[awesome_dude]

There's a lot here to unpack - and it's incredibly nuanced.

Crime in most countries is on the decline, there have been "blips" or "spikes", but the reality is that crime is decreasing.

When people talk about communities not being policed, there's also multiple things at play - partly it's perception, which is subjective, and not very reliable (back in my dayyyyyy), and partly it's about focus.

As for prosecution - most countries are realising that prosecution leading to incarceration is counter productive - as the GP touched on, prison becomes a University for criminals, as well as a record being prohibitive in getting individuals "on the right track" - that is, they become more isolated and excluded, leaving them with fewer choices when it comes to behaviour.

I'm middle aged, and for my entire life, the same drum has been beaten - crime is rising, children don't respect their elders, youth are getting away with crime, there should be harsher punishments, and so on.

But the hard facts have shown otherwise (as to /why/ crime is dropping, that's a genuine subject for debate, for example the removal of lead in petrol is now thought to be one of the key reasons that violent crime is dropping)

[runjake]

> the reality is that crime is decreasing

This is the problem with assuming stats == reality. The ground reality often does not match the overall stats.

Overall, crime seems to be decreasing. But this doesn’t help in areas like mine, where the population is growing, taxes are increasing, and crime is rising, yet budgets for adequate LE/justice resources seem to be decreasing or not keeping pace with crime growth. This seems to be fairly common in growing areas of the western US.

[nradov]

Crime statistics are on the decline. It's harder to tell whether actual crime is on the decline.

[awesome_dude]

Anecdata isn't going to get us any closer.

Statistics gathered the way the are is all we have

[nradov]

Are the statistics accurate?

Jeff Bezos said, "I have a saying, which is when the data and the anecdotes disagree, the anecdotes are usually right."

https://lexfridman.com/jeff-bezos-transcript/#chapter6_amazo...

[awesome_dude]

I have a saying - if you think the data is bad because it doesn't match your narrative, go out and prove you have better data collection methods.

Anecdata is well known to be problematic.

[philwelch]

> Anecdata is well known to be problematic.

Show me the data that backs that claim.

[hilariously]

If its not true, then my anecdote that its true should suffice to make it true, no data required Q.E.D.

[awesome_dude]

It's always been that way for me... is that not enough, you want actual data?

[verisimi]

But.... you can get statistics on anything you like, if you are prepared to fund (or defund) them. If you pay to see the relation between crime and how many cats there are in a neighbourhood, you can get that! Ie statistics themselves are part of the game.

[awesome_dude]

So, we believe nothing?

Or, we demand evidence that what you assert about this set of statistics is accurate

[verisimi]

Given that you can just throw money at the solution you want to engineer, and create the illusion of science, perhaps believing nothing is a better position to be in. At least you're not buying into what is essentially just another avenue of corporate or governance marketing.

And sorry for bringing information to your attention. Just wait till you hear about how corporates fund law.

[awesome_dude]

How do we know that your cynicism isn't funded by corporates in an attempt to undermine the real science?