceration rate (persons imprisoned in federal and state prisons per 100,000 in total population) has been higher in periods of economic stagnation (when the unemployment rate, and hence the reserve army of labor, is much higher). In the Great Depression the incarceration rate for federal and state prisons peaked at 137 per 100,000 in 1939, after which it rapidly dropped with the coming of the Second World War. (See Figure 1, which shows the trends at five year intervals. Note: the peak year of 1939 does not appear in the chart.) The decline in the rate of incarceration in the war years was not simply the result of millions entering the military. Jobs were plentiful—jobs where one learned skills along with the opportunity to use the skills in better paying positions. Lots of overtime and weekend work boosted incomes despite the low wage rates.

http://www.monthlyreview.org/0701editr.htm

The chart (prisoners from 1925 to 2000 - contrary to quote above there is a peak just before 1940) is here.

http://www.monthlyreview.org/docs/0701fig1.pdf

Perhaps, the most honest statement is this:


Published: Sunday, January 23, 2000
Crime rate falls in U.S., and no one is sure why
MICHAEL FLETCHER WASHINGTON POST
Why is crime down in America?
.....
Much of the evidence offered to support these theories is, in the end, contradicted by history or otherwise unraveled. Yes, the economy is better. But it also boomed during the 1960s, when crime began its steep upward march. And in the past, crime has waned during economic downturns, most notably during the Great Depression.
.....
It may well be that there is no way to know what will happen with America's crime rates because the factors that influence them are too complex.

In his new book, ``Butterfly Economics: A New General Theory of Social and Economic Behavior,'' British economist Paul Ormerod argues that human behavior is essentially unpredictable, in large part because individuals are as likely to be influenced by one another as by objective factors such as poverty or the police.

Will crime rise or fall in the next generation? You can ask the same thing about hemlines with as much chance of accurately predicting the answer, he maintains.

http://www.d.umn.edu/~bmork/2306/Newspapers/crimerates.J00.htm

My conclusion is that working from very generalized data sets is not helpful. Here (this thread) we have a specific problem (deserted houses and buildings)which do lead to an increase in crime - regardless of why any individual turns to crime. Thus, that problem is finite and can be solved. The larger, general problem is "messy", "wicked".

Jedburgh
10-14-2008, 08:09 PM
but every economic downturn brings a rise in the crime rate; just that simple. Can't change that by not mentioning it. Better in fact to remind people it will occur and prepare everyone for reality.
Observing current discussions among crime analysts on a variety of forums illustrates that:

1. LE across the spectrum is well aware of the potential problem.
2. It is already happening, with burglaries on a significant upward trend, and the number of "new" thieves with no fingerprints on record are an indicators of the nature of the problem. Another indicator is the trend in shoplifts being more towards "needs" (food, diapers, sanitary products) than luxury items.
3. The trends noted above are local. There are significant differences within different areas of major cities, between cities, and between states as to the degree of impact. Despite the massive alarmist media coverage, and the deeply personal real impacts in many areas, there remain substantive parts of the country that are little affected.

Ken White
10-14-2008, 08:33 PM
I'd add that all the great data provided by jmm99 essentially corroborates it with the amplifier that the 'cultural revolution' of the 1960s skewed the picture due to a foolish desire then and since to let a lot of perpetrators walk and be rehabilitated instead of tossing 'em in the slammer. Social engineering; they meant well but actually encouraged crime as it became low or no cost...

As you point out -- with local variations; then and now. As any street Cop can tell you, even minor swings in the economic cycle have their effect, slight though it may be.

Note that jmm99's offerings show an anomaly -- one article says that crime rates were low during the Depression, another shows the incarceration rate during that period climbed significantly. That is and indication of the beginnings of crime reporting and data gathering getting off to a rocky start and a no-nonsense attitude toward any potential lawbreaker. Different time.

reed11b
10-14-2008, 09:34 PM
I'd add that all the great data provided by jmm99 essentially corroborates it with the amplifier that the 'cultural revolution' of the 1960s skewed the picture due to a foolish desire then and since to let a lot of perpetrators walk and be rehabilitated instead of tossing 'em in the slammer. Social engineering; they meant well but actually encouraged crime as it became low or no cost...

As you point out -- with local variations; then and now. As any street Cop can tell you, even minor swings in the economic cycle have their effect, slight though it may be.

