National Center for Policy Analysis

MONTH IN REVIEW

Crime
August,1996

TERRORISM AND FREEDOM

It is usually assumed that measures aimed at curbing terrorism will necessarily conflict with Americans' cherished individual rights. If so, how much of our personal freedom are we willing to give up? And if we do agree to trade-offs, how sure can we be that terrorism will be defeated?

So far in the U.S., efforts to protect the country from terrorism have only produced petty annoyances -- longer lines at airports, bomb-scare evacuations and searches of personal items. Experts say that we could be headed for the sorts of Draconian measures practiced in other countries.

In Israel, school children on field trips are often accompanied by armed escorts.
In Britain, people suspected of terrorism can be held in jail for up to two days without being charged.
In France, police have sweeping eavesdropping powers, enabling authorities to tap all pay phones near the apartment of a suspect and engage in night raids on private homes.
In Northern Ireland, people driving out of Catholic neighborhoods are checked for identification.

Even so, few countries have been able to make much of a dent in a determined terrorist campaign -- while incurring a heavy price in personal liberties, experts point out. As the debate here begins, various groups are beginning to stake out positions.

The National Rifle Association has so far been able to defeat a plan to lace explosives with "taggants," which would enable investigators to trace their origin.
The American Civil Liberties Union has begun fighting proposals for wider federal wiretapping power.

Overseas experts say the U.S. is a terrorist's dream -- with our relatively open borders, huge population, and the easy availability of weapons. They also often express astonishment over our naivete towards terrorism, bred from a history without it.

Source: Kyle Pope and Amy Dockser Marcus, "Can America Stomach a War on Terror?" Wall Street Journal, August 2, 1996.

CONCEALED GUNS DETER CRIME, STUDY FINDS

Murder, rape and aggravated assault are down in states which allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons, according to a University of Chicago study due for release next week. John Lott, author of the study, analyzed FBI crime statistics in the nation's 3,054 counties from 1977 to 1992 to see if the introduction of concealed weapons laws had any effect on crime.

Some of his findings:

In states where it is legal to carry concealed handguns, murder was down 8.5 percent, rape fell 5 percent and aggravated assault declined 7 percent.
The drop is not primarily due to people defending themselves with guns, but because criminals seem to alter their behavior to avoid coming into contact with a potential victim who might be carrying a gun.
Since 1986, the number of states making it legal to carry concealed weapons has increased from nine to 31.
In states which have such laws, criminals shifted to property offenses -- such as auto theft and larceny -- in which contact with a victim is rare.

"The policy implications are undeniable: If you're interested in reducing murder and rape, then letting law-abiding, mentally competent citizens carry concealed weapons has a positive impact," Lott was quoted as saying.

Source: Dennis Cauchon, "Study: Weapons Laws Deter Crime," USA Today, August 2, 1996.

WHERE CHILDREN PREY, PARENTS PAY

Cities and states across the nation are experimenting with so-called parental responsibility laws -- which penalize parents for delinquent acts of their children. Ten states passed such laws in 1995, and six more have done so this year.

While it is too early to assess their impact on teen crime, the town of Silverton, Oregon, reports that juvenile crime was down by 39 percent last year, after 14 parents were cited.

In Louisiana, parents found guilty of "improper supervision" of a minor faces a fine of up to $1,000 and up to six months in prison if their child associates with a convicted felon, drug dealer or gang member.
In Arkansas, parents face up to $500 fines and can be held in contempt if they do not attend parental training programs.
In California, more than 1,000 parents have been ordered to undergo counseling or parenting classes -- or face prosecution for contempt if they refuse.
In Oregon, parents are required to enter into a contract with the court -- for example, agreeing to attend family counseling -- facing a $1,000 fine if they fail to comply.

Source: Haya El Nasser and Desda Moss, "Teen Crime Tosses Ball to Parents' Court," USA Today, August 6, 1996.

