7 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 31.8 ms ] thread
Both sides lie, it's all media click bait. Politicians use it to keep everyone polarized. Chris Rock got it right.
This is pretty crazy. If true, murder rates are extremely sensitive to public perception of the system.

This means that the most rudimentary status-quo thought of protecting the police image as an end of itself is actually the most utilitarian position of all.

Maybe as faith in the system declines, people are more likely to take matters into their own hands. So some of the murders would have previously been police killings, or arrests.
I think this has some truth to it. People that can't trust the criminal justice system handle problems outside of the system and I don't think it's a negligible % of total murders. Community justice takes over and skews overall crime data for certain communities.
I don't think this is the most likely explanation. The Article points out various explanations.

The impact on murders and crime seems to be short lived, compared to police homicides. That's also good sign.

(comment deleted)
Roland Fryer mentioned this a while ago while discussing his paper on racial dispartiies in police use of force last year in a YT interview, he predicted an increase of felonies (100k's of felonies including 60k additional shootings i beleive were the numbers he used), due to 2020 politicans endorsing anti-police protests + large protests.

a big correlation for the uptick in crime he argued was related to politicans endorsing protesting controvercial police incidents + protests, which historically is assosciated with significant sharp upticks in crime.

https://scholar.harvard.edu/fryer/publications/empirical-ana...