Via Strang’s Blog: Olle Wästberg, until just now Sweden’s consul general in New York, returns to Sweden on the wings of an an article extolling New York City’s crime rate in comparison to that of Sweden. Favorite topic!
Before I go on to question the validity of the comparison, let’s assume for a while that the numbers are valid at face value, as reported by Wästberg (and I certainly accept that the statistics are for similar populations):
New York had 598 murders in 2003. Sweden had 189 in the same year, according to the National Council for Crime Prevention. New York had 1,875 rapes, and Sweden 2,565. Assaults: 18,764 in New York against 65,177 in Sweden. Burglaries: 29,207 in New York against 122,700 in Sweden.New York hade 598 mord år 2003. Samma år hade Sverige, enligt Brottsförebyggande rådet, 189 mord. New York hade 1 875 våldtäkter och Sverige 2 565. Grov misshandel: 18 764 i New York mot 65 177 i Sverige. Inbrott: 29 207 i New York mot 122 700 i Sverige.
I found myself asking the question — If you had to choose between these two crime rate options for your society, which would you prefer? The answer is not immediately evident to me: I don’t grow attached to possessions, and am not a woman, so I gravitate towards the murder rate as being the ultimate arbiter of my personal safety. As long as I have my life at the end of the ordeal, I can cope with the rest, goes my thinking. But then, it’s a fact that most murders are committed by acquaintances, and if there is anything I am proud of it is my ability to choose friends with a propensity not to commit murder.
Let’s chart these crimes by category, in order of severity. How to acccount for the comparatively gentle slope of New York’s numbers? Gun ownership would be an explanation, were it not for the fact that guns are outlawed in New York.
I can think of two reasons, off the cuff, that might explain New York’s favorable “yield curve” for crime, and neither depend on levels of crime prevention spending:
First off, it is damn hard to be alone in New York. Walk home along Avenue B at 3am on a Monday and you’ll still have at least 10 potential witnesses to any crime — quite a deterrent. There is safety in numbers, and I used this basic observation to ensure that I never even came close to being mugged in my 12 accrued years of New York living, including extensive expeditions into what were considered dodgy areas at the time. At an average Swedish location, on the contrary, you are hard-pressed to find witnesses, let alone victims (so I’ve heard).
Second, in New York, people live on top of one another, and across from one another, and down the hall. In Sweden’s cities, too, there is such a thing as the apartment, though far rarer is the doorman (read private-sector crime prevention) — but in addition, more Swedes than New Yorkers live in isolated communities, removed from neighborhood watchers. All else being equal, then, more opportunities for burglary exist in Sweden, if only because the same amount of people are forced to live in approximately 370 times the spaceFrom Wikipedia: NYC surface area: 1,214.4 sq km. From CIA: Sweden surface area: 449,964 sq km..
But now for the boring part: Sweden’s crime statistics are structurally overreported. I’ve already covered by how much, and why, the murder rate is overreported. And Sweden’s National Council for Crime Prevention weighs in with several further good reasons [Swedish] why its crime rates might be actual multiples of those of other countries.
To return to Wästberg (and Patrick at Strang’s) thesis, which is that Sweden could benefit from more crime prevention spending — If I care predominantly about not dying, then I have to disagree, and here is why: Take a look at the causes of violent death in both Sweden and the US, from current reliable statistics that involve the counting of actual bodies. In Sweden, the murder rate is around 1 per 100,000 per year, and the suicide rate is around 16 per 100,000, for a grand total of 17 per 100,000 per year. In the US, the murder rate is 6 times as high, at around 6 per 100,000, whereas the suicide rate is a bit lower, at around 14 per 100,000, for a total of 20 per 100,000 per year.
Clearly, these totals are in the same ballpark. But it is also clear to me that if Sweden wants to reduce the overall number of violent deaths without spending more money, it should start spending less on crime prevention and more on suicide prevention. In other words, more psychiatrists, fewer police. But even if we were not being glib, and even if we were running for office on a law and order platform and promising more spending, I’d be prioritizing investment in Sweden’s collective mental health.
I would think the effect of latitude on Seasonal Affective Disorder would account for most, if not all, the difference in the suicide rate. You can’t really move all of Sweden’s population south for the winter. Maybe some investment in light therapy boxes instead of/in addition to more psychiatrists would be more effective.
Hunh. The measurement you’ve left out is the ratio of violent deaths vs. nutcases. OK, the Swedes are depressed. But New York is full of weirdos, oddballs, psychos and gonzo types. So on a per gonzo basis, the murder rate’s low, compared to, say, Columbine, where everyone is nice and normal and sprays machine gun fire at will. If weirdness is a symptom of self-expression and conformity is that of repression, then this may explain why the city’s murder rates have dropped like a brick over the past 15 years.
The crime stats deflators mentioned in the file you link to are probably not directly relevant to either the US in general or New York City in particular. Indirectly, there may be some relevancy since NYPD precinct commanders are graded on crime stats and thus have an incentive to depress reporting (prosecutors, OTOH, have an incentive to inflate the number of crimes they solve through convictions and plea bargains).
What almost always skews American crime statistics is the extremely high level of violence among African Americans. No other industrialized country has a segment of the population that large and that violence prone.
The flip side is that the drop in homicides is primarily due to a decrease of murders among said African-Americans.
It is not likely that gun laws have much impact on the homicie rate. Washington, D.C., has very strict gun laws, like NYC, but one of the worst murder rates in the country (typically 40+/100,000 ppl, many times the national rate).
It is of course up to you to decide what kind of crimes concern you the most, but you should understand that most people are less bothered by the remote prospect of getting killed and far more by the prospect of getting mugged or burglarized.
As an Australian,I love America and the way you kill each other. There are only 2 problems that I can see.
Arm every child from the age of 10 BUT every Male Child must be castrated at birth so that eventually all of you will be dead and then a new type of people can populate your country without ANY fire-arms in the country .
I hope it happens,aqnd please hurry KILL EACH OTHER NOW.