Faux News and Right Wing Co. can b*tch and moan all they want about CRIME when election season kicks in, but fundamentally making crime expensive is not cheap. What is crime? How do you know if criminal act occurred? How do you lower criminal acts?
Of course this article assumes that law enforcement is a bunch of trustworthy do nothing wrong do-gooders, for which many are not and are just there to be told what to do for the job.
First off, you want crime to go to zero? Get rid of the laws obviously ☠️. There you go, crime is defined by the law.
If some performs a criminal act, how do you know in that instant it was criminal in the first place. You see this is where police get themselves into trouble and lose credibility with the public and actually contribute to increasing crime by way of creating disorder and no trust.
Do you open an "investigation" into everything that occurs that looks criminal or "suspicious"? Clearly not as there are only so many you can have open at anytime barring implicit quotas that have to be filled. In order for police to be relevant and budgeted, crime must occur no matter how small, exaggerated and false it might be. Perception of criminal act is more important than the act itself. Lowering crime to zero is not in the interest of any security force as a matter of existence.
Preventing crime from even occurring is the cheapest but also the most expensive. It's also the most pill pushed without any strategy. Typically it is endorsed with community as fluff but a way for law enforcement at all times and levels to get more POWER to monitor you wherever you might be. Any way to gather, not limited to, your communications, where you are, where you are looking, what people you hang out with and what are you reading/searching/exposed is seen as a way to prevent crime. Makes sense right, how else will child pornography, human trafficking, terrorist, etc. laws be enforced if they cannot gather much information. Ain't that the problem today though? They look to shoehorn themselves into that position of overseer which many people are uncomfortable with, so it becomes very expensive to do. The more information they get access to, the more time and resources taken away from actual perceivable crimes that have occurred.
I say preventing crime can be the cheapest, but that assumes optimistic attitude where in trust is given to credible people, which is hard to do. If someone, who has self interest in their own, community and criminal's safety themselves, comes to law enforcement with credible information about criminal acts that are about to, are occurring or have occurred, then how much did law enforcement spend to get that information? It's resources well spent. People have to be educated in what is criminal, but something agreed to be overtly criminal is typically what should spur action to investigate and act when necessary. It's cheap only when information is credible and as we can see on Twitter, much information is NOT CREDIBLE.
Can you prevent crime? Sure, but not to zero. Many factors leading people to crime is out of yours and law enforcement's control. Economy can go bad, social disorder, etc. contribute to people's attitudes. Law enforcement can encourage better use of community resources through education, diversion, programs, engagement to prevent quality of life crimes so people care more about where they live. Law enforcement should also educate their responders better on use of power on when it is actually worth doing it as it wastes money, attention, resources and trust when frivolous.
I would argue that creating an atmosphere where it feels like you are living in sh*t contributes to not caring and increasing crime then copycats, it's self fulfilling. The Faux News Network loves to sh*t on certain places therefore creating that sense of unease. I assert that law enforcement who go on that network to LIE and tell Congress something different, contribute to the feeling of criminal wonderland therefore increasing crime. If the Fox News Network along with other garbage news networks were banned from talking about crime crime crime, the false bad economy or even shut down today, happiness would go up and crime would lower overall, moderate and law enforcement's job would be easier. News networks' attitudes would shift. I 100% guarantee you.
Wherever it feels cheap to get away with quality of life crimes, obviously people will do.
Lowering crime isn't cheap, but it manageable. It's about maintaining atmosphere. Too bad there are competing self interests. Just isn't cheap to fight crime along with those interests. People talk about lower crime rates in other countries, problem is in other countries their interest is to actually make people give a sh*t about their community, not to grab or use power or make themselves relevant the same way they always have.