Does abortion lower the crime rate?

In the mid 90’s, many people were worried about the crime rate.  People were saying by 2000, it was going to be a “bloodbath.”  However, the exact opposite happened, crime rate went down.  Many thought it was because of: innovative policing strategies, increased reliance on prisons, changes in crack and other drug markets, aging of the population, tougher gun control laws, strong economy, increased number of police, etc.  However, when you look at these reasons, they seem to be just wishful thinking.  (I can go into how they are not, but I just don’t have the time).

How can we tell if the abortion crime link is a case of causality?  Well, when a child is aborted, that usually means that the mother does not want the child, feels as though it will not grow up in a good household, or simply she feels she cannot care for it.  If that child is forced to grow up in this unloving household, single mother/poor, statistically that child has a greater chance of going to crime when he grows up.

In the first year in the passing of Roe v. Wade, some 750,000 women had abortions (1 abortion for every 4 births).  By 1980, the numbers 1.6 million (1:2.25)  Thus, by the time 1995 rolled around, the previous generations where abortion was illegal, grew up, and the generation where abortion was legal came in.

Now this may seem like a coincidence, but look at the states where abortion was LEGAL before the senate passed a nation wide law.  In New York, California, Washington, Alaska and Hawaii, a woman could get an abortion 2 years before the rest of the nation, and indeed those states saw crime begin to fall earlier than the other 45 states.  Between 1988 and 1994, violent crime in the early states fell 13% compared to other states.  Between 1994 and 1997 their murder rates fell about 23% more than those of other states.

To further push the correlation, sure enough the sates with the highest abortion rates in the 1970’s experienced the greatest crime drips in the 1990’s.  Since 1985, states with high abortion rates have experienced a roughly 30% drop in crime relative to ones with low abortion rates.

Moreover, there was no link between a given states abortion rate and its crime rate before the late 1980s, then the first cohort affected by legalized abortion was reaching its criminal prime, which is yet another indication that Roe v. Wade was indeed the event that tipped the crime scale. 

what the link between abortion and crime does say is this: when the government gives a woman the opportunity to make her own decisions about abortion, she generally does a good job of figuring out if she is in a position to raise the baby well. If she decides she can't, she often chooses the abortion.

>>1
Yes, cause most of crimes are pretty much directly linked to poverty and most of poor parent's decide to abort their babies for economical reasons. Might sould cruel, but that's the real world. Learn to deal with it.

>>2
        That may be true, and i mostly agree.  However, if they are that bad off why didn't they not get knocked up in the first place for economic reasons?

Well, because poor people are usually pretty ignorant, and dont understand the reprocusions of sex.  So, they get pregnant, then want to mooch off the government.

Once again, I am speaking generally.

http://www.freakonomics.com/ch4.php

PUT BIRTH CONTROL IN M&M PACKAGES AND GIVE IT AWAY

>>4

         Ok, lets assume that they are that ignorant.  they havn't figgured out that sex=pregnancy.  I am willing to say that most poor are somewhere between ignorant and stupid, but at least i give them more credit than that.  even if they are that stupid, i assume they can learn after the first time getting pregnant, and abortions are not difficult to get now, only third-term abortions are illegal(and rightly so).  Also the it is not difficult to get contraception now.  having children is only really profitable for welfare bums, a relativly small percent of the poor working class, most are just on assistance and don't profit from children.  so any poor woman, or poor couple should have 1 child before they figure out that (a) sex causes babies without contraception  (b) babies are  expensive and you don't want any more.  and there should be those smart enough to figure this out before getting pregnant in the first place.  so discounting welfare bums the poor population in any generation should have children equal the a little less than the female population, or a little less than 52% the adult population.  that is far below actual numbers.

>> they havn't figgured out that sex=pregnancy... i give them more credit than that.
you shouldn't

IF THEY WERE SMART THEY WOULDN'T BE POOR

>>1
>Now this may seem like a coincidence
Protip: When someone starts a sentence like this, it is.

abort all balck babies

>>11
        Before they become criminals

http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/products/a332/a332.gif

>>1
of course it does. unwanted children are not raised correctly, and thus become really ridiculous human beings. the smarter of them are able to function in society, but the rest kinda just stumble around in a stupored daze for the rest of their lives.

why give birth to a kid who in 20 years is more than bound to be a drunk bum living in a worse situation than you are?

Kill stupid people, white and black. Think about it, no niggers or racists.

>>13
     You can still put your child up for adoption.  you can just leave it at the fucking hospital you give birth at and they hae to take care of it legally.  I know this doesn't solve the problem as many foster and orphanages probably have a high rate of having criminals come out of them than a normal or adopted child, but that just means the programs there need revamping, not that the parents should have aborted.

>>15
   Interestingly enough, babies who were left for adoption have about the same chance of becomming cirminals.  About 50% of the baby's intellect comes from the parents, even if they never saw them.  So, dumb broads often shoot out dumb kids. 

The more you know.

>>16
   agreed.
    However you are failing to see that i never said those adopted put up for adoption are more likely to become criminals.  I said those raised in orpahages and foster parents are probably have a higher rate of becoming criminal than those that get adopted into a family. 
    Not all criminals are criminals because of stupidity.  There are also crimes of circomstance.  And those in tough situations commit crimes at times.

It should also be considered that there are plenty of criminals who are very intelligent.

But anyway, I thin most people regardless of their socioeconomic background are well aware of the fact that sex causes babies.  The problem is people are really fucking stupid when it comes to sex.  The think they can get by using the withdrawl method, or having sex while the girl is on her period, or something equally retarded.
Now, when it comes to the poor, they tend to be religious.  And being religious they assume they MUST have the baby.  Or they're stupid enough to think it might all work out.  Or that it will be fun or easy.  9 months of smoking and drinking later they give birth.  Of course, there's a high probablitly that the father has left by now.  And I really don't feel like typing the rest.

