NC/1NR Link Extensions: General

2NC/1NR Impacts Turns Case – Racism

Crime creates fear and discrimination against minorities and women

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK262852/ Crime, fear of crime and mental health: synthesis of theory and systematic reviews of interventions and qualitative evidence. Public Health Research, No. 2.2 (Chapt 3) Theo Lorenc (et al),1,* Mark Petticrew,1 Margaret Whitehead,2 David Neary,2 Stephen Clayton,2 Kath Wright,3 Hilary Thomson,4 Steven Cummins,5 Amanda Sowden,3 and Adrian Renton6. March 2014 1 Department of Social and Environmental Health Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK 2 Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK 3 Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK 4 MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit (SPHSU), University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK 5 School of Geography, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK 6 Institute for Health and Human Development, University of East London, London, UK * Corresponding author

Third, as suggested earlier, the impacts of fear of crime are highly unequally distributed, and these inequalities tend to closely shadow the existing power relationships within society. The experience of fear of crime as a pervasive factor in one’s day-to-day existence is one that disproportionately affects women, ethnic minorities and people living in material disadvantage. For many people, fear of crime may refer as much to the latent violence that is implicit in discriminatory social structures as to the manifest violence that is measured by crime statistics; the inescapability of such fear, and its symbolic resonance with the marginalisation and devaluation of oppressed groups, may amplify its effect on mental health and well-being. Some scholars have utilised the concept of ‘spirit injury’ to encapsulate this link between individual victimisation and structural inequality.74,75

2NC/1NR Impacts – Economy

Crime increases have a strongly negative effect on growth

http://www.rcfea.org/RePEc/pdf/wp51_12.pdfWP 12-51 The Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis (RCEA), Italy ECONOMIC GROWTH AND CRIME: DOES UNCERTAINTY MATTER?

Although there is a growing body of literature on the link between crime and macroeconomic performance, there is no cross-country evidence on the impact on economic growth of the crimeuncertainty interaction. Yet, if the growth-uncertainty relationship is negative, as many empirical studies suggest7 , and the uncertainty-crime relationship is positive, then the crime-uncertainty interaction should exert a strong negative impact on economic growth. Our results support this view. We find evidence that increasing crime has no independent negative effect on growth under favorable economic conditions and thus under circumstances of low macroeconomic uncertainty. Higher-than-average macroeconomic uncertainty, however, enhances the adverse impact of crime on growth, making the effect of the crime-uncertainty interaction highly significant and negative. Accordingly, crime appears to be particularly harmful to growth in bad times, that is, when worsening economic conditions make the return to investment less secure. This result has important policy implications. Since the global financial crisis of 2007-2009, the degree of uncertainty surrounding macroeconomic performance in many countries has increased. At the same time, the opportunity cost of engaging in certain types of crime activity, including property crime and drug trafficking, has fallen for a number of individuals who have experienced a reduction in income as a result of the global financial crisis of 2007-2009 and of the recent European debt crisis. So, increased total crime is a possibility. Accordingly, the combined effect of higher-than average macroeconomic uncertainty and possibly higher-than-average crime may well be a further reduction in growth rates in the coming years.

Increased crime takes down a sluggish economy

http://www.rcfea.org/RePEc/pdf/wp51_12.pdfWP 12-51 The Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis (RCEA), Italy ECONOMIC GROWTH AND CRIME: DOES UNCERTAINTY MATTER?

This paper seeks to add to the existing crime literature by exploring to what extent the degree of macroeconomic uncertainty influences the way that changes in crime impact on growth. For this purpose, we examine how the interaction between accelerations of crime and macroeconomic uncertainty affect per-capita income growth, after controlling for other explanatory variables typically included in growth regressions. We use annual data from 25 countries for the period 1991- 2007 and two alternative measures of uncertainty, based on the conditional variance of industrial production and the unconditional variance of a survey-based consumer sentiment indicator. We find that the effect on growth of increased crime is asymmetric: as uncertainty regarding the future prospects of the economy increases, increasing levels of crime become more harmful to growth. In particular, we find that accelerations of crime exert a strong adverse influence on growth when interacted with high levels of macroeconomic uncertainty but have no statistically significant impact on growth when interacted with low macroeconomic uncertainty. This indicates that crime mainly contributes to reducing economic growth in bad times, that is, when worsening economic conditions, and thus higher-than-average uncertainty regarding the future state of the economy and poor business climate, make the return on private investment less secure. By contrast, in good times, when the perceived degree of macroeconomic uncertainty is low, crime accelerations exert no independent adverse influence on growth. This result has important policy implications. It suggests that viewing crime as an important impediment to growth can be misleading if information regarding the future prospects of the economy is not explicitly taken into account.

