Ignored evidence linking corporal punishment, poverty and crime grows

In Politics, not technology, caused botched executions In indicated that statistics among other research clearly shows that the death penalty doesn't work as a deterrent. FBI crime statistics for 2012 add to that evidence showing that if anything states without the death penalty have lower rates for violent crime and they also show that there is a correlation with high crime rates, the use of corporal punishment in schools, and high poverty rates.

Crime rates, including violent crime have been slowly but steadily decreasing since the early nineties; this includes the two years prior to 2012, but not 2012 which is virtually unchanged. It remains to be seen whether the crime drop is leveling off, beginning a reverse or just slowing down for one year. But there is plenty of research out there to better understand why crime has been dropping and how to continue policies that will continue it. Unfortunately the traditional media and political establishment might not be willing to acknowledge some of the best research and base their decisions on it or report it to the public. Past research along with new research and this review of crime, mostly in 2011-12 almost certainly indicates that the leading contributing causes of crime include poverty and escalating violence starting with child abuse and corporal punishment. This review may not be the best research; but it isn't hard to do a better job than our current politicians or media which spends and enormous amount of time presenting crap like Nancy Grace and Jane-Velez Mitchell.

The following chart is based on statistics from the FBI; presumably these have been peer reviewed however that doesn't guarantee that they're perfect. Murders are the only crimes that local communities are required to report; so other crimes are reported on a voluntary basis. The DPIC has also compiled a list of murder rates which goes back 17 years and it indicates similar results based on all three categories although they focus on the death penalty.

Following each State name indicates whether they have the death penalty or corporal punishment in schools and how high their poverty rates are. Corporal punishment in schools is abbreviated CP in S; death penalty is abbreviated DP; poverty rates are based on List of U.S. states by poverty rate; the average is 12.6%; the second figure is the supplementary rate adjusted geographically according to the cost of living.

A summation of the correlation of corporal punishment in schools and poverty follows the chart.

