The event gave researchers from the Right and Left a unique chance to identify important intellectual and policy gaps as Americans consider policing and criminal justice.
The meeting, sponsored by Berkeley Law and The Heritage Foundation, featured never merely researchers from across the political spectrum but district attorneys and former city attorneys—including San Francisco’s Chesa Boudin, then a doctor at the law school and chairman of Berkeley’s Criminal Law &, Justice Center. ( The Daily Signal is Heritage’s news and commentary outlet. )
The striking contrast between each team’s view of human nature was evident throughout the meeting.  ,
A broad and seemingly insurmountable gulf appeared between the strategies the Left and Right would use to achieve that goal, despite the fact that both sides claimed they wanted fewer crimes.
The Heritage Foundation older legal fellow Zack Smith spoke about the need of the discussion, especially given the demand for less harsh sentences and other criminal justice reforms that have grown in tandem with increases in violence.
Proposition 47, a ballot initiative that lowers sanctions for some crimes and expedites the release of some prisoners, was passed in California in 2014. A number of similar laws were passed throughout the nation as a result of the shift.
” To usually today when we talk about criminal justice reform, when we talk about legal fairness issues, there’s no accountability for people who break the law”, Smith told lawmakers.
Smith said it was a story that initially- day drug offenders, for example, spend time behind bars.
” Most people in prison today are committing violent crimes like rape, robbery, and murder, so whenever you hear panelists today or elsewhere talk about reducing the prison population by 50 %, 75 %, even 80 % in some cases, that necessarily means releasing some repeat, violent offenders back into our communities”, the Heritage scholar , said.
Here’s a collection of the most important conversations that took position at the March 8 meeting, titled Justice Unveiled: Arguing Violence and Public Safety Conference.
How to Prevent Crime: A Conflict of Visions  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,
The most intense conflict of visions between the Left and Right on murder was demonstrated by a panel on policing and public health at the meeting.  ,
On the right, more attention is being paid to qualified policing in high-crime areas and stricter sentencing guidelines for those who commit atrocities.
So-called prison abolitionists on the left criticize fundamental forces and “root causes” to discuss crime, placing greater emphasis on policing in the context of increasing crime.
For more” sweet officers,” according to Jamelia Morgan, a professor at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law’s Center for Racial and Disability Justice, to replace traditional police. Essentially, that means more social staff instead of officers officials.
Morgan cited Mariame Kaba’s works as a model for those opposed to the abolishment of officers and prison. The law teacher quoted from Kaba’s 2020 New York Times article, published just as the George Floyd protests and riots were beginning.
Morgan said, quoting Kaba:
We have been so conditioned as a society to believe that we can solve problems by policing and caging people that many people ca n’t think of anything else but prisons and the police as solutions to violence and harm. People like me who want to abolish prisons and police, yet, have a perspective of a diverse culture, built on participation instead of independence, on mutual help instead of self- preservation.
Kaba advocates increasing the amount of tax money to be used to address issues of safety and justice by spending more on housing, food, and education.
Many U. S. cities defunded police departments in 2020 and 2021, after Floyd’s death in police custody in Minneapolis.  ,
The murder rate jumped by 30 % from 2019 to 2020 according to the FBI, the largest single- year jump in recorded U. S. history.
The Manhattan Institute’s Nick Ohnell fellow, Rafael Mangual, claimed that police are a necessary component of promoting justice and protecting citizens in a free society. According to Mangual, police play two broad roles, with one purpose being to detect violations of the law and the other to prevent violations of the law.
Often, just the presence of police is enough to deter crime, according to research, he said.
The Manhattan Institute professor noted crime statistics that demonstrate how investing in police reduced crime and other costs to the city and community, saying that the second way to stop crime is to remove criminals from the street.
” If a police officer makes an arrest and removes an active offender from the street, if that person was committing 10, 20, or 30 felonies annually,” Mangual said, “being in custody spares the community the crimes that would otherwise have been committed.”
The problem of repeat offenders, he said, is the main factor contributing to recent spikes in crime. Because the justice system repeatedly places the same criminals back on the street, they frequently commit crimes.
” In the city of Chicago, the typical homicide suspect has 12 prior arrests”, Mangual said. ” One in five]homicide suspects ], 20 prior arrests, these are not just individuals who are being locked up for the first offense and having the key thrown away”.
According to the Manhattan Institute professor, the issue of crime will always be with us, whether or not we like it.
No one has ever been able to eliminate poverty, inequality, or crime or predation, according to the author. It is part of the human condition”, Mangual said.
Taking away policing, which has proved to be effective in reducing crime and violence, is “irresponsible”, he concluded.
