Comments on: Is Gentrification Really Why D.C. Has Fewer Murders?

By: Sean Gallagher

Sean Gallagher — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 22:09:00 +0000

“But I disagree that the demographics and the economic development is solely responsible.” I don’t think anyone would say any one shift is solely responsible. That’s stupid. But the economic shifts have not hurt. As dcguy points out – it does help the tax base = more police and it’s more police that really has helped make a difference (in addition to community engagement etc). It’s also partly the age of information. And violent crime is just not as cool as it used to be. Ha.

By: Jack McKay

Jack McKay — Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:45:00 +0000

Reduced lead exposure, due to the elimination of lead in gasoline and in paint, explains much of the drop in violent crime: “A recent peer-reviewed study (Environmental Research, May 2000) shows that variations in childhood gasoline lead exposure from 1941 to 1986 explain about 90% of the variation in violent crime rates from 1960 to 1998″. As people who were exposed as children to environmental lead “age out” of the violent-crime ages, the homicide rate is expected to continue to decrease, just as is being observed here.

By: wsinger

wsinger — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:31:00 +0000

you might have referred to Zimring’s new book, searching for explanations of NYC’s crime drop. It’s reviewed here: http://goo.gl/Df75H

By: Dcguy

Dcguy — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:00:00 +0000

Gentrification led to the increased tax base that allowed for the hiring of additional police patrols.

By: Eaaae

Eaaae — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:35:00 +0000

*disprove.

By: Eaaae

Eaaae — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:28:00 +0000

Exceptions do not prove the rule. The stories of Navy Yard, Columbia Heights, and H Street beg to differ.