Note that jmm99's offerings show an anomaly -- one article says that crime rates were low during the Depression, another shows the incarceration rate during that period climbed significantly. That is and indication of the beginnings of crime reporting and data gathering getting off to a rocky start and a no-nonsense attitude toward any potential lawbreaker. Different time.
There was also shorter sentences and less post incarceration stigma and still a lower percentage of the population incarcerated then now. I am going to have to agree to disagree with you on this one Ken
Reed

Ken White
10-14-2008, 11:15 PM
Check the pot and drug sentences then and now... ;)

reed11b
10-14-2008, 11:29 PM
Check the pot and drug sentences then and now... ;)

And then agree to agree w/ you 100% on that particular aspect.
Reed
Another way of describing the "Broken Window Theory" JMM, is the social cues theory. Basically that signs of disorder are a signal to criminals that "open" criminal activity is OK or at least unenforcible. Note that it only works on "open" criminal activity (visable activity) but that this is often the most important in "percieved" public safty. So the "broken window" enforcement has little to do with lowering actual major crime rates, but a lot to do with public perceptions of safety. Of course in COIN, public perception of safety matters.
Reed

Ron Humphrey
10-15-2008, 12:45 AM
accidently left unlocked back door off the screen porch Theory to deal with the "closed" criminal activity?:confused:

120mm
10-15-2008, 01:37 PM
And then agree to agree w/ you 100% on that particular aspect.
Reed
Another way of describing the "Broken Window Theory" JMM, is the social cues theory. Basically that signs of disorder are a signal to criminals that "open" criminal activity is OK or at least unenforcible. Note that it only works on "open" criminal activity (visable activity) but that this is often the most important in "percieved" public safty. So the "broken window" enforcement has little to do with lowering actual major crime rates, but a lot to do with public perceptions of safety. Of course in COIN, public perception of safety matters.
Reed

In crime, perception is everything.

My wife and I spent April in Eastern, rural Crete, which I think qualifies as being a "poor" society. Crime there is nonexistent, and when I dropped a large amount of currency, a young man followed me to return it and refused a reward.

Crime "used" to be nonexistent in the rural society where I grew up, and we were poor as dirt. However, the '60s brought the "perception" that "anything goes" and crime became common by the '70s. (I know, highly correlational, but very coincidental, if not causal...)

I spent 3.5 years or so, teaching in a prison, and will attest that the actual number of hardcore criminals in prison is actually relatively low. Something like 10% of law-breakers commit 90% of crimes. The secret isn't longer sentences, it's finding that 10% and removing them from society, one way or another.

I think more participation at the lower levels of democracy might help, too....

jmm99
10-15-2008, 05:13 PM
from reed
So the "broken window" enforcement has little to do with lowering actual major crime rates, but a lot to do with public perceptions of safety.

Agreed that perception is an important aspect, but I am not a believer in the doctrine that perception is reality - sometimes, yes; sometimes, no.

How does broken window policing affect reality ? The obvious initial impact is on the minor crimes policed. However, to effectively police those crimes, LE has to become closer to the community it polices. I.e., who broke the window or who sprayed the graffiti ? Assuming that is done effectively, the contacts made within the community will eventually give data on the overall crime picture in the community, including major crimes. Some similarity to COIN operations - separate the people from the criminals.

So, the desired end result is ultimately better policing of major crimes.

Hey Slap, do I have this substantially correct ?

PS: - 120mm. Agree totally with your last 4 paragraphs (see above for my view of "perception"). Basically, the same life experience in growing up in a generally depressed mining community (where most of the mines closed between 1920-1945); and still live here (economic salvation has been two universities).

jmm99
10-15-2008, 05:45 PM
WSJ
A rising tide of ‘underwater’ homeowners
1 in 6 now owe more on their mortgage then their property is worth
By James R. Hagerty and Ruth Simon
updated 5:58 p.m. ET, Wed., Oct. 8, 2008
.......
About 75.5 million U.S. households own the homes they live in. After a housing slump that has pushed values down 30 percent in some areas, roughly 12 million households, or 16 percent, owe more than their homes are worth, according to Moody's Economy.com.
......
Among mortgages on one- to four-family homes, 9.16 percent were a month or more overdue or were in foreclosure in the second quarter, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. That compared with 6.52 percent a year before and was the highest level since the association began such surveys 39 years ago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27089919/

The mortgages in foreclosure rate is lower - Candy Crowley on CNN (Mon nite) put it at about 2%. Still that is over a million potential "problem children", with roughly 4 times that on the brink (payments overdue). The article points out that the problem varies from region to region - as has been stated here as well.

120mm
10-15-2008, 07:52 PM
PS: - 120mm. Agree totally with your last 4 paragraphs (see above for my view of "perception"). Basically, the same life experience in growing up in a generally depressed mining community (where most of the mines closed between 1920-1945); and still live here (economic salvation has been two universities).

