³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

You´ve got to ask the question are crime satistics down due to the lack of crimes committed or due to the lack of crimes reported and criminals prosicuted?
They say rape and crimes of a sexual nature have dropped over the years, but i suspect this is a result of the way these cases are treated. More and more women are failing to report these incidents due to numbers of reasons; shame - due to conflicting images in the media and advertising campaigns many believe that if you are attacked after a night out dressed sexy & drinking that you are asking for it, yet nothing is said of the sick person who thinks it is acceptable to violate another human being. Also there has been alot of occassions were a rapist has not been convicted or even charged due to lack of evidence and the unfortunate fact that in some cases the accusation was a lie. Not to mention the after care of victims - not enough resourses not enough time for everyone. I understand things are improving but at the same time not enough is being done to reassure victims that by reporting the crime they will be taken care of.
As for the satistics as a whole I am very sceptical. Think about it by authorities not reporting every little theft, criminal damage or domestic then its enevitable that rates are going to lower rather than rise.

This is not just Manchester, this is the whole country! When will this government wake up and stop all the spin. This will all jump up and bite you on the....

How many reality TV shows exist showing drink and drug fuelled thugs threatening public order and fighting? How many people are threatened by wandering gangs of fearless teenagers that cause noise, fear and occasionally carry out acts of vandalism, hooliganism and sometimes bullying? Crime is escalating beyond belief, and it is not the fault of our excellent police. It is New Labour schools without discipline and low standards that lead to low self-esteem; it is zero tolerance of policing the streets and neighourhoods as coppers are off chasing paper criminals and it is official indifference to reality. I am sorry. As long as criminals have more human rights than their victims, the fear of crime will continue. For many people, Britain is becoming an ugly place to leave peacably in.

I found the report on wythenshaw very biased. The reporter asked a series of leading questions, the report made statements which were misleading, e.g. the proportion of ASBO's in the area are higher than the national average. Manchester has a higher proportion than the rest of the UK, because the Council has a policy of using them where other areas don't see the need to do that. That council prides itself on the use of ASBO'S & parenting orders whether they are justified or not.
The results are clear to see, a community who feel under seige, but don't trust their council either.
What would be referred to as a lose/lose result.

I grew up in Wythenshawe and bought my first house there 10 years ago. 5 years ago left due to increasing levels of crime. My house was burgled 3 times in a year and my car vandalised. I still have family that live in the area and they find that the sense of community is falling as people start to hide behind their front doors in fear. The government seem to think that continued investment and regeneration ia the answer but over the last 20 years I've seen pound after pound poured in and seen very little improvement. Unfortunately the silent majority continue to suffer represented my people that have very few links to the area. I'm not even certain that the local Mp live in the areas and chooses to live in the more prosperous area of Sale. Only when the local people are empowered to make the required changes can I sell things getting any better. If they don't I really can't see a bright future as hard working and decent people will only aspire to leave what could be a very nice area.

If the national picture is reflected by Sheffield, then crime is rising and the police authorities are failing. Here, crimes are not recorded, complaints about police failures are not recorded, and the criminals have genuine reason to believe they are virtually untouchable.
In Lowedges, Sheffield, nulabor held a pilot crime reduction project that was an absolute disaster and utter failure. The police and council both lied, to feed the kudos and hubris of the local sponsoring minister. This failure was then rolled out nationally, with inevitable consequences.
Sorry, Wythenshaw.
Sheffield council representatives are the last people to tell the people of Wythenshaw how to improve their lives.

Howard Martin is right, but it could also extend to the Tories as well nowadays. Doing my research I have come across a lot of people who feel that neither party is equipped any longer to combat any social problems that make up "Broken Britain". The lack of experience is universal and although we seem to go for younger leaders these days, none of the main parties can really provide an alternative to New Labour.

Merely banging on about political correctness and so on will not solve the problems we are facing here. We need a strong opposition with figures that have been in government before to combat the decline in expertise and sound public policy, not another batch of spin doctors or "Blue Labour".

