The Shaky Evidence That Flock Cameras Reduce Crime Rates

Flock has been promoting a recent study of its cameras' impacts on car theft. But the paper didn't demonstrate a causal effect.

By Autumn Billings of Reason. 

"Do Flock cameras actually reduce crime? A new analysis by the Institute for Justice casts doubt on Flock Safety's claims that its automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) significantly reduce car theft and increase clearance rates. 

Flock Safety has been promoting a working paper that examines whether the company's controversial and hotly debated cameras improve outcomes for motor vehicle theft. To test the effects of Flock's surveillance network, the study uses data from 216 agencies that began using Flock in the period from 2017 to 2023, and 3,108 agencies that did not. The authors then evaluated the cameras' effects on monthly motor vehicle thefts, arrest rates for motor vehicle theft, and the recovery time of stolen cars following ALPR deployment.

The study's findings include an 11 percent drop in motor vehicle theft, a 15.9 percent increase in motor vehicle theft arrests, and a reduction of 0.28 days in the median recovery time for some stolen cars. The authors concluded that "fixed ALPR deployment is associated with lower theft and higher [arrests], alongside a modest reduction in recovery lag among recorded recoveries."

But the data aren't actually that clear, according to a new analysis from the Institute for Justice (IJ), a libertarian law firm and home of the Plate Privacy Project. 

IJ Senior Researcher Analyst Matthew West found that motor vehicle thefts and arrest rates in those jurisdictions were already trending in the favored direction months before Flock's cameras were ever in use. Unsurprisingly, many of the places that chose to deploy ALPR systems did so when experiencing high levels of vehicle theft, and engaged in crime-fighting initiatives beyond partnering with Flock. Because the study doesn't compare places on similar trajectories, it is unclear how much credit the cameras, as opposed to those other initiatives, deserve for causing motor vehicle thefts to fall and arrests to rise. 

"Because there were already differences in arrests and thefts trends before ALPR deployment, we don't know if the differences in ALPR deployment were caused by ALPR deployment," West explained in a statement. 

West goes on to point out that the authors were able to obtain an 11 percent drop in motor vehicle theft only "when the data are weighted in favor of agencies that had a bigger problem to begin with." By contrast, if "the data are instead averaged across all agencies (or weighted by population), the study finds no statistically significant change" in the number of thefts.

The study's data have other complications that the authors did not fully account for. One is the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns, which impacted both the level of crime and the number of people driving across the country. Another is the viral "Kia Challenge" on social media, which led to increased Kia and Hyundai thefts. Such "events may have contributed to motor vehicle theft rising and falling at different times in different places," writes West, further complicating whether ALPR cameras did, in fact, cause favorable changes in the data. 

hese criticisms don't necessarily mean the study's results are wrong, but they do show that the full picture hasn't been explored.

Flock has been using the working paper's results to defend its cameras against an ongoing national backlash. But as much as the company may wish otherwise, the scrutiny of ALPR surveillance technology is far from over."

Birthright Citizenship and Youth Crime

Evidence from Germany

From Jeffrey Miron.  

"A study of German immigration reform provides evidence for the debate over immigrant assimilation.

The study looked at the

Act to Reform Nationality Law … [under which] children born in Germany on or after January 1, 2000, automatically acquired citizenship if at least one parent had legally resided in Germany for at least eight years at the time of birth.

Researchers found

a sharp decline in offenses committed by non-Germans born after the reform. … [T]he actual increase in offenses committed by Germans was smaller than the decline in offenses committed by non-Germans, suggesting that birthright citizenship reduced crime among immigrant children. Specifically, [the] calculations reveal a 70 percent reduction in youth crime among children who obtained citizenship because of the reform.

Altogether, these

findings suggest that inclusive citizenship policies can reduce crime and its associated costs, which could strengthen social cohesion. Moreover, other research has shown that the German reform improved the educational outcomes of immigrant children and promoted their social integration."

The Impacts of Parole Supervision

From Jeffrey Miron.

"California, New York, and other states have lessened parole for exiting prisoners, hoping it will improve their reentry outcomes. One study of Illinois’ efforts

reveal[s] that the reform reduced the share of these prisoners who returned to prison within one year by 9–10 percentage points … This reduction was almost entirely due to a lower rate of technical revocations of supervision.

Further, there was

no evidence that the reform affected crime rates among released prisoners … [as] the absence of supervision reduced the likelihood of parolees committing crimes, offsetting any increases in crime associated with fewer technical revocations. … [Also,] longer terms of parole supervision diminish the benefits of lawful behavior because parolees face the ongoing threat of technical revocation.