As usual, you are correct. My first sentence was too absolute.

I find the current view of poverty and crime being single-issued as eerily reminiscent of the Victorian England view of the "criminal poor".

In addition to being raised in poverty, I had a head injury in '98, and raised a family of four on part-time income, under the poverty line for the next 5 years, while I recovered. Shockingly, I did not resort to a life of crime, unless you consider feeding my family beans, rice and homemade polenta to be criminal.;)

Sergeant T
10-15-2008, 08:41 PM
Another big contributor to the upswing in crime is that we're processing another youth bulge. Gen Y is about 70 million in size. If you get 1% turning to a life of crime that's an additional 700K beds you're gonna need in a system already bursting. Put this on top of the big numbers that are being/due to be released from corrections & you've got your crime wave.

Broken Windows is a fine approach when the community actually wants to be policed. Worked more than a few neighborhoods where residents didn't care what you were offering, they flat didn't want you there. Moskos seems to have had a similar experience in Baltimore.

JMM99: Don't we sort of have a model for how this breaks down by looking at how Detroit has played out over the last 25 or so years?

I've had a hypothetical question floating in my head for a while now: I wonder how effective the soldiers engaged in COIN would be if they could be sued every time the kicked down the wrong door, cuffed the wrong person, or discharged their weapon? Just something I ponder.

Ron Humphrey
10-15-2008, 10:16 PM
I've had a hypothetical question floating in my head for a while now: I wonder how effective the soldiers engaged in COIN would be if they could be sued every time the kicked down the wrong door, cuffed the wrong person, or discharged their weapon? Just something I ponder.

and which should probably be looked at very hard in the understanding that particular portions of the polity think almost everything can/should be approached from a LE perspective. And tend to plan accordingly:eek:

Rifleman
10-15-2008, 10:56 PM
I think more participation at the lower levels of democracy might help, too....

120mm,

Care to expound on that a little more please?

slapout9
10-15-2008, 11:27 PM
Hi all, love this thread. Good questions are being asked. I have a few comments but since I had a root canal done today:( and I moving a little slow, I will respond later. Again I hope this keeps going because several good points have been raised.

jmm99
10-16-2008, 01:50 AM
JMM99: Don't we sort of have a model for how this breaks down by looking at how Detroit has played out over the last 25 or so years?

Hate to tell you, but I know Milwaukee (6 hours away if you don't stop) better than Detroit (12 hours away).

Detroit has been hit by almost every negative variable you can imagine:

1. Collapse of auto industry.

2. Flight to suburbs, absentee landlords & deserted houses.

3. Problems with police force (internal affairs type) - existed when force was largely White; exists when force is largely African-American - but it seems a systemic problem, IMO; e.g.,


NY Times
National Briefing | Midwest: Michigan: Detroit Police Chief To Resign
Published: May 22, 2001
By ELIZABETH STANTON (NYT)
Detroit's police chief, Benny N. Napoleon, announced that he would resign effective July 15. Last month, Mr. Napoleon, whose department is under investigation by the Justice Department for police shootings, the arrest of homicide witnesses and the treatment of prisoners, said he would leave in January, when Mayor Dennis Archer's term ended. The chief, a 26-year veteran of the police force, said he was leaving earlier to work in the private sector. Mr. Archer appointed Mr. Napoleon as chief in 1998. Elizabeth Stanton (NYT)

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B03E5D9153DF931A15756C0A9679C8B 63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/J/Justice%20Department

and Benny's Bio (from better times - 1999):

http://www.answers.com/topic/benny-n-napoleon

4. Lousy political leadership in general. Again, some very good people. You can't get much better than Denny Archer, but he was virtually driven from office.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Archer

I could name other decent judges, lawyers and cops; but you should get the idea by reading Napoleon's and Archer's bios.

IMO - the average person in Detroit probably wants policing - they are the ones getting hit by crime. But, they didn't like DPD 60 years ago when I first went to Big D - and probably don't much like it better today.

Others from MI (and Detroit) may well have different opinions.

selil
10-16-2008, 03:14 AM
Seems like that is the message the despised "liberal intellectual elite" have been trying to spread for years. I would add that bolstering the middle-class has greater economic gains then enriching the rich.
Reed

P.S. I am a firm believer in the broken window theory, and believe it has a great deal of relevance in COIN.
Reed

Do prefer a "conservative moronic ludite" message instead? Perhaps you might want to think about less punditry like actually talking about broken window theory? Giluianni applied the same principle to squeegee men in New York.

selil
10-16-2008, 03:16 AM
Check the pot and drug sentences then and now... ;)

Marijuana wasn't illegal nationwide until what 1967 and LSD in 1969? Drug crimes have always been used against the disenfranchised classes starting with booze and carried through history.

