There’s “no consistent association” between police funding and crime rates across the country, according to a published study by University of Toronto researchers.

  • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    5 months ago

    No consistent association means the data doesn’t back up higher or lower funding having an impact on crime. It doesn’t say anything about rates when the funding is zero or when funding is very high.

    Is “zero” not “lower”?

    • TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      If there’s no zero in the dataset, then we don’t have any zero about data. It could be, for instance, that some police have a large effect, but that you hit diminishing returns incredibly quickly.

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That’s literally what I said elsewhere in this thread. People are putting words in my mouth all over this thread but literally all I was saying is that it’s impossible that the headline is true verbatim.

        • TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          How so? The study showed no consistent association between funding and crime rates. That is true verbatim.