« Speaking to Libertarian convention, Donald Trump promises to commute prison sentence of Silk Road creator Ross Ulbricht | Main | Any suggestions for whom else Donald Trump might pledge to free from federal prison "on day one" back in the Oval Office? »
May 26, 2024
Homicides still way down as weather (and crime politics) heats up in 2024
A few days ago, I received an alert from my local paper about this article reporting that "data from the Columbus Division of Police showed that the city is experiencing some of the lowest levels of violence in a decade." According to this press piece, the biggest city in Ohio has recorded only 18 murders in this calendar year, compared to 41 at this time last year. The article also flagged that a number of other cities have also seen significant homicide declines.
Conveniently and encouragingly, Jeff Asher posted yesterday this new substack entry detailing that Columbus, Ohio is not alone in experiencing a significant homicide decline to start 2024. Folks should read his full posting for lots more context and details, but here are some highlights:
[M]urder is down around 20 percent in 2024 in more than 180 cities with available data this year compared to a comparable timeframe last year (as of the moment of this piece's publication). Murder is down 20.5 percent in 183 cities with available data through at least January, down 20.2 percent in 174 cities with data through at least February, and down 20.8 percent in 59 cities with data through at least March 20....
We could still see, and perhaps should expect to see the sample's murder decline to regress towards a more normal rate of decline as the year goes on. It's only April and there is a ton of time left in 2024 for these figures to regress, but murder is down roughly twice as much with a sample that’s twice as large as what we had last year at this time.... Murder is down more than 30 percent at the moment in Washington DC, New Orleans, Las Vegas, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Detroit, Columbus, Nashville, Philadelphia, and I could keep going....
It's not just murder data in cities pointing to a large decline. Shooting data from the Gun Violence Archive shows a decline of around 12 percent in terms of shooting victims through March compared to 2023. This matches the trend of declining shootings in 20 of the 25 cities with available shooting data through at least February this year.
As readers may recall from prior posts, 2023 brought a considerable (perhaps historic) decline in homicides in the US compared to 2022 (which saw a small decline in homicides after very significant increases in homicides throughout the US in 2020 and 2021). And my check today at the latest AH Datalytics' collection of homicide data for 2024 from 250+ US cities shows now an 18.8% cumulative decline(!) in murders across the nation's cities through more than the first third of 2024. And a number of big cities are showing even bigger 2024 declines from police reports: Washington DC and Milwaukee homicides are down around 25%; Cleveland, Dallas and Phoenix homicides are down nearly 30%; Baltimore, Columbus, New Orleans and Philadelphia homicides are down more than 40%.
I am not sure criminologists have a clear story for why we are not seeing historicthe homicide declines, but the many hundreds of fewer murders to start 2024 is certainly something to celebrate and to hope continue. (I noted in a prior post that the 2023 and 2024 declines in homicide come at a time of relatively low use of the death penalty and relatively lower rates of incarceration by US standards.) Of course, these remarkable homicide numbers could change in the months ahead, and the hotter weather of summer months historically bring an uptick in homicides.
Also sure to heat up this summer are crime politics. I flagged in this post yesterday a recent Politico article quoting aides of President Biden suggesting the Pesident was planning to embrace tougher approaches on crime and immigration. And today bring this lengthy New York Times piece headlined "Even as Violent Crime Drops, Lawlessness Rises as an Election Issue." Here is a small excerpt:
Homicide rates are tumbling from pandemic highs in most cities, funding for law enforcement is rising, and tensions between the police and communities of color, while still significant, are no longer at a boiling point. But property crime, carjackings and smash-and-grab burglaries are up, adding to a sense of lawlessness, amplified on social media and local online message boards.
Mr. Trump is re-upping his blunt, visceral appeal to voter anxieties. He declared recently that “crime is rampant and out of control like never before,” promised to shoot shoplifters, embraced the “back the blue” slogan against liberal changes to police departments — and even falsely accused the F.B.I. of fabricating positive crime data to bolster Mr. Biden.