Ken White
10-16-2008, 03:40 AM
Marijuana wasn't illegal nationwide until what 1967 and LSD in 1969? Drug crimes have always been used against the disenfranchised classes starting with booze and carried through history.incarceration rate in the 30s was far lower simply because drug crimes, a large percentage of todays sentences, didn't exist. That and other things. Lots of things are now crimes that were not in in 1967 much less in the 30s...

selil
10-16-2008, 01:27 PM
incarceration rate in the 30s was far lower simply because drug crimes, a large percentage of todays sentences, didn't exist. That and other things. Lots of things are now crimes that were not in in 1967 much less in the 30s...

Using the national and various state corrections bureaus statistics between 40 and 50 percent of all people incarcerated have nothing more than non-violent drug user types of convictions (possession). It is also the largest growing segment of the prison population. The PEW study 1 in 100 shows that the United States has 1 in 100 people on some type of supervision (probation through parole) or incarceration. Roughly five times any other western nation.

Tom Odom
10-16-2008, 01:45 PM
Using the national and various state corrections bureaus statistics between 40 and 50 percent of all people incarcerated have nothing more than non-violent drug user types of convictions (possession). It is also the largest growing segment of the prison population. The PEW study 1 in 100 shows that the United States has 1 in 100 people on some type of supervision (probation through parole) or incarceration. Roughly five times any other western nation.

The 2 countries with the largest percentage of their populations incarcerated:

The US

Rwanda

reed11b
10-16-2008, 02:44 PM
The 2 countries with the largest percentage of their populations incarcerated:

The US

Rwanda
I had read recently that Russia had a higher percentage then the US, but not by that much. Either way, it's a wake up call that the correctional community has been aware of for years
Reed
(I work part time a juvenile correctional counselor)

Tom Odom
10-16-2008, 03:24 PM
I had read recently that Russia had a higher percentage then the US, but not by that much. Either way, it's a wake up call that the correctional community has been aware of for years
Reed
(I work part time a juvenile correctional counselor)

I was flat out wrong on Rwanda--it has gone down dramatically in recent years. I remembered reading that but it was based on 2002 data. For example:

Prison population statistics (http://inhisserviceweb.com/prison_statistics.htm)

In absolute terms, the United States currently has the largest prison population in the world, with more than 2 million. In 2002, both Russia and China (the latter with a population 4 times that of the USA) also had prison populations in excess of 1 million.

As a percentage of total population, Rwanda has the largest prison population as of 2002, with more than 100,000 (of a total population of around 8 million), largely as a result of the 1994 genocide. The United States is second largest in relative numbers with 486 prisoners per 100,000 of population, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, also making it the largest in relative numbers amongst developed countries).

The Rwandan prison population was 130,000 in 1998; 102,000 in 2002; somewhere around 60,00 2006 after a 2003 decree to decongest the population. Nevertheless some 700,000 remain accused of genocide and face gacaca trials

US and Russia keep trading depending on source when you google the question

This report (http://www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/pubs/2006nov_factsheet_incarceration.pdf) was interesting. Are you familiar with it or the organization?

Tom

reed11b
10-16-2008, 04:43 PM
This report (http://www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/pubs/2006nov_factsheet_incarceration.pdf) was interesting. Are you familiar with it or the organization?

Tom
I am familiar w/ both. Not a lot to add information wise other then the organization is fairly well respected w/i the justice community. While articles on the specific relationship between US incarceration rates and the ROW are not that common, most articles by non-partisan justice groups make mention of the disparity of US rates of incarceration to the rest of the industrialized world and the growing percentage of non-violent drug offenders on mandatory sentencing w/i the prison population. Most "get tough on crime" politicians seem to make the situation worse and actually lead to conditions were invasive criminals (i.e thieves and crimes of assault) are forced to be released earlier to make more room for drug and "three-strike" minor offenders. A note to Ken and others: most non-partisan justice organizations have also concluded that while the old adage that “10% of the criminal population commits 90% of the crime” is basically true, you can not reduce crime by 90% by incarcerating that 10% since other individuals step into the roles of the incarcerated criminals. With the exception of extremely violent criminals (murders and rapists) longer sentences tend to have little utility in either protecting the community or in acting as deterrents to crime. This is all second-hand and I can dig up the reports if anyone is interested, or you can do it yourselves. Even the federal Justice departments and agencies tend to support these findings if you wanted to start there.
Reed

Ken White
10-16-2008, 05:31 PM
A note to Ken and others: most non-partisan justice organizations have also concluded that while the old adage that “10% of the criminal population commits 90% of the crime” is basically true, you can not reduce crime by 90% by incarcerating that 10% since other individuals step into the roles of the incarcerated criminals. With the exception of extremely violent criminals (murders and rapists) longer sentences tend to have little utility in either protecting the community or in acting as deterrents to crime.I have absolutely no idea what you think I might have said that would indicate I'm not aware of or would disagree with that...