I worked for 30 years at an electronics firm in Wythenshawe,that failed in the 90's. As a Cheshire boy from an up market area, when I started my apprenticeship there,1959,I got a rude awakening meeting the rougher elements of Manchester, who had been brought out of the slums and housed in new properties which they soon wrecked. A large number of indivduals, badly educated or not wanting to be educated congregated together was bound to be trouble with a capital .Drunkenness,violence and general antisocial behavior occured on a regular basis continuously on the streets even then.
The only changes I have noted have been the introduction of drugs ~ 1970,which of course are now on an epidemic scale and recently the proliferation of guns. Knife crime was evident but not on the level it is now.
I went to college during my apprenticeship and achieved H.N.C.Electronics, and rose through ranks of the firm.
That's the solution to the present malaise in this country. "Education,education,education!" as I believe someone once said.

When I was growing up in Oldham during the thirties there no TV glorifying guns and violence, we had to get our entertainment from membership in Scout Packs, street football etc, mostly run by the churches, if the local policeman caught you throwing stones you got a clout on the ear and believe me it was remembered. Nowadays you are sent at public expense to the local psychologist where the kid takes no bloody notice at all, he goes home and laughs at the system, the schools dare not touch a child now for fear of being sued. The entire situation is ass backwards.PS I now live in Canada and we have problems here but I do not think they are as bad. I can walk our streets at night but I would not walk the streets in Oldham where I lived as a child.

The risk of crime may be less but the risk or a knife or agun may be higher. Frankly also I don't think its just a few poor estates - most people acknowledge that on a Friday or Saturday night quite respectable areas (Used to live in Richmond London) and well educated people will treat "fisticuffs" as part of the night out. Its not an exception anymore. As for Government figures do even the government believe in them? Not fit for puprose last time I heard.

To quote Justice Secretary Jack Straw: "crime levels have come down considerably". There are problems with certain types of crime in some parts of the country, but overall there has been an improvement. The fear of crime is certainly causing anxiety among some people. Politicians must understand they have a responsibility to guard against irresponsible exploitation of fears over law and order to gain political advantage, yet some (you know who you are) promulgate punitive views in wilful disregard of the evidence. Classic example: Tory leader David Cameron's gaffe about "anarchy in the UK" (August 2007) - and attention was drawn to this in a Guardian letter published on 30.08.07 - (4th letter).
There will no doubt be another hullabaloo over Lord Carter's review ("Review of prison overcrowding due") - details came online an hour ago:
Government ministers need to come under some robust questioning (Paxman-style) about why they have let things get into such a mess.

I have fond memories of Wythenshawe from 1949 to 1953 that was the largest council housing estate in the country at that time. Moving from Ancoats, to a brand new house with a bathroom and a back-boiler fire lit by gas. We had a garden and wonderful walks to Ringway to 'The Bungalow' and ‘scrumped’ apples from a local farm with a friendly farmer. Summers were always sunny it seems now. I joined the Girl Guides and was jealous of my friends that became Morris Dancers who used to win cups. Me and my brother and sister passed our scholarships and went to grammar schools, many friends went to Yew Tree School or Central schools and made their way in the world in worthwhile jobs that benefited the world we live in. So what happened? Under-funding in the seventies in comprehensive schools by the Tories so that many felt that they did not matter. Unemployment, collapse of apprenticeships caused young people to turn to quick ways of getting money. Disrespect for people by a seemingly indifferent Thatcher cabinet taught those who were now neglected, to return the compliment in the society they lived in. Could go on, but I won't. Lord Alfred Morris must be breaking his heart, he who worked so hard for Wythenshawe as their MP.

I live in Wythenshawe , the Newsnight report paited a gloomy picture of the Town Centre - and rightly so it is a quite horrible place.
The key to ALL Wythenshawes problems is employment, there are basically two communities - the working people and the non-working people, take a guess which group cause the social ill's ?
Frankly the phrase the devil makes work for idle hands could be Wythenshawes motto.

So much has been said on this, and so many links provided to explicate the likely causes of increased offending behaviour (whether this is reported/recorded or not) that there's not a lot of point repeating it all again, but:

a) the Prison population has doubled over the past decade;

b) Over 12m crimes reported, only half are recorded by the police, only 1.2m are detected (there is massive variation by offence, the % of property crime as low as single figures often), about half go to court resulting in 80,000 custodial sentences a year and 120,000 community - despite talk of a fall in crime, since the WWII the trend has been 45 degrees upwards with brief blips as politicans introduce figure massaging measures; that has been the main contribution of New Labour i.e. SPIN.

c) offender programmes don't reduce recidivism; i.e. they don't work. They never will.

