Your local soviet insists that more bread was produced this year than in every previous year combined, so you should not fret about the store shelves being empty.
I wonder who is lying, your local soviet, or the store shelves?
This is poor work by Aporia's standards. Specific categories of crime, such as rape, gang activity, and acid attacks, have exploded in frequency across England over the past few years. Go read Licence to Kill by David Fraser.
There are no data on rape or gang activity that would allow us to make confident assertions about long-term trends. Data on sexual assault from the CSEW indicate no change in prevalence between 2005 and 2023.
The probity of UK crime data has to be viewed in the context of who gathered it. Any UK observer who has not picked up the extreme dysfunction of the UK police and CPS is just not paying attention. It is a craven clapped out bureaucracy and the salient point about such data as it does choose to gather is an indication of nothing so much as how craven and lazy it will be in its data gathering. To take just one example of many. Sharia law 'honour' reprisal and forced marriages are known to be rife (as has been reported to Parliament) but will not feature in this 'data'. Try touting this crime reduction 'success' fairytale around Rotherham, Telford, Oldham, Rochdale and see what the public reaction would be. There is something Kafkaesque about giving credence to the Criminal Justice System's self -serving data spin.
Are these the same crime statistics which record many rapists as women? Think I will continue to believe my eyes, ears and brain, but thanks for the propaganda.
Your comment seems to have been a reply to Noah Carl, not me! If you read my comment you'll see that I was also saying that these 'statistics' were not to be trusted.
Of the three data series mentioned at the beginning of the article, only the homicide data are gathered by the police. The data on violent incidents are gathered by a survey company, while the data on violent injuries are gathered by hospitals and then compiled by a team of academics.
The data set from hospitals was the most convincing, to me.
I *do* believe that my current superficial belief that crime *in the US* is much higher may be skewed falsely upward. Part of this is that I've had two car thefts in the last 5 years, where I had had none in the previous 25+ years. The neighborhood is essentially the same--upper-middle.
But this is no real measure. However, the *perception* of lack of safety is very high, and perhaps part of it comes from the very visible homeless population, which any observer would probably agree appears to disregard most social norms, including property crime.
I do think that you may have a broad point, though. Statistically it may be down. And yet one *must* be aware of what appear to be threats to one's life and property, and personally, when ostensibly crime rates were much higher (again, here in the US) I had much less concern and no real personal experiences with crime. Now that it's ostensibly down, I'm pretty nervous and I have had personal losses, and ultimately I'm responsible for my own safety and must also rely on my instinctive reaction to visual/actual threats, so...
"Britain’s violent crime decline is evident in both police-recorded data on homicides and estimates of violent incidents derived from the Crime Survey of England and Wales – as shown below.¹"
Why anyone in the West would believe their government data is beyond me.
Noah, you keep going out of your way to support the belief that crime is falling in Britain. You are happy with the crime rate and the inflow of immigrants...we get it. There are plenty of Brits who are not satisfied with the situation.
When it comes to crime that realistically *could* threaten me or my family, to hell with statistics. I'll trust my gut unapologetically. My own survival, and that of my family, are ultimately up to me, and I'll trust my own judgement on this, thank you.
I agree that is the standard we'd all like, but any source will be regarded as suspicious by some people because of the researchers, or the funding, or because the findings don't meet with preconceived ideas - look at the recent Cass Report. As of this point, have seen no reason to doubt official stats, but it would indeed be good to have team of independent researchers to verify them.
As I said, I really don't care. I live in the United States, and I am damn well aware of the problems of low-IQ immigration in this country. I am also aware of the high black crime rate.
You know, though, when it comes to perceived personal threat, one is foolish not to err on the safe side. Here in the US I'm told that the crime rate is actually down, and yet I've had two cars stolen in the last 5 years, and none the previous 25.
I'm not going to disagree at all. Firstly, nationwide statistics don't say anything about local conditions. Secondly, security is a combination of reality and feeling.
Yes but 'government' (meaning 'control' of 'mind') stats are defo tweaked for the elites and to skew our beliefs of them serving us 'correctly' which we know is just to make us subservient to their taxes and imbecilic money grabbing/laundering legislation etc. All biased for them not us.
"Even Muslims commit crime at only slightly higher rates than White Britons when adjusting for age."
Why would you adjust for age? If the cohort is younger on average than others, it would explain why they over index for violent crime (>2x). If it is important, why are the other groups not adjusted for age (e.g. Indians, Chinese)?