Fascinating.

reed11b
10-16-2008, 06:25 PM
I have absolutely no idea what you think I might have said that would indicate I'm not aware of or would disagree with that...

Fascinating.
Sorry Ken, I mentally placed your name on a post by 120mm. All due apologies.
Reed

jmm99
10-16-2008, 06:29 PM
120mm said it (post # 23) and I agreed with him (post # 24).

So, after containing the 10% and it is replaced by a new cohort, you contain that 10%. It's called the Whack-a-Mole theory of criminal justice. Anybody have a better approach - other than removing the "root causes" of crime.

PS: - Ken, it's because a Pink Bun dropping from the sky makes such an attractive target.

120mm
10-16-2008, 06:49 PM
120mm,

Care to expound on that a little more please?

I wasn't prepared to really expound on it, as I've had a kernel of an idea for awhile, concerning this.

A couple months ago, the COIN center asked for research into the role of criminality on COIN.

I don't think most of what we call "criminality" in COIN is actually "criminal", as Society is mainly responsible for defining "criminal" activity. As insurgents really don't answer to our society, but to their own peers, what they're doing isn't actually criminal.

So the guy who grows poppies in Afghanistan to make into drugs isn't criminal, at all. He's just "making his way, the only way he knows how" as the country song goes. "His" society tells him that is acceptable behavior.

Same thing with so-called "criminal" gangs. As long as the government tolerates gang formation, gangs get to make their own societal rules, and the individuals committing crimes are not necessarily individually "criminal", but rather members of a sub-society behaving in accordance with that society's rules.

Where this ties in to pushing democracy to the lowest level, is that the lower you push democratic participation, to include things like policing and service in the military/government organization, the harder you crowd sub-societal groups, like criminal gangs.

The problem is, how do you prevent the lower level organizations from mimicking criminal gangs and prevent the creation of a bunch of independent and out of control militias in every neighborhood in America?

To me, democracy doesn't just magically appear on election day. It involves citizens acting within the community on things like security, infrastructure and decisions about direction and economics. The more "professional" police become, and the more tax dollars you send to higher than community level, and the more "professional" the military becomes, the less and less connection ordinary citizens feel toward the higher levels of gov't. And the less effective that central gov't becomes, vis-a-vis it's citizens.

Like I said, I wasn't prepared to really write a thesis on it. There are still holes in this idea, but I think there might be something there.

120mm
10-16-2008, 06:56 PM
Sorry Ken, I mentally placed your name on a post by 120mm. All due apologies.
Reed

Which brings us to a fascinating concept that crime is a matter of "supply and demand", as theorized by Harry Harrison in his "Stainless Steel Rat" series of novels.

I think that the "justice" system's single most important role, is giving society the impression of "justice."

Without the perception that "criminals are punished", government loses its monopoly on nearly anything.

reed11b
10-16-2008, 11:22 PM
Which brings us to a fascinating concept that crime is a matter of "supply and demand", as theorized by Harry Harrison in his "Stainless Steel Rat" series of novels.

I think that the "justice" system's single most important role, is giving society the impression of "justice."

Without the perception that "criminals are punished", government loses its monopoly on nearly anything.

I would add "criminals are universally punished" or else it fails as a deterrent or even as a concept. This is why the criminalization of "victimless" crimes undermines LE and correctional agencies. One becouse catching a high percentage of drug users and gamblers and simalier crimes is unlikely, two, becouse the manpower wasted on trying too, allows crimes such as car theft to be nearly free of risk of being caught.
Reed

jmm99
10-17-2008, 01:30 AM
The posts below deal with community participation, whether the problem is unorganized crime, organized crime or insurgency - which represent something of a spectrum.


Slap post # 8
Could get really nasty out there. Hate to say it but Bill Lind has written about the Insurgency coming home to America...he might be right

Slap post # 14
According to SBW doctrine the government should buy up a bunch of houses that are being foreclosed on and GIVE them to Wounded Veterans and let them form a neighborhood watch group (give them a police radio set). Want be anymore crime in that community.

