| >Violent crime against children has fallen steadily since the early 1990s.... The world didn’t get more dangerous. We got more afraid. This is the step that otherwise smart people fail at. "We were afraid of danger X so we did Y to prevent it and turns out it was a waste because not only did X not get worse, it got better! To heck with Y!" And don't consider, maybe, things got better for that reason? This is "only sick people take medicine" logic. If you're tempted down this line of thinking you need to consider: If nothing had changed or they got worse, would that have been the expected results? What then would be the expected outcome? Comparative analysis at a minimum, not just to other societies with different norms but attempting at least to find pockets that didn't change as much or as quickly, what happened there and in other sub populations where factors varied. Otherwise you're just someone complaining how things used to be different, better in any way that fits a narrative that makes you feel comfortable or righteous or whatever. |
Urban areas in the 90s , in projects and ghettos were basically war zones in terms of murder rates. They pushed the average murder & violent crime rates off the charts. Those have come down, but that doesn’t mean that the cities are now safe for 5 year olds to walk around alone.
Compare moderately sketchy parts of LA to Tokyo or Helsinki and tell me which one feels safe and which doesn’t . You can tell yourself “LA is so much better than the 90s” but you still won’t feel safe in the same way.