---

Area	Year	Population1	Violent crime		Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter		Forcible rape		Robbery		Aggravated assault		Property crime		Burglary		Larceny-theft		Motor vehicle theft
			Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000	Number	Rate per 100,000
United States Total2, 3, 4, 5	2011	311,587,816	1,206,031	387.1	14,661	4.7	84,175	27.0	354,772	113.9	752,423	241.5	9,052,743	2,905.4	2,185,140	701.3	6,151,095	1,974.1	716,508	230.0
	2012	313,914,040	1,214,464	386.9	14,827	4.7	84,376	26.9	354,522	112.9	760,739	242.3	8,975,438	2,859.2	2,103,787	670.2	6,150,598	1,959.3	721,053	229.7
	Percent change		+0.7	*	+1.1	+0.4	+0.2	-0.5	-0.1	-0.8	+1.1	+0.4	-0.9	-1.6	-3.7	-4.4	*	-0.7	+0.6	-0.1
District of Columbia/ No CP in S / No DP5	2011	619,020	7,433	1,200.8	108	17.4	173	27.9	4,094	661.4	3,058	494.0	29,654	4,790.5	3,850	622.0	21,347	3,448.5	4,457	720.0
	2012	632,323	7,864	1,243.7	88	13.9	236	37.3	4,036	638.3	3,504	554.1	30,736	4,860.8	3,519	556.5	23,556	3,725.3	3,661	579.0
	Percent change		+5.8	+3.6	-18.5	-20.2	+36.4	+33.5	-1.4	-3.5	+14.6	+12.2	+3.6	+1.5	-8.6	-10.5	+10.3	+8.0	-17.9	-19.6
1. Tennessee / DP / CP in S 1.5% / 15.0%/14.3% poverty rate	2011	6,399,787	38,895	607.8	380	5.9	2,095	32.7	8,082	126.3	28,338	442.8	230,900	3,607.9	62,830	981.8	153,928	2,405.2	14,142	221.0
	2012	6,456,243	41,550	643.6	388	6.0	2,032	31.5	8,169	126.5	30,961	479.6	217,664	3,371.4	56,181	870.2	148,503	2,300.1	12,980	201.0
	Percent change		+6.8	+5.9	+2.1	+1.2	-3.0	-3.9	+1.1	+0.2	+9.3	+8.3	-5.7	-6.6	-10.6	-11.4	-3.5	-4.4	-8.2	-9.0
2. Nevada / DP / No CP in S / 10.6%/17.9% poverty rate	2011	2,720,028	15,452	568.1	139	5.1	913	33.6	4,308	158.4	10,092	371.0	70,075	2,576.3	20,342	747.9	40,156	1,476.3	9,577	352.1
	2012	2,758,931	16,763	607.6	124	4.5	931	33.7	4,918	178.3	10,790	391.1	77,510	2,809.4	22,120	801.8	45,372	1,644.6	10,018	363.1
	Percent change		+8.5	+7.0	-10.8	-12.0	+2.0	+0.5	+14.2	+12.5	+6.9	+5.4	+10.6	+9.1	+8.7	+7.2	+13.0	+11.4	+4.6	+3.1
3. Alaska / No DP / No CP in S / 10.0%/11.0% poverty rate	2011	723,860	4,416	610.1	30	4.1	436	60.2	576	79.6	3,374	466.1	19,094	2,637.8	2,852	394.0	14,854	2,052.1	1,388	191.7
	2012	731,449	4,412	603.2	30	4.1	583	79.7	630	86.1	3,169	433.2	20,037	2,739.4	2,950	403.3	15,565	2,128.0	1,522	208.1
	Percent change		-0.1	-1.1	0.0	-1.0	+33.7	+32.3	+9.4	+8.2	-6.1	-7.1	+4.9	+3.8	+3.4	+2.4	+4.8	+3.7	+9.7	+8.5
4. New Mexico / No DP / CP in S .2% (banned in 2011) / 17.9%/15.8% poverty rate	2011	2,078,674	11,904	572.7	158	7.6	856	41.2	1,720	82.7	9,170	441.1	73,549	3,538.3	21,419	1,030.4	46,730	2,248.1	5,400	259.8
	2012	2,085,538	11,660	559.1	116	5.6	957	45.9	1,847	88.6	8,740	419.1	75,094	3,600.7	21,384	1,025.3	48,247	2,313.4	5,463	261.9
	Percent change		-2.0	-2.4	-26.6	-26.8	+11.8	+11.4	+7.4	+7.0	-4.7	-5.0	+2.1	+1.8	-0.2	-0.5	+3.2	+2.9	+1.2	+0.8
5. South Carolina / DP / CP in S .2% / 15.0%/13.8% poverty rate	2011	4,673,348	27,894	596.9	320	6.8	1,678	35.9	4,631	99.1	21,265	455.0	183,243	3,921.0	47,351	1,013.2	122,255	2,616.0	13,637	291.8