120mm post #43
Where this ties in to pushing democracy to the lowest level, is that the lower you push democratic participation, to include things like policing and service in the military/government organization, the harder you crowd sub-societal groups, like criminal gangs.

The problem is, how do you prevent the lower level organizations from mimicking criminal gangs and prevent the creation of a bunch of independent and out of control militias in every neighborhood in America?

I suggest the following as a cheap resource (free) to organizing the community and separating it from criminals, insurgents, etc.


MODERN WARFARE
A French View of Counterinsurgency
by
Roger Trinquier
....
(pp.16-21)
6. Defense of the Territory
....
THE INHABITANTS ORGANIZATION
....
COUNTRYWIDE INTELLIGENCE

http://smallwarsjournal.com/documents/frenchview.pdf

Trinquier wrote at a time when Algeria was an integral part of France. So, unlike our manuals which address issues in a HN we are assisting, Trinquier's deals with fighting a domestic insurgency. He notes that forming the Inhabitant's Organization is simpler if the insurgency is less advanced.

Trinquier writes from an authoritarian viewpoint (necessary to deal with an advanced insurgency); but, since it is not a cookbook, its ideas could be adapted to our environment.

Progress along those lines would require political resolve - and a decentralization of control because community organizing has to be local (Saul Alinsky - Reveille for Radicals is worth the read if you can find it).

Given governments (both parties) whose answer to a crisis is something like "go out shopping", I am skeptical about the political resolve and acceptance of decentralization.

slapout9
10-17-2008, 02:04 AM
Hi All, many of you have heard me talk about the crime triangle, here is a link to the whole theory. It is actually 2 triangles the inner one is the crime/problem triangle the outer one is the control/solution triangle.
It approaches the problem amd solution as a system not an either or type problem.:)

http://www.popcenter.org/learning/pam/help/theory.cfm

Bill Moore
10-17-2008, 08:18 AM
jmm99, thanks for the link to Trinquier's writings, it even includes a bonus introduction by Bernard Fall. I read Trinquier's "On Modern War" and quickly realized he was one of the best military theorists on modern war to date. It was a library copy, but after reading this I'm breaking down and buying a hard copy for my library.

This really peaked my interest because I recently posted on the SWJ blog in response to the article titled "Between Clausewitz and Mao" about the importance of destroying the insurgent underground, or what Trinquier more eloquently refers to as the clandestine organization and a special organization.

One of his more interesting observations is our tendency to explain revolutionary warfare in a way that closely parallel's traditonal warfare, yet as he points out, it is far to simple and doesn't provide the understanding necessary to defeat this type of threat.


Studies have been made in many countries of what is called subversive warfare. But they rarely go beyond the stage of guerrilla warfare, which comes closest to the traditional form.


In modern warfare, we are not actually grappling with an army organized along traditional lines, but with a few armed elements acting clandestinely within a population manipulated by a special organization.

Getting back on topic, he also challanges the decapitation approach to attacking an insurgency (or HVI hunting). He emphasizes the need to completely remove the cancer from society so it can no longer influence the population, not simply killing a few select enemy personnel. This approach in some respects parallels the "broken glass" theory, we're not just getting the baddest of the bad, but we're getting all the bad.


The mission of the police operation is not merely to seek a few individuals who have carried out terrorist attacks, but to eliminate from the midst of the population the entire enemy organization that has infiltrated it and is manipulating it at will.


In modern warfare, we are not actually grappling with an army organized along traditional lines, but with a few armed elements acting clandestinely within a population manipulated by a special organization.

In a true insurgency I don't necessarily see direct parallels to crime, although what we call criminal acts may indeed be a means to raise funds to support the insurgency, such as insurgent tax collection (protection money). I suspect that much of the crime we see in insurgent affected areas is a result of increased lawlessness (broken glass). Some insurgent movements actually target criminals and severely punish them as a means of increasing insurgent legitimacy. Mao was adamant that his soldiers would not commit crimes against the populace, and if they did they would be severely punished.

This begs the questions, is insurgent legitimacy is less important today than it was during Mao's time? Is crime an effective means to fund an insurgency? Is there any other say to fund an insurgency if they don't have an external sponsor?

The reason I ask is that there are numerous studies suggesting that Al Qaeda operatives and related groups are now encouraged to conduct criminal acts (or criminal enterprise to include selling drugs) to fund their operations. It can be perceived as a double win, first your committing crime against your foe, thus undermining his society, second you're lining your coffers with cash to support operations. Yet I suspect insurgents who do this risk undermining their own integrity as an organization, and like many other insurgent groups risk evolving into an organized criminal group.

