Being tough on criminals hasn’t worked, but neither has being lenient. Here’s how to prevent—and punish—crime the right way.
Hela artikeln är klart läsvärd... nedan är ett lite oväntat utplock som kanske intresserar naturvetare som jag extra.
The wild card in the crime-control deck is lead abatement. The science is no longer in serious doubt (see Kevin Drum’s summing up in the January-February Mother Jones): Lead, even in very small doses, not only reduces IQ but also interferes directly with the systems in the brain that mediate self-command. Solid statistical evidence suggests that increasing lead exposure after World War II contributed to the great Boomer crime wave, and that EPA regulations starting in the 1970s that forced the conversion to unleaded gasoline were a major driver of the crime decline that started in the mid-1990s. /..../ Today’s children are still being exposed to damaging levels of lead from the soil (a leftover from lead in gasoline) and from residential buildings, and especially old window casings. The cost of abatement would be moderately stiff: Drum estimates something like $20 billion per year over 20 years, and arguably the process should move faster than that. Still, at that pace, lead abatement, while it was going on, would cost about 10 percent of our current criminal-justice expenditure, and nothing after that, for a permanent crime reduction likely—based on past experience—to be at least 10 percent. All the other cognitive and health benefits would be gravy.
En annan intressant artikel på temat är hittas hos BBC:
The UK Peace Index, published on Tuesday, attempts to answer a fascinating question: why has our country become "substantially and significantly" more peaceful?
som bland annat säger:
It goes on to admit that "many of the more common theories" refuse to stand up to scrutiny. The global financial crisis has seen many countries suffer severely in economic terms and yet levels of peacefulness have increased. The idea that violent crime goes up when the economy goes down is not backed by the evidence.