“Circumspect Police Ends the Drop in Crime?” This debate topic speaks about police being less proactive, because of vitriol, and causing an increase in crime rates. This debate topic is not directly related to the book, Ghettoside, but falls into the same bracket. The debate talks about the police becoming less involved because of denunciation, and rates of crimes increasing because of that. Ghettoside talks about the black-on-black homicide rates going up, one reason, because of the ignorance of the police. So, both the debate and the book have crime rates going up because of the lack of interference of the police department. The book shows ignorance because they simply don’t care, and the debate showing ignorance because of criticism. “For …show more content…
Trace L. Meares(2015) is the one who claims that the increase in crime is because of the “Ferguson effect”, and that long term data most likely will show a decline in crime. She uses a visual chart showing the shootings in NYC since 2004. She says that there has been frequent raises and declines in crime, and this particular raise is not because of the police backing off because of criticism. I found it really persuasive after seeing the visual to support her argument. James Alan Fox uses statistics to support his argument and says, “Reported jumps in crime in some cities reflect only a few months, a statistically unreliable indicator of a trend.” This side of the debate had many more statistics and facts which supported the argument. I think that this side has a very good presentation as it amalgamates opinions, facts, statistics, and visuals, which made it really appealing. At the end of reading the debate, I felt that the argument which says that the crime rate is not affected by the police is more convincing. Honestly, I would probably support the other side, but the facts and ways of persuasion were really well presented. I felt that the addition of aspects other than opinions made this argument more