Tom Odom
10-17-2008, 12:03 PM
Guys,

Before you put ole Trinquier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Trinquier) up on a pedestal--and I have read modern war and used it in a history lesson--consider that the French did much of what Trinquier advocated and lost. Why?

Well the short answer lies in JMM's intro of Trinquier when he states that it was at a time when Algeria was part of France. Therein lies the root cause of failure because that was an illusion, one cherished deeply by les pieds noirs and certainly less so by indigenous Algerians.


Getting back on topic, he also challanges the decapitation approach to attacking an insurgency (or HVI hunting). He emphasizes the need to completely remove the cancer from society so it can no longer influence the population, not simply killing a few select enemy personnel. This approach in some respects parallels the "broken glass" theory, we're not just getting the baddest of the bad, but we're getting all the bad.

Also keep in mind that in the execution of what he advocated Trinquier was a practioner of torture on a broad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Aussaresses)scale. As Algeria collapsed, Trinquier and other veterans joined the mercenary circuit in africa--they ended up in Katanga with the knickname Les Affreux, one they earned by action.


From Modern Warfare: The interrogators must always strive not to injure the physical and moral integrity of individuals. Science can easily place at the army's disposition the means for obtaining what is sought

But we must not trifle with our responsibilities. It is deceitful to permit artillery or aviation to bomb villages and slaughter women and children, while the real enemy usually escapes, and to refuse interrogation specialists the right to seize the truly guilty terrorist and spare the innocent

There is a slippery cliff in that paragraph and the French lept over it.

Overall the theory sounds good but the author was in my opinion a French version of Klaus Barbie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Barbie)

Stick with Galula

Read Modern Warfare (http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/trinquier/trinquier.asp)

Tom

120mm
10-17-2008, 02:22 PM
I would add "criminals are universally punished" or else it fails as a deterrent or even as a concept. This is why the criminalization of "victimless" crimes undermines LE and correctional agencies. One becouse catching a high percentage of drug users and gamblers and simalier crimes is unlikely, two, becouse the manpower wasted on trying too, allows crimes such as car theft to be nearly free of risk of being caught.
Reed

Great points. Kind of like the adage about "not issuing an order you know will not be obeyed".

Or making promises you know you can't keep.

Or fighting a war against "terror".

jmm99
10-17-2008, 04:58 PM
and some comments (by no means final).

Galula was not lacking in my reading (see next); but Trinquier's brief discussion of community organizing, and consequent intelligence sources, seemed (IMO) to be the most on point summary of the process.

Galula's Counterinsurgency Warfare, in its operational chapter (chap. 7, pp.75-94), discusses a similar process in his 5th-7th steps (Local.Elections, Testing the Local Leaders & Organizing a Party at pp.89-92). Galula's model is more generalized and akin to organizing a local political party (been there, done that).

Trinquier's model is a more structured community group (subject to some centralized control) which is joined at the hip with the police and military to defeat the insurgents (or criminals). It seemed (IMO) more relevant to address the points made by Slap and 120mm (quoted in post # 46).

Galula goes into his application of the process in another freebie, which is here.


Pacification in Algeria 1956-1958
David Galula
New Foreword by Bruce Hoffman
Rand 2006
MG478
......
PART THREE
The Struggle for the Support of the Population
(pp. 139-210)

The link to the .pdf file (2.4 MB) is here.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG478-1/

This one, BTW, is a much better read (more interesting to me - lots of war stories) than his more formal work.

-------------------------------------------
There are three posts in a row here (Slap # 47, Moore # 48, Odom # 49), which should be discussed slowly - since we are discussing conceptual references, not cookbooks. And, we are dealing with situations and approaches that include the good, the bad and the ugly (the point made by Tom Odom in # 49).

- for non-Frenchies, Les Affreux = The Horribles. That tag name was applicable to many paramilitary groups in the Congo of those times. Wasn't there, but was fairly well read at the time about that sorry mess. Further discussion of Trinquier's ugly side (as to which I've some thoughts) would be a digression from this thread.

First, as to Slap's "A Theory of Crime Problems" (url in # 47), this is a simple (you can read it in a couple of minutes), but not simplistic, model based on a triangle of basic variables. This little thing grows on you as you sit back and think about it. Not only as to the examples given, but those you can imagine. For example, think of yourself as a victim and your house as a target. Who is the Guardian (in my case, moi); and what are the tools (home defense plans, capabilities, etc. - in my case, they exist). With not too much thought, these same basic concepts could be extended to an insurgency (which, in essence, both Trinquier and Galula do).

Bill Moore's comments (# 48) hit on a number of points that I simply have to take some time to think about - and have to read "Between Clausewitz and Mao" (I think that will be re-read, but I haven't got there yet). Expect I'll have more to say about the criminal-insurgent spectrum.

