What causes a reduction in crime?
That is the holy grail of Jamaican politics — the leader who can bring about a reduction in crime.
So many great leaders have been sacrificed on the altar of crime control, and more specifically homicide control.
PJ Patterson, Edward Seaga, Portia Simpson Miller, all great people in their own special way, have all failed in this regard — the secret to making Jamaica safe again.
They were all so unique in their areas of expertise, all accomplished in their own right.
A scholar, a symbol of strength, and a beacon of womanhood in a misogynistic society. Yet these three great people couldn’t stop dummies from killing each other.
Why? What stops people from killing? In fact, what causes a reduction in crime in general?
Well, each crime has its own dynamic that assists its committal.
Say housebreaking for example, why did the committal of this crime reduce during COVID-19?
Well because, in fact, most persons were at home so the opportunity for the crime to be committed was gone.
Crime requires an opportunity for it to occur.
Rape also reduced during COVID-19; this was impacted by everyone being at home. But it’s still reducing and we’re all back at work. Well, not actually.
More people work from home nowadays so there are less persons venturing out of the security of their homes.
Many rape victims know their attackers, and it (rape) occurs at home.
Well, more people at home also removes the opportunity.
Shooting and murders are a dynamic to themselves. They also have several types which each respond to different stimuli.
Domestic murders are the hardest ones to control because they are the hardest to predict given the proximity between victim and offender and the consistency of contact.
Yet, there are mechanisms available to law enforcement in modern times to prevent and dissuade domestic violence, to include murders.
The primary one is being more reactive to complaints as it is highly unlikely that there is no build-up. So reports of domestic conflict are now treated seriously, totally different from how it was treated in the 80s.
There are counsellors available, in some police stations there is a separate office, and there are consequences to using violence against your family members.
You will be charged for physically assaulting your wife or brother once they sign the report.
If you are a firearm holder you can lose that gun licence; if you are a parent you can lose that child.
It may seem that these methods and systems are not working but domestic murders have not increased, in keeping with population growth. I honestly believe that these changes are contributors.
Our murders are primarily committed by gangs against persons with some degree of association with gangs. They are really hard to prevent as victims and offenders are usually in close proximity to each other, they are well armed, and the history of the acrimony goes back many years.
So occupation of the space by the armed forces typically prevents murders, which is why the zones of special operation (ZOSO) are so effective.
Consequences are another big factor. If there is a major consequence to an act of violence, especially murder, then it dissuades the act. This, of course, is gauged by the power of the State.
In countries like Cuba or China the power of the State in relation to remand is so extreme that the last thing you want to do is draw attention to yourself.
In countries like Taiwan which have so little crime but extreme State power, despite not being a communist society, getting the attention of the State is a formula for life remand.
So what causes our reduction and what is causing it now?
Well the first big reduction was the end of the civil war in 1980.
The stimuli was gone because the political parties stopped supplying it. Also, the offenders left in large numbers for the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. When they returned as deportees, the killing increased.
So, removal of offenders is a factor. This has been assisting the current reduction with the many persons who have been charged in recent times due to the anti-gang cases, and will help even further as more get sent away for long prison sentences due to the new gun Bill.
Long-term success, however, requires social intervention.
This includes an environment that creates a platform for the youth who has been influenced by the persons in his small circle, and the access to resources that allow for education to truly be accessed.
The approach by law enforcement to citizens of inner cities and slums, and the clear divisions that exist within society between persons who live a few yards apart, are also factors that will impact murders and the committal of same.
The introduction of a new immigrant group has historically impacted crime in some environments. The most notable being Miami and the surge in crime after the massive introduction of Cuban refugees following the Mariel boat lift in the 1980s.
However, steps taken by law enforcement, coupled with measures introduced by the State to assist in the settling of the new citizens, eventually levelled the homicide rate to some extent and significantly assisted with the development of the economy of Florida.
Crime reduction has no simple switch that turns it up or down.
Each crime has its own dynamic, and in each environment that dynamic changes.
Over the last three decades Jamaica has made changes that impact crime reduction currently.
The treaties that allow for American involvement assists in stemming the contribution of our Diaspora to our crime.
The legislative changes that have made long prison sentences a prescription for gun crimes will eventually cause a reduction in gun crimes.
Crime control is a science that works over a period of time if it allows for flexibility to respond to new crimes and new challenges. A good example is lottery scamming.
This crime didn’t exist a decade ago, and its impact has changed Montego Bay, in St James, forever. However, new laws were introduced that have given law enforcement the mechanisms to manage it.
Crime reduction is at its most effective when dramatic changes are involved. However, dramatic changes usually result in the curtailing of a person’s freedoms, and this impacts the response by the public, the press, and the reputation of the country internationally.
So the adoption and creation of new laws and the required social changes, though timely, are the most responsible methods to reduce crime.
This is what is taking place but it’s going to be slower than what the public wants, and comes at a cost in lives.
The balance is hard to attain but it can happen and, based on current standing, has happened.
Persons like myself who live the war everyday are intolerant to less dramatic measures because we see the impact in lost lives daily.
However, we tend to be myopic whereas Government has to look wider — they have the entire State to consider.
I guess that’s why persons like myself don’t become the leaders of countries.
