Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew


New on NRO . . .
Close
James Q. Wilson’s Life-Saving Work
His writings helped reverse the anti-punishment trend.

By Thomas Sowell


Archive Latest RSS Send

James Q. Wilson in 1972


Text  

There are undoubtedly many people who are alive today because of James Q. Wilson, who died last week. He was not a doctor or medical scientist, nor was he a fireman or coast guardsman who rescued people from immediate dangers.

James Q. Wilson was a scholar who studied crime. He saved lives because his penetrating analyses of crime and the effect of the criminal law debunked the theories of other intellectuals, which had led judges and legislators to ease up on criminals — leading in turn to skyrocketing rates of crime, including murder.

Prior to 1960, murder rates in the United States had been going down for decades. Even the absolute number of murders declined, while the population grew by millions. Despite the addition of two new states — Hawaii and Alaska — in 1960, the number of murders in the 50 states was less than it had been in the 48 states 30 years earlier.

Advertisement

The murder rate in 1960 was just under half of what it had been in 1934.

But that was not good enough for the intelligentsia, with their theories on how to “solve” our “problems.” First of all, they claimed, we had to stop focusing on punishment and get at the “root causes” of crime. In other words, we had to solve the criminals’ problems, in order to solve the problem of crime.

This approach was not new in the 1960s. In fact, it went back at least as far as the 18th century. But what was new in the 1960s was the widespread acceptance of such notions in the legal system, including the Supreme Court of the United States.

The crusade against punishment, and especially capital punishment, spread through all three branches of the federal government and into state governments as well. Even a murderer caught in the act had so many new “rights,” created out of thin air by judges, that executing him could require a decade or more of additional litigation, even after he was found guilty.

The best-known product of this 1960s revolution in the criminal law was the famous Miranda warning, “You have the right to remain silent,” etc. It is as if we are engaged in some kind of sporting contest with the criminal, and must give him a chance to beat the rap, even when he is guilty.

In the aftermath of this revolution in the criminal law, promoted by the intelligentsia in academia and in the media, the long downward trend in murder suddenly reversed. By 1974, the murder rate was more than twice what it had been in 1961. Between 1960 and 1976, a citizen’s chances of becoming a victim of a major violent crime tripled. So did the murder of policemen.

1   2   Next >
Text  

You Might Also Like...

Nordlinger: Telemark Journal

Williamson: The Party of Civil Rights

Interview: The Presidency, Unplugged

Nordlinger: Nobel Nuggets, Part V

Nordlinger: Nobel Nuggets, Part IV

Nordlinger: Nobel Nuggets, Part III



COMMENTS   5

EXPAND  

   03/06/12 06:06

I am proud to owe a debt of gratitude to both Mr Wilson and to you. Well said!

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   03/06/12 12:05

There has yet to be an article by Dr. Sowell where I haven't learned something.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
karl anglin
   03/06/12 16:40

RIP Mr. James Q. Wilson.
Thanks again Dr Sowell,
for your brillance!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Kifaru
   03/06/12 14:10

A major reason for the increase in crime is that the boomers came of age. Young people commit far more crime than oldsters.

A major reason for the subsequent decline in crime is that those who were most likely to commit crimes, were never born; they were aborted.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Zazabeth
   03/07/12 09:08

Is it going to turn cloudy and stormy at exactly 12 noon today, weatherman? I see you may have consulted some crystal balls to assert these major reasons. Do tell because my fishing days are running out. Because if these two reasons are cited by Quincy, it helps to point that out.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact