Abstract
The reduction of the crime rate in the 90s caught many unaware. There were no expectations whatsoever that various factors would conspire to make America a safer place. Before this period, New York was considered the most unsafe city in the world to live. This is no longer the case as New York has become safe. Various analysts have put have various theory in an attempt to explain this phenomenon. The existence of various explanations means that people interpreted the situation differently. Whether the same phenomenon can go on forever is questionable. In the world today where economic matters play a significant role, security stands tall as a crucial factor shaping investments. Most governments tend to do a lot of work to ensure that investors find a reason to invest in a given place. Yet despite all attempts, only a secure place can attract competent investors. This paper aims to address the massive decline in the rates of crime in the 1990s in America, with special focus on New York
Introduction
In the 1990s through 2000s, there was a sharp decline of crimes in the US, with New York leading in the reduction rate. Reports indicate that homicide, for instance, decreased by a massive 43 per cent. There was a 29 percent decrease in the violent and property crime index as reported by the Federal Bureau of Investigations. Interestingly, such a phenomenon was not predicted, and was without any warning. If anything, the sharp decline in the rate of crimes was inconsistent with what experts had predicted early, that the 90s would see a significant increase in crime rates. This paper analyses the dramatic crime reduction in the US during the stipulated time. It seeks to give reasons that caused this to happen, whether it is possible for the trend to continue in future and why New York, in particular, performed so well in the reduction of crimes. In addition to the above information, the paper will analyze some of the authors who can supply insight into this crime reduction.
Reasons for the Decrease in Crime during this Period
Increased policing/Increase in the number of the police
Police represent the government agency responsible for curbing crime. As such, they form the first line of defense. There is vast evidence connecting the correlation between the crime rate in the 1990s in US and the number of police officers at the time (Zimring., 2011). Whenever there is an increase in the number of crimes, the government tends to react by increasing the number of police officers. In the 90s, this trick was used. According to reports by FBI, there was a significant increase in the number of police officers. Per capita, the number was increased by up to 14 percent, that is, between fifty thousand and sixty thousand officers were increased. In the history of the US, this was the greatest increase to be witnessed (Crime Rates., n.d). Despite this, the expectations were that the increase would be higher, based on the Omnibus Crime Bill of 1994. Analysts have argued that this move alone (increasing the number of police officers) contributed to about one-seventh of the crime reduction.
There were concerns as to whether the move to increase the number of police officers in order to curb the crime rates was cost-effective. Reports indicate that a fourteen percent increase in the police force cost the nation up to $8.4 billion a year. It would be difficult to argue whether the increase was justified, taking into account that crime reduction can’t be quantified. The sharp decline of the crime rate during this time, however, vindicates the move.
The increase in prison population
In the history of the United States of America, the 90s present the decade when there was a significant increase in the number of people behind bars. The mid 70s had witnessed the expansion of the prison population amid early calm. By the end of the 90s, approximately two million people had been incarcerated at some point. This number was roughly four times higher the number in the 70s. This begs the question, what facilitated the increased incarceration? Research shows that this was due to the increased revocation of parole, imprisonment of drug-related offences and longer sentences being meted against those convicted (Zimring., 2011).
One would inquire how the above contributed to a reduction in crime. First, the increase in the rates of imprisonment means that more and more offenders were locked in prison, hence they were evacuated from the streets where they execute the crimes. By being imprisoned, they would not be available to commit the crimes, in what has been termed as the incapacitation effect. Secondly, the ‘deterrence effect’ came into play. The main reason for imprisonment is to deter potential offenders fear going ahead to commit crimes. The threat of dire consequences is enough to warn potential criminals against executing their ill-minds. Eventually, the intended purpose was served (Cohen & Land., 2007). The criminals were locked up in prison while potential offenders retracted because of the fear of being punished. This worked positively to the reduction of the crimes in the United States of America.
The Receding Crack Epidemic
The year 1985 witnessed rapid growth of the market for crack cocaine. Crack cocaine had a twofold effect: first, it boosted the sale of cocaine. Second, it made cocaine users popular and common among the consumers. This business plummeted in the late 80s, leading to violence among the rival gangs who were competing to control the sales.
Cracking the sale of cocaine played a significant role in the decline of crimes in the 90s, particularly homicide. It is important to note that the sellers of this substance were mainly black kids under the age of 25 years. Homicide was increasingly associated with them, hence the assumption that drug use and sale affected them. With the increased police force during the time, the police were instructed to be hot on the heels of the perpetrators of cocaine. Within few months, several black youths were arrested and convicted in drug-related charges (Zimring., 2011). This resulted in a sharp decline in the usage of drugs. The fact that murder cases reduced significantly after this move is prove that this was one of the major reasons for the sharp decline in the rate of crime at the time.
The move to legalize abortion
The decision in the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade (1973) has been heavily touted as having a direct impact on the reduction of the rate of crime in the US. There is adequate evidence to suggest that legalizing abortion would have a positive impact later on as regards to the reduction of the crime rates. The question is, how did legalizing abortion promote the drastic decrease of the crime rates in America?
