Given how greatly the issue of crime and violence looms in the Chicago mayoral campaign, I was a bit interested in the mayor of Baltimore’s observations in a Washington Post op-ed about a pilot program in his city, long one of the homicide capitols of the United States. To read it you need a very high tolerance for platitudes but here’s the kernel of the piece:
In January 2022, my administration launched Baltimore’s Group Violence Reduction Strategy (GVRS) pilot in the Western Police District. This strategy, known nationally as focused deterrence, facilitates direct, sustained engagement with individuals who are the most likely to be either the victims or perpetrators of violence. Since the start of this pilot, we have seen homicides and nonfatal shootings in the Western District — historically the most violent of Baltimore’s police districts — drop by a combined 34 percent as of Dec. 31.
Through this strategy, my Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement (MONSE) manages the coordination of law enforcement, the justice system, the community and social service partners to offer individuals the resources to walk away from violence while creating swift, certain and legitimate accountability for those who continue to engage in violent activity. Last year, I made a historic $50 million investment to MONSE in American Rescue Plan Act dollars for violence prevention, which largely funds GVRS implementation.
An act of violence doesn’t start or end when someone pulls a trigger. There are countless points along the way where we can intervene. Building meaningful, impactful public safety requires the creation of pathways for behavioral health services, housing support, life coaching, case management and other resources to ensure that a situation never gets to the moment at which a person harms another human being.
For example, at a weekly review of shootings in the Western District, police intelligence indicates that the brother of a recent murder victim is planning retaliatory violence against the suspected shooters. MONSE then works with trusted community partners to locate the brother while engaging a group of credible messengers tailored to the person and situation, including loved ones, faith leaders, community leaders and law enforcement.
Once located, the brother is invited to a meeting with these credible messengers where he is asked how he is and what he needs, and is reassured that it is our priority to ensure that he remains safe, alive and free. He is also informed that law enforcement is aware that he is planning an act of retaliation and that this act would result in harm to his children, his mother and himself.
He is presented with a choice: (1) agree not to resort to violence and be connected with supports, including emergency relocation and mental health and other services, or (2) face swift and certain consequences that put his freedom, life and safety at risk. The brother agrees to step away from his plan of retaliation. He is immediately referred to Baltimore’s Youth Advocate Programs, through which he receives intensive case management and support.
I’m in broad agreement with that plan but I should admit that I am skeptical about the effectiveness of support services and convinced that “swift and certain consequences” are key to reducing crime and violence in the “most vulnerable communities”. IMO a key problem is that city hall, law enforcement, states attorneys offices, defenders, and judges all need to be pulling in the same direction. The objective should be “swift and certain” justice, whether that means conviction or acquittal.
A comparison with another similar district in which such a “pilot program” had not been introduced might have been illuminating. I guess you can’t have everything. In the past such comparative studies have supported the possibly counter-intuitive notion that additional police presence does not, in fact, have much impact on crime. Had a comparable district not experienced similar declines in violence it would be powerful evidence in support of the program.
A well informed backwoods ER Doctor has assured me that there is no “crime wave” in large cities. Rural communities have been taken over by musket toting Amish gangs. I think the corn cobs in his outhouse have been stolen multiple times and his mailbox is smashed once a week.
In other news, pigs can fly.
The problem is that the criminal’s right are more important than their victim’s rights. Until that changes, police attrition will continue, and increasing the salary will attract people who are in it for the money.
Here is the sad part. They have identified the source of many of the shootings and murders. Like the Hatfields and McCoys, many of these are non-gang related feuds, and until the “justice system” starts working, street justice will prevail.
Then feel free to cite the data that crime in general has increased. Homicides had increased but not crime in general. Surprised people on the right still think crime is a problem. The week after the election stories about crime in the right wing media dropped precipitously. I am going to go out on a limb and predict that they ramp up again when the next election nears, along with Hunter Biden claims and maybe even new claims about Benghazi. Surely you guys can manage another 4 or 5 Benghazi investigations.
Steve
@steve
You do not have a clue as to what goes on in the mid to large US cities. We do not care about “crime in general”. Violent crime is up, and we do care.
You may think that it is wonderful that fewer mailboxes are being smashed, but in New Orleans, that rates that below jaywalking. Here, jaywalking is how you cross a street.
Furthermore, a lot of crimes are not even reported. If the police show up, nothing is going to happen. (Unless there is a dead body, they may not get there for hours or days to take a report. Yes, days.)
I guess that Chicago and Baltimore Democrat politicians are part of the “vast right wing conspiracy”. If you really think so, do your own field research in Chicago, Baltimore, or New Orleans. I can drop you off in a few neighborhoods for you to gather data, but make sure your affairs are in order, first.
Meh. I am old now but in the 70s and 80s, when crime was worse, I worked in West Philly and North Philly. We used to go into the projects for home visits. Been shot at and stabbed twice. I am well aware of what some neighborhoods are like, but not that interested in swapping anecdotes. Prefer data.
Oh, and in Frank Rizzos Philly lots of crime, especially in the darker areas was ignored also.
Steve
@steve
If you require data, you will need to disaggregate it yourself. I am not being obtuse, but I am not aware of any authoritative source to reference. For New Orleans, you can research NOPD Data and Dashboards.
The FBI has a “Uniform Crime Reporting Program”, but from what I can tell it is nationwide. Unfortunately, New Orleans residents are not interested in what happens in the backwoods of West Virginia. I am sure it is a wonderful place, but we like indoor plumbing.
(You will need to google the FBI site. If I add the link it will most likely get caught in the moderation holding cell.)
Getting the raw data is your first step. To disaggregate it, you will need to understand the terms each location uses to define a crime, and you will need to exclude the non-violent crimes. The first will require you to understand each location’s Criminal Code. The second is more subjective.
Usually, murder is similar enough, but in Louisiana, not all homicides are murder. In Louisiana, there is no “assault and battery”. They are separate and mutually exclusive crimes. Assault is an attempted battery. Both have an “Aggravated” version, and this denotes a weapon or serious bodily harm.
In Louisiana, robbery is theft against a person(s), and burglary is theft in a structure or vehicle. Armed robbery includes a weapon or serious bodily harm. Aggravated burglary includes a weapon or serious bodily harm, but it also requires a person to be present.
In other states, these are not the same, and in many cases, they should not be aggregated. The FBI database may distinguish these differences, But I doubt it.
In Louisiana, I would include 1st & 2nd degree murder, attempted 1st & 2nd degree murder, aggravated battery, aggravated assault, armed robbery, and aggravated burglary, at a minimum.
Manslaughter is an unintentional homicide, but it requires “sudden passion or heat of blood”. While manslaughter is a violent crime, I may not include it. I would not include negligent homicide, but I may include vehicular homicide.
(The LA Criminal Code starts at the lowest version, and it adds elements to increase the severity. So, negligent homicide is an unintentional homicide, and adding “sudden passion or heat of blood” makes it manslaughter.)
Rape is another violent crime. I think the Criminal Code was amended to make carjackings a distinct crime, and the simple version could still be considered violent. I would include shoplifting with jaywalking. Simple burglary is traumatic, but I would exclude it as well.
I know damn well that not one of the political pundits you read has done an analysis even close to mine, and the above is the short version. You are completely clueless as to what is happening in mid and large cities, today.