Colorado: Crime down after legalization

[Loren Pechtel]

http://www.vox.com/2014/5/13/571137...zed-pot-sales-revenue-is-up-and-crime-is-down

To me this is a DUH! thing but there are some deniers around.

 

[Jokodo]

http://www.vox.com/2014/5/13/571137...zed-pot-sales-revenue-is-up-and-crime-is-down

To me this is a DUH! thing but there are some deniers around.

It would be nice to have multi-year trends of crime rates for comparison. The reduction seems rather slight and might well be just continuing a trend starting well before legalisation. And even if it didn't - if there's no multi year trend of crime reduction in Colorado - I'm highly doubtful that such a small change is significant.

Note that I don't disagree in principle - it seems pretty logical to me that legalisation would if anything reduce crime - but there's probably to much noise in the data to actually see this effect.

 

[Perspicuo]

Correlation doesn't mean... oh what the heck, pass me the joint!

 

[dystopian]

It would be nice to have multi-year trends of crime rates for comparison.

Good thing there's other countries that have had legalized drugs for years then; they all show pretty much the same effect over many years: a significant reduction in ancillary crimes as a result of legalization or tolerance practices. On this side of the pond, the correlation was already well established to the point of being incontrovertible back in the early 90's. There's really no reason to expect colorado to somehow being the exception to the rule and imagine there's no connection between its new drug policies and reduction in ancillary crime; doing so requires a complete ignorance of what's been going on for decades in other parts of the world.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

... doing so requires a complete ignorance of what's been going on for decades in other parts of the world.

Isn't that what being an American is all about?

 

[J842P]

It would be nice to have multi-year trends of crime rates for comparison.

Good thing there's other countries that have had legalized drugs for years then; they all show pretty much the same effect over many years: a significant reduction in ancillary crimes as a result of legalization or tolerance practices. On this side of the pond, the correlation was already well established to the point of being incontrovertible back in the early 90's. There's really no reason to expect colorado to somehow being the exception to the rule and imagine there's no connection between its new drug policies and reduction in ancillary crime; doing so requires a complete ignorance of what's been going on for decades in other parts of the world.

Yeah. The United States will suddenly discover this fact too, and will once again be the beacon of freedom in the world ::wavesflag::

That is how I predict the eventual full legalization of marijuana in the USA will be framed in the USA media. No mention of the asinine failure to learn from the policy decisions of other countries. Because "America is no.1!" Thus, we are and always were leading the way. Of course, the world is changing now. I don't know how much longer that nationalist narrative can survive in the mind of the American polity in a world that tends to greater media heterogeneity, which I must assume will be effected by the rise of the internet.

But at least on the topic of marijuana legalization, the electorate will not learn from its mistakes, and the politicians will continue with their song and dance.

 

[fromderinside]

Isn't that what being an American is all about?

American? You want American.

"If they legalize and regulate drugs I'll demand I be put back in a Tiger Cage because American freedom will have been lost forever." John McCain from under the floor of the Senate in the mind of FDI

 

[Jokodo]

It would be nice to have multi-year trends of crime rates for comparison.

Good thing there's other countries that have had legalized drugs for years then; they all show pretty much the same effect over many years: a significant reduction in ancillary crimes as a result of legalization or tolerance practices. On this side of the pond, the correlation was already well established to the point of being incontrovertible back in the early 90's. There's really no reason to expect colorado to somehow being the exception to the rule and imagine there's no connection between its new drug policies and reduction in ancillary crime; doing so requires a complete ignorance of what's been going on for decades in other parts of the world.

Look, I'm not saying that legalising drugs doesn't cause a reduction in crime (and I'm incidentally on the same side of the Atlantic as you). What I'm saying is that the data presented isn't good enough to show that it does. And that's a fact. Just because the link is real doesn't change that fact either.

 

[TV and credit cards]

But at the end of the day won't the crime stats take a backseat to revenue being up? That's easier to quantify. I mean, if a few more Little Debbies start disappearing off the shelves, we're still good.

I really think this will be looked at in a light that shines proportionally as with legalized gambling. That is, if issues do arise, tax revenue may be diverted toward social/police programs but no one's going to kill this cow. It's been my observation that politicians are loathe to stop a revenue stream.

 

[dystopian]

Look, I'm not saying that legalising drugs doesn't cause a reduction in crime (and I'm incidentally on the same side of the Atlantic as you). What I'm saying is that the data presented isn't good enough to show that it does. And that's a fact. Just because the link is real doesn't change that fact either.

Uhm, do you mean the data presented in the case of Colorado? Because elsewhere the data is most certainly good enough to show exactly that. If there's equivalent situations elsewhere in the world; with ample and good data to show a substantial effect; then why the hell would we complain that the limited amount of data in colorado that shows the exact thing we'd expect and which is perfectly in line with well established precedent isn't good enough to show correlation? That's like reinventing the wheel everytime you get into a new wheeled vehicle.

 

[Jokodo]

Look, I'm not saying that legalising drugs doesn't cause a reduction in crime (and I'm incidentally on the same side of the Atlantic as you). What I'm saying is that the data presented isn't good enough to show that it does. And that's a fact. Just because the link is real doesn't change that fact either.