BRANDISHING A LEGAL KNIFE TOWARD STREET GANGS

Californians have come up with a novel approach to deal with the menace of street gangs: civil suits.
Prosecutors are reported to be winning injunctions to curb gang activity. The court orders are enforced by police, and gangs violating them can be prosecuted for criminal contempt -- which are easier convictions to obtain. And private citizens are seeking damages in small claims courts from landlords and other owners of properties that harbor gangs. So far, the results have been encouraging.

These civil actions are based on the idea that gang activity, in legal terms, is a "nuisance."

Gang-related violent felonies in Los Angeles county rose from 3,583 in 1986 to 17,276 in 1994.
But in areas where injunctions have been obtained, gang activity is down sharply.
Following an injunction in June against a Hispanic gang in Pasadena, crime is down and law-abiding visitors are again frequenting local recreational areas.

Before Los Angeles turned to civil suits to fight gangs in 1993, gangs in a Van Nuys neighborhood prohibited residents from locking their own front doors, so members could duck in when fleeing the police. After a court injunction, crime is down dramatically.

The injunctions go beyond prohibiting illegal activity. They also enjoin gang members from engaging in some legal acts within a designated territory.

Gang members may not possess knives, razors, cellular phones, pagers, police scanners, burglary tools or spray paint in public.
They may not drink alcohol on public property.
Nor are they allowed to be on the roofs of buildings -- often used as lookout points.

Threatened or actual lawsuits in small claims courts by citizens' groups have also forced owners to clean up hundreds of drug houses and other problem properties.

Source: David A. Price, "Ganging Up on the Street Gangs," Investor's Business Daily, August 7, 1996.

TOUGH CRIME POLICY NABS ENVIRO-THUG

The Environmental Protection Agency has extradited an "environmental terrorist," Bruce Burrell. He was nabbed in Costa Rica and returned to Florida, where he is under indictment for more than 70 violations of federal law, including smuggling, obstruction of justice, conspiracy, money laundering, tax evasion and violations of the Clean Air Act.

His extradition caps a lengthy investigation by police agencies. He and a codefendant face a maximum of 700 years in prison and more than $28 million in fines.

His crime is Freon smuggling -- one of the indirect costs of banning its manufacture and future use. The economic cost of the Freon ban now in effect in the United States and other developed countries could top $100 billion over the next 10 years. The costs in human life could also be quite high, since most Freon substitutes are toxic or highly flammable.

When a product that the public desires is banned and there are no good substitutes, the price goes up and black markets arise. Freon sold for $1 a can in 1987; now it sells for between $15 and $30 a can, and the price is expected to rise. The result is smuggling from developing countries where the ban doesn't apply.

According to environmentalists, Freon released when refrigerators and air conditioners are repaired or leak breaks up ozone molecules in the upper atmosphere. Ozone blocks the sun's ultraviolet rays. The loss of ozone could cause an increase in skin cancers and damage wildlife; although some scientists believe the effect would be negligible.

On the other hand, Freon made modern refrigeration and air-conditioning possible. Millions of people in countries without adequate refrigeration still die from food-borne disease. Freon is non-toxic, largely inflammable and long-lasting.

The results of laboratory tests, the increase of Freon in the atmosphere and the discovery of a seasonal thinning of the ozone layer over the Antarctic were a cause for concern and further study, but they did not merit the panic and resulting legislative ban.

Source: Op Ed, H. Sterling Burnett, environmental policy analyst , National Center for Policy Analysis.

For complete information on Freon and related issues, visit the NCPA Environment page at http://www.public-policy.org/~ncpa/pi/enviro/envdex.html

VIOLENT JUVENILE CRIME RATES HIGH

For the first time in almost a decade, nationwide arrest rates for violent crimes by juveniles fell slightly in 1995, according to preliminary data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation from local police reports. The FBI also reported that the arrest rate for homicides by juveniles fell for the second year in a row -- after tripling during the previous decade.

