Tagged: violent crime

Police Stops and Naïve Denominators

In their 2025 article published in Crime Science, Jerry Ratcliffe and Shelley Hyland critically examine how reported racial disparities in police stop data can be misleading. They argue that much of the misrepresentation stems from the widespread use of an inappropriate baseline, or “denominator,” when calculating stop rates.

Typically, analysts compare the distribution of police stops across different racial groups to the distribution in the total city population. Unfortunately, this method does not account for differences regarding who is actually more or less likely to encounter police stops. In doing so, this approach ignores important factors such as the uneven geographic distribution of crime and variations in police deployment. According to the authors, by relying on this “naïve denominator,” studies risk overstating racial disparities. Ratcliffe and Hyland’s work challenges researchers, policymakers, and the public to reconsider how police stop data should be interpreted to paint a more accurate and nuanced picture of racial bias in law enforcement.

Continue reading . . .

$380m federally funded Justice Reinvestment Initiative fails to deliver on public safety promises

The federal Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), launched in 2010 and funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), was designed to help states reduce prison populations through legislative reform and evidence-based practices. The initiative offers grant funding as an incentive for states to revise sentencing, pretrial, and community supervision policies. The core idea is to save money by reducing incarceration and reinvesting those savings into local, community-based programs that address root causes of criminal behavior, such as mental health and substance use issues, with the ultimate goal of lowering recidivism.

Despite these aims, there is limited evidence that JRI reforms have consistently achieved their intended outcomes. While many state programs report success in reducing their prison populations, these analyses often rely on superficial data and overlook critical metrics such as public safety. The lack of rigorous evaluation, narrow definitions of “success,” and inconsistent implementation have led to growing concerns—especially about whether offenders released under JRI reforms are adequately supervised.

A recent report published by CJLF critically assesses the impact of JRI, exploring the shortcomings of its implementation in various states. Policymakers are urged to adopt a more cautious, evidence-based approach, including piloting programs and closely monitoring outcomes to ensure public safety is not compromised in the name of reform.

Continue reading . . .

Understanding the 2020–2021 homicide spike in the U.S.: Causes, variations, and recovery patterns

The United States experienced a sharp rise in homicide rates during 2020–2021, prompting widespread research into one of the most significant crime surges on record. A recently published study by the Manhattan Institute analyzed homicide patterns in 78 large cities, identifying shifts in city-level trends and exploring links to policing disruptions, social unrest, and pandemic-related economic changes. While the study was not designed to evaluate criminal justice reform initiatives, its findings have implications for understanding the social context in which many of these programs were implemented.

Researchers found that the spike in homicides was tended to be more severe in cities and communities already struggling with high baseline violence, with contributing factors including reduced police staffing, disrupted public services, and concentrated group-related gun violence. Surprisingly, unemployment shifts during the pandemic were not consistent predictors of rising homicides, challenging common assumptions.

Continue reading . . .

Prop 47’s impact on crime in California

When California voters passed Proposition 47 in 2014, the goal was noble: decrease incarceration rates for nonviolent offenders and redirect resources towards rehabilitation and public safety programs. The measure reclassified certain felonies to misdemeanors, thereby lowering the severity of penalties for certain offenses, and has been touted as a revolutionary step in California’s criminal justice reform. Proponents argued that this would lead to reduced recidivism and better community outcomes. However, a decade later, the reality is far from the success story many hoped for. A recent paper by the Manhattan Institute discusses some of the ways in which Prop. 47 has negatively impacted public safety and health and put strain on county resources.

Continue reading . . .

The power of communities in crime prevention: Insights from Baltimore

Crime tends to be concentrated in specific areas within cities, with about 50% of crime occurring on just 5% of streets. One police strategy that can help combat this is known as “hot-spot policing,” which has been shown to reduce violent crime in multiple studies.  Another factor that can help reduce crime in an area is when citizens exercise “informal social control.” Informal social control refers to the ability of community members to regulate behavior and maintain order through cohesive relationships, mutual trust, and willingness to intervene.  It involves residents taking actions to prevent and address crime and disorder in their neighborhoods.

One common assumption is that the chatoic and disordered nature of high-crime hot spots renders residents incapable of playing a significant role in crime prevention. However, a new study conducted in Baltimore seems to reveal otherwise.

Continue reading . . .

Unveiling the impact of depolicing on crime: Insights from Denver’s neighborhoods

A new research study published in Criminology examined the impact of sudden and sustained reductions in proactive policing (i.e., “de-policing”) on violent crime across neighborhoods in Denver, Colorado, leveraging the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and social unrest after the murder of George Floyd as exogenous shocks. The study utilized multilevel models to analyze the impact of large-scale reductions in police stops and drug-related arrests on violent and property crime in the city.

Continue reading . . .

Recidivism trends in California: New CDCR report

Recidivism rates are down, according to a new report by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). In a press release accompanying the report, they state that “the report marks the second year of data showing the effects of the passage of Proposition 57, and the findings point to lower recidivism rates for those who earned credits from participation and completion of rehabilitative programming.”  But this statement is misleading. While the data showed a slight decrease in recidivism rates, correlation does not equal causation, and this would be an overly simplistic interpretation of the data. There are other factors that could have contributed to recidivism rates, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, which influenced crime rates and caused many court closures and temporary suspensions of intakes and transfers to CDCR, which likely influenced recidivism measures in this report. The report did not rigorously evaluate the impacts of Prop 57, and therefore, the findings are not sufficient to demonstrate a casual relationship between Prop 57 and reduced recidivism rates. Continue reading . . .

Analyzing homicide trends: Republican vs. Democratic leadership

In the ever-evolving landscape of American politics and society, the question of how political affiliation relates to social phenomena remains a topic of enduring interest. One such subject, the fluctuating rates of homicide, serves as a poignant case in point. Numerous researchers, thinktanks, and policymakers have examined the stark variations in homicide rates that have emerged across these political divides. However, with so many factors at play influencing homicide rates, it becomes increasingly difficult to know how much variation is attributable to differences in political affiliation. In this post, I will dissect views from thinktanks on both side of the aisle and attempt to make some sense of this controversy. Continue reading . . .