The researchers also

conducted policy simulations to estimate the impact of reducing existing … [parole for low-to-medium offenders] by half. … [The] findings indicate that such a reform would reduce the average prison population by roughly 3 percent and likely cause no harm to public safety.

Altogether, the study

demonstrate[s] that existing parole systems increase reincarceration rates through technical violations of supervision conditions without bolstering public safety."

When Rudy Giuliani Made New York Great Again

His recent successors failed to learn the lessons of the great reformist mayoralty of the 1990s

By Myron Magnet. Excerpts:

"in 1994 . . . Crime had skyrocketed in the preceding decades, with murders doubling in the 1960s and doubling once more over the next two decades before reaching 2,154 in 1991—one every four hours, roughly. Dope dealers hustled on the street alongside pushy panhandlers and prostitutes. Derelicts slept alongside graffiti-smeared buildings. An epidemic of car break-ins led owners to post “No Radio” signs in their windows, and auto alarms blared indignantly at all hours. Businesses fled: The 116 major corporate headquarters in Gotham in 1971 had dwindled to 49 by 1995. Small-business owners buzzed customers in through locked doors and, at closing time, rolled down metal security gates, luring graffiti vandals."

[Giuliani] "grasped the theory of social scientists James Q. Wilson and George Kelling that stopping small crimes would prevent more serious crimes, just as replacing a broken window halts more window-breaking by showing that somebody watches and acts. He had seen this theory proven in the subways in the two years before his election, when Robert Kiley, head of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, kept subway trains and stations hosed clean of graffiti and transit police chief William Bratton started arresting turnstile jumpers and graffiti vandals. Crime in the subways began to fall. When Mr. Giuliani entered City Hall, he named Mr. Bratton the city’s police commissioner." 

"arresting “squeegee men” who smeared dirty rags across motorists’ windshields, holding them hostage for a “contribution.”"

"Police stopped, questioned and frisked those suspected of carrying weapons or casing a business, dissuading the ill-intentioned from packing guns while reducing shootings. Mr. Bratton made computer maps of crime hot spots and concentrated cops where thugs operated. City Hall’s revolutionary idea was that cops should prevent crime"

"Murders fell 20% to 1,561 the first year and a further 58% to 649 in 2001"

"the Giuliani administration started an ambitious workfare program. Welfare offices became “job centers” and set welfare recipients to painting park benches, raking leaves and cleaning courtrooms. Recipients learned discipline and gained self-respect. Many moved into conventional jobs and, as in the nation as a whole, caseloads dropped dramatically." 

Cato Immigration Studies Director David J. Bier Testifies Before the House Judiciary Committee

Click here.

"Chairman McClintock, Ranking Member Jayapal, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify.

For half a century, the Cato Institute’s research has shown that people—whatever their ancestry, background, or birthplace—can thrive in a free society.

Our research finds immigrants—legal and illegal—work at higher rates, generate more income and taxes, and have reduced the national debt by $14.5 trillion over the last 30 years.

Immigrants improve public safety by reducing violent crime rates, meaning that you are less likely to be a victim.

Fairfax highlights this reality. About half the county’s residents are immigrants or children of immigrants.

Its household income is double the national average, and its murder rate is less than half the average.

If illegal immigrants in Fairfax were their own city, they’d have a lower homicide rate than 90 percent of America’s largest cities and the country overall.

Nationwide, illegal immigrants are half as likely to commit crimes that land them in prison as US-born Americans.

Despite all this, Congress refuses to allow most would-be immigrants to come legally, which leads to illegal immigration.

Just 3% of applicants seeking legal permanent resident status were approved in 2024.

That was before the current administration banned a majority of the legal immigrants previously allowed to come, including half of all spouses of US citizens.

It has cut legal immigration twice as much as illegal immigration.

At the same time, it terminated legal status for over 2 million immigrants who were already here, creating four times as many new illegal immigrants as it has deported.

America’s cities must manage the fallout from this sabotaged system. Many have decided not to volunteer their cops, jails, and resources to DHS.

DHS doesn’t like that, but under our Constitution, cities and states don’t take orders from the feds.

And thank James Madison for that because we all know we wouldn’t want the Feds to dictate environmental policy, gun policy, or COVID policy to the states.

If you want Fairfax to change its policy, you must convince them.

The first step would be to give up the mass deportation dream.

About one in five Fairfax residents is someone who could be deported or who lives with them.

It would destroy neighborhoods, rip Americans from their spouses, parents, friends, families, customers, employees, employers, nurses, nannies, and teachers.

Let me be clear: Noncitizens who harm Americans should be arrested, convicted, and deported.

I think cities can help with that, but deportation is DHS’s job.

Indeed, you all passed the Laken Riley Act in 2025 to require DHS to immediately take custody of people charged with violence or theft.