The rate of homicides committed by youths age 10 to 17 rose from 5.4 per 100,000 in 1984 to 14.5 in 1993.
In 1994 it dropped to 13.2 per 100,000 and in 1995 to 11.2 per 100,000.
The overall rate of juvenile violent crime -- which includes assault, robbery and rape, as well as murder, declined by 2.9 percent in 1995.

The preliminary figures for 1995 are subject to revision and a final report is expected in November. Experts are cautious in interpreting the data -- which weren't broken down by region -- and give various reasons for the drop in homicides:

The most violent young people -- the first group involved in the crack cocaine trade and usually armed -- have died or become adults.
The drop may be due in part to the growing number of state laws that allow juveniles to be tried as adults, suggests Attorney General Janet Reno.
And since seven or eight cities account for 25 percent of all the homicides in the country, lower murder rates in those cities reduce the national average, points out criminologist Alfred Blumstein of Carnegie Mellon University.

According to a March 1996 Justice Department report on juvenile crime, the actual number of homicides by juveniles exceeded 26,000 in 1994. And the percentage of murderers using guns quadrupled, while the rate of murders using other weapons remained the same.

Sources: Fox Butterfield, "Crimes of Violence Among Juveniles Decline Slightly," New York Times, August 9, 1996; and Ronald J. Ostrow, "Number of Young Killers Triples from 1984 to '94," Houston Chronicle, March 8, 1996.

For more information visit the Youth and Crime section of the NCPA Crime page http://www.public-policy.org/~ncpa/pi/crime/crime2.html

A "SUPER-PREDATOR" AT AGE 11

Los Angeles police secured an extraordinary court order allowing them to publicly name an 11-year-old boy who was their prime suspect in a crime -- despite state laws that protect anonymity of juveniles. The chief of police held a press conference to warn the community of the "dangerous and violent young man" police were seeking.

Police claim the 11-year-old boy and a group of other kids, kidnapped, raped and tortured a 13-year-old, tried to burn down the abandoned house where they had trapped her, and killed an 82-year-old woman next door.

If police are correct, the boy fits the description of Brookings Institution scholar John DiIulio's "super-predators," the small number of violent young people who commit much of the crime -- each generation of which is substantially more violent than the last.

A study of incarcerated male juveniles in California found that 94 percent were re-arrested as adults -- 82 percent for major felonies -- and 42 percent had more than nine arrests as adults in an eight-year followup period.

While most jurisdictions are moving to allow police leeway to name juveniles and punish them as adults at younger ages, the perverse effect of setting an absolute threshold is that it encourages gangs to recruit even younger boys.

An alternative would be to get rid of the age limit altogether and establish criminal responsibility based on the individual's ability to understand what he is doing and its wrongfulness, as we do in insanity-defense cases.

There are 40 million children in the United States under the age of 10, more than at any other time since the baby boom. People wonder whether there is anything that can be done to stop the potential super-predators among them before it's too late.

Source: Susan Estrich, "Violent Kids Can't Be Reformed," USA Today, August 8, 1996.

CONCEALED CARRY LAWS REDUCE CRIME

Major crime fell dramatically in states which have legalized the carrying of concealed handguns, according to a comprehensive new study at the University of Chicago.

For the first time, researchers analyzed crime statistics for all 3,054 counties in the United Sates between 1977 and 1992, according to one of the authors of the unpublished study, Professor John Lott. After adjusting for a general fall in crime rates, the study found that:

In the 31 states that now have "concealed right to carry" laws, murders were down, on average, by 8.5 percent.
Rapes were down 5 percent and serious assaults by 7 percent.
In cities with populations of more than 250,000, murder rates dropped after the passage of such laws by an average of 13.5 percent.

According to the study, the fall in crime did not result from an increased use of guns, but from potential criminals avoiding confrontations. In fact, criminals apparently shifted to lower-risk offenses, since property crimes increased in those states. Other findings included:

The most dramatic falls in murder rates were in areas where the number of women carrying firearms was high.
The study found that for every woman who carries a concealed hand, the murder rate fell by three to four times more than it would have if one more man had carried a concealed gun.
If states with concealed handgun bans had allowed them in 1992, about 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes and more than 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided.