Mr. Biden, in response, is taking a more low-key approach. He has spotlighted improving violent crime rates, promoted vast increases in funding to law enforcement under his watch and pointed to an aggressive push on gun control, as well as a revived effort to hold local departments accountable for discriminatory and dangerous policing practices in Black and brown neighborhoods.
May 26, 2024 at 03:55 PM | Permalink
Comments
The narrative of lawlessness is unfortunately working for Republicans despite facts to the contrary. The Democrats need to hammer on the fact that homicides have declined since 2022 to reaffirm to need for criminal justice reforms. Incarceration does not lower crime rates and Democrats need to meet its constituency halfway with aims to lower incarceration rates and push for a degree of sentencing reforms.
Posted by: Anon | May 27, 2024 10:57:22 AM
The narrative of lawlessness is unfortunately working for Republicans despite facts to the contrary. The Democrats need to hammer on the fact that homicides have declined since 2022 to reaffirm to need for criminal justice reforms. Incarceration does not lower crime rates and Democrats need to meet its constituency halfway with aims to lower incarceration rates and push for a degree of sentencing reforms.
Posted by: Anon | May 27, 2024 10:57:23 AM
The stats are irrefutable: as the death penalty declines, so does the murder rate.
Posted by: anon | May 27, 2024 5:13:17 PM
anon --
I'm less interested in stats than in justice. The idea that something less than the death penalty is justice for McVeigh, the Boston Marathon bomber, Dylann Roof or Ted Bundy, etc., is not merely misguided but preposterous.
If you want the DP used cautiously, fine. If you want to bar its use ever no matter what, you're in a small minority of people who simply don't want to see the real world.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 27, 2024 6:42:18 PM
I believe that our current DP regime is haphazard enough that it likely has no discernible effect on actual crime rates. I fully agree with Mr. Otis that as a matter of desert that there are plenty deserving who are spared. I can wish that it were otherwise, but as the old saw goes, 'wish in one hand ...'.
Posted by: Soronel Haetir | May 27, 2024 8:40:09 PM
Soronel --
Correct. The DP is not carried out nearly often enough to have very much of a deterrent effect. That of course would change is we increased the number of executions.
The fact that some people get away with less than they have coming to them is inevitable, but is not a reason to abstain from just punishment in those instances where the culprit has been captured and convicted after a fair trial.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 27, 2024 8:53:56 PM
But there's no evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to homicides. 23 states have abolished the death penalty and it's on the books for the remaining 27 states. However, 6 of those 27 states have placed a moratorium on the death penalty. For example, Massachusetts abolished the death penalty and the state hasn't seen a spike in murders. The same for New York.
In addition, states that have capital punishments are not monoliths. It's particular counties within a state that request the death penalty. Texas has 254 counties yet Texas death row inmates are from less than 50 counties. Only three counties (Harris, Smith and Tarrant) have imposed more than one death sentence since 2019.
Posted by: Anon | May 27, 2024 11:57:44 PM
Anon --
"But there's NO EVIDENCE that the death penalty is a deterrent to homicides." (emphasis added)
That's completely false. There's plenty of evidence of the death penalty's deterrent value (and about an equal amount of evidence the other way).
https://deathpenalty.procon.org/questions/does-the-death-penalty-deter-crime/
In addition, and as I noted but you ignore, deterrence, while one benefit of the DP, is not the only or even the main benefit. For some ghastly crimes, it's the only punishment consistent with the Eighth Amendment that comes close to justice.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 28, 2024 10:42:47 AM
Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and unusual punishment. You mention ghastly crimes, but that phrase is arbitrary and subjective.
Posted by: Anon | May 28, 2024 2:20:31 PM
Anon --
So you're not disputing that your prior statement that "there's no evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to homicides" is false. Good. Then why did you make that claim in the first place?
"Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and unusual punishment."
And the Supreme Court has repeatedly held over the last 50 years or so that the DP per se is not a violation of the Eighth Amendment, not so?
"You mention ghastly crimes, but that phrase is arbitrary and subjective."
Will you admit that McVeigh's crime(killing over 160 people) was ghastly however that term might sanely be defined?
Will you admit that the Boston Marathon bomber's crime (blowing up an eight year-old to bleed to death in his father's arms) was ghastly?
Will you admit that Dylann Roof's crime (gunning down multiple black parishoners out of racial hate) was ghastly?
Will you admit that Ted Bundy's crimes (serial sex/murders of coeds) were ghastly?
Or is it that murder victims are to be dismissed as human garbage so that you can make excuses for the killers?
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 28, 2024 3:16:46 PM
Mr. Otis, it is hard to take you seriously when you say in rapid succession "The DP is not carried out nearly often enough to have very much of a deterrent effect. That of course would change is we increased the number of executions" and "There's plenty of evidence of the death penalty's deterrent value (and about an equal amount of evidence the other way)."
When you equate opposing the death penalty to dismissing victims as "human garbage" you ratify your lack of seriousness.
I would note you ignore the point that non DP states consistently have lower murder rates than DP states.
Posted by: 4 Justice | May 28, 2024 4:00:45 PM
4 Justice --
"Mr. Otis, it is hard to take you seriously..."
I don't care if anonymous commenters with no stated credentials take me seriously.
"...when you say in rapid succession "The DP is not carried out nearly often enough to have very much of a deterrent effect. That of course would change is we increased the number of executions..."
Do you disagree with that statement, and if so on what basis?
"...and "There's plenty of evidence of the death penalty's deterrent value (and about an equal amount of evidence the other way)."
Do you disagree with that statement, and if so on what basis?
"When you equate opposing the death penalty to dismissing victims as 'human garbage' you ratify your lack of seriousness."
When you get on your high horse with not one word of even pretend concern for victims, you ratify my skepticism.
"I would note you ignore the point that non DP states consistently have lower murder rates than DP states."
And I would note that cities with the strictest gun control laws have many more murders than cities with less strict gun control laws. Does that mean strict gun control laws cause murder? No, of course not. It means that jurisdictions with the biggest problem adopt the most stringent solution.
Same with the DP.
P.S. The idea that McVeigh should have been given a mere term of years for killing over 160 people, 19 of them six years of age or less, is preposterous (which is why you walk past mentioning McVeigh).
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 28, 2024 11:15:39 PM
My credentials are I have been a public defender for 30 years.
If you can't see the contradiction between saying that more executions would lead to greater deterrence and saying there is equal evidence that the death penalty does and does not result in deterrence, I don't know how to help you.
I am sympathetic toward victims and the families of victims, including those who oppose the death penalty who prosecutors often ignore. http://mvfhr.org/
Gun control and the death penalty are not equivalent. I'm not actually a fan of gun control as currently practiced and won't defend it.
As to the death penalty, if the states with the highest murder rates have been adopting it since 1975 and they still have the highest murder rates doesn't that suggest it is not working.
"The idea that McVeigh should have been given a mere term of years for killing over 160 people, 19 of them six years of age or less, is preposterous"
Why is it preposterous? Why is state sponsored killing preferable to incarceration. There is no argument here just an assertion.
And if you dont' care whether you are taken seriously why spend time typing?
Posted by: 4 Justice | May 29, 2024 10:45:39 AM
4 Justice --
-- "My credentials are I have been a public defender for 30 years." My condolences. Hearing that many lies from that many clients after all that time must be quite grating. Unless they're all wonderful people.
-- "If you can't see the contradiction between saying that more executions would lead to greater deterrence and saying there is equal evidence that the death penalty does and does not result in deterrence, I don't know how to help you."
There is no contradiction, and if there were you'd have zip interest in helping me anyway. That's just an Internet throwaway line. You direct your efforts elsewhere.
-- "I am sympathetic toward victims and the families of victims..."
What specific actions have you undertaken to show that sympathy?
"...including those who oppose the death penalty who prosecutors often ignore."
Prosecutors are hired to serve the interests of the public and do not work for individual persons regardless of their views on the death penalty. If a point be made of it, though, most victims' families want the DP. This is especially true in cases of sex/torture/murder -- the kinds of cases that get PD offices all atwitter.
Me: "The idea that McVeigh should have been given a mere term of years for killing over 160 people, 19 of them six years of age or less, is preposterous"
You: "Why is it preposterous? Why is state sponsored killing preferable to incarceration. There is no argument here just an assertion."
If you don't understand why the DP for McVeigh is just -- as the huge majority of the country does -- then, to quote someone on this thread, I don't know how to help you.
"And if you dont' care whether you are taken seriously why spend time typing?
I don't care about anonymous writers who get all giddy over, and spend their professional lives catering to, killers. Correct. Fortunately, there are many others -- a majority -- who read the comments on this thread.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 29, 2024 11:50:41 AM
The fact that Bill writes off public defenders as people who spend their professional career catering to killers shows his disregard, or lack of knowledge, about the criminal system and the Sixth Amendment. I suppose it takes an extreme degree of callousness to support the prosecution at all times.
Posted by: Anon | May 29, 2024 2:04:20 PM
Anon --
I asked you these questions and would still be interested in your answers.
In response to my saying that there are ghastly crimes for which the DP is just, you replied, "You mention ghastly crimes, but that phrase is arbitrary and subjective."
Will you admit that McVeigh's crime(killing over 160 people) was ghastly however that term might sanely be defined?
Will you admit that the Boston Marathon bomber's crime (blowing up an eight year-old to bleed to death in his father's arms) was ghastly?
Will you admit that Dylann Roof's crime (gunning down multiple black parishoners out of racial hate) was ghastly?
Will you admit that Ted Bundy's crimes (serial sex/murders of coeds) were ghastly?
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 29, 2024 3:23:05 PM
Anon - you will not it is all ad hominem attacks with no hint of intelligent argument. That he can't understand why his admitting the lack of evidence that the DP is a deterrent undermines his argument that the DP is a deterrent demonstrates his inability to make an intelligent argument. Like most conservatives he apparently hates the Constitution.
Posted by: 4 Justice | May 29, 2024 3:28:27 PM
4 Justice --
If there's anyone who hates the Constitution, it would be those who keep snarling -- despite its text and consistent interpretation, including by the present Court -- that it outlaws the death penalty. It doesn't.
P.S. Since Anon seems less than eager to answer, I'm wondering if you might want to reply to my questions earlier in this thread about whether McVeigh, the Boston Marathon bomber, Dylann Rood and Ted Bundy committed ghastly crimes.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 29, 2024 4:32:21 PM
Anon stated: “ Bill writes off public defenders as people who spend their professional career catering to killers…”
Meanwhile at the riots on the law school campuses…
Defense attorneys ❤️ Hamas.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 29, 2024 4:34:39 PM
Bill-
All of the crimes you listed for horrible crimes and some acts of terrorism. However, I would not sentence any of these individuals to death, despite these crimes being "ghastly." I still oppose capital punishment.
Posted by: Anon | May 29, 2024 11:07:30 PM
Tarls
What riots on law school campuses? I'm aware that people are peaceably protesting at college campuses against the genocide of Palestinians. In fact, that activity is protected by the First Amendment.
Posted by: Anon | May 29, 2024 11:09:07 PM
Anon,
They were damaging and vandalizing buildings and not allowing Jewish students (physically blocking and threatening them) to walk through campus.
That is not “peaceably protesting” and is not 1A protected activity. Neither is blocking traffic during morning commutes protected. Not to mention, even protected speech can be vile.