Enhanced crime results in poverty because businesses cannot strive

Poverty and crime have a very "intimate" relationship that has been described by experts from all fields, from sociologists to economists. The UN and the World Bank both rank crime high on the list of obstacles to a country’s development. This means that governments trying to deal with poverty often also have to face the issue of crime as they try to develop their country's economy and society. Crime prevents businesses from thriving by generating instability and uncertainty (at micro and macroeconomic levels). This is true in markets of all sizes, national, regional, municipal and even neighborhood-al (okay the word doesn’t exist). That's why having a business in a ghetto is rarely a good idea. The vicious cycle of poverty and crime International organisations also blame crime – including corruption – for putting at risk Africa's chances of development nowadays. The same goes for Latin America. Crime has this capacity to generate vicious cycles causing unemployment, economic downturns and instability. Poverty and crime combined together leave people with two choices: either take part in criminal activities or try to find legal but quite limited sources of income - when there are any available at all. Unemployment, poverty and crime Starting from the 1970s, studies in the US pointed more and more at the link between unemployment, poverty and crime. After that other connections with income level, time spent at school, quality of neighborhood and education were revealed as well. Fresh research from the UK even indicates that economic cycles may affect variations in property and violent crimes. But most importantly, what reveals the unmistakable connection between poverty and crime is that they’re both geographically concentrated - in a strikingly consistent way. In other words, where you find poverty is also where you find crime. Of course this doesn't include "softer" crimes such as corruption which causes massive damage to people's lives but in a more indirect type of violence.

Violent crime is costly

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of Sonecon, LLC, a senior fellow of the Georgetown University McDonough School of Business, an advisor to the International Monetary Fund, director of the NDN Globalization Initiative, and chairman of the U.S. Climate Task Force. Kevin A. Hassett is director of economic policy studies and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. The Economic Benefits of Reducing Violent Crime A Case Study of 8 American Cities June 19, 2012 https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2012/06/19/11755/the-economic-benefits-of-reducing-violent-crime/ (ac: 7-6-15)

Violent crimes are costly. Murders, rapes, assaults, and robberies impose concrete economic costs on the victims who survive as well as the families of those who lose their lives, in the loss of earnings and their physical and emotional tolls. Violent crimes also impose large costs on communities through lower property values, higher insurance premiums, and reduced investment in high-crime areas. In addition, violent crimes impose significant costs on taxpayers, who bear the financial burden of maintaining the police personnel and operations, courts, jails, and prisons directed toward these crimes and their perpetrators. Fortunately, the incidence of violent crimes in the United States has fallen sharply over the last 20 years. From 1960 to 400 1990 the rates of these crimes rose sharply as did their attendent costs. Over that period murder rates nearly doubled, rates of rape and robbery increased fourfold, and the rate of assault quintupled. Since the early 1990s, however, rates of most violent crimes have been cut nearly in half. (see Figure 1)

Violent crime leads to cost from both the government and citizens

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of Sonecon, LLC, a senior fellow of the Georgetown University McDonough School of Business, an advisor to the International Monetary Fund, director of the NDN Globalization Initiative, and chairman of the U.S. Climate Task Force. Kevin A. Hassett is director of economic policy studies and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. The Economic Benefits of Reducing Violent Crime A Case Study of 8 American Cities June 19, 2012 https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2012/06/19/11755/the-economic-benefits-of-reducing-violent-crime/ (ac: 7-6-15)