Representatives of the Left on the panel reacted to this enunciation of the constrained view of human nature.
Shakeer Rahman, a lawyer for the Los Angeles Community Action Network and the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, expressed doubt that Mangual’s claim that crime and inequality will always be present will prevail.
” Abolitionists are the hopeful ones, because we believe that a world without poverty is possible, that that can be built and that’s at least worth prioritizing”, Rahman said.
Rahman claimed that this creates the issue of racial disparities in prison. Factors such as structural racism lead to this disparity, he said.
Mangual reacted at this point, saying that he thought some structural factors led to crime. He claimed that there is something wrong with people like him who have African ancestry.
Instead, the issue is the breakdown of families, Mangual argued. The disintegration of the family—especially black families —has created childhood disorders that lead to longer- term behavioral issues, he said.
Mangual responded that black families have been broken up by the U.S. criminal justice system, and that research suggests that fathers who are absent from the home are even more likely to be a victim of crime.
Crime Surge a Hoax, the Left Says
The highest percentage of Americans, both Republicans and Democrats, who call crime a” serious problem” is at the highest level since the polling company began recording it in 2000, according to a recent Gallup poll.
However, many left-wing speakers at the conference claimed that media propaganda is to blame for the widespread perception that crime has escalated to become a serious issue.
Jody Armour, a professor at USC Gould School of Law and a scholar of critical race theory, said the perception that crime is rising is just a “moral panic.”
At the Berkeley Law School conference, one of the main topics of discussion was whether there is even a slight increase in crime. Civil rights lawyer Alec Karakatsanis said on a panel about crime trends that the issue is with the media reporting on crime, not the crimes themselves.
Although many crime statistics are” true facts,” Karakatsanis claimed, they are “used to deceive people in profound ways.” He attributed the media’s influence on how much crime is rising.
The civil rights lawyer cited a blatant theft at a San Francisco Walgreens that attracted widespread media attention. The incident was real,  , he said, but it created a “false impression” that shoplifting is increasing when shoplifting is down.
In San Francisco, reported shoplifting incidents decreased slightly in 2023 compared to the previous year, but the most recent figures are still significantly higher than those of 2019.  ,
Walgreens and other Bay Area retail locations frequently take drastic measures to lock freezers and shelves in order to stop widespread retail theft.  ,
One Walgreens location in Richmond, California—a city close to San Francisco—put chewing gum behind glass, The San Francisco Standard reported. The drug store chain Walgreens has shut down numerous locations because they believe they are no longer profitable.
According to police, many of these retail thefts are being committed by organized crime rings.
According to Karakatsanis, talking about crime boils down to “framing,” and that “most people in society have completely lost their way” when they consider what public safety means.
The problem with looking at crime, he said, is that most people look at so- called index crimes such as homicide, assault, and property theft. Most crimes, he argued, are n’t reported as crimes. He pointed to tax evasion, “wage theft”, and corporate fraud.
A System Focused on Equity, Not Preventing Crime
Heather MacDonald, a researcher at the Manhattan Institute, said she is n’t optimistic about trends in criminal justice.  ,
MacDonald cited the fact that many cities indicate that crimes wo n’t be punished. So, according to her, criminals grew more violent and the number of crimes committed exploded.
She emphasized the rise in retail crimes, which left-wing academics refrained from arguing.
Because doing so has a different effect on minority criminals, MacDonald said,” Our criminal justice elites have decided that they would rather subject the property of honest businessmen to mass expropriation than to apprehend and punish looters.”
These are” not crimes of necessity, they are crimes of opportunity”, she said.
MacDonald made the case that the rise in property and retail crimes is not a result of poverty or economic hardship. Many retail thefts are recorded on a smartphone and posted as videos on social media, she said.
” No one who has a smartphone is poor”, MacDonald said. No one who committed these crimes is unable to eat. Rather, predatory theft comes from a sense of entitlement. If others have something I do n’t have, I’m entitled to take it”.
The expert from the Manhattan Institute claimed that society should n’t be conned into believing that the smallest necessities of life, like shampoo, must be kept in retail stores.
” This is not a normal state”, MacDonald said. It is the result of a lack of will. the desire to uphold the principles of civilized society.
Passage of California’s Prop 47, MacDonald said, launched a wave of similar decriminalization measures around the country. Reclassifying many property and drug felonies as misdemeanors, she said, has resulted in hardcore criminals remaining on the street.
” It is not a’ moral panic’ to be concerned about the lawlessness that has broken out since 2020, it is realism”, MacDonald said, referring to Armour’s use of the term.