d) the Probation Service is now swamped with ~230,000+ offenders under supervision (yes it's more than in b)) still the USA has more like 7.5 million in their criminal justice system, and it is disproportionately non-white, so likely to grow here too;

e) interventions (which don't work) are now being put out to the Third and Private Sectors now that the Offender Management Act is law, and probation may not be a public service for much longer as a consequence;

f) probation can't get the staff even to do basic Offender Management (i.e court reports etc) they're losing interventions (which is what attracts them to the job), and it's now a predominantly female profession with HR ethnicity quotas which means tat p[art of the work is likely to go too soon);

g) the YJB/YOTs/police bend over backwards not to give young offenders a criminal history, this keeps the crime figures down, which is not the same as there being a falling crime rate;

h) many inner city schools now have police officers

i) there are problems with the British Crime Survey counts - see methods;

j) schools are demonstrably having harder times with behaviour and are now pressured to include, not to exclude badly behaved pupils (if they exclude blacks at 2x the white rare, they risk being called racists by the DfES);

k) crime peaks in late adolescence and is over-represented in the Black Caribbean community and this group is doing worse and worse academically in our schools as we feminise the curriculum more, this pattern may get worse if we insist on Muslims being secularised.

How CAN things be getting better? The only brake on this is the birth rate (nationally below replacement level, but differential), but that isn't being limited in the lower half of the ability distribution which is where most of the crime occurs, it's being increased through tax credits, 'education, education, education' and immigration. Too many in 'the underclass' are having kids (mainly BME groups, 99% of London's growth over the next 30 years will be in these groups, largely E London) where parents can't cope with their kids for whom there won't be jobs. There are not enough females are at home building families AND neighbourhoods in the more able sectors of society, and there is ability-flight from the inner cities (and country). There are too many foreign workers/criminals taking jobs from young indigenous males, so what does one expect them to do during their 'high risk' years?

There are not enough smart people having kids, so too few able people to manage public services effectively for tem, I could go on and on and on ad nauseam...

Politicians don't listen, or are too busy making matters worse and have no intention of listening as rising crime serves a useful disintegrating purpose in their Trotskyite efforts to Balkanise/de-nationalise the country in pursuit of EU Regional Assemblies?

The bottom line is simple: if you send your brighter women (half population now go to university) out to work they'll have numerically less (bright) kids as a consequence, so in time, you'll end up with an increasingly skewed, bottom heavy population in terms of cognitive ability, and, given the service sector needs more feminised, verbal cogntive, skills, you'll get more crime through creating an unbalanced society, and this will be exacerbated if you import/breed more androgenised males. If you want to see crime figures, look to what's happened in Nigeria, S Africa, Bangladesh, Pakistan over the past 50 years as their populatins have trebled whilst the UK has remained almost static.

Education is not the solution, it's the cause of the problem in the UK, that and immigration, and female emancipation/equalities.

Truely speaking crime will fall completely, but it all depends on peoples desire for "WANTS" we all know quite well that our wants are so many and the means to satisfy that (human being) is unlimited,and until it is limited to an extreme people won`t stop comiting crime. we are not only going to look at the root cause of it you know,the politician can say a lot that crime has droped drastically, the are just as weak as human as we all are.
The are not perfect, police can`t too,infact it makes matter worst,cause when they see them coming they crimer pretend not to be what they are and after they`re gone then the trouble starts but when they are caught they seized to do it,after a while here they come again, but if all the small community paricipate in watch your neighbour stuff,how they are doing, what they do and try to share their values by showing respect then we can make our small,small community a better place to live especially our young ones who are always a target for these unscupulus venum,love should be the KEY to our answer.We should be contempt with what we have and who we are. cos your life is so unique from mean mine as well so let me live my life and you live yours too.Above all you have to love the life you live and live the life you love by so doing you will be bless and rewarded by your heavenly father.I tell you for free there is no reward better than that. cos the world we are living in is just varnity, varnity, all is varnity, you fight today, tomorrow you are gone forever so WHY do have to do what you are suppose to do? i mean the negative things that you people do not wants in the community that you dwell? think about it and do something about it, STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO OTHERS!!!!! my last word is God will definitely guide and protect the WYTHENSHAWE ESTATE and perpetrators will confess and every thing will surely come to a pass in jesuses name, amen!!!!

