In how much DANGER are we?

The Safe Neighborhood Act exists because crime exists in California, this is true. California is by no means a safe place for everyone, but California is also a very large place with a large population, often living in large urban cities. So yeah, things get complicated and crime definitely exists. However, to say that California is a very dangerous place or that things are getting worse is by no means an accurate depiction of the changes in California crimes.

I do not want to simply point to the Safe Neighborhood Act, because the idea that California is full of failed crime prevention attempts appears to be a very common conception of California government.

Indeed, policies such as the Three Strikes Act have been ineffective; policies architected by some of the same authors of the Safe Neighborhood Act also contribute to the notion that crime is uncontrollable because of ineffective policy (though this act really didn’t contribute to crime reduction). In reality, though, California has significantly reduced its crime rate and is not at a cataclysmic point in its history.

The crime rate in California has been monitored for the last 56 years. Though the crime rate is significantly lower than it was then, California experienced a huge increase in both property and violent crime rate before it dropped. “The violent crime rate was on a general increase from 1983 to 1992, when it peaked at 1,103.9. Since then, the rate has seen annual decreases, dropping a total of 53.0 percent.”

The crime rate for 2006 further shows the significant drop to a rate of 518.4 per every 100,000 population. More recent years, however, show that California property crime rate has increased by 13 percent, while violent crime rate had decreased by 7.8 percent.

Now, the fight against crime is by no means over by virtue of the crime reduction in California, however, acknowledgement could be appropriate. The later ‘90s really decreased crime; this is not to say that it was all correctly done. Prisons are currently overcrowded and require an immense amount of money to maintain. Additionally, imprisonment is not an indicator of a healthy society. Also, the end of the decade saw an increase in especially property crime that took a significant setback to the “progress” made. Crime reduced since the ‘80s, but the action of imprisoning did not fix future setbacks.

Certainly, prevention programs and investmenting in schools does not increase crime. Simply overcrowding jails or building more to accommodate inmates does not prevent future crimes. This becomes a burden on society, and an injustice to those who have not been properly met by society and are vulnerable to become engaged in unlawful criminal activities.

In no way do I believe that violent are okay in society. By no means do I believe that this issue should not be addressed because crime is not as alarming as it once was. Contrary to this, prevention and intervention programs are essential to further reduce harm and prevent people from falling into a situation where criminal activities become an outlet.

Crimes exist and they are unfortunate to those who become victims and to those who for a number of reasons engage in crime, however, California is not a failed policy case study (at least everything). Policies should not scare voters into propositions that might jail more adults and minors more so than addressing the issues that catalyze crime in the first place.


Please visit the website below for more information.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Crime in California 2005
http://ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/candd/cd05/preface.pdf