tour on c-span.org. abt, ajoined by thomas senior research fellow with the harvard kennedy government school. in particular, we wanted you on this morning, following up on your opinion piece from the new york times on crime statistics, which was headlined, "how not to respond to the rising murder rate." tell us about the murder rate in the u.s. and where it has gone into the fbi report. guest: sure. it is a pleasure to be on. thank you for having me. the first thing to understand is surge in recent

homicides in the u.s. is cause for concern but not panic. of a bit of context, rates violent crimes and all crimes has been falling fairly consistently since the early 1990's. it is only in 2014 -- 2015 and 2016 that we have seen this pronounced spike in homicides. it is about an increase of 12% 2014 to to 2014 -- 2015.we have had an increase of about 22% in the last two years. that increase is the largest we have seen in about 25 years. t to minimizent no this, but also to keep it in

perspective. there is no crime wave, but there is a serious spike in homicide. host: reflecting some of that, your comments in the piece, you write, what to make of this to your spike in death and violence -- two-year spike in death and violence is unclear, but partisans on all sides will seek to spin it to their advantage. what are the developing narratives that come out of these statistics when they are released? guest: i think you are saying a trend over the past few years with the crime numbers. partisans from all sides try to bring them in the narrative around them that suits their other political positions. tend toives typically minimize or downplay these numbers, suggesting they are

highly localized, suggesting there is no trend here. that is a fair question. we don't know that there is a trend. also suggesting there are root causes at play. the broader concern is that fear of rising crime might slow the momentum for criminal justice reform. that is where their interest lies. on the other side, you have a very serious issue with some conservatives demagogueing the issue. politicians like president trump and attorney general sessions using these numbers to spread fear and sow divisions among americans and spreading some misinformation, saying these hikes in crime are related to immigration or drugs, basically trying to connect it to a larger cultural argument they have been making. unfortunately, on both sides

politics is at play. the issue is the more the volume is turned up, the hotter the issue gets, the harder it is to do sober, common sense problem-solving. host: we are focusing on at the i crime statistics. -- fbi crime statistics. we want to hear your comments. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents and others (202) 748-8002. we welcome your tweets. abt, your piece lays out some solutions. you write about a proven approach that deserves more support, mr. kennedy's national network for safe communities to minimize

incarceration and improve police relationships. killing must end now. if you let us, we will help you. if you make us, we will stop you. those turned away from violence are offered support. thistemic review found strategy reduce crime and violence in nine out of 10 studies with homicide reductions of 34% to 63%. areas thisut those program has been put into place. guest: this intervention, which is known by a number of different names, sometimes called the group violence intervention, also called focused deterrence. its original name was operation cease-fire. whatever you call it, this began in boston in the early 1990's and is responsible for a dramatic drop in homicides,

specifically youth homicides. it has been tried in a number of other cities. it does not always work. that is just the reality of policymaking. nothing works 100% of the time. focused deterrence has a fairly isong track record, and it stronger than any other violence prevention. caroline,n done in a oakland, california, in cincinnati, ohio. in many of these places it does good results. it is important to say that there is no one solution. viewingo caution your public, even with cognitive behavioral there be, smart

policing, any of these other policies, there is no one thing that can reduce violence. you need a set of strategies working together. host: headline from usa today, violent crime increases for second straight year. our guest is here until about 9:00 eastern. we want to hear from you. what do things look like in your area? what is the crime rate in your area? fayetteville, pennsylvania, robert on her democrats line. caller: thank you for letting me join in. i believe the root cause of all of this is the massive influx of illegal aliens, whatever you want to call it, immigration that was pushed across the border the last couple years of the obama administration. i have a friend in pittsburgh and doesn't even admit that there is a problem with ms13,

like we should sweep that under the rug, too. if you want to see what happens to crime numbers, wait until he you go after our second amendment rights, and see what the crime numbers go to. host: how does immigration plan to the statistics if at all? caller'sunderstand the concerns. i have to say every serious examination of the connection between immigration and crime is that immigrants are less likely to commit crime than the average american citizen. there is no connection empirically that we can find between immigration and crime. if anything, immigrants make a community safer. 13, i haves literally walked past bodies on the streets in those neighborhoods. ms 13 is a deadly, serious gang.