Plot the trend data not from 1981, but from 1941, and bear in mind what I have said above and elsewhere, i.e. that we've had negative indigenous population growth for decades (like the rest of Europe) especially since the 60s.

Michael Howard was advised by ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Ofice Civil Servants that there was nothing he could do about this relentless rise (he said so on Newsnight a while back, replay the clip Newsnight. The clip also featured Richard Wilson on this so you have it from the horses' mouths), all Howard could do, he was advised, was manage 'public expectations' (i.e perception manage aka spin). Now, Howard said he didn't take the advice.

Do you think Blair and co didn't?

in response to , Ed Iglehart (2):

Reporting may be on the rise but only because everyone knows you can not claim back compensation for items damaged or stolen on insurance without a crime number. This entails two minutes on the phone to your local police station - it does not mean the matter is invesigated and it certainly doesn´t mean that anyone is prosecuted for the crime in question.

Ed (#21) It is never just a matter of agreement, argument etc, it's always been a matter of empirical evidence and disconnects which gets lost in politics. Most of the UK population lives in urban areas. These are New Labour heartlands. Most of the immigrant population settles in these big urban areas. This drives out good and leaves bad behind to breed at higher rates. Crime in communities (and even inside schools) is rising, attainment in real terms is falling. The standard ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Office figures show an almost continuous rise in crime since the 1940s (plotting from 1981 doesn't show the whole picture but makes recent dips look good for New Labour, see The Narey Measures). Over 12m offences are reported a year, 6 million are recorded by the police but only 1/5 are detected (the % of property offences etc are often detected in single figures). Only half of those end up in court cases, and only 80,000 offenders get custodial and 120,000 community sentences each year. But the prison population has doubled in 10 years, and although 80% each year get on average just 3 months, and 10% 4 years+, over half the prison population is now long-term and growing, as the sentences are longer because the (robbery/violence) crimes are more serious. There are something like 100,000 prolific offenders (PPOs) account for 50% of the crime (but based on what figures as this is based on 1m offenders?). Many of these can be spotted at a VERY early age, i.e. from early childhood behaviour. How is that possible? It's because this behaviour is largely genetic (so dumping a 'supernanny' paid £12,000 a year on a dysfunctional family is just going to produce a lot of burned out young women).

If anyone asks the police 'off the record' they'll admit that they just can't cope. The causes of this are now well understood. Dealing with them in our PC liberal-democracy is quite another matter. The UK is going the same way as the USA, and for the same demographic reasons.

This is not just an armchair analysis - the anti-prison (Penal Consortium) lobby has been a far left-wing force for decades, and the general public doesn't know the half of it.

We have all accepted a much lower standard of civilization, especially in our cities, so behaviour that would not have been tolerated before, now is, and crimes which would have been reported before now aren't. When you do ring the police you don't get much help, and they never seem to know what is going on. If local police stations could be brought back instead of having these far out of town call centres which know nothing of the crime scene, that would be a big improvement.

Ed (#24) Yes, but how many Tesco, M&S, Sainsbury hypermarkets, pubs and winebars etc do you have? Do ou know how much Group 4 etc get for tagging & bussing criminals about?

Your neck of the woods looks like it's very bad for 'the economy' ;-)

Ed (#26) Irony - recent governments have been doing their best to privatise as much of the state (including the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Office) for years. The Offender Management Act will accelerate that shortly.

But consider this: In 2001 the entire population of Scotland was just 70% of that of London. In fact, back in 1951, London's population was higher than 2001 (8,346,000 vs 7,172,091).

Yet crime today is much higher in London than it was in 1951, so it isn't just a function of population density, it's driven, as I've said many times now, by that political incorrect factor (which people are discouraged from talking and thinking about as that would be bad for some people's economy), namely dysgenic/differential fertility exacerbated by immigration of low skilled (IQ) people. This is very good for some people's economy (like Tesco, M&S, Group 4) in the medium term, after which the money men will move on somewhere else once they will have driven standards down so low that there isn't a viable economy to mine:

Note that Scotland's indigenous population is also falling:
/blogs/newsnight/2007/11/the_big_immigration_debate.html

But Scotland has a much smaller ethnic minorities population (which seems to be a latitude statistic for Europe) which is why this fall is more obvious. Differential/dysgenic fertility is good for some people's business if they can exploit/mine it through building big supermarket complexes etc (e.g. Glasgow where I suspect much of the cheap foreign labour compensating for the low birth rate will try to migrate to). New Labour seems to encourage all this as 'good for the economy'. Whose given the indigenous birth rate? The only criterion for success in any species is reproductive fitness, so New Labour is being 'economical with the truth'.

