This was a question posed by my government teacher and one that I wish we had discussed more thoroughly;

What would stop crime rates from rising in inner cities; more funding for education, or more funding for police? Or if you want a more abstract question, what is better; preventative measures or harsher punishments?

You can only pick one, you can't pick both. Let's hear everyone's opinions :)

I think preventative measures would be better, because it would be better to prevent someone from...let's say...killing someone, rather tahn just punishing them more for killing someone.

Prevenative measures, definitely.

Preventive measures.

Education tends to lesser aggressiveness. I've noticed those who have good education at home and like to read tend to be more calm, while those who may or may not have good education at home, and dislike school an books, tend to be more playful, sometimes to the point of aggressivity.

Also, I find it better that something bad never happened, than having to punish someone. Why? If Dude A stole $500, he can give it back. If Dude A raped a woman, can he give it back? If Dude B was driving past the speed limit, he can stop doing such, but if he was going fast. crashed another car and killed someone, could he give that someone his life back? No, of course not.

Finally, well-educated people have less reasons to do such acts. They need money? They can get a job out from what they know. They have problems with their partner? Talk it out, and if necessary, divorce. This doesn't apply to all though, but it does to the majority :)

PS: Give the example, intelligence over force :D

..Captain America or Spiderman.........-shot-

Preventative measures AND Harsher punishments.

I'm an advocate for preventative measures, including a heavy focus on education and on city renewal/ public works.

Have any of you ever read the Tipping Point by Malcom Gladwell? In it, he asserts that a cleaner, more respectable looking environment deters crime. Whereas a criminal who sees graffiti and broken windows is more likely to think that a neighborhood is less policed/ less valued and will have no compunctions about committing a crime, since crime is easy to get away with in such a district.

People are less likely to scatter mud on something that's purely clean, but more willing to cause minor harm to something already tarnished.


Education is an excellent preventative measure, and should, I believe, receive the most focus in areas where there isn't enough money to go around. Obviously, no one can raise themselves out of the gutter without being given the tools. However, re-construction in inner cities is equally important. If a kid is attending a school that looks completely torn up, he'll automatically perceive that society values him less and doesn't want to give them the best of anything. With that precedent, he won't feel that it's worth even trying.

The maintenance of high-density housing in that area is also important, so that the kids attending school don't have to worry about health concerns, break-ins, and the like.

Finally, the opening of aide-programs for adults-- childcare for small children, free language tutoring at a community center-- would help prevent adults from becoming desperate.


With those measures, any crime-ridden community should soon see benefits. Overpolicing doesn't help; it breaks up families already desperate just to get by.

Well, I think a police force, with the right punishments, would work, but not as well as Preventive measures, with police. That way, less people would commit crimes instead of them committing crimes and then getting bugger punishments.

Also, preventative measures would make the existing police force more able to deal with the subsequent reduced crime.

Think of it as smart investing.

Plus, those people who no longer commit crimes can go on to be productive, increasing the overall welfare of the nation. Therefore increasing the welfare of even more citizens, making others even less likely to do crime.

It's self perpetuating! :)

There's been longitudinal studies done that show that allowing access to abortions lowers crime rates. Presumably this is because the ones needing abortions most are the poor. I guess that would be a preventative measure. i also think education funding really helps.

More wage equality. This is not easily done. Besides the fact that we face inherited wealth, the whole system is set up for this. One person will be paid better then an entire factory filled with employees.
Crime happens naturally due to wages being too unfair.

Overpopulation. Just another natural response. When you crowd animals, they get more aggressive. Studies have been done.
I wish this would mean child limits. Too bad people cry personal freedom to breed like a rabbit.

An overall more fair society that doesn't reject people from lower class and middle classes and lets them move up in life. For now, the only way for some to move up in life is to resort to crime. If this the only path society lets them have, they are going to take it.

Someone mentioned abortion availability. I have read allowing abortions does reduce crime rates.
Maybe because the factors leading to the unwanted children will also lead to them being raised in hostile conditions creating more future criminals.