In addition, the researchers found no evidence of an increase in accidental killings or suicides in states with concealed carry laws.

Sources: Ian Katz, "'Gun Law' Cuts Crime Rate, US Study Finds," Guardian, August 3, 1996, and Dennis Cauchon, "Study: Weapons Laws Deter Crime: Fewer Rapes, Murders Found Where Concealed Guns Legal," USA Today, August 2, 1996.

For more information on gun ownership as a deterrent to crime, read NCPA's study "Myths About Gun Control" at http://www.public-policy.org/~ncpa/studies/s176/s176.html

REFORMS THAT WOULD REDUCE CRIME

Although crime rates have leveled off recently, they are still three times higher than in 1960. According to economist Morgan O. Reynolds, one reason is that "expected punishment" has fallen.

Expected punishment is the time a criminal can expect to serve in prison, given the (low) probabilities of arrest and conviction for a crime and the likely time in prison he would serve. For example,

Between 1950 and 1980, expected punishment for crimes of violence and burglary fell by 80 percent, from seven weeks to 10 days.
Expected punishment for robbery fell from 140 days in 1950 to 34 days in 1980.
Overall, the chance of going to prison for a serious crime fell from 5.3 percent in 1950 to 1.6 percent in 1980.

Reynolds says building more prisons has helped increase expected punishment since 1980 to half what it was 40 years ago. But he recommends taking other steps to make crime deterrence credible, such as:

Abolishing the juvenile justice system -- which by not punishing youths seduces them into thinking crime is without consequences.
Repealing the Miranda ruling -- which has reduced perfectly voluntary confessions and arrest clearance rates by about 25 percent.
Restoring shaming sentences -- including humiliation and corporal punishment -- since the speed and certainty of punishment matter more to criminals than the theoretical maximum sentence.
Privatize parts of the justice system, such as bail, parole and probation -- which would create incentives for competitive market reforms.

Reynolds agrees with Scottish philosopher Adam Smith that "Kindness toward the guilty is cruelty toward the innocent."

Source: Morgan O. Reynolds (director, Criminal Justice Center, National Center for Policy Analysis; professor, Texas A&M University), "Crime: Why To Get Tough & How," Investor's Business Daily, August 22, 1996.

HOW GUNS DETER CRIMINALS

Where law-abiding citizens are legally permitted to carry concealed handguns, violent crime is reduced, according to new evidence.

A study of FBI crime statistics by John R. Lott, Jr., a professor of law at the University of Chicago, and economics graduate student David Mustard produced compelling evidence that criminals respond rationally to deterrence threats. The study analyzed crime patterns in all 3,054 American counties from 1977 to 1992. Incidences of crime were compared between the 31 states that give their citizens the right to carry concealed handguns -- if they do not have a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness -- and those which do not.

The researchers concluded that, by their most conservative estimates, states which had passed laws permitting concealed handguns reduced murders by 8.5 percent, rapes by 5 percent, aggravated assaults by 7 percent and robbery by 3 percent.
If non-gun states in 1992 had changed their laws in that year, citizens would have been spared approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies.
In large cities, concealed handgun laws produced an average drop in murder rates of more than 13 percent.
Since accidental deaths due to handguns number fewer than 200 a year, if states now without concealed handgun laws were to adopt them, the number of accidental deaths would increase by only nine a year, at most.

Lott found that criminals are less likely to attack citizens if they are unsure whether the potential victim might be armed. But rather than give up a life of crime, some criminals switch to offenses against property, such as larceny and auto theft, where there is less likelihood of a confrontation.

Source: John R. Lott, Jr. (University of Chicago), "More Guns, Less Violent Crime," Wall Street Journal, August 28, 1996.

For more information on Gun Control and Crime, visit NCPA's crime page at http://www.public-policy.org/~ncpa/pi/crime/crime.html