BTW, there is another thread, which is dealing with something of the same issue in Afghanistan - what is an insurgent ? - which is here.

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?p=58608#post58608

Finally, Bill Odom issues a caution (# 49), which is very factual - Horne's Savage War of Peace goes into all of that in detail. Won't be as absolute as Bill - but, then I ain't a colonel. ;)

My take on these sources is eclectic: Use the good; Sierra Charlie the bad and ugly - and pray God to have the wisdom to know the difference.

PS: - Bill Odom. Trinquier was a far deeper person than Barbie (albeit RT was misguided for religious reasons - reliance on an aberrant view of Thomist philosoiphy).

Those who are interested might want to Wiki such refs as Action Française and Cité catholique - all of that is right wing French politics, which underlay a lot of the OAS, Algeria, torture (as a redemptive cleansing of the terrorist !), etc.

The url ref. to Paul Aussaresses (linked in Odom # 49 at "torture on a broad" - have to consult Freud on that one) is also worth following up - going there takes us into areas that are well off-topic here.

jmm99
10-17-2008, 05:24 PM
Realized I already had this as soon as I saw the authors.


Between Clausewitz and Mao: Dynamic Evolutions of the Insurgency and Counterinsurgency in Iraq (2003-2008)
Thomas Renard and Stéphane Taillat

http://smallwarsjournal.com/mag/docs-temp/111-renard.pdf

A nice guy:


Lieutenant (réserve) Stéphane TAILLAT
Régiment d'Infanterie-Chars de Marine (RICM)

Hey Stéphane, Colonialement

slapout9
10-17-2008, 05:25 PM
jmm99, I think you mean Tom Odom not Bill Odom on your post #51.

Tom Odom
10-17-2008, 05:26 PM
PS: - Bill Odom. Trinquier was a far deeper person than Barbie (albeit RT was misguided for religious reasons - reliance on an aberrant view of Thomist philosoiphy).

Bill Who?:D

Probably so on Barbie--to our great disgrace we hired that SOB in the post-war era as an anti-communist advisor

Les Affreux I know from my Congo research and writing. Trinquier was not alone by any means and I would attribute much of what they did to the ends justifies the means that characterized virtually all colonial/frontier armies including the US on occasion. God was always a favorite reason and still is.

I also spent some time on OP with French Naval commandos, Marine Infantry, and Legionaires--one of whom was a rehabilitated 1st Parachute Regiment and OAS member. A few shots of Pernod and it was off to the bloody pulpit against the great DeGaulle sell out.

Bill, ehh Tom

jmm99
10-17-2008, 05:35 PM
Also, here is Bill Moore's SWJblog comment on the Stéphane's article. Another conceptual piece worth reading.

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2008/10/between-clausewitz-and-mao/

jmm99
10-17-2008, 05:39 PM
for linking you to the After World - I did promote you though :D

-------------------------------
For those interested in the Congo 1964-1965, you will want to read a mini-tome by then MAJ Thomas P. Odom - Dragon Operations: Hostage Rescues in the Congo, 1964-1965, Combat Studies Institute, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College; Leavenworth Papers No. 14.

Here is the index to the LP series (you have a choice between .html and .pdf).

http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/csi.asp#papers

jmm99
10-17-2008, 06:27 PM
if Jedburgh can give some help on the second.

The SWC thread is here.

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=2326

Human Factors Considerations of Undergrounds in Insurgencies, Department of the Army Pamphlet 550-104, 1966, is still here.

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/p4013coll9&CISOPTR=85

Jedbugh added:


The Human Factors DA Pam linked above was the second product of the Special Operations Research Office on undergrounds. Here is the first: SORO, Nov 63: ... Complete 349 page document at the link.

But, no url for the link :(

Searched at cgsc without success just now. Jedburgh or anyone else - please the link if not too much trouble. Thanks in advance.

Tom Odom
10-17-2008, 06:33 PM
Now that I am back among the living. Merci Mingi

Also on mercs and related matters in the Congo

Shaba II: The French and Belgian Intervention in Zaire in 1978 (http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/odom2/odom2.asp)
Lieutenant Colonel Thomas P. Odom

jmm99
10-17-2008, 07:55 PM
= Thanks what or who ?

Contribute to my linguistic learning, as I dl your second mini-tome. :)

Mike

Tom Odom
10-17-2008, 07:59 PM
= Thanks what or who ?

Contribute to my linguistic learning, as I dl your second mini-tome. :)

Mike

that would be thanks much!