Uhm, do you mean the data presented in the case of Colorado? <snip>

Yes. And indeed, this thread is about Colorado. And no, just because we happen to know, from other data, that the correlation presented very likely indeed reflects a causal relation doesn't change the fact that it is in itself insufficient to show such.

 

[dystopian]

Look, I'm not saying that legalising drugs doesn't cause a reduction in crime (and I'm incidentally on the same side of the Atlantic as you). What I'm saying is that the data presented isn't good enough to show that it does. And that's a fact. Just because the link is real doesn't change that fact either.

Uhm, do you mean the data presented in the case of Colorado? <snip>

Yes. And indeed, this thread is about Colorado. And no, just because we happen to know, from other data, that the correlation presented very likely indeed reflects a causal relation doesn't change the fact that it is in itself insufficient to show such.

So, if we've observed that the sun rises in the morning-time and sets in the evening time 364 days of the year, and on each day we've done the math necessary to show that this has something to do with the earth's orbit around the sun; we don't have sufficient evidence to declare that the sun rising and setting on the 365th day has something to do with the earth's orbit without first doing the math? Huh?

 

[Jokodo]

Look, I'm not saying that legalising drugs doesn't cause a reduction in crime (and I'm incidentally on the same side of the Atlantic as you). What I'm saying is that the data presented isn't good enough to show that it does. And that's a fact. Just because the link is real doesn't change that fact either.

Uhm, do you mean the data presented in the case of Colorado? <snip>

Yes. And indeed, this thread is about Colorado. And no, just because we happen to know, from other data, that the correlation presented very likely indeed reflects a causal relation doesn't change the fact that it is in itself insufficient to show such.

So, if we've observed that the sun rises in the morning-time and sets in the evening time 364 days of the year, and on each day we've done the math necessary to show that this has something to do with the earth's orbit around the sun; we don't have sufficient evidence to declare that the sun rising and setting on the 365th day has something to do with the earth's orbit without first doing the math? Huh?

No, it's more like saying that we have good evidence that the earth is getting warmer, but the fact that it's warmer today in Madrid or Amsterdam than it was on any May 19 between 2010 and 2013 doesn't in itself constitute such evidence (no more than the fact that it's colder than this day last year in Belgrade, Vienna, or Palermo constitutes evidence against).

 

[dismal]

It would be nice to have multi-year trends of crime rates for comparison.

Good thing there's other countries that have had legalized drugs for years then; they all show pretty much the same effect over many years: a significant reduction in ancillary crimes as a result of legalization or tolerance practices. On this side of the pond, the correlation was already well established to the point of being incontrovertible back in the early 90's. There's really no reason to expect colorado to somehow being the exception to the rule and imagine there's no connection between its new drug policies and reduction in ancillary crime; doing so requires a complete ignorance of what's been going on for decades in other parts of the world.

Look, I'm not saying that legalising drugs doesn't cause a reduction in crime (and I'm incidentally on the same side of the Atlantic as you). What I'm saying is that the data presented isn't good enough to show that it does. And that's a fact. Just because the link is real doesn't change that fact either.

Yeah, I don't see why it wouldn't reduce crime but it's pretty silly to be claiming this result with this superficial an analysis of this amount of data.

 

[Elixir]

I live in Colorado and work with nationwide law enforcement every day. It has been surprising to note how various LE personnel tend to view the CO phenomenon from the outside. Most of them will admit in private that the whole kerfuffle is a tempest in a teapot, even as they loudly warn against the dangers of laxity when it comes to the availability of weed to minors. Mostly, I think they would like to see their own states relieve them of having to waste time ticketing or arresting people who smoke or are caught in possession of small amounts of pot. There certainly doesn't seem to be any unified sentiment against "The Killer Weed" of the 50s among LE agencies or individuals, so I don't expect it will be long before it goes legal nationwide.

 

[SimpleDon]

By definition when you reduce the things that you call a crime you are going to reduce crime.

If you eliminated all criminal statutes you would eliminate all legally recognized crime. It would be sort of like expanding the rational behind the fantasy of the free market to all of the interactions between the members of society. Get government out of our lives completely. Reduce regulation. You know, crazy talk.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

By definition when you reduce the things that you call a crime you are going to reduce crime.

If you eliminated all criminal statutes you would eliminate all legally recognized crime. It would be sort of like expanding the rational behind the fantasy of the free market to all of the interactions between the members of society. Get government out of our lives completely. Reduce regulation. You know, crazy talk.

But this is about other crime dropping.

 

[James Brown]

I didn't see anything in the article, but what should also be down after legalization is crime directly tied to prohibition. For example, no marijuana user was arrested last week in Colorado and then became a victim of assault while in custody.

Even if all other crimes remained flat before and after legalization, and factoring out the criminality of marijuana possession, then overall crimes could still be down.

 

[bilby]

... doing so requires a complete ignorance of what's been going on for decades in other parts of the world.

Isn't that what being an American is all about?

It is in their constitution, I think. I don't know, because I do my best to remain wilfully ignorant of anything that happens in the USA.