Two premises have been given for this. First, there is a general consensus that ‘unwanted children’ pose a greater risk for crime. Secondly, that legalizing abortion would mean a massive reduction in unwanted births. Zimring argues that there is a correlation between crime and undesired effect of an adverse home (Zimring, 2011). Children raised in difficulties by unstable homes were twice likely to engage in criminal activities when compared to those raised in stable families. By legalizing abortion, it would mean that there would be a reduction in the number of unwanted children. On a similar note, parents of unwanted births are more likely to develop psychological problems that may lead them to commit crimes. For instance, if a rape victim gives birth, chances are high that they will develop a negative attitude to the child and develop resent to the other gender. By legalizing abortion, women were in a position to make better choices, whether to keep the pregnancy or note. This had a direct impact on the crime reduction in the US in the 70s (Azfar., 2010).
The Strong Economy in the 90s
The 90s period witnessed a sustained economic growth in the US. Between the year 1991 and 2001, there was an increase of up to 30 percent of the GDP per capita. As a result, there was a decrease in the unemployment rate to 4.8 percent in 2001 from the 6.8 in 1991. Evidence shows that unemployment is one of the causes of criminal behavior in humans. Empirically, the drop in the unemployment rate at the time can be said to have had a positive impact in reducing the rate of crimes. Comparably, the eras when the unemployment rate is high are characterized by an increase in the crime rate (Zimring., 2011). Because of this, analysts argue that the economic growth played a role in the reduction of the rates of crime.
It is intriguing to note that in the entire country, New York City recorded the highest rate of crime reduction. This is extremely unbelievable, taking into account the fact that New York had been termed as being the most unsafe city to live in around the 1970s. In addition to the factors given above that prompted the sharp decline in the rate of crime, New York had its own parameters that saw it lead. According to Zimrig, the move by Guliani to introduce the ‘zero tolerance’ approach proved to be important. This approach was used as the threshold to deal with criminals in the city. Effectively, it was not meant to address major crimes alone, even misdemeanors were inacceptable in the eyes of Guliani. The intention was to clean the city.
The approach that police officers used in New York City also proved to be effective. The New York Police Department, during this time combined the harm reduction approach and the strategic policing approach. Interestingly, the police in New York engaged in a clean-up exercise, where they went after guns, targeted open-air drug markets among many other moves. They never attacked the drug users (Zimring., 2011). By cutting the drug supply, the users would not have any supply. It is this strategic approach that boosted New York’s crime rate reduction.
Whether it is possible for the decline to continue forever
The decrease in the rate of crime in the United States cannot continue forever. Most of the factors discussed above that contributed to the decline cannot be maintained, will come a point when the rate will increase again.
A good example is considering the change of legislations and the impact this may have on the crime rate. As espoused above, the Supreme Court case which legalized abortion played a significant role in decreasing the rate of crime in America. Today, that is not the position. As a matter of fact, the way abortion was handled during the 70s is not the same way it is handled at the moment. Abortion has been criminalized, and anybody found taking part in it will likely be incarcerated. It would also be impossible to keep on increasing the number of the police to cope up with crime. Criminals are finding newer ways of doing things (Crime Rates., n.d). With the advancement of technology, for instance, police find challenges in curbing drug use. It would, therefore, be wrong to imagine that the reduction of the crime rates will continue forever.
My critical thinking opinion on the crime reduction
A decrease in the rate of crime in any country has a positive impact. For such a decline to be realized, there is no doubt that the government must heavily invest and introduce tough laws for the common good. One such move by the government in the 90s was to increase the police force by fourteen percent. To some extent, this might seem as an expensive move, because the increased police force will command a lot more money. In the case of the 90s, the 14percent increase cost the government around $8 billion. With all due respect, this is a lot of money.
Despite this, comparing the impact that the reduction of crime has with the amount invested would point out to a wise investment. Crime is a major threat to the economy. Crime pushes away investors. Such an eventuality is likely to push away potential investors. Research shows that safe working environments tend to attract investors, thereby boosting the economy. The yields realizable, with time, overcome the amount of cash invested to boost security. With this being the case, therefore, the crime reduction was fully justified for the development of America.
Conclusion
Security is a sensitive matter when it comes to having a successful economic environment. Because of this, the American government has invested heavily in the sector to ensure that investors are encouraged to consider America. It would be prudent for the government to try the trick used in the 90s. There is no doubt that this will work.
References
Azfar, O., & Gurgur, T. (n.d.). Government Effectiveness, Crime Rates and Crime Reporting.SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.723681
Cohen, L. E., & Land, K. C. (2007). Age Structure and Crime: Symmetry Versus Asymmetry and the Projection of Crime Rates Through the 1990s. American Sociological Review,52(2), 170. doi:10.2307/2095446
Crime Rates. (n.d.). The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America: An Encylopedia. doi:10.4135/9781452218427.n160
Zimring, F. E. (2011). A Safe City Now? The City that Became SafeNew York’s Lessons for Urban Crime and Its Control, 28-48. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199844425.003.0002