Yet DHS is ignoring that law. It has deprioritized threats to focus on easy targets.

They aren’t tracking down serious criminal fugitives like the monster who killed Stephanie Minter.

Instead, DHS agents are racially profiling Americans at Home Depots, arresting spouses of US citizens at green card interviews, beating the parents of US Marines, and dragging legal immigrant nursing mothers from their homes without warrants.

Only 6% of ICE arrests have a violent criminal conviction. ICE has arrested 150,000 people who have no criminal convictions or even charges.

And we know it’s not because they got everyone with a serious record. Stephanie’s case and many others prove it.

It’s because they care about, as one ICE agent put it, “quantity over quality.”

How many Stephanies will get murdered before DHS follows the law and prioritizes serious criminals?

How many?

Most Americans don’t want to wait for the answer. They want to pause the mass deportation fantasy and focus on protecting Americans.

That’s the only policy that will defend our safety, prosperity, and freedom.

Thank you."

HUD Says Realtors Can Now Speak the Truth (about crime rates and school quality)

By Alex Tabarrok. 

"HUD: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) sent a “Dear Colleague” letter to real estate professionals clarifying they are not violating the Fair Housing Act when they share information with prospective homebuyers about neighborhood crime rates and school quality data.

“Buying a home is one on the most significant decisions a family will ever make,” said Secretary Scott Turner. “Americans should not be left in the dark about vital facts like neighborhood safety or school quality. HUD is making clear that real estate professionals can openly and lawfully provide this information in an equal and consistent manner to American families.”

The background is that The Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits discrimination in housing based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin (and via later amendments) familial status, and disability. Discrimination included “steering” buyers toward or away from neighborhoods based on protected characteristics. The Biden administration ramped this up with a directive and Executive Order that essentially said the Fair Housing Act must be interpreted not just to prohibit discrimination but to redress and undo past discrimination:

This is not only a mandate to refrain from discrimination but a mandate to take actions that undo historic patterns of segregation and other types of discrimination and that afford access to long-denied opportunities.

…the [HUD] Secretary shall take any necessary steps,…to implement the Fair Housing Act’s requirements that HUD administer its programs in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing and HUD’s overall duty to administer the Act (42 U.S.C. 3608(a)) including by preventing practices with an unjustified discriminatory effect.

The “discriminatory effect” language reinforced that so-called disparate impact, not just intentional discrimination counted as discriminatory—and it contributed to a legal and reputational environment in which platforms and agents had strong incentives to avoid anything that could be characterized as steering. As a result, by the end of the year, Realtor.com had removed its crime map from all search results, as did Trulia, Redfin announced it would not add crime data to its platform and since Zillow already didn’t include such data, by early 2022 all the major portals had dropped crime information. Similarly, the National Association of Realtors published material instructing agents not to directly answer client questions about neighborhood safety. One article in “The Safety Series” was titled “‘Is This a Safe Neighborhood?’ Don’t Answer That” and by “Safety Series” they meant safety for the realtor not the client.

So without explicitly making such information illegal, the government created a legal and reputational climate that chilled its provision. Portals removed crime maps and realtors became reluctant to answer ordinary buyer questions about neighborhood safety and school quality. That is a degradation of service, not a civil-rights victory. The pretext was that crime information might not be accurate but the real fear was that it would accurately suggest neighborhoods with high percentages of black residents had more crime. Withholding information about crime and schools, however, does not change the facts; it just shifts the informational advantage toward buyers who are wealthy, well-connected, or sophisticated enough to find the data themselves. Moreover, it should go without saying that black homebuyers also want information about neighborhood crime rates–don’t these buyers count? Suppressing truthful information is rarely a good way to improve outcomes. As with Ban the Box, blocking direct access to relevant information encourages worse proxy-based decision-making.

Trump’s HUD is correct: fair housing law should prohibit discrimination, not prevent realtors from telling the truth."

Police Chiefs Allegedly Faked Robberies in $5,000-a-Pop Visa Fraud Scheme

For nearly a decade, four Louisiana lawmen and a Subway shop owner manufactured phony crime reports to help foreign nationals stay in the U.S., prosecutors say

By Joe Barrett of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"In a case still winding through court, federal officials allege the men spent nearly 10 years manufacturing false crime reports as part of a visa-fraud scheme. The operation netted the officers $5,000 per “victim” and helped hundreds of foreign nationals secure U visas—a status that allows certain crime victims to remain in the U.S., Van Hook said."

"The center of the scheme, authorities said, was Chandrakant “Lala” Patel, the friendly owner of a Subway and other small businesses. Patel, himself a U visa recipient, would allegedly connect with crime “victims” looking to stay in the U.S."

