Rise And Fall Of Violent Crime Rates Linked to Leaded Gasoline
There is an article by Kevin Drum at Mother Jones that should be required reading for everyone, titled America’s Real Criminal Element: Lead.
Here is the basic assertion: the rise of violent crime rates in the 60′s and 70′s, and the subsequent decline in the 90′s, looks to be causally related to the prevalence of lead in gasoline used after WWII. The evidence supporting this assertion is quite strong. Read the article.
This article, if it gets the attention it deserves, could represent a paradigm shift in how we look at crime rates and the allocation of resources to reduce crime. Here’s an excerpt from the article:
At the same time that we should reassess the low level of attention we pay to the remaining hazards from lead, we should probably also reassess the high level of attention we’re giving to other policies. Chief among these is the prison-building boom that started in the mid-’70s. As crime scholar William Spelman wrote a few years ago, states have “doubled their prison populations, then doubled them again, increasing their costs by more than $20 billion per year”—money that could have been usefully spent on a lot of other things. And while some scholars conclude that the prison boom had an effect on crime, recent research suggests that rising incarceration rates suffer from diminishing returns: Putting more criminals behind bars is useful up to a point, but beyond that we’re just locking up more people without having any real impact on crime. What’s more, if it’s true that lead exposure accounts for a big part of the crime decline that we formerly credited to prison expansion and other policies, those diminishing returns might be even more dramatic than we believe. We probably overshot on prison construction years ago; one doubling might have been enough. Not only should we stop adding prison capacity, but we might be better off returning to the incarceration rates we reached in the mid-’80s.
If this shift happens, a sociological theory used aggressively by politicians like Rudy Giuliani called the broken window theory may finally get the criticism it deserves.
The link above is to the city of Missoula’s official website, where the application of the broken window theory by local law enforcement is proudly trumpeted:
The term “Broken Windows” comes from the metaphor used to describe this concept.
“If a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and no one is in charge.”
This theory says that the little things matter.
New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani adopted the Broken Windows Theory and implemented a community-policing strategy focused on order maintenance. Graffiti was washed nightly from subway cars, subway turnstile jumpers arrested and trash picked up among other things. Minor, seemingly insignificant, quality-of-life crimes were found to be the tipping point for violent crime. When New York “windows” were repaired, crime dropped.
The Missoula Police Department has made the Broken Windows theory an integral part of our law enforcement strategy, with the emphasis on maintaining our high standard standard of living we currently enjoy today.
One of the localized consequences of the alleged success of this “theory” was Missoula’s city council passing an ordinance banning
panhandling aggressive solicitation back in August of 2009:
The ordinance prohibits begging in an “aggressive manner,” such as touching a person without asking, following someone being solicited and using violence. It prohibits telling lies to get money, and it also bans soliciting in some public places, such as near ATMs and within six feet of an entrance to a building.
Councilors voted 7-4 to adopt the main ordinance, with opponents saying it appeared the rules wouldn’t be equally enforced among all solicitors. They didn’t want to pass a law that inadvertently banned the kinds of solicitations many community members support, such as high schoolers holding up signs for free car washes. The following council members voted against the ordinance: Jason Wiener, Pam Walzer, Stacy Rye and Marilyn Marler. Councilman Bob Jaffe was absent.
Wiener, who represents the downtown area, said he could back the rules that clamp down on aggressive acts. But he suggested striking the portion of the law that outlines the places and distances where people may and may not solicit – aggressively or otherwise.
He said with a “wink and a nod,” it appeared that part of the ordinance was going to be selectively enforced. And the new rules mean even peaceful people can’t ask for anything at all in some places, like 20 feet from from an outdoor patio or cafe.
Understanding that lead appears to be a significant environmental factor in the increase in violent crime rates across the country doesn’t take away from the need to address violent crime when it occurs, but I do hope a better understanding of root causes will inform future social responses we, as a community and a country, take.
Last October, the Missoulian reported that our local jail is consistently full due, in part, to our new municipal judge’s abandonment of treatment courts. Continuing on this path will inevitably lead to the need to build a bigger jail, and doing that will require lots of money.
If that is the path we choose, I have a suggestion how we could generate some of the money. Aggressively enforce open container laws across the socioeconomic strata of Missoula.
That would mean instead of just “transients” getting tickets they can’t/won’t pay (leading to expensive time spent in jail) Missoulians walking around with plastic cups of wine on First Fridays and tailgating Griz fans can be ticketed as well.
Yeah, like that would happen.