Sense and Nonsense About Crime, Drugs, and Communities

One would not think it necessary to spend nearly $150.00 for a book that dispels popular myths about crime, drugs, and communities. But many concerned with such issues live in suburbia, never visiting high crime areas and knowing little about the realities of “the streets and hoods.” I have lived in nearly crime free suburbia; right now I live on the edge of the country side with whitetail deer visiting the yard most evenings. But I also lived in South Central Los Angeles and was there during the Rodney King riots. Flames, smoke, and murder were up-close and personal during that time.It should not be necessary to shift through pounds of research studies to know that “Propositions” Six and Seven (Page xviii) are true. “Simply putting more cops on the street will not reduce crime. Faster response time will not produce more arrests or lower the crime rate.”Having lived in both suburbia and the hood it is apparent that police activities can have, at best, only very modest positive effects on crime. It should be clear that policing does not cause reduced crime because there are practically no police in low crime areas. Other social factors create low crime rates, not policing. To reduce crime in American’s hoods it is necessary to determine what factors foster the development of positive personal character and life styles not found among many people living in high crime areas. Some insight might be gained from observing that the following factors are present in high crime areas: large amounts of government spending on welfare and other social programs, prevalent attitudes focused on government dependency, low motivation to strive toward self reliance, and disproportionally high rates of lottery sales.Any effort to dispel our many popular and unfounded myths is a good thing. But I gave this book a 3 rating because Professor Walker is in serious need of studying Chapter 2 of Gary Kleck’s Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control. In 61 pages Kleck briefly outlines illegitimate academic practices in summarizing research findings. Unfortunately Walker applies many such illegitimate practices in his book.For example, in discussing John Lott’s More Guns, Less Crime (page 270) Walker gives equal weight to fifteen reanalyzing studies utilizing Lott and David Mustards’ original data plus additional studies using different data sets and methodologies. From these studies Walker concludes, “The result of this intensive research effort is inconclusive.” On page 32 Kleck includes a section titled “’All studies are created equal’: Failing to distinguish technically sound studies from poor ones.” This is exactly what Walker does in coming to his conclusion. He reports no soundness analysis of the studies his conclusion is based upon.On the same page he speculates on the more guns/less crime issue supposing that, “Common sense, however, suggests that the availability of more guns at a mass shooting incident in a public area (say, a shopping mall or theater) would likely result in more deaths. In discussing so-called “stand your ground” laws (page 272) Walker’s Proposition 26 is based on speculation also. “Laws designed to allow more people to carry guns and laws that allow them to use their guns in a greater range of circumstances are more likely to increase rather then reduce homicides.” On page 37 Kleck discusses “Using speculation to rebut empirical evidence.” There, of course, is no empirical evidence to support either of these speculations.Not wanting to belabor the point, Walker violates other academic standards discussed by Kleck. It seems possible Professor Walker is unaware of standards for summarizing research studies. Kleck is a criminologist and applies empirical research standards in his daily work. Walker’s academic background is in history in which empirical research-based standards and practices do not apply. Dr. Joseph L. Bass

The book arrived in decent condition with some highlighting throughout but still usable and in good shape. Using this review to show proof of prior wear and for future reference.

We received this rental quickly and in very good condition. Excellent price compared to purchasing or renting elsewhere, especially for a college student. We will definitely rent textbooks again if what my college student needs is offered.

The book came in excellent condition, basically new I think. I enjoyed reading it; the pages were all crisp and bright white. No stains, highlighting, wear or tear or dog-eared pages! I also enjoyed reading the book; it was very easy and had plenty of cartoons/images to help me understand the material. I used this for a Criminology class. I also liked how the book was smaller and easier to transport than my other textbooks.

Great book for students and the general public! This book is absolutely not one-sided (conservative or liberal), has up to date information about crime, and great references. Have also recommend it to several of my undergraduate students. Helped me prepare for my Ph.D. comprehensive exams too.

Really enjoyed this book. Provides a lot of insight on both sides of the aisle. Gives stances on how liberals and conservative thinking can be wrong, and gives clear insight on what works and does not work. Very easy to read and provided clear statements on the entire stance after every argument. Best chapter was about gun control!

Can. Stop reading this. Love CJ

Very good textbook.Like the "propositions"Definitely helps to understand what policies have not worked and why. Helps to understand that law enforcement should move toward education to better policy options.