	2012	4,723,723	26,397	558.8	324	6.9	1,679	35.5	4,489	95.0	19,905	421.4	180,550	3,822.2	45,086	954.5	122,263	2,588.3	13,201	279.5
	Percent change		-5.4	-6.4	+1.3	+0.2	+0.1	-1.0	-3.1	-4.1	-6.4	-7.4	-1.5	-2.5	-4.8	-5.8	*	-1.1	-3.2	-4.2
6. Delaware / No DP / No CP in S / 9.2%/13.9% poverty rate	2011	908,137	5,144	566.4	48	5.3	307	33.8	1,558	171.6	3,231	355.8	31,163	3,431.5	7,617	838.8	22,001	2,422.7	1,545	170.1
	2012	917,092	5,020	547.4	57	6.2	243	26.5	1,492	162.7	3,228	352.0	30,639	3,340.9	7,371	803.7	21,832	2,380.6	1,436	156.6
	Percent change		-2.4	-3.4	+18.8	+17.6	-20.8	-21.6	-4.2	-5.2	-0.1	-1.1	-1.7	-2.6	-3.2	-4.2	-0.8	-1.7	-7.1	-8.0
7. Louisiana / DP / CP in S 1.7% / 18.3%/12.8% poverty rate	2011	4,574,766	25,373	554.6	506	11.1	1,262	27.6	5,235	114.4	18,370	401.6	168,529	3,683.9	46,242	1,010.8	113,174	2,473.9	9,113	199.2
	2012	4,601,893	22,868	496.9	495	10.8	1,158	25.2	5,475	119.0	15,740	342.0	162,936	3,540.6	42,140	915.7	112,915	2,453.7	7,881	171.3
	Percent change		-9.9	-10.4	-2.2	-2.8	-8.2	-8.8	+4.6	+4.0	-14.3	-14.8	-3.3	-3.9	-8.9	-9.4	-0.2	-0.8	-13.5	-14.0
8. Florida / DP / CP in S .3% / 11.1%/19.5% poverty rate	2011	19,082,262	98,198	514.6	984	5.2	5,273	27.6	25,622	134.3	66,319	347.5	671,200	3,517.4	170,171	891.8	461,408	2,418.0	39,621	207.6
	2012	19,317,568	94,087	487.1	1,009	5.2	5,260	27.2	23,889	123.7	63,929	330.9	632,988	3,276.7	153,563	794.9	442,095	2,288.6	37,330	193.2
	Percent change		-4.2	-5.4	+2.5	+1.3	-0.2	-1.5	-6.8	-7.9	-3.6	-4.8	-5.7	-6.8	-9.8	-10.9	-4.2	-5.4	-5.8	-6.9
9. Maryland / No DP / No CP in S / 9.7%/14.0% poverty rate	2011	5,839,572	28,817	493.5	399	6.8	1,200	20.5	10,342	177.1	16,876	289.0	166,846	2,857.2	35,823	613.5	114,951	1,968.5	16,072	275.2
	2012	5,884,563	28,055	476.8	369	6.3	1,235	21.0	10,141	172.3	16,310	277.2	162,031	2,753.5	33,732	573.2	113,274	1,924.9	15,025	255.3
	Percent change		-2.6	-3.4	-7.5	-8.2	+2.9	+2.1	-1.9	-2.7	-3.4	-4.1	-2.9	-3.6	-5.8	-6.6	-1.5	-2.2	-6.5	-7.2
10. Oklahoma / DP / CP in S 2.3% / 15.6%/10.8% poverty rate	2011	3,784,163	17,311	457.5	212	5.6	1,410	37.3	3,288	86.9	12,401	327.7	127,618	3,372.4	36,462	963.5	80,064	2,115.8	11,092	293.1
	2012	3,814,820	17,902	469.3	216	5.7	1,588	41.6	3,231	84.7	12,867	337.3	129,743	3,401.0	35,731	936.6	82,448	2,161.3	11,564	303.1
	Percent change		+3.4	+2.6	+1.9	+1.1	+12.6	+11.7	-1.7	-2.5	+3.8	+2.9	+1.7	+0.8	-2.0	-2.8	+3.0	+2.2	+4.3	+3.4
11. Arkansas / DP / CP in S 4.7% / 15.9%/15.9% poverty rate	2011	2,938,582	14,173	482.3	160	5.4	1,230	41.9	2,357	80.2	10,426	354.8	110,430	3,757.9	34,016	1,157.6	70,645	2,404.1	5,769	196.3
	2012	2,949,131	13,835	469.1	173	5.9	1,247	42.3	2,320	78.7	10,095	342.3	107,941	3,660.1	31,890	1,081.3	70,327	2,384.7	5,724	194.1
	Percent change		-2.4	-2.7	+8.1	+7.7	+1.4	+1.0	-1.6	-1.9	-3.2	-3.5	-2.3	-2.6	-6.3	-6.6	-0.5	-0.8	-0.8	-1.1
12. Michigan / No DP / No CP in S / 12.0%/12.4% poverty rate	2011	9,876,801	43,731	442.8	617	6.2	4,344	44.0	10,263	103.9	28,507	288.6	251,329	2,544.6	69,755	706.3	156,666	1,586.2	24,908	252.2