By most measures, violent crime continues to impose significant costs on Americans and their communities. The costs borne by the American public for this level of criminal activity are significant. Medical care for assault victims, for example, costs an estimated $4.3 billion per year. We spend $74 billion per year on incarcerating 2.3 million criminals, including some 930,000 violent criminals. Moreover, the costs of the pain and suffering borne by the victims of violent crimes is several times greater than the more direct costs of those crimes. As a result, successful efforts to reduce violent crime can produce substantial economic benefits for individuals, communities, and taxpayers. This report presents the findings and conclusions of a yearlong project to examine and analyze the costs of violent crimes in a sample of eight major American cities and estimate the savings and other benefits that would accompany significant reductions in those crimes. This analysis draws on data pinpointing the incidence and location of murders, rapes, assaults, and robberies. The data were provided by the police departments of Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Jacksonville, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, and Seattle. We examined a broad range of both direct and intangible costs associated with those violent crimes based on their incidence in each of the eight cities in 2010. The direct costs reported here are those borne by the residents and city governments of the eight cities, although additional costs are also borne by state and federal governments and the taxpayers who finance them. Finally, we calculated the benefits to those residents associated with substantial reductions in violent crime, including the impact on residential home values and a variety of savings to the city governments. In today’s tight fiscal and economic environment, the mayors and city councils of every city—along with state and the federal governments—are searching for ways to reduce their spending and expand their revenues. The common challenge is to achieve sustainable fiscal conditions without hobbling government’s ability to provide the vital goods and services that most Americans expect, all without burdening businesses and families with onerous new taxes. This analysis provides another way available to many American municipalities: Secure budget savings, higher revenues, and personal income and wealth gains by reducing violent crime rates. To calculate the extent of those savings and benefits, we analyze a broad range of direct costs associated with the violent crime in the eight cities sampled here. These direct costs start with local spending on policing, prosecuting, and incarcerating the perpetrators of those crimes. These costs also encompass out-of-pocket medical expenses borne by surviving victims of violent crime as well as the income those victims must forgo as a result of the crimes. These costs also include the lost incomes that would otherwise be earned by the perpetrators of violent crimes had they not been apprehended—as distasteful as it is to calculate the foregone income of rapists or armed robbers who are arrested, convicted, and incarcerated. These direct, annual costs range from $90 million per year in Seattle to around $200 million per year in Boston, Jacksonville, and Milwaukee, to more than $700 million in Philadelphia and nearly $1.1 billion for Chicago.

The housing market takes the biggest hit when violent crime occurs

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of Sonecon, LLC, a senior fellow of the Georgetown University McDonough School of Business, an advisor to the International Monetary Fund, director of the NDN Globalization Initiative, and chairman of the U.S. Climate Task Force. Kevin A. Hassett is director of economic policy studies and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. The Economic Benefits of Reducing Violent Crime A Case Study of 8 American Cities June 19, 2012 https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2012/06/19/11755/the-economic-benefits-of-reducing-violent-crime/ (ac: 7-6-15)

The largest economic benefits, however, arise from the impact of lower rates of violent crime on the housing values in the cities sampled here. To estimate this effect, we use data covering several years on the incidence of violent crimes by zip code in each city and changes in housing values in the same zip codes over the same period. Five of the eight cities were able to provide data by zip code covering at least six years. Our analysis of those data found that a reduced incidence of murders in a particular zip code is followed by a predictable and significant increase in housing values in the same zip code in the next year. On average, a reduction in a given year of one homicide in a zip code causes a 1.5 percent increase in housing values in that same zip code the following year. We applied these findings to available data on the value of the housing stock in the metropolitan areas of all eight cities. The estimated increases in the value of the housing stock for the eight cities and their immediate metropolitan areas, following a 10 percent reduction in homicides, range from $600 million in Jacksonville and the surrounding area to $800 million in the Milwaukee area, to $3.2 billion in Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs, and $4.4 billion in the Boston area. Unfortunately, inconsistent reporting of other types of violent crime—rapes, assaults, and robberies—preclude a reliable analysis of the impact on housing values of changes in the incidence of those crimes.

Surveillance checks crime – the US proves this is essential for economic growth

Rohit Choudhry Mar 4 2015 Addl DG in the Punjab Police

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/good-policing-a-must-for-economic-growth/49254.html Good policing a must for economic growth