Overall, it was an interesting article. I hadn't really considered the move away from cash, didn't know that Brits are now drinking less, and found the section about the effectiveness of incarceration convincing.
Yes, liquor store hold-ups were fairly common in the US when I was younger, in the 50s-90s, e.g., but I seldom hear of any, and I've surmised that this is because of payment with charge cards is a much higher percentage, hence no cash to be had.
I believe the issue is the right wing argument that violent immigrant crime is avoidable simply by not allowing mass immigration. Certainly highlighting that proves their point.
Yes. There are two separate issues here. One is minimizing crime in a stable society, which is basically a timeless concern. The other is to use crime stats to support a political agenda, pro or con immigration and/or some minorities. This is a transient concern.
We've got to separate the two issues to make any substantial progress with either.
As mentioned in the article, several large immigrant groups (notably Indians, Chinese and Arabs) commit violent crime at much lower rates than White British.
Understood, and I am familiar with your stance on immigration and perhaps I was being pedantic, but since you mentioned RW social media in your article, I was defending the reasonable RW emphasis on immigrant criminality *in general*. Politicians won't read your article and parse out low crime immigrants from high crime immigrants- they'll use it as justification for more, tf I wanted to challenge any generalization. Obviously, your article is read in America and things are quite different here - Hispanics are over represented in prison. Actually, I'm not sure RW explicitly accuses all immigrants as per capita more dangerous than natives (imo, they certainly do not, especially re E. Asians), but their overall assessment seems logical to me.
I think his point is, even if all immigrants combined only committed a single crime last year, that crime wouldn't have happened if no immigrants had been allowed into the country. Of course, this assumes that the crimes committed by immigrants wouldn't be committed by native-born criminals instead if immigrants weren't present. If you think of crime as a transaction, if the conditions are there to facilitate it, the transaction will be carried out one way or another.
My article deals with crime rates. If groups with below-average crime rates increase as a share of the population, then the overall crime rate falls – all else being equal.
I understand that. I was only relating the anti-immigration view. We say that the overall crime rate is lower because immigrants reduce the average. They point to a single crime committed by an immigrant and say "that crime wouldn't have happened if he hadn't been allowed into the country." I'm not sure how to counter that, other than to say that we're talking about statistics, not individual crimes. No one is saying we should reduce the crime rate even more by expelling all native-born citizens.
Are these statistics from the same Govt /Elite which had proof of the 'safe and effective' Covid 'vaccines'? Please excuse my cynicism of any thing they say which sounds unlikely.
We've seen the same drop in violent crime in the US, for many of the same reasons. One additional factor here was the nationwide legalization of abortion in 1973. Violent crime peaked around 20 years later, then began falling, very likely due to the fact that unwanted children, who may have been more predisposed to crime, weren't here when they otherwise would have started reaching their prime criminal years.
And we need to factor in that during that same time frame we had three strikes and mandatory sentencing in many jurisdictions.
It's a muddy picture, enough so that those who want to use crime, increasing or decreasing, to bolster a preferred social agenda, can find support for their diverging beliefs.
WRT to lead as a contributing factor to crime, this is the first I've heard of it. On the face of it I can see a circumstantially connection, maybe, but is there a demonstrated causal connection?
There are certainly many factors that contribute to the crime rate, and it's difficult to conduct a regression analysis to determine which one has the greatest effect. And as you pointed out, people view this through their preferred social agenda. A pro-lifer who is told that outlawing abortion will increase the crime rate would just say to lock up more criminals.
There was a spike in murders in the US at the end of the COVID period as more people spent more time outside the home, however, recently it has fallen to pre-pandemic levels. So temporary conditions can have an effect along with long-term policies.
Interesting that a Quote from Prince, interview stating that 'everyone would be out on the streets as normal then a few planes would go over and everyone started fighting & arguing with each other...(chemical poisoning clearly debilitates rational thought, mind warped and reactionary action kicks in, I'll reference the studies on this. Tbh i don't usually look at state funded Wikipedia either. lol Plus the report on The Tootsies and other tribes fighting each other after 'chem trails' in US Military planes went over
Wikipedia is just a summary. It's not "state-funded" either, it's privately funded. I used to contribute to it until they jumped on the "Gaza genocide" bandwagon.