"He would then turn to one of the law-enforcement officials to draw up paperwork for crimes that never happened"

"The officers would generate false reports and swear in writing that the people named were legitimate crime victims"

"For years, it worked, authorities said. Investigators with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spurred the multiagency probe in July 2024 after uncovering a pattern of inconsistencies in U-visa applications."

"Hundreds reportedly obtained U visas through the scheme, and Louisiana isn’t alone."

"Earlier this month, a federal grand jury in Boston indicted 10 Indian nationals for allegedly staging convenience-store holdups in Massachusetts and elsewhere to secure U visas. A bogus robber and getaway driver would appear to rob the clerk or owner at gunpoint, then flee, authorities said. Minutes later, the clerk would call police and present security-camera footage as evidence."

Also see Five Things to Know About the Visa Fraud Case Shaking Small-Town Lousiana: Prosecutors say the little-known U visa is at the heart of an alleged scheme. 

BART's new fare gates have led to a 1,000-hour decline in clean up time; 41% drop in crime; and $10 million increase in projected revenue

Tweet from NX Thompson, CEO of The Atlantic.

 

Mass Deportation by the Numbers

ICE arrests are growing but fewer have a criminal history

WSJ editorial. Excerpts:

"It started out that way. At the beginning of 2025, 87% of ICE arrests were immigrants with either a prior conviction or a criminal charge pending, according to ICE data obtained by the Deportation Data Project. Only 13% of those arrested at the beginning of 2025 didn’t have either a conviction or a pending charge.

But the criminal share of apprehensions has declined as the months have gone on. By October 2025, the percentage of arrested immigrants with a prior conviction or criminal charge had fallen to 55%. Since October, 73% taken into ICE custody had no criminal conviction and only 5% had a violent criminal conviction, according to a Cato Institute review of ICE data.

Many of the criminal immigrants the Administration counts among those in detention are convicted criminals culled from prisons."

"but there’s no doubt Minneapolis and St. Paul have ordinances that bar using resources to help ICE apprehend people based on immigration status. That complicates ICE’s job and makes confrontations more likely."

"Syracuse professor Austin Kocher, who tracks official ICE data, finds that between Sept. 21, 2025, and Jan. 7, 2026, single-day ICE detentions increased 11,296. But only 902 of those were convicted criminals, 2,273 had pending criminal charges and 8,121 were other immigrant violators. ICE arrests have been trending upward since January 2025, but criminal arrests have plateaued." 

Vandalism and America’s Anti-Business Climate

When wealth producers are perceived as ‘owing’ to society, the pointless defacement and theft directed toward them soon follows.

By Scott Beyer of The Independent Institute. 

"When people talk about America’s “anti-business climate,” they frame it as a policy problem, centered on high taxes, suffocating regulations, and labor mandates. But America’s anti-business climate is also a cultural disposition. Long before any legislation passes, a deeper attitude takes hold that frames wealth producers as, at best, lucky beneficiaries of an unfair system, and at worst, moral wrongdoers who have taken more than they deserve. Once that premise is accepted, a troubling chain reaction follows. If success is illegitimate, then harms committed against successful people and businesses begin to feel justified. Vandalism becomes “punching up”; theft becomes “redistribution”; and other street-level maladies are similarly rationalized. 

Whether this mindset originates in culture and seeps into politics, or vice versa, is a chicken-and-egg question. In practice, the two reinforce each other. Political rhetoric demonizes wealth, cultural resentment intensifies, and politicians respond to that resentment, resulting in disorder.

No state better embodies this dynamic than California.

At a policy level, California checks every box associated with hostility toward business. The state has a tough regulatory regime, and the highest top marginal income tax rate in the nation. Now there is a ballot measure that proposes a “wealth tax” of 5% on anyone worth $1 billion or more, which has already caused several billionaires, including the founders of Google, to move operations from the state. 

This policy environment does not exist in a rhetorical vacuum; California’s political leadership has actively framed wealth creation as suspect. It’s unsurprising, then, that California is also a place where widespread vandalism and petty crime are directed at symbols of wealth and commerce.

Consider the ubiquitous graffiti in cities like Oakland and Los Angeles. This is not random teenage mischief; much of it explicitly targets businesses, housing developments, and commercial corridors, and sometimes even has anti-gentrification messages. In that sense it is a form of ideological vandalism.

Or take the case of In-N-Out Burger, a famously apolitical, working-class-friendly company that almost never closes locations. In January 2024, the company permanently shut down its Oakland restaurant, citing relentless crime. According to In-N-Out’s own statement, employees and customers were subjected to repeated car break-ins, robberies, and vandalism.

