A Kiddie Crime Epidemic? Hardly
Falsely pitting the recent crime uptick on youths cynically plays on older generations' fears on race.
Mike Males
MIKE MALES is
senior researcher for the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice in San
Francisco.
Los Angeles Times
September 17, 2006
'WE ARE here to say, 'America, we have a problem,' " Los Angeles Police Chief
William J. Bratton told the Police Executive Research Forum in Washington last
month. "Crime is coming back, and it has a new and troubling element … a
youthful population that is largely disassociated from the mainstream of
America."
According to Bratton, the nation needs to "refocus on this gathering storm of
crime."
But go to the Los Angeles Police Department's website and you'll see a different
story: "Crime has been reduced 15% in the past year," it beams. The LAPD's Sept.
9 report shows drops in homicide (down 4%), rape (down 4%) and overall violent
crime (down 1%) compared with the same period in 2005, on top of a 28% decline
in violent crime from 2004 to 2005.
The fact is, violent crime in and around Los Angeles today is at its lowest
point in 35 years, according to figures from the Criminal Justice Statistics
Center in the California attorney general's office.
This year is headed for the fewest homicides since 1971, when the city had a
million fewer people.
As for the new and troubling youth population Bratton is so worried about, it
too may be much smaller than he seems to be suggesting. Whether more dissociated
youth inhabit Los Angeles today than, say, back in 1969's Manson family days is
hard to say, but what is clear is that they are not reflected in the LAPD's
latest crime figures.
In fact, the figures show the least criminal and violent younger generation
since accurate statistics were first compiled. Rates of criminal arrest of L.A.
youth in 2005 were staggeringly lower than 30 years ago: Homicide is down 55%;
rape, 81%; robbery, 21%; assault, 44%; property felonies, 83%; drug offenses,
52%; and misdemeanors, 60%.
The huge decline in homicide, violence and crime by L.A. youth over the last
decade coincided with record increases in the teenage population and more youths
on the streets than ever before. Fewer teens today are incarcerated in state and
local juvenile facilities than at any time in at least half a century.
Other California cities have also seen impressive, three-decade plunges in crime
by youths. Contrary to claims that urban teenagers have become more violent and
criminal, youthful arrest rates for both violent and property offenses in San
Diego, San Jose, San Francisco, Long Beach, Fresno, Sacramento and Oakland all
are sharply lower today — down by 25% to 80%, depending on offense and time
period — than they were in the 1970s, 1980s or 1990s.
Contradicting warnings that urban youth crime has spread to suburbs, violence
and crime by youths in areas surrounding California's major cities also declined
rapidly in recent decades to the lowest levels ever recorded.
But reality morphs in Washington, where federal funds are disbursed and the
national media are ever-eager to trumpet alarms about youth. Bratton was one of
many police chiefs at the Washington forum who played the "youth card" to pitch
for more money and officers even as their departments' statistics show much
calmer realities back home.
"We are turning the country over to our young people, and they are killing each
other," said Providence, R.I., Police Chief Dean Esserman, claiming a spike in
robbery shootings. "Violence has become gratuitous."
But crime statistics posted on the websites of the Providence Police Department
and the Rhode Island State Police reveal that violent crime rates and juvenile
violence arrests in Providence fell in the years 2003 to 2005, including for
robbery, compared with what they were in the previous three years.
In city after city where police and news stories proclaimed soaring juvenile
gunplay, official crime statistics showed nothing of the sort. In fact,
tabulations of arrestees by the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports and the California
Criminal Justice Statistics Center show that in 2004 and 2005, criminal
arrestees were older than in the past. The median age of a violent felon
nationally in 2004 was 30, the oldest level in half a century, up from 27.8 in
1990 and 26.3 in 1975. The latest FBI crime clearance statistics show juveniles
committed fewer than 5% of the nation's homicides, the smallest proportion ever
recorded.
Los Angeles County provides a stark contrast: 35,000 juvenile felony arrests in
1975, 26,000 in 1995, 18,000 in 2005. Their over-40 parents' generation has gone
the other way: 9,000 felonies in 1975, 24,000 in 1995, 35,000 in 2005. How can
law enforcement, interest groups, academics and the news media continue to
ignore such striking trends?
The subterfuge is accomplished simply: Even when crime is down and youth arrests
are plummeting, there is always some offense in some city in some year that rose
when compared to some previous year. For example, Los Angeles' teenage homicide
and assault rates dropped sharply from 2004 to 2005, and robbery arrest rates
have plunged 50% in the last decade — but robbery rates did rise by 3% in 2005.
Bratton, law enforcement and other interests may hype imaginary epidemics of
"youth violence" as cynical political ploys to win attention and funding, but
there's no doubt that most Americans (police included) honestly believe today's
young people are more threatening and violent than those of the past. Why is
this? Why do officials find it so pathetically easy to incite and re-incite
visceral fears of the young even as solid evidence shows violent offenders are
getting older?
Perhaps the answer lies in simple demographics. In a state and nation in which
overwhelmingly white older generations confront younger generations that are
rapidly becoming (indeed, in California, have already become) mostly Latino,
black and Asian, raising the alarm of "youth violence" arouses elders' worst
anxieties that racial change means more crime and chaos.
If all we elders can do is to keep reviving the century-old fear of youth and
minorities while ignoring the serious crime threat in older generations, then
maybe we would be better off turning the country over to young people.