Can you point me to a peer-reviewed study showing a correlation between "planes flying overhead" and violence? Chemtrails don't exist. Imagine how that would work - you'd need to make sure hundreds of thousands of pilots, engineers, mechanics, builders, flight crews, etc. kept the existence of secret tanks full of poison secret. And not just in the US, but all over the world. If people could cooperate that effectively, we'd be living in the Star Trek universe by now.
wow, legalised abortion uh. Unwanted kids sometimes due to rape and such crimes, high poverty rates, low level crime feeding deprived families, divorce etc. The legalisation of abortion is one of those legislations i was talking of to convince us we need to hold back, not procreate and decline in numbers, whilst they kill, injure us with vaccines and legal suicide/abortion which is simply abhorrent. Trauma control, funnel us into a corner mentally, I don't believe legalised abortion can/has 'reduce(d) crime' because of unruly, unparented kids etc, certainly not en mass to edge stats figures. Bizarre congruence.
Wikipedia is just a summary. It's not "state-funded" either, it's privately funded. I used to contribute to it until they jumped on the "Gaza genocide" bandwagon.
Can you point me to a peer-reviewed study showing a correlation between "planes flying overhead" and violence? Chemtrails don't exist. Imagine how that would work - you'd need to make sure hundreds of thousands of pilots, engineers, mechanics, builders, flight crews, etc. kept the existence of secret tanks full of poison secret. And not just in the US, but all over the world. If people could cooperate that effectively, we'd be living in the Star Trek universe by now.
I agree this is a highly biased piece, Statistics never express true world, real life experience. Ie as previous comment stated Acid attacks, rape etc child abduction These stats apparently don't take those crimes (please correct if i'm wrong) into consideration. I've seen these stats exactly stated in USA (90%) the same quoted by FBI !
So, are these Government officials, crime stats just blanketed across the western world to pronounce this idea. To say that more are incarcerated for longer is obviously a key but this is really a narrowminded way of looking at crime per se.! To lump 1987 Hillsborough into 2017 stats is simply absurd distortion and a heinous reporting of stats!? We know 'they' (politicians and mason friends) frequently dictate and change the definition of said crimes, lower sentence time, increase legislation thus aligning with their 'benefits' of governance. Just seems very contrived and very staged, i know all the media sources get their info from 'different' but essentially the same bandwagon, branch of info...Google for example, thus leading to unconscious bias (ie they 'believe' it's from independent sources but algorithms etc have bowled the stories or stats to pertain to this cofactor or that statistic in line with that category etc. All seems very contrived. I personally have seen too many cameras with no justification, not lowered crime in my area! It Just infuriates people, negative accentuated energy creates negative division and frustration in people, a drone society and backlash against restrictions is inevitable (just not by 'their' definition) so their legislations and policies 'look' to be accomplishing 'something' lmao Theatre! Lockstep propaganda.
Modern technology, absent some absolutely crazy thing like BLM, leads to most forms of crime declining even if the police are becoming more incompetent.
An example of this happened to me about 20 years ago. Our house was robbed. The police did nothing to investigate, obviously, but we found some blood near where the thieves had smashed the window and they took a swab. A year later, a local yoof was picked up for drug dealing; they did a blood test, put it into the system and it made a match. Case cracked with essentially zero police effort.
FWIW, during the recent solar activity that resulted in rare viewings of the northern lights farther south, I'm convinced that one of my LED clock displays was affected.
"Meanwhile, the fraction older than 60 (a group that perpetrates virtually no violence) increased by three percentage points."
With all their wailing about January 6, the US Democrats seem to be implying this is the most violent/dangerous group. We all know they're being disingenuous.
Your local soviet insists that more bread was produced this year than in every previous year combined, so you should not fret about the store shelves being empty.
I wonder who is lying, your local soviet, or the store shelves?
This is poor work by Aporia's standards. Specific categories of crime, such as rape, gang activity, and acid attacks, have exploded in frequency across England over the past few years. Go read Licence to Kill by David Fraser.
There are no data on rape or gang activity that would allow us to make confident assertions about long-term trends. Data on sexual assault from the CSEW indicate no change in prevalence between 2005 and 2023.
The probity of UK crime data has to be viewed in the context of who gathered it. Any UK observer who has not picked up the extreme dysfunction of the UK police and CPS is just not paying attention. It is a craven clapped out bureaucracy and the salient point about such data as it does choose to gather is an indication of nothing so much as how craven and lazy it will be in its data gathering. To take just one example of many. Sharia law 'honour' reprisal and forced marriages are known to be rife (as has been reported to Parliament) but will not feature in this 'data'. Try touting this crime reduction 'success' fairytale around Rotherham, Telford, Oldham, Rochdale and see what the public reaction would be. There is something Kafkaesque about giving credence to the Criminal Justice System's self -serving data spin.
