If he gets reelected, the hard-won bipartisan consensus for criminal justice reform will be dead, paving the way for a draconian crackdown when crime is at a historic low
How nefarious! The FBI makes an ESTIMATE and subsequently revises them. The revision is characterized as "quiet" implying a lack of transparency according to the partisan hacks having taken over the oversight committee. Even though those revisions were publicly available when published.
Trump lies, let's get that out of the way. But much of this essay is a demonstration of how one's biases lead one to interpret data which has many potentially different interpretations. You assert: "Before giving a fuller account of the crime rate, let me explain how criminologists like me make sense of the data and how we know that crime is down." But not all crime is down, and it's not down in all locations. And even if it is "down," a better question might be "from what baseline?" This is a big country with many potentially different outcomes/answers to the big questions: is crime a problem, what's the trendline, what works and what doesn't? You do your readers a disservice when you frame these important questions inside the binary framework anchored in Trump's dishonesty. I get that one of the zeitgeists of the UnPopulist is to oppose populism and DJT. It's a legit crusade. But I found more credibility in this piece from The Free Press:
"Vice President Kamala Harris has talked about how violent crime is at a 50-year low, a statement that, while largely accurate, came back to haunt her when the FBI recently updated its stats for 2022 and showed an increase over the previous year rather than a decrease.
"What’s the truth about crime in America? Are things worse? Or better? In a highly polarized election year, the answer is often: What do you want it to be?”
Data on crime has been weaponized and politicized, just like everything else. I had a good friend who was a detective in a major US city explain this to me. Until they explained this to me, I was oblivious to the politics of it as well.
When governments stop prosecuting certain crimes (like for example decriminalizing theft under $1000) of COURSE crime statistics are going to drop. Duh.
And yet major cities have never felt less safe. Try walking through many of them alone at night..something you could easily do 5 years ago.
“In 2023, the FBI initially reported an estimated 1.7 percent decrease in violent crime in 2022 but later quietly revised the report to show a 4.5 percent increase––a staggering 6.2 percent change.”
The article you responded to within two minutes of publication, despite being an article that takes longer than that to read, acknowledges the very fact you desperately shot in here to say: "The FBI’s crime rate calculations have been the center of controversy because its 2022 figures were updated from a 1.7% decrease in violent crime to an 4.9% increase."
It's the "quietly" part of the quote that Craig supplied, and is not present in your summary that matters, it seems to me. There are suggestions that crime data has been politicized. It makes people like me—lawyer, not criminologist—wary of people who use data for political purposes, as this essay does.
First, thanks for reading. We appreciate both readers who find value in our content and readers who wish the analysis had gone a bit differently.
But consider the possibility that "there are suggestions" doesn't by itself automatically merit the elevation of those suggestions into a legitimate concern. Yes, "there are suggestions" that the FBI has fudged the numbers for political purposes. Just as Trump and allies will suggest anything at all that is politically usable for them, the facts be damned. But when we looked into those suggestions we didn't find any basis for them.
Here is our section on this broader point:
"Since pundits and politicians are focusing on short-term assessments, let’s start there. According to the FBI’s latest comprehensive yearly report, nationwide, violent crime (overall) decreased (3%) in 2023, as did the homicide rate (11.6%), the rape rate (9.4%), the robbery rate (0.3%), and the aggravated assault rate (2.8%). These numbers are not terribly significant, but many will be reassured to see them going in the right direction and not, as Trump has been suggesting, the other way.
The FBI’s crime rate calculations have been the center of controversy because its 2022 figures were updated from a 1.7% decrease in violent crime to an 4.9% increase. Although updates are typical (as noted above), and neither figure is significant (meaning both numbers are consistent with standard annual fluctuations), the Trump campaign touted this flip as vindication and proof that crime is out of control under the Biden-Harris administration. As a FactCheck.org assessment concluded, 'Even with the revisions, however, the 2022—and 2023—figures for violent crime, and murder specifically, are lower than the figures for 2020.'"
We think this summary captures everything relevant to this controversy: the FBI's adjustments, the controversy surrounding it, and a link to finding out more from a source we concluded had assessed the matter adequately.
If you go to that Fact Check assessment, it goes into great detail about the very question you're concerned about. It quotes Adam Gelb, president and CEO of the independent Council on Criminal Justice, who says this: "Gelb told us that the FBI 'could’ve handled this much better' and 'the way that it’s playing out does undermine public confidence.' But 'there’s no evidence of any political interference from the administration. None whatsoever. The FBI aggregates these numbers that are supplied by state and local law enforcement.' He’s 'not aware of a single agency that said, ‘Hey they garbled our numbers.'”
We supplied a resource for our readers to chase this down, if they desired, and we acknowledged the FBI's adjustments. But because we ultimately agree with Gelb's assessment, we didn't include a word that automatically carried with it an indication that there was suspicious behavior here.
How nefarious! The FBI makes an ESTIMATE and subsequently revises them. The revision is characterized as "quiet" implying a lack of transparency according to the partisan hacks having taken over the oversight committee. Even though those revisions were publicly available when published.