Then there are the mass car break-ins and smash-and-grab retail store thefts that have become part of San Francisco’s reputation. Of course, so-called quality of life crimes were deprioritized by former city District Attorney Chesa Boudin. While California’s other law enforcement bureaucrats may not be as extreme as Boudin, the soft prosecutions that occur across the state show that they are similarly unbothered by such theft.

A similar dynamic exists closer to home in Charlottesville, Virginia—a city that, in many ways, functions like a mini San Francisco.

Charlottesville is saturated with social justice language: wealth redistribution, climate justice, systemic oppression. One recent, twice-elected mayor built her political brand around racial agitation, framing the city’s present-day inequalities as ongoing moral crimes committed by one racial group against another. Another councilor has used his platform to stage protests against a beloved local business, demanding “living wages”.

Homelessness illustrates the issue most starkly. Charlottesville’s downtown pedestrian mall has seen a visible increase in homelessness, along with the predictable antisocial behavior. Yet the prevailing attitude is that the homeless are owed space, tolerance, and resources—while the businesses operating nearby are expected to absorb the costs. During a recent debate over an anti-camping ordinance, a business advocate attempting to speak during public testimony was shouted down.

In such an environment, disorder is inevitable. Loitering, vandalism, and break-ins have become increasingly common in areas where the homeless concentrate. I work for a company that has operated successfully in Charlottesville for decades. Our company vehicles have suffered slashed tires and keyed doors. We have even considered removing our signage, because merely being visibly successful appears to invite hostility.

The widespread keying of Tesla vehicles over the past year provides the ultimate example. These acts were pure zero-sum destruction, with the only “gain” being that perpetrators could attack a symbol— Elon Musk—that represents everything they hate: wealth, intelligence, and productive success. 

The broader takeaway is clear. When society frames certain successful people or institutions as illegitimate, it creates a premise for harming them. While outright violence remains rare and widely condemned—the Luigi Mangione case being a counter-example—smaller clandestine harms proliferate: vandalism, theft, intimidating protests, reputational smears, and ultimately confiscatory taxation. Each step becomes easier once the initial moral judgment has been made.

Left-wing politicians often stoke these sentiments, sometimes cynically, sometimes sincerely. In either case, the results are visible in the crime and economic stagnation found in many progressive cities. An anti-business culture does not stay abstract for long." 

Mass Incarceration and Mass Crime

By Alex Tabarrok.

"In our Marginal Revolution Podcast on Crime in the 1970s, I pointed out that blacks were often strongly in favor of tough on crime laws:

Tabarrok:  [P]eople think that mass incarceration is a peculiarly American phenomena, or that it came out of nowhere, or was due solely to racism. Michelle Alexander’s, The New Jim Crow, takes this view.

…[But] back then, the criminal justice system was also called racist, but the racism that people were pointing to was that black criminals were let back on the streets to terrorize black victims, and that black criminals were given sentences which were too light. That was the criticism back then. It was black and white victims together who drove the punishment of criminals. I think this actually tells you about two falsehoods. First, the primary driver of mass imprisonment was not racism. It was violent crime.

Second, this also puts the lie, sometimes you hear from conservatives, to this idea that black leaders don’t care about black-on-black crime. That’s a lie. Many Black leaders have been, and were, and are tough on crime. Now, it’s true, as crime began to fall in the 1990s, many blacks and whites began to have misgivings about mass incarceration. Crime was a huge problem in the 1970s and 1980s, and it hit the United States like a brick. It seemed to come out of nowhere. You can’t blame people for seeking solutions, even if the solutions come with their own problems.

A new paper The Racial Politics of Mass Incarceration by Clegg and Usmani offer more evidence challenging the now conventional Michelle Alexander view:

Public opinion data show that not just the white but also the black public became more punitive after the 1960s. Voting data from the House show that most black politicians voted punitively at the height of concern about crime. In addition, an analysis of federally mandated redistricting suggests that in the early 1990s, black political representation had a punitive impact at the state level. Together, our evidence suggests that crime had a profound effect on black politics. It also casts some doubt on the conventional view of the origins of mass incarceration.

As the authors note, the fact that blacks supported tough-on-crime laws doesn’t mean racism was absent. Racial overtones surely influenced the specific ways fear of crime was translated into policy. But the primary driver of mass incarceration wasn’t racism—it was mass crime."

Prohibitions Increase Violence

Jeffrey Miron and Jonah Karafiol. 

"Since September 2025, the U.S. has carried out five lethal strikes on small boats off the coast of Venezuela, leaving 27 people dead as of October 14. Even granting the government’s account—that these were traffickers and the strikes were effective interdictions—the policy question remains: does escalating force in prohibited markets reduce violence?

In short: no.

