Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Yes, lead poisoning could really be a cause of violent crime [View all]happyslug
(14,779 posts)96. Purchased of cars were concentrated in the Rural and Suburban areas prior to WWII
And during WWII, the actual number of motor vehicles DECLINED, as many former users of horses return to horses for the duration (The most noted were Milkmen).
AS to your picture of New York City in 1930 see the following quote of New York City TODAY:
New York is the only city in the United States where over half of all households do not own a car (Manhattan's non-ownership is even higher - around 75%; nationally, the rate is 8%).
Around 48% of New Yorkers own cars, yet fewer than 30% use them to commute to work, most finding public transportation cheaper and more convenient for that purpose,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_City#cite_note-2001summary-6
Walk and bicycle modes of travel account for 21% of all modes for trips in the city; nationally the rate for metro regions is about 8%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_City#cite_note-2001summary-6
http://nhts.ornl.gov/2001/pub/STT.pdf
http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-15.pdf
In 1930 the Car ownership rate in New York City was even lower. Today, 2013, over 54% of the people of New York use Public Transit to get to work, an additional 21% walk or ride a bike to work, for a total of 75%. The remaining 25% include not only people who drive, but people who fly, take a boat, or take a train to NYC to work.
In the 1920s GM did a study and found that the largest prospective area for growth in Auto usage was Rural America. Grain prices were up due to the fact the US Grain producers #1 competitor, Russia and the Ukraine, were out of the market due to turning Communist (More due to a refusal of other European countries to trade with them then anything else, this was reversed in 1927 when Stalin decided to dump grain onto the world market to pay for his first Five Year plan, but in most of the 20s Rural America was booming).
THe second largest group were Upper Middle Class Urban dwellers, who were also the first to move to the Suburbs, thus while most Working Class stiffs still walked to work from 1920 to 1946, managers and other professionals started to move out to the Suburbs AND use their automobiles to commute to work. Thus your picture proves nothing.
Most people in Urban Area were working class, not the poor, and not the 10% of the population generally considered "Upper Middle Class" (as that term is used today, the term "Middle Class" was used for them till the 1960s when it was decided that unions had moved the Working Class to Middle Class standards and with that change the term Middle Class started to include what use to be called Working Class). It was this group that started to buy cars as early as 1905, and continue to be the main source of car owners till after WWII in urban areas. Most urban areas, prior to the end of WWII mimicked New York City, it is only with the embrace of the automobile did the modern auto dominated city developed.
As to the 200 Motor Vehicles per 1000 people, remember that included trucks. In the 1920s and 1930s most cities pushed for trucks to replace horses, so the city did not have to clean up after the horses. Many of the motor vehicles purchased during the 1920s and 1930s in urban areas where such local delivery trucks. In my home city of Pittsburgh, the Streetcar system had to end its own fright hauling business in 1940 due to the fact so many businesses had adopted trucks to haul goods around that they no longer saw the Streetcar system as a fast alternative (it had been when the horse was use to haul goods). This demand for trucks, and the subsequent flexibility trucks provided, did in a number of Inter-Urban Streetcar systems. Interurbans tended to be more rural then urban and depended not only on passenger service, but freight service. For example the City of Hershey Streetcar system failed when Hershey switched from having farmers haul their milk to the Streetcar stop and instead had trucks pick up the milk directly from the farmers. THis mid 1920 change, killed off a income stream for that interurban Streetcar and forced it to close down.
Just a comment that 200 motor vehicles per 1000 people included trucks and a lot of vehicles in rural areas. These Rural vehicle, when they burned leaded gasoline, would have the effect minimize by the fact on a per mile basis, the vehicle count was low. Urban areas, would see a concentration of lead as more and more people drove to work just based on the number of vehicle in a relatively much smaller area.
I have found that most people living today can not even image living in a society without access to an automobile, yet that was the norm as late as 1945 in urban areas. I have found people refusing to accept that people can survive without cars but that was the norm for most people's great grand parents.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
123 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It was hypothesized 80 years ago that the fall of the Roman Empire was due to lead plates, goblets
leveymg
Jan 2013
#1
I stand corrected. People have known for at least 1900 years that ingesting lead is dangerous
leveymg
Jan 2013
#72
I think too much is being made about this story. I don't view it as news or even as original
leveymg
Jan 2013
#76
I don't buy it. what is the mechanism through which increased exposure to lead increases
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#3
i remember when similar studies were done in the 70s. there were problems with them then, &
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#5
how do you explain the pre-1925 rise in murder and the drop circa 1937-1965? Lead began
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#10
yes, they line up well for the crime of aggravated assault, in the cities chosen, in the time
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#52
Prohibition ended on 12/5/1933 and professionally manufactured alcohol became more readily available
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2013
#34
'it's possible....' but unlikely to have had such a large effect on murder rates.
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#39
why should it adjust for *any* causes? it's a graph of the murder rate, period. i'm not shouting
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#43
The rate of people being Killed in Europe in 1946 was a HUGE DROP from from 1944
happyslug
Jan 2013
#69
Military deaths/war deaths aren't part of the murder rate statistics. They're part of the general
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#98
Lead paint, and the switch from lead pipe water systems after 1900, better reporting
happyslug
Jan 2013
#62
i'm not convinced by all the ad hoc, maybe this maybe that stuff on lead pipes & lead paint,
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#79
I already acknowledged the point about national data. But we do have data for a lot of big
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#86
There was chipping paint in rural homes too. And there was chipping lead paint circa 1910-
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#111
Yes, & what was the lead source that declined precipitously in the 1910s-20s such that the murder
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#108
lead is a *proven* toxin, & has *proven* effects on physical & mental development (i.e developmental
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#122
Your math is wrong. 1935 plus at least 20 years (more for cumulative effect) is 1955
SharonAnn
Jan 2013
#66
lead began being added to fuel about 1925, not 1935. murder rates dropped dramatically ~1937-1965.
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#74
200 cars/1000 people in 1930 = 200% increase from 1900, 100% increase from 1920. And car
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#87
Purchased of cars were concentrated in the Rural and Suburban areas prior to WWII
happyslug
Jan 2013
#96
'Freakanomics" is right-wing garbage, Steve Levitt is a right-wing hack, and this lead theory
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#89
it was in the book too; not directly, but the whole argument turns on differential abortion rates
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#107
Gas isn't/wasn't the only delivery mechanism, though--lead paint was an issue too.
MADem
Jan 2013
#102
No, it wasn't, but none of the other sources you mention disappeared in the teens and 20s, which
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#110
Well, they didn't all have to die--they could come home wounded, or with PTSD, or healthy--
MADem
Jan 2013
#117
same could be said of vietnam vets, but it didn't happen. this is all ad hoc rationalizing because
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#119
Not so much...for example, it's pretty well-accepted that lead exposure = decreased IQ.
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#123
why would lead just affect violent crime rates? rather than crime generally, i mean.
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#11
Because it's specifically violent crime that's linked to lead poisoning?
Spider Jerusalem
Jan 2013
#41
lol. i read your link. the theoretical construct cited has to do with impulse control, which isn't
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#46
none of which are specific to aggravated assault or violence. but speaking of drugs:
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#54
That was a drug war, something generally removed when it comes to overall murder rates
happyslug
Jan 2013
#68
and did the authors of such studies control for effects of 'drug war'? & how is it possible to
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#71
that's a reason we might pay more attention to violent crime stats rather than other crime stats,
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#73
around here we used to have many murders, shootings by the foreign gang bangers..then Obama was
Sunlei
Jan 2013
#56
Except the correlation between eliminating leaded gasoline and declining violent crime...
Spider Jerusalem
Jan 2013
#12
I don't believe that just because someone says so in a news report. I can see it doesn't
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#15
but i haven't read those papers, and no one has posted them on DU. they posted news reports.
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#19
as you are the sort of person who thinks name-calling is an acceptable discussion tactic, you
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#26
i didn't say incarceration rates always follow violent crimes rates. i posted the stats on incar-
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#33
Thank God for the uk/eu news and uk medical reports or Americans would never know what harms them.
Sunlei
Jan 2013
#55
except most of the research was done in the us & reported in the us as well.
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#57
not these days, the corporations have much stronger control and our American news has declined.
Sunlei
Jan 2013
#58
yeah, that's why outlets like "forbes" are discussing this research (done in the us), because of
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#100
the main way used to be leaded paint & gas. since both were banned, average blood levels of lead
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#18
Check the CDC, which keeps stats on lead across 50 states. Their data do correlate high lead
ancianita
Jan 2013
#20
can you link to one of those pages where these correlations are shown or described?
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#36
My mistatement. I meant that their lead measures data are correlated by others with crime. I'm
ancianita
Jan 2013
#81
Thanks. There's data from national to local levels, and it's all helping to make this case.
ancianita
Jan 2013
#104
you apparently didn't read what i posted. It says two things: most of the data just shows
HiPointDem
Jan 2013
#109
perhaps the answer today is the medical treatment with chelators as a routine health care.
Sunlei
Jan 2013
#40
Too bad you are already tomb-stoned. Now you'll never know what's silly about that statement.
cthulu2016
Jan 2013
#91