Trump lies, let's get that out of the way. But much of this essay is a demonstration of how one's biases lead one to interpret data which has many potentially different interpretations. You assert: "Before giving a fuller account of the crime rate, let me explain how criminologists like me make sense of the data and how we know that crime is down." But not all crime is down, and it's not down in all locations. And even if it is "down," a better question might be "from what baseline?" This is a big country with many potentially different outcomes/answers to the big questions: is crime a problem, what's the trendline, what works and what doesn't? You do your readers a disservice when you frame these important questions inside the binary framework anchored in Trump's dishonesty. I get that one of the zeitgeists of the UnPopulist is to oppose populism and DJT. It's a legit crusade. But I found more credibility in this piece from The Free Press:
"Vice President Kamala Harris has talked about how violent crime is at a 50-year low, a statement that, while largely accurate, came back to haunt her when the FBI recently updated its stats for 2022 and showed an increase over the previous year rather than a decrease.
"What’s the truth about crime in America? Are things worse? Or better? In a highly polarized election year, the answer is often: What do you want it to be?”
https://www.thefp.com/p/trump-harris-crime-fbi-statistics?utm_source=publication-search
Data on crime has been weaponized and politicized, just like everything else. I had a good friend who was a detective in a major US city explain this to me. Until they explained this to me, I was oblivious to the politics of it as well.
When governments stop prosecuting certain crimes (like for example decriminalizing theft under $1000) of COURSE crime statistics are going to drop. Duh.
And yet major cities have never felt less safe. Try walking through many of them alone at night..something you could easily do 5 years ago.
Nice try.
He maybe even knows that he is lying but he wants to dope his cult-style voters with lies.
R > D on crime shown here:
https://yostpost.substack.com/p/empirical-proof-that-the-uniparty
“In 2023, the FBI initially reported an estimated 1.7 percent decrease in violent crime in 2022 but later quietly revised the report to show a 4.5 percent increase––a staggering 6.2 percent change.”
https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-demands-transparency-from-fbi-about-quietly-revised-crime-statistics/#:~:text=In%202023%2C%20the%20FBI%20initially,a%20staggering%206.2%20percent%20change.
The article you responded to within two minutes of publication, despite being an article that takes longer than that to read, acknowledges the very fact you desperately shot in here to say: "The FBI’s crime rate calculations have been the center of controversy because its 2022 figures were updated from a 1.7% decrease in violent crime to an 4.9% increase."
It's the "quietly" part of the quote that Craig supplied, and is not present in your summary that matters, it seems to me. There are suggestions that crime data has been politicized. It makes people like me—lawyer, not criminologist—wary of people who use data for political purposes, as this essay does.
First, thanks for reading. We appreciate both readers who find value in our content and readers who wish the analysis had gone a bit differently.
But consider the possibility that "there are suggestions" doesn't by itself automatically merit the elevation of those suggestions into a legitimate concern. Yes, "there are suggestions" that the FBI has fudged the numbers for political purposes. Just as Trump and allies will suggest anything at all that is politically usable for them, the facts be damned. But when we looked into those suggestions we didn't find any basis for them.
Here is our section on this broader point:
"Since pundits and politicians are focusing on short-term assessments, let’s start there. According to the FBI’s latest comprehensive yearly report, nationwide, violent crime (overall) decreased (3%) in 2023, as did the homicide rate (11.6%), the rape rate (9.4%), the robbery rate (0.3%), and the aggravated assault rate (2.8%). These numbers are not terribly significant, but many will be reassured to see them going in the right direction and not, as Trump has been suggesting, the other way.
The FBI’s crime rate calculations have been the center of controversy because its 2022 figures were updated from a 1.7% decrease in violent crime to an 4.9% increase. Although updates are typical (as noted above), and neither figure is significant (meaning both numbers are consistent with standard annual fluctuations), the Trump campaign touted this flip as vindication and proof that crime is out of control under the Biden-Harris administration. As a FactCheck.org assessment concluded, 'Even with the revisions, however, the 2022—and 2023—figures for violent crime, and murder specifically, are lower than the figures for 2020.'"
We think this summary captures everything relevant to this controversy: the FBI's adjustments, the controversy surrounding it, and a link to finding out more from a source we concluded had assessed the matter adequately.
If you go to that Fact Check assessment, it goes into great detail about the very question you're concerned about. It quotes Adam Gelb, president and CEO of the independent Council on Criminal Justice, who says this: "Gelb told us that the FBI 'could’ve handled this much better' and 'the way that it’s playing out does undermine public confidence.' But 'there’s no evidence of any political interference from the administration. None whatsoever. The FBI aggregates these numbers that are supplied by state and local law enforcement.' He’s 'not aware of a single agency that said, ‘Hey they garbled our numbers.'”
We supplied a resource for our readers to chase this down, if they desired, and we acknowledged the FBI's adjustments. But because we ultimately agree with Gelb's assessment, we didn't include a word that automatically carried with it an indication that there was suspicious behavior here.
Call me Daniel Dale.
Or FOS!!!