When prohibition forces a widely demanded product underground, participants still engage in purchase and sale. And, with no legal avenue to resolve disputes over territory, quality, and debts, buyers and sellers often turn to violence.

Empirical evidence supports such a conclusion. A 1999 study covering roughly a century of US homicide data finds that stronger enforcement of alcohol and drug prohibitions corresponds to higher homicide rates.

Especially problematic is the kingpin approach, in which authorities “decapitate” cartels via short-run seizures, arrests, or assassinations. A 2018 study finds that after these “successes,” homicides increase in the affected municipalities and spill over to nearby areas. Likewise, a 2015 study of organizational “beheadings” shows removing bosses destabilizes protection rackets and boosts killings rather than pacifying markets. In these cases removals create power vacuums, dissolve informal agreements, and increase uncertainty over territory and payments. Consequently, the expected return to preemptive violence rises, and competing factions test boundaries until a new equilibrium emerges.

Thus, by pushing high-demand markets underground, prohibition replaces contracts with retaliation, selects for firms best at coercion, and turns “enforcement wins” into violent reshuffling. If the aim is fewer homicides and less cartel power, the better path is to repeal drug prohibition, rather than promote militarization."

Prohibitions Increase Violence

By Jeffrey Miron.

"Since September 2025, the US has carried out five lethal strikes on small boats off the coast of Venezuela, leaving 27 people dead as of October 14. Even granting the government’s account—that these were traffickers and the strikes were effective interdictions—the policy question remains: does escalating force in prohibited markets reduce violence?

In short: no.

When prohibition forces a widely demanded product underground, participants still engage in the purchase and sale of it. And, with no legal avenue to resolve disputes over territory, quality, and debts, buyers and sellers often turn to violence.

Empirical evidence supports such a conclusion. A 1999 study covering roughly a century of US homicide data finds that stronger enforcement of alcohol and drug prohibitions corresponds to higher homicide rates.

Especially problematic is the kingpin approach, in which authorities “decapitate” cartels via short-run seizures, arrests, or assassinations. A 2018 study finds that after these “successes,” homicides increase in the affected municipalities and spill over to nearby areas. Likewise, a 2015 study of organizational “beheadings” shows removing bosses destabilizes protection rackets and boosts killings rather than pacifying markets. In these cases, removals create power vacuums, dissolve informal agreements, and increase uncertainty over territory and payments. Consequently, the expected return to preemptive violence rises, and competing factions test boundaries until a new equilibrium emerges.

Thus, by pushing high-demand markets underground, prohibition replaces contracts with retaliation, selects for firms best at coercion, and turns “enforcement wins” into violent reshuffling. If the aim is fewer homicides and less cartel power, the better path is to repeal drug prohibition rather than promote militarization."

The Simple Solution to Violent Crime: More Cops

The connection between poverty and lawlessness is complicated, but Trump gets a basic point right.

By Jason L. Riley. Excerpts:

"“If I had to summarize one of the most consistent and robust findings in the criminological literature in a single sentence,” Mr. Mangual writes, “it would go something like this: More policing means less crime.”" [Manhattan Institute scholar Rafael Mangual]\

"A 2005 academic paper on policing in Washington found that “an increase in police presence of about 50 percent leads to a statistically and economically significant decrease in crime on the order of 15 percent.” A 2016 study concluded that an increase in private police patrols around the University of Pennsylvania campus in Philadelphia “decreased crime in adjacent city blocks by 43%-73%.”"

"“there is now a strong consensus in the academic literature” that increasing the presence and visibility of police officers “reduces crime.”"

"although “the total reduction in homicide is roughly equal across Black and white victims, the decline in homicide is twice as large for Black victims in per capita terms.”"

"Not only are most poor people not criminals, but the most impoverished communities in the U.S. aren’t the most violent. Further, violent crime was significantly lower in earlier eras, when poor Americans were materially much worse off than they are today."

"Merchants are more likely to abandon lawless neighborhoods, where operating costs are higher, taking employment opportunities and economic activity with them. As businesses leave, the tax base shrinks, property values decline and public services suffer. In the 1940s and ’50s, the homicide rate for black males fell by double digits, and black incomes rose faster than white incomes."

We Support Laws Against Actual Crimes, Unlike, Apparently, Some College Leftists

By Matthew Cavedon of Cato.

"Classical liberals spend a lot of time talking about aspects of the criminal justice system we don’t like: laws punishing consensual, non-harmful activity between adults; police officers violating the Constitution; prosecutors forcing people to plead guilty; judges who are little more than prosecutors in robes; “correctional” approaches that only make people worse. Sometimes, it can even sound like we’re against law and order itself.

