Crime control and the homicide statistic
Except for the views expressed in the column above, the articles published on this page do not necessarily represent the views of the Jamaica Observer.
There is a practice worldwide of judging the level of control that law enforcement exercises over its jurisdiction by the number of murders committed in a given period. This is usually an annual calculation, but has been known to extend to even further time periods.
Jamaica, more than any other country I know, is intimately obsessed with murder rates and the speed at which they can be reported. I think using the murder rate as a global and national practice is a flawed system of judging the degree of crime control that law enforcement exercises over its citizenry. But, it is indeed a universal practice.
Now, the fact that something is internationally practised does not mean it makes sense. There was a time that the world thought the planet was flat, slavery was okay, burning witches worked, and kings had a right to rule. We now know that all of those practices and beliefs were false.
A murder requires an environment that allows it to happen, whether this environment is a dark, lonely road or a well-lit, crowded cell. Every violent act is dependent on a permissive environment.
Murder is the result of a very violent act, as is every shooting — whether it results in death, wounding, or escape.
So if we are to measure the level of crime control that law enforcement exercises over its populace we have to look at shootings that have a living complainant, whether wounded or otherwise, and murders, irrespective of what tool was used to commit these murders.
Some would say: “Then why not knife woundings?”
Well, every time you point a lethal, barrelled weapon at someone and pull the trigger, you are intending to kill and capable of doing same. It is not necessarily so with a knife.
The successful completion of a violent act with intent to kill is murder. That is my definition.
What determines the success varies. This includes the skill level of the attacker, the escape ability of the victim, the standard of the hospital to which the wounded person was taken, even the speed of the car that got the person there.
The chance of the violent act failing has very little to do with the standard of law enforcement and its control over its environment.
So what we should use as the measuring stick is the number of extremely violent events, which constitute shootings and murders, that occurred in the environment being policed.
In 2010, Jamaica recorded 2,978 extremely violent events (not including non-fatal stabbings), of which 1,447 resulted in murder. In 2019, Jamaica recorded 2,585 extremely violent events, as per the earlier description. This represents a reduction of 13 per cent.
Now, if we only looked at murders, the percentage decrease would have been 18 per cent. The 18 per cent reduction could have been the result of bad aim, good running, or good health care. The environment that existed allowed for the violent activity to occur. The end result of the violent activity had nothing really to do with law enforcement.
Now, let me make it clear. I am not saying it is law enforcement’s fault that the environment exists for extremely violent events to occur. It is a variety of reasons. The existence of the environment and its present state cannot be judged by the aim of the shooters or the skill of the surgeon, but rather by the number of times the event occurred. Let me show you how relevant this is in determining success or failure.
Between 2016 and 2019, Jamaica experienced a two per cent increase in murder, but a 2.6 per cent decrease in extremely violent events. The reason there was not a corresponding decrease in murder rather than an increase, was simply that there was an increase in the efficiency of the perpetrators, or a reduction in the effectiveness of the health services. Both are variables that law enforcement cannot influence.
However, no matter the end result, we had a reduction of 2.6 per cent in extremely violent events in 2019 vs 2016.
Nobody even looks at or cares about other crimes at all. Do you know that there was a time that murders were not even considered preventable? Yes. And there was a really good reason for this.
Do you want to know what that is? Brace for it.
Nobody can determine when a bunch of morons — well-armed, living near each other, zinc fences apart, armed by another moron living far away in Florida, New York, or London — are going to get upset, jump the borderline and commit an extremely violent act that results in death.
I have seen great ministers and great police commissioners’ careers ruined at the expense of our country because of this obsession to judge the efficiency of their performance by the fatal activities of some idiots. This is the equivalent of blaming Prime Minister Holness for an economy ruined by the novel coronavirus, or the minister of agriculture for flood rains that wipe out crops.
The Jamaica Constabulary Force performs over 20 services, all very important to our country. Maybe we could assess the performance in those areas, as there are controllable factors in most of them, rather than the one that is, in essence, non-preventable.
As we march through a unique Christmas season, where shop owners fear sneezes more than rifles and big spending is occurring only through dangerous overcrowding, let us accept that our safety will be determined by our own vigilance and investment in our own required infrastructure, and have no more relevance to law enforcement than full moons have to taming or creating werewolves.
Murder control, like monsters, is just another myth. Feedback: drjasonamckay@gmail.com