The New York Times printed a great story on police and the impact we have on crime. It also focused on spending for police versus the spending for incarceration. In the story Lawrence W. Sherman, an American criminologist on the faculties of the University of Maryland and Cambridge University in Britain is quoted saying “The United States today is the only country I know of that spends more on prisons than police,” . “In England and Wales, the spending on police is twice as high as on corrections. In Australia it’s more than three times higher. In Japan it’s seven times higher. Only in the United States is it lower, and only in our recent history.” The story goes on to focus on the relationship between more police on the street and lower crime rate. Here's the link to the article http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/nyregion/police-have-done-more-than-prisons-to-cut-crime-in-new-york.html?hp&_r=3&pagewanted=all
The NY Times article's focus matches up with a news story by Duluth's ABC station on the additional police stationed in the area of the Last Place on Earth and how their presence is making a difference. Here is that story http://www.wdio.com/article/stories/S2916418.shtml?cat=10335
So, how about cutting the Department of Corrections budget and giving that money to communities with higher crime areas to hire more police officers?
Good idea chief! But I bet the DOC won't like it! We need to spend more on police and do more community policing initiatives.
ReplyDeleteMakes sense. . .but aren't you generally advocating longer prison sentences for property crimes offenders? Would you suggest offsetting those longer sentences (and incarceration costs) by reducing other sentencing guidelines?
ReplyDeleteI would like to see longer sentences for property crimes, but here's the premise; if we had more cops we could prevent more crime and thus less people would go to prison.
ReplyDeleteI've never really thought about the question: does increased policing reduce crime by deterring people from committing crimes or by catching, convicting, and incarcerating people who would otherwise commit crimes? No doubt some of both happen, but it sounds like you think the deterrence effect is more important than the "preventative detention" effect.
ReplyDeletePrevention doesnt work for career habitual criminals and many criminals are such. Only with more police and a better trained force, they are training all the time...can we reduce crime, yet the laws on the books often offer probation to repeat offenders as well and these need to be changed
ReplyDeletePrevention isnt effective with habitual repetitive criminals, many of wich are in Duluth.
ReplyDeleteA thank you to the Duluth Police Department for catching the thief who'd steal Henry Bank's cell phone...it is such efforts like this that do more than prevention can with felony level criminals. He would not get the cell phone back but your response to help was both professional and curtious and fast, chief! Thank you for doing a good job for citizens. Herb Bergson would say that choosing you was the best decision he made, I agree!
ReplyDelete