Feedback: drjasonamckay@gmail.com
That is the holy grail of Jamaican politics — the leader who can bring about a reduction in crime.
So many great leaders have been sacrificed on the altar of crime control, and more specifically homicide control.
PJ Patterson, Edward Seaga, Portia Simpson Miller, all great people in their own special way, have all failed in this regard — the secret to making Jamaica safe again.
They were all so unique in their areas of expertise, all accomplished in their own right.
A scholar, a symbol of strength, and a beacon of womanhood in a misogynistic society. Yet these three great people couldn’t stop dummies from killing each other.
Why? What stops people from killing? In fact, what causes a reduction in crime in general?
Well, each crime has its own dynamic that assists its committal.
Say housebreaking for example, why did the committal of this crime reduce during COVID-19?
Well because, in fact, most persons were at home so the opportunity for the crime to be committed was gone.
Crime requires an opportunity for it to occur.
Rape also reduced during COVID-19; this was impacted by everyone being at home. But it’s still reducing and we’re all back at work. Well, not actually.
More people work from home nowadays so there are less persons venturing out of the security of their homes.
Many rape victims know their attackers, and it (rape) occurs at home.
Well, more people at home also removes the opportunity.
Shooting and murders are a dynamic to themselves. They also have several types which each respond to different stimuli.
Domestic murders are the hardest ones to control because they are the hardest to predict given the proximity between victim and offender and the consistency of contact.
Yet, there are mechanisms available to law enforcement in modern times to prevent and dissuade domestic violence, to include murders.
The primary one is being more reactive to complaints as it is highly unlikely that there is no build-up. So reports of domestic conflict are now treated seriously, totally different from how it was treated in the 80s.
There are counsellors available, in some police stations there is a separate office, and there are consequences to using violence against your family members.
You will be charged for physically assaulting your wife or brother once they sign the report.
If you are a firearm holder you can lose that gun licence; if you are a parent you can lose that child.
It may seem that these methods and systems are not working but domestic murders have not increased, in keeping with population growth. I honestly believe that these changes are contributors.
Our murders are primarily committed by gangs against persons with some degree of association with gangs. They are really hard to prevent as victims and offenders are usually in close proximity to each other, they are well armed, and the history of the acrimony goes back many years.
So occupation of the space by the armed forces typically prevents murders, which is why the zones of special operation (ZOSO) are so effective.
Consequences are another big factor. If there is a major consequence to an act of violence, especially murder, then it dissuades the act. This, of course, is gauged by the power of the State.
In countries like Cuba or China the power of the State in relation to remand is so extreme that the last thing you want to do is draw attention to yourself.
In countries like Taiwan which have so little crime but extreme State power, despite not being a communist society, getting the attention of the State is a formula for life remand.
So what causes our reduction and what is causing it now?
Well the first big reduction was the end of the civil war in 1980.
The stimuli was gone because the political parties stopped supplying it. Also, the offenders left in large numbers for the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. When they returned as deportees, the killing increased.
So, removal of offenders is a factor. This has been assisting the current reduction with the many persons who have been charged in recent times due to the anti-gang cases, and will help even further as more get sent away for long prison sentences due to the new gun Bill.
Long-term success, however, requires social intervention.
This includes an environment that creates a platform for the youth who has been influenced by the persons in his small circle, and the access to resources that allow for education to truly be accessed.
The approach by law enforcement to citizens of inner cities and slums, and the clear divisions that exist within society between persons who live a few yards apart, are also factors that will impact murders and the committal of same.
The introduction of a new immigrant group has historically impacted crime in some environments. The most notable being Miami and the surge in crime after the massive introduction of Cuban refugees following the Mariel boat lift in the 1980s.
However, steps taken by law enforcement, coupled with measures introduced by the State to assist in the settling of the new citizens, eventually levelled the homicide rate to some extent and significantly assisted with the development of the economy of Florida.
Crime reduction has no simple switch that turns it up or down.
Each crime has its own dynamic, and in each environment that dynamic changes.
Over the last three decades Jamaica has made changes that impact crime reduction currently.
The treaties that allow for American involvement assists in stemming the contribution of our Diaspora to our crime.
The legislative changes that have made long prison sentences a prescription for gun crimes will eventually cause a reduction in gun crimes.
Crime control is a science that works over a period of time if it allows for flexibility to respond to new crimes and new challenges. A good example is lottery scamming.
This crime didn’t exist a decade ago, and its impact has changed Montego Bay, in St James, forever. However, new laws were introduced that have given law enforcement the mechanisms to manage it.
Crime reduction is at its most effective when dramatic changes are involved. However, dramatic changes usually result in the curtailing of a person’s freedoms, and this impacts the response by the public, the press, and the reputation of the country internationally.
So the adoption and creation of new laws and the required social changes, though timely, are the most responsible methods to reduce crime.
This is what is taking place but it’s going to be slower than what the public wants, and comes at a cost in lives.
The balance is hard to attain but it can happen and, based on current standing, has happened.
Persons like myself who live the war everyday are intolerant to less dramatic measures because we see the impact in lost lives daily.
However, we tend to be myopic whereas Government has to look wider — they have the entire State to consider.
I guess that’s why persons like myself don’t become the leaders of countries.
Feedback: drjasonamckay@gmail.com