Thankfully, there are folks like the faculty of New York City’s New School to remind us of our more moderate side. Professor Cresa Pugh is offering a sociology class this semester called “How to Steal.” In this “field-based seminar,” students will earn four credit hours for exploring “the politics, ethics, and aesthetics of theft” from inside “corporate storefronts, grocery chains, museums, libraries, banks, and cultural institutions.” They will investigate whether it’s “possible to steal back what was already stolen” and discern when theft counts as “survival, protest, or care.” They’ll be invited to embrace “moral ambiguity, radical ethics, and imaginative justice.”

Not all of this is completely bonkers. Much of Professor Pugh’s scholarship is about the looting of artifacts by European colonizers, which, yeah, was often theft. It’s also certainly fair to remember that someone can justly steal a loaf of bread to keep from starving (as long as the existence of modern welfare systems is kept up front and center as an alternative). But equating the story of how mummies ended up in the British Museum with how pretzels get to your local Publix is ridiculous. And implying that Walmart has it coming when fraudsters steal its TVs is more juvenile than it is just. Free exchange is what colonialist theft wrongly denied. It is also what American commerce ideally embodies.

It’s also worth noting that the New School course is being offered at a time when parts of the left are romanticizing crime, even violence. Ivy League grad Luigi Mangione has become an anti-capitalist folk hero since assassinating UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Over the summer, anti-Zionists shot dead a young couple outside Washington’s Jewish Museum, tried to burn down the home of Pennsylvania’s governor, and firebombed marchers against Hamas in Boulder, Colorado—killing an 82-year-old woman.

Classical liberalism shares the concerns of the broad American left about many aspects of the criminal justice system (though we’re more consistent about criticizing gun control). But classical liberals insist that life and property are inalienable rights (as, in fairness, do many progressives). We are against the government violating these rights, which is why we demand limits on its power. We are also against private citizens infringing on them through crime, which is why many of us have little appetite for calls to abolish police and prisons.

Too much criminal law threatens to destroy freedom. So can too little."

Mexico’s Cartels Are Exporting Their Bloody Rivalry to Ecuador and Beyond

The two most powerful drug rings are locked in a turf war over control of a key South American smuggling route. The bodies are piling up.

By Ryan Dubé of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"Corruption flourished as drug traffickers bought off judges, politicians and state security officials, prosecutors said. “They realized that the weak spot in the region was Ecuador,” said Fausto Salinas, former head of Ecuador’s police. 

Sinaloa joined with Telmo Castro, an Ecuadorean army captain who used military vehicles to transport cocaine from the border with Colombia to the Ecuadorean coast, according to Ecuadorean police. Mexican pilots picked up the drugs at clandestine runways.

Castro earned about $600,000 a load, Jorge Cifuentes, a Colombian who was one of Sinaloa’s top cocaine suppliers, said during the 2018 U.S. trial of Sinaloa boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán. Castro was killed in prison in 2019."

"The Choneros took over the route when Prado was arrested in Colombia in 2017. He was extradited to the U.S., where he pleaded guilty in 2018 to drug smuggling. In his absence, the Choneros expanded their work for Sinaloa across coastal Ecuador."

"'In 2022, traffic officials in Manta pulled over a black Chevrolet Tahoe carrying $7 million in drug money. The officials kept the cash and released the driver, a Mexican Jalisco member." 

"Macías oversaw the Choneros from prison. Armed inmates protected him as he moved among amenities including a private gym and a pool with ducks."

Mayor Daniel Lurie: ‘San Francisco Needs to Save Itself’

The new mayor discusses his plans for restoring the city’s quality of life and getting the budget under control. He may have some lessons for New York

By Max Raskin. Mr. Raskin is a co-founder and managing director of Uris Acquisitions and an adjunct professor at New York University School of Law. Excerpts:

"public safety is Mr. Lurie’s top priority. He praises District Attorney Brooke Jenkins: “She believes like I do that, if you commit a crime, there needs to be consequences. I know that that might be shocking to say, but we weren’t doing that before.” Ms. Jenkins has been censured by both the state bar and a state appellate court for overzealous prosecutions—a notable change from her predecessor, Chesa Boudin, the Weather Underground scion who was recalled from office in 2022 for barely prosecuting at all."

"He endorsed Proposition 36, a ballot initiative that passed in November, which increased punishment and allows felony charges for more drug and theft crimes, including recriminalization of shoplifting items worth $950 or less."

"“If you are going to walk into a store and you are going to steal things, there are going to be consequences now in San Francisco and in the state of California.”"

"The mayor has made police hiring a priority. The city is understaffed by about 500 officers below the minimum recommended level of 2,000. One of his policy commitments is to close this gap."