Meanwhile, Scotland takes yet further steps towards independence with little opposition from 'English' MPs. Will it survive without English subsidies, or will it just look to the EU instead like Spain etc?

Sorry had to break off SmackDown is on (it's great to have Sky) - with EDGE - not seen him since he came to town in a black plastic mac , with Stone Cold, The Rock, Chris Jerico and The Undertaker.

Just to keep with the theme of smack down, violence and death

Chris Jerico's doing Armageddon Pay For View. I carn't wait for that one myself

Ed (#26) Group 4 - Irony (as was the rest). Recent governments have been doing their best to privatise as much of the state as possible as it costs too much to run and they can't get the staff. The Offender Management Act (2007) will accelerate this within crimina justice shortly.

On your specific point, consider this: In 2001 the entire population of Scotland was just 70% of that of London. In fact, back in 1951, London's population was higher than 2001 (8,346,000 vs 7,172,091).

Yet crime today is much higher in London than it was back in 1951, so violent crime isn't just a function of population density, it's driven, as I've said many times now, by that political incorrect factor (which people are discouraged from talking and thinking about as that would be bad for some people's economy), namely dysgenic/differential fertility exacerbated by immigration of low skilled (IQ) people (which is why it appears that exam reslts are improving I suspect). This is very good for some people's economy (like Tesco, M&S, Group 4), at least, in the medium term, after which their money men will move somewhere else once they've driven standards down even further and there isn't a viable economy to mine:

Note that Scotland's indigenous population is also falling:
/blogs/newsnight/2007/11/the_big_immigration_debate.html

Scotland has a much smaller ethnic minorities population (which seems to be a latitude statistic for Europe) which is, I suspect, why the fall is more obvious. If people can leave Scotland, they do.

Differential/dysgenic fertility is good for some people's business if they can exploit/mine it through building big supermarket complexes etc (e.g. Glasgow where I suspect much of the cheap foreign labour compensating for the low birth rate will try to migrate to). New Labour seems to encourage all this as 'good for the economy', but whose given the falling indigenous birth rate?

The only criterion for success in any species is reproductive fitness, so New Labour is being 'economical with the truth' surely? It's people are breeding less.

Meanwhile, Scotland takes yet further steps towards independence:

with little opposition from English MPs. is this about pursuit of better, smaller, government(s) (EU regional assemblies, all around 4-6 million?)? Will Scotland survive without English subsidies? Will it have to if it can look to the EU instead like Spain and others do? Are we seeing the end of the large European nations?

Ed - Why not respond to the key point that I made about population density? What I have to say is based on the evidence is it not? Consider the following also:

Ranked GDP per capita in Euros

England 26,904

1. London 44,401
2. South East 31,300
3. East of England 27,778
4. South West 27,348
5. East Midlands 26,683
6. West Midlands 25,931
7. North West 25,396
8. Yorkshire and the Humber 25,300
9. North East 22,886

Scotland 24,792

Furthermore, consider:

1) The numbers leaving Scotland.
2) The falling birth rate (lower than England).
3) The lower than England non-EU level of 'compensatory' immigration.
4) Scotland's 2006 vs 2003 PISA performance of 15 yr olds (in detail, i.e. Maths, English & Science).

These (and the health figures) are not indices of a healthy population or economy.

Not, despite appearances, that I think immigration IS good for a general economy - it's good for SOME people ;-)

Adrienne

this is a sweeping and unfounded statement, more brain washing from the islamicist community. if muslims don't secularise, britain will cease to function as a secular democracy, i.e. we will be in a caliphate

wappaho (#33) Or secular 'liberal-democratic' anarcho-capitalists will find it that little bit harder to profit from the faster-breeding Muslims who are not so easily trusting? Who's making the money most saliently now?

Where are all of the British Chinese peers (British Chinese are also about 0.5% of the population and are top in the academic league tables) in this egalitarian society? Where are all the Indian peers which come second in the academic league tables?

Islam is a threat to this hegemony is it not? The Caliphate is a new bogeyman, vilified by those who fear it most (mainly in the Middle East).

Ed (#35) Suffice it to say - there may be more than has met your eye on this matter.

Ed (#35) There may be more than meets your eye here.

Ed You were right to challenge the figures I listed. The Scotland figure was wrong (2004). Scotland should have been much higher in the list, third or fourth. Yes, one can make it look different by going into more detail. But as Scotland's birth rate is well below replacement level and its population is falling faster, I guess GDP to the extent that it includes oil, must rise faster as a function of this? If one treats the NE (Aberdeen) of Scotland as atypical (oil etc and treats Edinburgh and Glasgow as special cases like London because of the
financial services), the picture changes again. The N-S function remains more or less true for England though, and your point about London is of course sound.

My figures were too hastily taken from Wikipedia a) 'The Economy of
Scotland' and b) 'The Economy of England'. It would have been better if I had used 'The Economy of the UK' as this has both English regions and Scotland for the same year. The Scotland GDP was quoted as ONS 2005 and the England regions GDP was 2004. My apologies. The UK link below gives ONS data for 2004/5.

The ONS site provides details on how the figures are computed.

The spreadsheet below for 2004/5 breaks all UK regions down in detail.

_2006/SubregionalGVA.xls

Crime is not just a function of population density however. People tend to collect in high crime areas because many can't afford to get out, and they can't afford to get out because they often lack ability, which also influences birth control etc etc.

In my view, unpalatable as it may be, we change populations not by
changing people's behaviour through changes to the environment, but by
changing them (i.e. by replacing them) genetically.

But surely, a good part of the 'background' is their genes which they get from their parents? How do these researchers (rarely biologically based) know that it isn't a function of different maturation (neoteny) at work, ie. that the poor (which is becoming progressively more non-White & non East Asian these days given the high non-white S Asian/African immigration and birth-rate, where 20% of births are to mothers born outside the UK and many will be to
2nd generation Black British and Asian British registered as just British), maturing earlier and 'plateauing' relative to those from more able families (including, I hasten to add, the progeny of able Black and S Asian families - this is all about frequencies, not race) as tests become harder (they are designed to as a function of age)? New Labour is accommodating this inconvenience by planning to let pupils sit SATs as a function of readiness (maturity) rather than chonological age.

What if it IS mainly parental genes which determine class (and
ability/SES) and not 'environment'? What if we are behaving as naive
sorcerers/Marxists simply because most social scientists don't know enough biology/science as a consequence of this ever more Service Sector (female tilted, so warning, it will U predict, become ever more tilted towards 'unwitting' intrigue/deception/verbal/spin too) dominated economy which has progressively less demand for 'pursuit of truth' based science skills?

Statistics what are they or what should they be?
Statistics is the gathering of all data and compiling realtive information for the purpose of prevention in this respect crime. How valuable is the stats, well the BCA gater information by victim surveys, how many can recall a true account of what happend, how many people tick the wrong box relative to the crime commited. Official statistics how many crimes are related to theft of mobiles, due to false insurance claims, how much of the crime goes un-reported. Claims that are not insured and even acts of attempted burglary go un-reported vastly due to the response time of police officers that there is no point in reporting the crime as it will never acheive any results, i.e the return of stolen goods. With the ever rising costs of insurance it is cheaper to pay for damage or stolen goods out of your own pocket. So can we depend on these statistics, or are they just an aid for more goverment funding?????????????

Mary (#43) Newsnight should run (as a loop of the clip where Michael Howard explained that when in office he was advised that all he could do was 'manage public expectations' when it came to the rising crime rate. This interview was run by Newsnight as part of a piece on Blair on crime in the Spring of 2006. It began with kids and car crime, and had a nice clip of a senior civil servant to boot.

Newsnight should run this short clip as a loop in the background every time they have a politician talking about crime management on their watch...

If you want to increase the number of blondes in your population, you don't do it through better marketing of hair colouring. This simple point appears to be lost on the current generation of politicians.

I've suggested elsewhere what really nee to be done.

Ed (#45) The rise in the crime rate since WWII is not a function of population growth per se, but of the dysgenic composition of the population. So yes, we could do with more 'blondes', as this would produce (ceteris paribus) a lowering of the crime rate (and other indices of social fragmentation).

International data on ethnic differences in criminogenic risk are testament to that.