Well said, yes i concur Thanks for these essential facts
Thank you....I think you might well find lots more to like on Slouching Towards Bethlehem: https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/
Are these the same crime statistics which record many rapists as women? Think I will continue to believe my eyes, ears and brain, but thanks for the propaganda.
Your comment seems to have been a reply to Noah Carl, not me! If you read my comment you'll see that I was also saying that these 'statistics' were not to be trusted.
Here here, my sentiments exactly. Exactly right! ;-)
Of the three data series mentioned at the beginning of the article, only the homicide data are gathered by the police. The data on violent incidents are gathered by a survey company, while the data on violent injuries are gathered by hospitals and then compiled by a team of academics.
The data set from hospitals was the most convincing, to me.
I *do* believe that my current superficial belief that crime *in the US* is much higher may be skewed falsely upward. Part of this is that I've had two car thefts in the last 5 years, where I had had none in the previous 25+ years. The neighborhood is essentially the same--upper-middle.
But this is no real measure. However, the *perception* of lack of safety is very high, and perhaps part of it comes from the very visible homeless population, which any observer would probably agree appears to disregard most social norms, including property crime.
I do think that you may have a broad point, though. Statistically it may be down. And yet one *must* be aware of what appear to be threats to one's life and property, and personally, when ostensibly crime rates were much higher (again, here in the US) I had much less concern and no real personal experiences with crime. Now that it's ostensibly down, I'm pretty nervous and I have had personal losses, and ultimately I'm responsible for my own safety and must also rely on my instinctive reaction to visual/actual threats, so...
"Britain’s violent crime decline is evident in both police-recorded data on homicides and estimates of violent incidents derived from the Crime Survey of England and Wales – as shown below.¹"
Why anyone in the West would believe their government data is beyond me.
Noah, you keep going out of your way to support the belief that crime is falling in Britain. You are happy with the crime rate and the inflow of immigrants...we get it. There are plenty of Brits who are not satisfied with the situation.
Precisely! WHY would ANYONE believe their Government data!??!
I'm not saying you are wrong, but whose statistics would you accept? Anecdote is not data, whether it is posted on social media or not.
"I'm not saying you are wrong, but whose statistics would you accept?"
Independent with no allegiance to the government.
But I really don't care. If Noah and the Brits are happy with their crime and immigration situation, that sounds good to me.
When it comes to crime that realistically *could* threaten me or my family, to hell with statistics. I'll trust my gut unapologetically. My own survival, and that of my family, are ultimately up to me, and I'll trust my own judgement on this, thank you.
Too right, same !
I've written numerous articles and tweets criticising mass immigration.
Yes, I agree. In my judgement you have good credibility.
FWIW...
I agree that is the standard we'd all like, but any source will be regarded as suspicious by some people because of the researchers, or the funding, or because the findings don't meet with preconceived ideas - look at the recent Cass Report. As of this point, have seen no reason to doubt official stats, but it would indeed be good to have team of independent researchers to verify them.
As I said, I really don't care. I live in the United States, and I am damn well aware of the problems of low-IQ immigration in this country. I am also aware of the high black crime rate.
I completely understand. Each country has its own set of problems. Thank you for taking time to respond.
You know, though, when it comes to perceived personal threat, one is foolish not to err on the safe side. Here in the US I'm told that the crime rate is actually down, and yet I've had two cars stolen in the last 5 years, and none the previous 25.
"Who you gonna believe: me, or your lyin' eyes?"
Many thanks to Richard Pryor...
I'm not going to disagree at all. Firstly, nationwide statistics don't say anything about local conditions. Secondly, security is a combination of reality and feeling.
Yes, exactly.
I try hard to keep it real as I can, but ultimately I'll go with what has kept me alive all these years.
Yes but 'government' (meaning 'control' of 'mind') stats are defo tweaked for the elites and to skew our beliefs of them serving us 'correctly' which we know is just to make us subservient to their taxes and imbecilic money grabbing/laundering legislation etc. All biased for them not us.
"Even Muslims commit crime at only slightly higher rates than White Britons when adjusting for age."
Why would you adjust for age? If the cohort is younger on average than others, it would explain why they over index for violent crime (>2x). If it is important, why are the other groups not adjusted for age (e.g. Indians, Chinese)?