"“Property crime is down 30%. Violent crime is down 20% year-over-year. Car break-ins are at a 22-year low.”"

"“I saw good management when I was living in New York under [Mayor Mike] Bloomberg.” Mr. Lurie’s governing style borrows liberally from the billionaire, who served 12 years starting in 2002."

"In a break with previous administrations that were wary of the technology industry, Mr. Lurie regularly attends tech conferences"

"Whereas Mr. Mamdani castigates billionaires, Mr. Lurie courts them. Everyone from Laurene Powell Jobs to Jony Ive is getting involved in partnerships Mr. Lurie and his head of economic development, Ned Segal (a former CFO of Twitter), are establishing."

"It is unusual to hear a Democrat declare, “The era of soaring city budgets and deteriorating street conditions is over.”"

"A former nonprofit executive, Mr. Lurie proposed cutting nonprofit contracting by $185 million"

"He prefers a technocratic future to a socialistic one, and he wants San Francisco to be its capital." 

Zohran Mamdani Wants New York City to Try Real Socialism

If AOC’s candidate defeats Andrew Cuomo in Tuesday’s mayoral primary, we’ll know who owns today’s Democratic Party

By Thomas McKenna of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"The city already prevents landlords from raising the rent more than a token amount on these units each year."

"The city’s rent-stabilization program already makes it impossible for some landlords to cover their costs. Others find it cheaper to leave apartments empty if needed repairs aren’t worth the investment. Tens of thousands of rent-stabilized units sat vacant in 2023, according to U.S. Census data. More will be empty if landlords can’t pay their mortgages, and tighter supply pushes prices up."

"no-cost public transit tends to attract more crime, homelessness and soliciting. Officials in Portland, Ore., cited upticks in each when they ended fare-free rides downtown in 2010." 

How Progressive Government Set the Stage for the L.A. Riots

The city’s failed policies on crime, economics and schools hurt immigrants more than anyone else

By Allysia Finley. Excerpts:

"The Los Angeles Police Department has about 1,300 fewer officers than a decade ago—and about half as many per capita and nearly 90% fewer per square mile than New York City."

"he mayor this spring proposed eliminating another 400 police positions to close the city’s $800 million budget hole, caused by ballooning pension costs and lawsuit payouts. The LAPD has also struggled with low morale and recruitment owing to lax enforcement policies that let lawbreakers run free. Crimes such as shoplifting, vandalism, disorderly conduct and trespassing are rarely prosecuted."

"Los Angeles County has lost some 1.4 million people due to domestic out-migration since 2010, which has been offset in part by an influx of 530,000 immigrants."

"many of those immigrants lack the qualifications . . . to serve in the city’s police force."

"high minimum wages are pricing unskilled workers out of jobs, to the detriment of immigrants, young people and public safety."

"The minimum wage in L.A. is $17.28, and the state requires fast-food restaurants to pay $20 an hour. The Employment Policies Institute’s Michael Saltsman calculates that California’s unemployment rate for teens was 21.2% in April—about double the nationwide figure—and 9.7% for adults 20 to 24, vs. 7.2% on average in the rest of the country."

"Only 21% of the city’s eighth-graders scored proficient or higher in reading last year on the Nation’s Report Card, and 19% in math." 

George Floyd’s Death Almost Consumed America in Revolution

As the streets exploded, nearly every institution celebrated a ‘reckoning.’ Then people fought back.

By Mike Gonzalez. He is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation. Excerpts:

"During the civil unrest between May and July, more than 2,000 officers were injured in the line of duty, according to an analysis by the Major City Chiefs Association, an organization of police executives. Of 8,700 protests across major U.S. cities that summer, 3,692 involved some level of illegal activity, and 574 included outright violence, including attacks on police as well as destruction of local businesses and other private property.

The report found 2,385 looting incidents, 624 arson incidents, and 97 police vehicles burned. In Minneapolis and St. Paul combined, about 1,500 properties sustained severe damage, with nearly 80 completely destroyed. Reporting from Axios found that the destruction resulted in at least $1 billion to $2 billion of paid insurance claims."

"The Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project reported in September 2020 that at least 86% of riots for which the identification of the participants was known were explicitly linked to Black Lives Matter activism."

"After all, the founders of BLM, particularly Patrisse Cullors and Alicia Garza, were trained by Marxist ideologues: Ms. Cullors in radical-left activist Eric Mann’s Labor/Community Strategy Center, and Ms. Garza in Gramscian scholar Harmony Goldberg’s School of Unity and Liberation.

The goal of these BLM leaders was clear. In 2019 Ms. Garza had told a group in Maine, “We’re talking about changing how we’ve organized this country. . . . I believe we all have work to do to keep dismantling the organizing principle of this society.”"