The main cause of the raise and fall of crime in the 20th century was lead

[Malthus]

As for the article, it is certainly interesting, but I suspect that no one factor is fully explanatory; for example, unleaded gas was used all over NA but crime rates varied a lot from place to place. It is certainly possible that lead made thinks worse overall than they would otherwise have been, though.

actually, Canada & US crime rates move in the same direction.  And there's more crimes in cities (more vehicles) than in small places.  Cows&trees don't kill people.  Well, the non stupid ones anyway.

In Canada, native reserves have a disproportionate amount of violent crime, and most of them are rural and remote.

Are the natives on reserves getting extra lead - or is it other historical, sociological and cultural factors at work?

[jimmy olsen]

As for the article, it is certainly interesting, but I suspect that no one factor is fully explanatory; for example, unleaded gas was used all over NA but crime rates varied a lot from place to place. It is certainly possible that lead made thinks worse overall than they would otherwise have been, though.

The article addresses that though, now that leaded gas has been phased out a lot of the differences between large cities and small cities and rural areas have evened out. Large cities had more crime because they had more cars and higher concentrations of lead in the air from exhaust. If you go to the article, neighborhood lead concentration maps are identical with crime maps.

[jimmy olsen]

Mind, I still wouldn't call this proof, but it certainly suggests a causal link

Which is why I thought it prudent to remind tim of the fact that the causal link still is missing. The title says

The main cause of the raise and fall of crime in the 20th century was lead

So far the best argument has been "I can see how lead might be a significant factor....". Apart from the obvious correlation/causation issue my first grip would be with the assertion that there was a rise in the crime rate during the 20th century.

http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.html

Click the link, they have many embedded links to studies which discuss the issue.

[Malthus]

The article addresses that though, now that leaded gas has been phased out a lot of the differences between large cities and small cities and rural areas have evened out. Large cities had more crime because they had more cars and higher concentrations of lead in the air from exhaust. If you go to the article, neighborhood lead concentration maps are identical with crime maps.

In the US, rates of crime were higher in inner-city (Black) ghettos. In Canada, the high crime rates are in rural (native) ghettos. The same explaination cannot (easily) explain both.

[Admiral Yi]

In the US, rates of crime were higher in inner-city (Black) ghettos. In Canada, the high crime rates are in rural (native) ghettos. The same explaination cannot (easily) explain both.

You're oversimplying.  The theory doesn't posit that lead explains 100% of crime.  A child who grows up lead-free is not guaranteed to live a crime-free life.  Rather that, while holding all other relevant factors constant, increased exposure to lead leads to more criminal activity.

[Malthus]

In the US, rates of crime were higher in inner-city (Black) ghettos. In Canada, the high crime rates are in rural (native) ghettos. The same explaination cannot (easily) explain both.

You're oversimplying.  The theory doesn't posit that lead explains 100% of crime.  A child who grows up lead-free is not guaranteed to live a crime-free life.  Rather that, while holding all other relevant factors constant, increased exposure to lead leads to more criminal activity.

Nope. I already made the point in an earlier post that it is possible lead plays an overall effect.

I do think however that the article is overselling it, and that it is being yet more oversold by some in this thread. My post, for example, was in response to the claim that "neighborhood lead concentration maps are identical with crime maps".

Lead cannot (readily) explain on the one hand that crime is more prevelent in the cities (in urban ghettos) and on the other hand that in other places crime is more prevelent in the country (native reserves). Socio-economic, historical and cultural factors have greater explanatory power.

That said, of course it is possible that lead has an effect, over and on top of these other factors. It just isn't possible that its effect is as great as claimed - that crime and lead match identically.

[Admiral Yi]

Nope. I already made the point in an earlier post that it is possible lead plays an overall effect.

I do think however that the article is overselling it, and that it is being yet more oversold by some in this thread. My post, for example, was in response to the claim that "neighborhood lead concentration maps are identical with crime maps".

Lead cannot (readily) explain on the one hand that crime is more prevelent in the cities (in urban ghettos) and on the other hand that in other places crime is more prevelent in the country (native reserves). Socio-economic, historical and cultural factors have greater explanatory power.

That said, of course it is possible that lead has an effect, over and on top of these other factors. It just isn't possible that its effect is as great as claimed - that crime and lead match identically.

Lead maps were identical to crime maps in cities like New Orleans because presumably the precincts examined were homogeneous in terms of other explanatory variables.

[11B4V]

Bah, people are going to be fucked up. This article allows people to try and not take accountability for their actions.

[Josquius]

I'm too lazy to do the legwork and find it, but a few years ago I read one of the few studies I've personally seen on pre-20th century crime rates. Prior to about 1850, violent crime rates were generally quite high per 100,000, in both the United States and Western Europe. They were also quite similar to one another between those two entities. After 1850, violent crime has been on a long term downward trend, with fluctuations, but the downward trend in Western Europe started to drop off much faster than the one in the United States. I found it interesting because it shows that at least from a numbers perspective, what many people often assume, that the United States one day suddenly became more violent out of sync with the rest of the West isn't accurate. Instead, we all started very violent and Western Europe got less violent at a much faster and higher rate than the United States. This report also mostly showed some of the  big "crime problems" of the 20th century as just relatively minor bumps in the long term curve of downward crime rates.

I guess probably because of the abundance of data availability, many people think violent crime statistics start in the mid-20th century, 1930s at the earliest. If that's all you look at it tells a story of rising American crime that has fallen off in the 1990s-Present. But if you look at more historical data it shows it's really just a generally downward trend overall and even the spike we had in 60-90s is just a minor wave on the overall downward moving trend.

True....I've certainly read of higher historic crime rates too. I just read freakonomics a few weeks back and I'm sure its talked about there. I recall it mentioning broad figures from centuries ago and its quite a downward trend from the 1500s or somesuch. And I'd imagine the data gets very incomplete the further back you go.
Makes sense really with more poverty, laxer law enforcment, etc...
But then since the dawn of time people have been moaning about societal decay, how things were better in their father's day, etc.... So the public perception is of course naturally wrong.

[Valmy]

Bah, people are going to be fucked up. This article allows people to try and not take accountability for their actions.

How exactly is an entire population supposed to be accountable for its actions?  It consists of millions of individuals.

[Ideologue]

Bah, people are going to be fucked up. This article allows people to try and not take accountability for their actions.

How exactly is an entire population supposed to be accountable for its actions?  It consists of millions of individuals.

I know a way.

[Ed Anger]

People's committees.

[Josquius]

A crazy theory  that I've just come up with in the last 5 minutes: Video games are the cause of the 90s to present drop in crime.
Have there been papers on this? There should have been....

[Ideologue]

A crazy theory  that I've just come up with in the last 5 minutes: Video games are the cause of the 90s to present drop in crime.
Have there been papers on this? There should have been....

Iirc yes, there have been.

[viper37]

In Canada, native reserves have a disproportionate amount of violent crime, and most of them are rural and remote.

Are the natives on reserves getting extra lead - or is it other historical, sociological and cultural factors at work?

ah this.  It's simple, actually.  Remove alcohol and drugs from indian reservations and the crime rate drops to below the national average.