we have to realize that wall gang poses a major threat to the states of el salvador and guatemala and honduras, in the united states it is much sparser. i want to caution, ms 13 is not at all on the same scale in the united states as it is in those countries. 13 mayhe issue of ms talking to this next question. -- high into this next question. they want to know on twitter is their original pattern type into -- tied into guns? tell, as far as we can this rise is happening in most of the cities in the united states. it is happening where rates of violence are already far too

high, and that is primarily in poor communities of caller. -- color. the number one victim of gun violence are young, poor men of color. those are the people disproportionately impacted by this rise. some people think this rise is just in a few cities. just chicago, just baltimore. 20% of the rise can be attributed last year to chicago. that leaves 80%. the fact of the matter is that violent crime is up in most cities. that needs to be taken into account. int: let's hear from dee massachusetts. republican line. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, we can. isler: the biggest problem of course criminal justice reform.

had 20 years ago, you summer jobs programs for young people, all types of investments into young people, putting money in their pockets, keeping them around mentors, colleges, universities. nowadays we don't really have leaders, elected officials who really focus on looking after or helping out. looking for that diamond in the rough. politicians are concerned with getting reelected, raising money. back to gun violence, you have got all these young people, 18 years old, 17 years old in boston. a couple of days ago denzel

washington is filming in roxbury, and his security is shot by 218-year-olds carrying carrying-year-olds guns. host: what did you hear about his comments about violence in boston and the murder rate? made threeink you good points and observations. one thing people need to understand about violence is three decades of social science tell us that violence is sticky. that means it concentrates in a small number of places in any given city, around a small number of people, and around a certain set of behaviors.

it is highly concentrated. for those most highly at risk, what we call the shooters, tough enforcement is required. we need to protect the public from those individuals. as the caller notes, we need balance, prevention. we cannot treat everyone in these communities like they are part of the problem. they are part of the solution. tough enforcement measures are needed. comprehensive, preventive measures are also needed. that was a good point. the caller also mentioned criminal justice reform. i think we are making a big mistake when we suggest criminal justice reform and violence reduction are at odds with one another. i think they are highly complementary, and we can do both at the same time. it is important we do both at the same time. if criminal justice reform improves the perception of by the people most

impacted by criminal justice, people in poor communities of color, if trust and confidence increases in those communities in law enforcement, you will see crime go down. with regard to boston, i am not familiar with that particular instance, but i am grateful to say that in boston we have surprisingly -- not surprisingly, we have white low rates of gun violence. the city has done a good job overall. it is not surprising that the boston police department has invested heavily in community policing. in some ways boston is an example of how to do this the right way. tweets,itter, mary getting to know neighbors, what is happening on your street, and refusing to put up with bs are the best crime deterrence.

let's go to wyoming, democrats line. caller: hi, partner, our you doing today? host: good. go ahead, bernie. caller: a few things to cover today. guns, i'mthing about not sure, but i would be willing the problem with these guns are not even registered to these individuals doing it. that is the point with these guns. they don't have to be registered. you can go to the pot shop or -- pawn shop or get a gun in big cities. we don't have that problem in wyoming, our population is so small. coming over from different countries and u.s. we need to stop that. if they want to come over, bring them the proper way. the one thing i will complain about the most, make them speak

english. half the time you cannot understand what they are saying at all. i don't think that is right. host: that is bernie in wyoming. we have addressed the immigration issue somewhat. he talks about unregistered versus registered guns. how much of an impact are the proliferation of guns in some areas on the gun crime in those areas? guest: when you look at the issue of homicide in the united states, there is often a television among advocates -- 10 tatian among advocates -- temp toion among advocates simplify the problem. in reality, it is a complex social problem. with regard to guns, i am in favor of reasonable gun regulations. the caller has a good point, most gun crime is committed with

guns that were illegally possessed at the time. that does not mean we should not pursue reasonable gun restrictions. we absolutely should. there is not one gun violence problem in the united states. there are several. we need different solutions for all of them. for instance, we have an issue with suicides in the united states. reducing suicides by gun requires a certain set of policy measures. reducing urban homicide requires another set of measures. reducing homicides that are related to domestic violence requires a third. finally, in the wake of the las vegas shooting, we need to think about how to address mass shootings. while they only account for less

than 1% of all homicides every and clearlyrrific require a response. int: let's hear from kirk new jersey on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you so much for letting me speak. i am truly independent. i have been on both sides. i think you touched on the discord in our authority and leadership at the beginning of this segment. i was blessed with ignorance. i'm not smart enough to be a politician or lawyer. i hate guns exec probably would shoot mitel -- because i would probably shoot my tell if i was careful. suicide -- half the population is taking some type of antidepressant that has the side

effect of suicide that is not being talked about. the elite that got out of the verbal neighborhoods that now have security guards and are now making movies about mass shootings. i see everybody being divided. i see the ferguson affect pushing people -- effect of pushing people to guns with no moral fiber. i see it getting worse in many ways. controversial, easy to talk about guns and violence, that there is a commandment thou shall not kill. host: any thoughts? guest: i think the caller said a lot, so i will just mention a few points in relation to his statements. he mentioned glorifying these