This result has important policy implications for India. Besides boosting the investor confidence, the programmes that directly or indirectly prevent crime can also generate substantial economic benefits by reducing crime-related costs incurred by victims (medical care costs, lost earnings, and property loss/damage), communities, and the criminal justice system which includes state, and central government funds spent on police protection, legal and adjudication services, and correction programmes. Further, there are the opportunity costs associated with the criminal's choice to engage in illegal rather than legal and productive activities and the indirect losses suffered by the victims, including pain and suffering, decreased quality of life, and psychological distress. In the US alone, more than 23 million criminal offences were committed in 2007, resulting in approximately $15 billion in economic losses to the victims and $179 billion in government expenditures on police protection, judicial and legal activities, and corrections. However, the western world has been consistent in its efforts to raise the policing standards. In America, the fall in crime rate began around 1991; in Britain it began around 1995; in France, property related crimes rose until 2001 but it has fallen by a third since. While the sociological changes like the young becoming increasingly sober and well behaved and repopulating the inner cities, economic and other factors like the end of the crack-cocaine epidemic in the 1990s are widely credited with reducing crime. Better policing, which includes both crime prevention and detection measures, have also contributed significantly to this phenomenon. Combination of community policing and intensive targeting of crime "hotspots" with the help of "CompStat'", which is a data-driven model of policing, has transformed the way streets are protected. Technology has improved the effectiveness of detective work too. The advent of mobile-phone call analysis and surveillance, Internet data connectivity, online banking and surveillance cameras have all increased the chances of tracking the digital foot prints and criminals getting caught and punished. The crime and economy correlation would suggest that adequate allocation in budgets for improving the policing could only be considered as prudent and productive spending by the governments. In the US, COPS programme had a strong federal support and the support of the US President, funds to the tune of $9 billion were provided by the federal government to implement the community policing schemes all over the country. Rule of law and economic growth The rule of law indicator measures the extent to which individuals and firms have confidence in and abide by the rules of society; in particular, it measures the functioning and independence of the judiciary, including the police, the protection of property rights, the quality of contract enforcement, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence. Judicial and the police independence are strongly linked to growth as it promotes a stable investment environment. Also, according to one study, the difference between developing economies that observe rule of law and economies that do not, is a more than 3 per cent growth in GDP. Realising the need for an environment of rule of law as an essentiality for economic growth, the Chinese government also has implemented a comprehensive legal system to shift from a system of "rule by man" to "rule by law". The Chinese government stresses on strong terms that police administration and operation must be guided by legislative provisions and has passed numerous laws and regulations in relation to police administration and operation, ushering in a new era of police development in China. CRIMINAL activity can drag the entire economy by discouraging domestic and foreign direct investments, reducing the competitiveness of business organisations, and reallocating resources. It creates uncertainty and inefficiency in the business environment. Thus, law and order is considered an important function for the state to perform and is placed among minimal functions of the state in addressing market failure. In today's globalised world, the increasing flows of economic investment and business traffic between the nations bring into focus the relationship between investment confidence and security and crime, the latter being important in terms of both official crime rates and the fear of crime. Recently, the Government of South Africa, in its green paper on policing acknowledged that high levels of violent crime in South Africa are having a significant negative impact on the country's economy. Rise of violent crimes was costing the country dearly due to loss of productivity and foreign investment.

2NC/1NR Impact – Poverty/Structural Violence

Crime causes poverty

Lippman, 91. (Theo, author of Spiro Agnew’s America and Editor at the Baltimore Sun. March 30, 1991.) DOA: 7/6/15. BALTIMORE SUN. “Poverty Doesn’t cause crime. Crime Causes Poverty.” Retrieved from: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-03-30/news/1991089022_1_cost-of-crime-poverty-fight-crime // JW

POVERTY DOESN'T cause crime. Crime causes poverty. Therefore, to fight poverty, fight crime. How does crime cause poverty? Suppose your family lives just above the poverty line. A burglar breaks into your house and steals all your clothes. What it costs you to replace them drops you into poverty, since you no longer have the minimum needed for food and shelter. Or suppose you're on your way home from work. A mugger takes your paycheck and beats you up so badly that you have to miss another week's work. Losing two weeks' pay is impoverishing at many levels. In 1988, according to the Department of Justice, "the total estimated cost of crime to victims was $16.6 billion. This estimate includes losses from property theft or damage, cash losses, medical expenses and other costs. The estimate was derived by summing crime victims' estimates of the amount of stolen cash, the value of stolen property, medical expenses and the amount of pay lost from work because of injuries, police-related activities, court-related activities, or time spent repairing or replacing property."

Poverty is the deadliest form of structural violence – it is equivalent to an ongoing nuclear war.
Gilligan, 96’ [James, Former Director of Mental Health for the Massachusetts Prison System, Violence, p.] // JW
In other words, every fifteen years, on the average, as many people die because of relative poverty as would be killed in a nuclear that caused 232 million deaths; and every single year, two to three times as many people die from poverty throughout

Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2015
2015 -> Police Militarization
2015 -> 2015 ihbb championships: hs history Bowl Round 4 – Prelims First Quarter
2015 -> Wrtp/big step · 3841 W. Wisconsin Ave., Milwaukee, wi 53208
2015 -> Rao bulletin 1 December 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles
2015 -> Darton College
2015 -> Training Workshop on Planning and Implementation of Multi-Sectoral Development Programme (MsDP) in Bihar Date : 6th
2015 -> Rao bulletin 15 June 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles
2015 -> Rao bulletin 1 September 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles
2015 -> Rao bulletin 1 August 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles
2015 -> Science, and transportation united states senate

Download 1.69 Mb.

Share with your friends: