Despite its small population of just 70,0000, Camden (NJ) has been in the top 10 most dangerous cities in America for more than half a century with only a few rare gaps. In fact, the crime rate in Camden has rarely dropped much since the city acquired its infamous reputation for criminal records in 1949. That was the year that an out-of-work Howard Unruh murdered 13 people in 12 minutes, thus setting the record. sad record of killing as many people in such a short time – more than one per minute! — and become the first known single-episode mass murderer in modern American history.
If you review the city’s history of crime and violence in recent years, then a total of 7,639 serious crimes were reported to the Camden police in 2000. In 2002, the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report cited Camden, New Jersey, for having registered 607 cases of theft. and 797 cases of aggravated assault, nearly double the national average.
Crime statistics for 2004 ranked Camden, New Jersey as the city with the highest crime rate in the country, up from third in 2003. Those rankings factored in a city’s crime rate for crime categories covering 6 basic crimes including murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft. In 2004, Camden experienced an increase in all categories over the same 2003 crime statistics. Specifically, the homicide rate was cited as nearly 9 times the national average of 5.7 per 100,000. Privately funded research in 2004 compared 354 cities with populations greater than 75,000.
“We must give our people jobs, training and opportunities,” said Ali Sloan-El, a city councilor, while speaking to the public in 2005. The official then identified Camden’s poverty and unemployment as the most important factors fueling the high crime rate of the community. According to the Prosecutor’s Office, Camden then also got a position on the list of the poorest cities in the United States.
However, the year 2005 used to be seen by the Police and the Municipal Council as inspiring some valid hopes for the improvement of public security due to many police measures taken. Indeed, the beginning of the year 2005, from January to March, saw a 24 percent decrease in crime in Camden, providing more reason than ever for the community’s optimism at that time.
They hoped to follow the example of Newark, the other former leader in the rate of violent crime in the United States that had started a similar project in 1996. The “crime mapping” pattern implemented in Newark could have resulted in a truly dramatic reduction of 43 percent. percent in reported crimes just as quickly. as back in 1998. There was no reason to doubt that the same scheme would work for Camden as well, all the more so since, according to Inc. Magazine, as of early 2004, Camden City had been ranked #6 out of 277 larger cities as the largest city. up-and-coming place to do business. The invisible flow of investment that had literally begun into the city’s infrastructure was expected to end poverty and unemployment and solve the city’s major crime problems. Even if no expert or analyst expected immediate results and only hoped for long-term improvements, hope still lingered.
Three years have passed since then. So what do we see now?
At the end of 2008, Camden reported a noticeable decrease in violent crimes, such as aggravated assaults, assaults with firearms, and robberies. On the other hand, 48 homicides were reported, up from 42 in 2007. The first six months of this year produced so many deaths and serious bodily injuries that Camden risked breaking its own 12-year record of 58 homicides reported in 1995.
Even if there was some improvement, progress was nowhere near what was expected in 2005. Sad to say, Camden firmly upholds its reputation as a city mired in street violence. In an attempt to maintain control of the situation, the police try to make more arrests for minor offenses such as public drinking, playing loud music and loitering, all of which fall under so-called quality of life crimes. These arrests are intended to prevent crimes of a more serious nature and serve as a kind of warning to potential criminals. But do they?
This current tactic followed by the Camden Police for the last 2 months as of late October 2008 appears to spread public skepticism as to its effectiveness. Citizens wonder if the police hope to prevent street shootings, homicides or drug trafficking by arresting people for loitering. Fines imposed on those arrested for loitering are what many of them cannot pay, while the record of having been arrested or issued warrants begins to show up on pre-employment background check reports, making it more difficult for subjects find work. if not reducing the very possibility of getting a job to the next minimum.