>>18
     Once again, this assumption of their ignorance explains the birth of one child per poor woman.  How does that explain actual number of births being substaially more than that?

>>whole thread

If you think poor people are the only ones who wind up with unwanted pregnancies, you must never have gone to college.

Also, I think economic and education levels are just one factor.  Unwanted kids raised without loev are more likely to grow up with a grudge against the world and take it out however they can.  Richer, more educated people will start a business and hire people they can shit on, or go to therapy, or something like that.  Poor people have fewer choices, and are more likely to wind up in jail.

I think free full-service abortions should be available, with free recovery facilities and support counseling.  Hell, I've seen some people who should get PAID to have abortions, but that's a dangerous proposition.

Poor people get the most abortions lmao?

I've met more middle class girls who have had abortions because they can AFFORD it than I've met people of low income who have recieved abortions. Poor people have no choice but to keep their kids.

>>20 hah, thats laughable paying for murder

>>16
I think it has more do with facts that kids are removed from their biological parents. That's typically very shameful and problematic. Think of it. Would you be happy to live if you knew that your parents hate you? I admit I have no real experience with such things, but that's what came in mind.

All children should be assumed by the government and raised in spartan conditions, indoctrinated into being patriots and given a firm logical critical scientific education.

>>24
Adolfus Huxley anyone?

I can see ways in which abortion might (and I emphasize the might) lower crime rates in indirect ways... if parents aren't having kids they can't raise or provide for, those kids won't act out on their lack of parenting, and/or won't be forced into situations in which desperation leads them to do certain things.

>>22
Yeah, it's a ridiculous idea.  But seriously, imagine that one of your fucked-up meth addict toothless pockmarked jailbird fetal-alcohol-syndrome neighbors gets knocked up.  Imagine having to listen to that baby crying all night while it goes through withdrawal and shit.  Wouldn't it be tempting to just pay for her abortion and give her a little extra to keep her quiet?  Of course the problem is she'd just get knocked up again if she knew there was a few bucks in it for her.

I think it does.. it makes logical sense that it would. 

I think it does.. it makes logical sense that it would. 

It probly does... Seems like it would.  Those who are poor and are forced to bear their children rather than have an abortion, who couldn't do as good a job of supporting them as an average person with stable income and whatnot would probly raise their children poorly... resulting in more criminals for the future.

I am pro-abortion and anti-welfare since I believe the stupid poor should be free to kill their inferior offspring and the lack of prospect of welfare aids in their decision.

"I am pro-abortion"

You mean pro-choice?

It is actually very logical that legalizing abortion would decrease crime while illegalizing abortion would have the increase in crime rate.  This is simply because if abortion would be illegal all the abortions would be crimes.  Therfore legalizing would make both the doctors performing the abortions non criminals, and the soon-not-to-be mothers not criminals.  decreasing cime and criminal rates overall.

      However, seriously, generation to generation crime tends to be proportional to the population overall, barring any political or social program that creates more crime this is true.  an example of this would be prohibition saw a huge increase in crime rate that came from all those drinkers suddenly being criminals.  That showed a substanitial increase for that generation for crime than for the previous one.  however if you compare each generation to the generation to the generation just before and just after it, crime rate is relatively constant in reference to population, although peeks of overcrowding in areas create crime problems in those ares, but rarely is there something that spreads across a whold nation crime wise.  There are other things involved like technology developing to deter crime easier and catch criminals easier, but these are those social and politial changes previously mentioned that must be delt with.  rises and falls in crime rate typically happen over time as socieity changes.  The middle ages had a horrible crime rate.  also long term trends only indicate a sharp dropping in US crime rate over the past 200 years and only a slight rise over the past 40.
        So locially abortion would simply decrease the the growth in population.   So if it slowed the growth in the crowded areas it would have a decreasing effect on crime.  however overall it really wouldn't decrease crime any in proportion to population.

>>33

I don't think people's opinions on abortion (generally) are going to be swayed by whether or not it lowers or heightens the crime rate.  The abortion debate is around whether or not the thing inside the woman is a "human" or not at the time it is aborted. 

Pro-choice people tend to argue that it is a part of the woman's body, like an appendage.  They say it is a fetus, not a human being, and thus she has the right to get rid of it through an abortion if she pleases. 

Pro-life people tend to argue that it is a 'human being', and to kill it would be murder.

Simply put, it is a matter of morals, principles, and more importantly, what constitutes an "individual" human being to you.  Clearly, if you think the fetus is an "individual", then it would be "murder" to kill it. 

Likewise, if you think it is not an individual, but rather a part of the woman's body, not-yet-independant, then she has the right to abort it.

>>34
Sure, but it doesn't change that it lowers the crime rate.

>>32
No, I mean "anti human".

I stand for a womans right to have an abortion.

I also stand firm that third-term abortions should be illegal as it is a pretty damn brutal thing, and have a little responsibility, you know you are pregnant before you are 6 months in.

>>36

LOL, I remember a funny incident in a debate between Jen. Granholm  (D-MI) was debating with Dick Posthumus (R-Gov candidate), and Dick says "I'm pro-life."  Granholm responded with:  "Oh? I'm pro-death."  ON TV!

>>38
and half of amerikkka went apeshit because they are morans?

>>39
Actually, Granholm won the following election and became Governor of Michigan.

>>38
     I may disagree with the guy politically on almost everything, but I still love an outspoken smartass thats willing to go out and make a point.