Overall, it was an interesting article. I hadn't really considered the move away from cash, didn't know that Brits are now drinking less, and found the section about the effectiveness of incarceration convincing.
Yes, liquor store hold-ups were fairly common in the US when I was younger, in the 50s-90s, e.g., but I seldom hear of any, and I've surmised that this is because of payment with charge cards is a much higher percentage, hence no cash to be had.
I believe the issue is the right wing argument that violent immigrant crime is avoidable simply by not allowing mass immigration. Certainly highlighting that proves their point.
Yes. There are two separate issues here. One is minimizing crime in a stable society, which is basically a timeless concern. The other is to use crime stats to support a political agenda, pro or con immigration and/or some minorities. This is a transient concern.
We've got to separate the two issues to make any substantial progress with either.
As mentioned in the article, several large immigrant groups (notably Indians, Chinese and Arabs) commit violent crime at much lower rates than White British.
Understood, and I am familiar with your stance on immigration and perhaps I was being pedantic, but since you mentioned RW social media in your article, I was defending the reasonable RW emphasis on immigrant criminality *in general*. Politicians won't read your article and parse out low crime immigrants from high crime immigrants- they'll use it as justification for more, tf I wanted to challenge any generalization. Obviously, your article is read in America and things are quite different here - Hispanics are over represented in prison. Actually, I'm not sure RW explicitly accuses all immigrants as per capita more dangerous than natives (imo, they certainly do not, especially re E. Asians), but their overall assessment seems logical to me.
I think his point is, even if all immigrants combined only committed a single crime last year, that crime wouldn't have happened if no immigrants had been allowed into the country. Of course, this assumes that the crimes committed by immigrants wouldn't be committed by native-born criminals instead if immigrants weren't present. If you think of crime as a transaction, if the conditions are there to facilitate it, the transaction will be carried out one way or another.
My article deals with crime rates. If groups with below-average crime rates increase as a share of the population, then the overall crime rate falls – all else being equal.
I understand that. I was only relating the anti-immigration view. We say that the overall crime rate is lower because immigrants reduce the average. They point to a single crime committed by an immigrant and say "that crime wouldn't have happened if he hadn't been allowed into the country." I'm not sure how to counter that, other than to say that we're talking about statistics, not individual crimes. No one is saying we should reduce the crime rate even more by expelling all native-born citizens.
Are these statistics from the same Govt /Elite which had proof of the 'safe and effective' Covid 'vaccines'? Please excuse my cynicism of any thing they say which sounds unlikely.
Absolutely! Well said i was going to comment that but you've addressed my point! Thanks ;-)
We've seen the same drop in violent crime in the US, for many of the same reasons. One additional factor here was the nationwide legalization of abortion in 1973. Violent crime peaked around 20 years later, then began falling, very likely due to the fact that unwanted children, who may have been more predisposed to crime, weren't here when they otherwise would have started reaching their prime criminal years.
And we need to factor in that during that same time frame we had three strikes and mandatory sentencing in many jurisdictions.
It's a muddy picture, enough so that those who want to use crime, increasing or decreasing, to bolster a preferred social agenda, can find support for their diverging beliefs.
It's a strange world we live in, huh?
That probably had an effect as well, along with “broken window policing” and ending the use of tetraethyllead as a gasoline additive.
What’s interesting is that several European countries experienced a similar drop in crime over the same period despite not enacting these policies.
WRT to lead as a contributing factor to crime, this is the first I've heard of it. On the face of it I can see a circumstantially connection, maybe, but is there a demonstrated causal connection?
There is a strong correlation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%E2%80%93crime_hypothesis
There are certainly many factors that contribute to the crime rate, and it's difficult to conduct a regression analysis to determine which one has the greatest effect. And as you pointed out, people view this through their preferred social agenda. A pro-lifer who is told that outlawing abortion will increase the crime rate would just say to lock up more criminals.
There was a spike in murders in the US at the end of the COVID period as more people spent more time outside the home, however, recently it has fallen to pre-pandemic levels. So temporary conditions can have an effect along with long-term policies.
Interesting that a Quote from Prince, interview stating that 'everyone would be out on the streets as normal then a few planes would go over and everyone started fighting & arguing with each other...(chemical poisoning clearly debilitates rational thought, mind warped and reactionary action kicks in, I'll reference the studies on this. Tbh i don't usually look at state funded Wikipedia either. lol Plus the report on The Tootsies and other tribes fighting each other after 'chem trails' in US Military planes went over
Wikipedia is just a summary. It's not "state-funded" either, it's privately funded. I used to contribute to it until they jumped on the "Gaza genocide" bandwagon.
Can you point me to a peer-reviewed study showing a correlation between "planes flying overhead" and violence? Chemtrails don't exist. Imagine how that would work - you'd need to make sure hundreds of thousands of pilots, engineers, mechanics, builders, flight crews, etc. kept the existence of secret tanks full of poison secret. And not just in the US, but all over the world. If people could cooperate that effectively, we'd be living in the Star Trek universe by now.
wow, legalised abortion uh. Unwanted kids sometimes due to rape and such crimes, high poverty rates, low level crime feeding deprived families, divorce etc. The legalisation of abortion is one of those legislations i was talking of to convince us we need to hold back, not procreate and decline in numbers, whilst they kill, injure us with vaccines and legal suicide/abortion which is simply abhorrent. Trauma control, funnel us into a corner mentally, I don't believe legalised abortion can/has 'reduce(d) crime' because of unruly, unparented kids etc, certainly not en mass to edge stats figures. Bizarre congruence.
Wikipedia is just a summary. It's not "state-funded" either, it's privately funded. I used to contribute to it until they jumped on the "Gaza genocide" bandwagon.
Can you point me to a peer-reviewed study showing a correlation between "planes flying overhead" and violence? Chemtrails don't exist. Imagine how that would work - you'd need to make sure hundreds of thousands of pilots, engineers, mechanics, builders, flight crews, etc. kept the existence of secret tanks full of poison secret. And not just in the US, but all over the world. If people could cooperate that effectively, we'd be living in the Star Trek universe by now.
I agree this is a highly biased piece, Statistics never express true world, real life experience. Ie as previous comment stated Acid attacks, rape etc child abduction These stats apparently don't take those crimes (please correct if i'm wrong) into consideration. I've seen these stats exactly stated in USA (90%) the same quoted by FBI !
So, are these Government officials, crime stats just blanketed across the western world to pronounce this idea. To say that more are incarcerated for longer is obviously a key but this is really a narrowminded way of looking at crime per se.! To lump 1987 Hillsborough into 2017 stats is simply absurd distortion and a heinous reporting of stats!? We know 'they' (politicians and mason friends) frequently dictate and change the definition of said crimes, lower sentence time, increase legislation thus aligning with their 'benefits' of governance. Just seems very contrived and very staged, i know all the media sources get their info from 'different' but essentially the same bandwagon, branch of info...Google for example, thus leading to unconscious bias (ie they 'believe' it's from independent sources but algorithms etc have bowled the stories or stats to pertain to this cofactor or that statistic in line with that category etc. All seems very contrived. I personally have seen too many cameras with no justification, not lowered crime in my area! It Just infuriates people, negative accentuated energy creates negative division and frustration in people, a drone society and backlash against restrictions is inevitable (just not by 'their' definition) so their legislations and policies 'look' to be accomplishing 'something' lmao Theatre! Lockstep propaganda.
Collapse in testosterone is the real cause
It's important to push back against wrongness regardless of how said issue is presumed to align with ideological camps. Kudos to Noah Carl.
Modern technology, absent some absolutely crazy thing like BLM, leads to most forms of crime declining even if the police are becoming more incompetent.
An example of this happened to me about 20 years ago. Our house was robbed. The police did nothing to investigate, obviously, but we found some blood near where the thieves had smashed the window and they took a swab. A year later, a local yoof was picked up for drug dealing; they did a blood test, put it into the system and it made a match. Case cracked with essentially zero police effort.
Nice analysis
tl;dr build more prisons.
Crime rates may follow Solar Activity. Please take a look at the alternative explanation in the link below. There, you may find an interpretation for the awful increase in homicide rates up to the 2003 egregious peak, and the subsequent decline. https://www.walshmedicalmedia.com/abstract/solardriven-geomagnetic-disturbances-impact-homicide-rates-in-europe-and-the-usa-121346.html
FWIW, during the recent solar activity that resulted in rare viewings of the northern lights farther south, I'm convinced that one of my LED clock displays was affected.
:^)
"Meanwhile, the fraction older than 60 (a group that perpetrates virtually no violence) increased by three percentage points."
With all their wailing about January 6, the US Democrats seem to be implying this is the most violent/dangerous group. We all know they're being disingenuous.