There is no genocide in Gaza. In fact, only one side is routinely breaking international law and that is your buddies in Hamas. Killing citizens to achieve a military objective is not a war crime. Using citizens as shields is. Stealing foreign aid for citizens is a war crime. October 7 was a war crime. The same side is the only one calling for genocide. (“From the river to the see…”).
Thanks for jumping in to make my point.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 30, 2024 1:51:03 AM
Changing the subject, a tried and true practice of those with no intelligent argument on their side. While unlike you I don't presume to speak for all public defenders, as the child of a concentration camp survivor I do not love Hamas. On the other hand some might say the crowds you are condemning include "some very fine people." I imagine you will be voting for Trump to usher in the "unified Reich."
Posted by: 4 Justice | May 30, 2024 12:41:01 PM
4 Justice,
You imagine a lot. I loudly opposed Trump when he first announced he was running in 2016 and have done so consistently since. Many here can attest to that.
You put “unified Reich” in quotes. When did Trump call for such a thing? That’s a weird thing to do, since Trump has been the most pro-Israel POTUS in history.
The discussion was about “catering to killers,” so I did not change the subject. An outsized number of defense attorneys and public defenders do ❤️ Hamas. The protests are filled with law school students, most of whom are not likely on track to be DAs upon graduation. Let’s hope they cannot get jobs.
https://nypost.com/2023/11/01/opinion/why-is-bronx-defenders-union-siding-with-hamas/
If you read the link, that particular group had already been sued (and lost) for discriminating against a Jewish colleague. Now THAT is a “unified Reich!”
Do you condemn all attorneys who call for the end of Israel and voice support for the terrorist Hamas?
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 30, 2024 1:02:07 PM
Tarls
Jewish-American students are among those protesting the genocide in Gaza. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of these protests are peaceful, although admittedly some protesters committed acts of vandalism on some college campuses.
Posted by: Anon | May 30, 2024 1:50:29 PM
Anon,
Yeah, the “Jewish-American” students who don’t observe or go to temple. The Bernie Sanders’ Jews.
“Overwhelming majority…”
I had enough of that phrase during the BLM riots. It was ridiculous then and now. In addition to violence, they are literally threatening on campus Jews, blocking their movement, taking over buildings, calling for the elimination of an entire country and its people, blocking the commute of people (and emergency vehicles), etc.
Just be cause they are slightly less vile than accomplishing a Hitlerian mass slaughter of Jews, calling for and supporting a group that did accomplish it is still pretty fu&&ing vile. They only lack the balls to do it, not the will.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 30, 2024 2:18:32 PM
Anon’s “vandalism.”
https://apnews.com/article/loay-abdelfattah-alnaji-paul-kessler-california-israel-hamas-8680ae6dbac164a4440c4e6049a5e919
That, alone, is one more person than the January 6 protesters killed. For the record, any of the 1/6 protesters who committed violence should rot in prison too. Unlike you, I’m equally against all violent scumbags and am not going to diminish their crimes with ridiculous phrases such as “mostly peaceful.”
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 30, 2024 2:23:27 PM
And again, there is no definition of “genocide” that fits what is going on in Gaza.
Israel could have ended the war in a week killing virtually every Gazan and not losing a single soldier.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 30, 2024 2:25:50 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/21/politics/trump-unified-reich-video/index.html
Posted by: 4 Justice | May 30, 2024 3:38:55 PM
4 Justice,
Too funny. Just what I thought. Trump never even saw that let alone said it.
And talk about changing the subject! 😂
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 30, 2024 4:09:59 PM
You never know what youre going to get Photoshopped into. Those of us gray in the beard may remember this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bert_is_Evil
Though in fairness that wasn't TOO far off. Both Osama bin Laden and the Children's Television Workshop DID want to destroy America.
MAGA
Posted by: MAGA 2024 | May 30, 2024 9:17:52 PM
