Home / Police
Showing posts with label Police. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Police. Show all posts

A study on crime by police

I am often asked about crime rates by police.  I have always assumed that the number is quite low, but there are very few hard numbers on this question.  Here are some numbers over a three year period from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2007.  There were 569,149 full-time law enforcement employees in 2006.  With about 703 police crimes per year, there was a rate of 124 per hundred thousand full-time law enforcement employees (see page 421 in "Exit Strategy: An Exploration of Late-Stage Police Crime" by Stinson, Liederbach and Freiburger).  


Of particular interest is weapons violations.  118/569,149=0.007%
Compare that to firearms violations of concealed handgun permit holders in Florida.  Between October 1, 1987 and July 31, 2011, there were 168 revocations for firearms related violations in Florida.  Over that period of time permits were issued to over 2 million permit holders.  168/2 million = 0.008%
But that isn't really a fair comparison for permit holders because the violation rate for officers is an annual rate and the rate for permit holders is over the entire period of time.  In a 2011 Fox News piece, I made this calculation:
Over the last 38 months, only four permit holders have had their permit revoked for a firearms related violation -- an annual revocation rate of 0.0003%. . . . 
0.007% or 0.0003% are both extremely low and the violations might not be comparable in that the private individuals might run into problems that a police officer (even one off duty might not run into), but the rate for police is still 23 times higher.


The rate of forceable rape and sodomy is 12.4 per 100,000 per year.  By contrast, the forcible rape rate for the general population was 30.9 in 2006.

The aggravated assault rate for officers was 13.8 per 100,000 per year.  By contrast, the rate for the general population was 287.5 in 2006.

Also of interest was this statement in the paper.


The conviction rate among officers who were arrested with 18 or more years of service was 89.1%, whereas the conviction rate for officers who were arrested with 17 years or less of service was 77.5%.  . . .

As expected, the rate of crime for younger officers is a lot higher than for older ones.

Thanks to Patrick J. Friedrich for this info.  The dissertation is available here.

Maxim has a new piece at Fox News: "California Police Sticking to Guns in Defense of Letting Kids Hold Automatic Weapons"

Maxim has a new piece at Fox News: "California Police Sticking to Guns in Defense of Letting Kids Hold Automatic Weapons"

His new piece is available here and starts this way:



Would you let your kid touch a machine gun?

Photos of officers from the Santa Rosa Police Department letting kids handle the department’s SWAT team weaponry at a community event has sparked a debate over how much exposure to guns is healthy for kids.

Community organizer Attila Nagy, who took the photos, told FoxNews.com that he was concerned it might encourage kids to use guns in the future.

"My main concern is for kids who handle these things. They're fascinated by them, and it makes them familiar with guns," he said.

One city councilwoman, Marsha Vas Dupre, told her local paper that she was “alarmed and devastated” by the photos.

But the police department is pushing back, saying they see nothing wrong with how they handled the event.

"The weapons are rendered safe and are unloaded. We ensure the safety of those weapons," Santa Rosa Police Capt. Gary Negri told FoxNews.com, adding that the police attend the event to build ties between the police and the community.

"Our goal is saying to people, ‘hey, don't be intimidated by the police.’ We want to break down that barrier… Once these events are over, people will be more comfortable having conversations with officers.” . . .
Damage from UK riots put at $324 million

Damage from UK riots put at $324 million

The Financial Times has this:



The interests of government and business have coincided neatly over the costs of riot damage, estimated at more than £200m ($324m). David Cameron dispelled widespread doubts that taxpayers would foot the bill in a well-judged speech on Thursday.

Without state support, many independent retailers would have gone bust. Some big chains would have shied away from the poor districts seen as the centres of telly-grabbing criminality. Burnt-out shops would have damaged footfall. Insurers would have jacked up premiums in neighbourhoods such as Tottenham, deterring reinvestment.






Cameron does have an interesting approach to who will pay. Given that he blames the police for sitting back initially and watching the looting, he is take the money to pay for this damage out of the police budget. Do you think that the police will delay action next time?



The prime minister confirmed that police budgets would take the hit. Rightly so. The constabulary’s initial tolerance of looting encouraged the mayhem to mushroom. . . .

Dash Cam: Police arrest Ohio Permit holder


Police have an extremely difficult and dangerous job, but at least as far as I can tell from this video I think that the officer over reacted some. It will be interesting to see if this case is quickly dropped.
Starting at about 6:45 into the video.
Officer: "Why do you keep having that? What is this?"
Driver: "Because I have a concealed carry . . . "
Officer: "Do you have a weapon on you?"
Driver: "Yes sir. Thats why . . . "
Officer: "Lock your hands behind your head"
Driver: (complies)
Officer: "What is the first thing you're supposed to do?"
Driver: "I was handing that to you sir . . ."
Officer: "You're supposed to tell me you have a weapon"
Driver: "I was trying to sir. . . You told me . . ."
Officer: "You are supposed to say that right off the god damn bat!"
Driver: "I'm sorry I was trying to I swear to God."
Officer: "Trying to . . . I was in the fucking god damn car . . ."
Officer: "Spin your ass around."
. . . [After some additional conversation] . . .
Officer: "God damn right cause you're going catch a felony on this one. NOW TAKE A SEAT." (scuffle, crying out)
In Indiana, there is no right to resist an illegal entry by police

In Indiana, there is no right to resist an illegal entry by police

Police make mistakes and they have a very difficult job, but still it would seem that people should still have the right to resist and illegal entry by police. Apparently not in Indiana.

Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.
"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."
David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system. . . .
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)