mass shooters. this is a real issue. we know there are chatrooms where people discuss these mass shootings and glorify them and exchange notes and information about them. one thing we really have to do is deny these mass shooters the fame that many of them desire. i firmly support a campaign called don't name them, which is the media tells you everything about the mass shooting at hand, but they don't tell you the actual name of the shooter, and they don't show you a photograph. we need to deny these killers that fame if that is what they want. mental health is an issue. can stigmatizeneed there is,

those people that are overwhelmingly nonviolent, we need threat assessment and measures to identify people showing disturbing signs, that they may in fact commit violence. proactively to address them. host: in reporting on the crime statistics, usa today has a chart looking at violent crimes in the u.s. across 20 years, 1997-2016, and crimes in the 1997.ns, 1.6 million in the trend all the way downward until 2015 or 2014, these are crimes including the murder rate, robbery and aggravated assault. you see the dip in the statistics, taking back up in the last couple years. it is a trend or is it too early to tell that the decline has

halted for a bit and will return on the downward again? thomas: i think it is too early to tell. it is important to note that the upward trend, if it is a trend, is limited to the violent crime. property crime is down and crime over all remains down. crimer overall rates of are about what they used to be in the 1960's. so we are still living in thankfully a remarkably peaceful era. the violent crime rates are actually half of what they were from the peak in the early 1990's, so that is a good thing. whether it is a trend is hard to tell. in we had a two-year spike homicide 10 years ago, after which crime continue to fall. you know, this spike is much larger than that one, but on the other hand the spike looks like the rate of change, it appears to be slowing down. the rate of change in 2015 is

signsompared to 2015, and in 2017 that the rate of change, it may continue to slow. so is it a trend? we do not know, but that is not a reason to ignore the issue. the fact is, in 2016 there were 3000 more homicides per year compared to 2014, 3000 lives. this is literally a matter of life and death and we need to treated appropriately. host: we are going to get one more caller, robert in tuscaloosa, alabama. caller: good morning. it is hard to get on. i want to make an observation. you can talk directly to your guests here, rather than 10 seconds later, and i have been watching c-span since 1979, but immigration, the immigration started when the europeans started coming to the western hemisphere and the people who are the most violent are the europeans.

in other words, those that are well-suited and doing well in some weretry, they -- run out, some are exiled to this country and to the europeans are europeans- adnd the are the ones that started the violence. they came to africa and got out people. and another country, are country has violence going all over the world with our soldiers. they have soldiers all over the world committing violence in every country. host: robert, we will you go. one more call my jeff on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to know how effective stop and search was, and also these cities where most of the crime takes place, i would like to know what party is in charge of those -- is it republican, independent, democrat? i think we might find

interesting answers with that. how much does hollywood play in this? host: let's go to the stop and search question. are they tied into the statistics at all? thomas: let me take those in rivers. as for hollywood, there is no connection in movies and television and video games and violence, it has been studied extensively and at best we can say the research is mixed. so hard to blame any of this on hollywood. second, as to the question or the point about who is an political control, overwhelmingly cities under democratic control run by democratic mayors, however if we are talking about politics much of the south has a much higher rate of a violence. inn in the north or california on the coast. around, is blame to go politically, if that is what you want to do.

lastly, to your specific question, really a question that can be answered by evidence, stop and frisk has been evaluated extensively. and the short answer on what the research tells us is that when it is done right it can be effective, but when it is done wrong it can be ineffective and really hurt the communities it is seeking to protect. when it is done right, stop and frisk is done in a highly targeted manner. in consultation with the community, limited to very specific places. when stopped and frisk goes wrong is when it is done blanketing an entire community without regard for who the specific people and where the specific places are better triggering most of the violence. and so, stop and frisk has really been demonized by one side, for celebrated -- or celebrated by the other, when it is a question about implementation.

it is what you do with it that matters. host: thomas abt, you can read some of his findings on this and other issues. he is on twitter.

announcer: discussions on landmark supreme court cases. and brown versus board of education, tuesday night, the life and influence of buffalo bill cody. wednesday night, the 60th anniversary of little rock's integration. night, the response of the 1957 forced desegregation of little rock. friday night, from american history tv, interviews with prominent photojournalists who have documented major events. watch american history tv, this week on prime time on c-span3. q&a talking about the influence of breitbart news.

later, a look at senate initial findings on russian interference in the 2016 u.s. elections. ♪ q&a,ncer: this week on will hilton. about his featured story about breitbart news and the journalists of who worked there. his featured story is down the breitbart hole. i saw a piece in 2015 that said that idea of skipping college might seem outlandish to some, but not to you. what is that