	2012	9,883,360	44,922	454.5	689	7.0	4,589	46.4	10,434	105.6	29,210	295.5	250,101	2,530.5	65,665	664.4	159,321	1,612.0	25,115	254.1
	Percent change		+2.7	+2.7	+11.7	+11.6	+5.6	+5.6	+1.7	+1.6	+2.5	+2.4	-0.5	-0.6	-5.9	-5.9	+1.7	+1.6	+0.8	+0.8
13. Missouri / DP / CP in S .6% / 11.6%/12.8% poverty rate	2011	6,008,984	26,888	447.5	366	6.1	1,469	24.4	6,275	104.4	18,778	312.5	199,085	3,313.1	44,875	746.8	138,879	2,311.2	15,331	255.1
	2012	6,021,988	27,155	450.9	389	6.5	1,511	25.1	5,782	96.0	19,473	323.4	199,590	3,314.4	42,466	705.2	140,816	2,338.4	16,308	270.8
	Percent change		+1.0	+0.8	+6.3	+6.1	+2.9	+2.6	-7.9	-8.1	+3.7	+3.5	+0.3	*	-5.4	-5.6	+1.4	+1.2	+6.4	+6.1
14. Alabama / DP / CP in S 4.5% / 16.7%/15.9% poverty rate3	2011	4,803,689	20,166	419.8	299	6.2	1,370	28.5	4,906	102.1	13,591	282.9	173,192	3,605.4	51,119	1,064.2	111,411	2,319.3	10,662	222.0
	2012	4,822,023	21,693	449.9	342	7.1	1,296	26.9	5,020	104.1	15,035	311.8	168,878	3,502.2	47,481	984.7	111,523	2,312.8	9,874	204.8
	Percent change		+7.6	+7.2	+14.4	+13.9	-5.4	-5.8	+2.3	+1.9	+10.6	+10.2	-2.5	-2.9	-7.1	-7.5	+0.1	-0.3	-7.4	-7.7
15. Arizona / DP / CP in S less than .1% / 15.2%/21.6% poverty rate	2011	6,467,315	26,789	414.2	397	6.1	2,499	38.6	7,145	110.5	16,748	259.0	229,896	3,554.7	54,695	845.7	155,400	2,402.9	19,801	306.2
	2012	6,553,255	28,108	428.9	358	5.5	2,277	34.7	7,386	112.7	18,087	276.0	231,930	3,539.2	52,934	807.8	159,838	2,439.1	19,158	292.3
	Percent change		+4.9	+3.5	-9.8	-11.0	-8.9	-10.1	+3.4	+2.0	+8.0	+6.6	+0.9	-0.4	-3.2	-4.5	+2.9	+1.5	-3.2	-4.5
16. California / DP / No CP in S / 13.2%/22.4% poverty rate	2011	37,683,933	154,943	411.2	1,792	4.8	7,665	20.3	54,291	144.1	91,195	242.0	973,822	2,584.2	230,075	610.5	596,905	1,584.0	146,842	389.7
	2012	38,041,430	160,944	423.1	1,884	5.0	7,837	20.6	56,521	148.6	94,702	248.9	1,049,465	2,758.7	245,767	646.1	635,090	1,669.5	168,608	443.2
	Percent change		+3.9	+2.9	+5.1	+4.1	+2.2	+1.3	+4.1	+3.1	+3.8	+2.9	+7.8	+6.8	+6.8	+5.8	+6.4	+5.4	+14.8	+13.7
17. Illinois / No DP / No CP in S / 11.5%/13.8% poverty rate	2011	12,859,752	54,523	424.0	781	6.1	3,030	23.6	20,217	157.2	30,495	237.1	344,468	2,678.7	77,719	604.4	237,362	1,845.8	29,387	228.5
	2012	12,875,255	53,403	414.8	744	5.8	3,570	27.7	19,471	151.2	29,618	230.0	332,013	2,578.7	71,101	552.2	235,222	1,826.9	25,690	199.5
	Percent change		-2.1	-2.2	-4.7	-4.9	+17.8	+17.7	-3.7	-3.8	-2.9	-3.0	-3.6	-3.7	-8.5	-8.6	-0.9	-1.0	-12.6	-12.7
18. Texas / DP / CP in S 1.1% / 16.2%/15.9% poverty rate	2011	25,631,778	104,734	408.6	1,130	4.4	7,486	29.2	28,620	111.7	67,498	263.3	892,810	3,483.2	215,755	841.7	613,131	2,392.1	63,924	249.4
	2012	26,059,203	106,476	408.6	1,144	4.4	7,711	29.6	30,382	116.6	67,239	258.0	876,059	3,361.8	204,810	785.9	606,253	2,326.4	64,996	249.4
	Percent change		+1.7	*	+1.2	-0.4	+3.0	+1.3	+6.2	+4.4	-0.4	-2.0	-1.9	-3.5	-5.1	-6.6	-1.1	-2.7	+1.7	*
19. New York / No DP / No CP in S / 14.5%/17.6% poverty rate3	2011	19,501,616	77,463	397.2	769	3.9	2,751	14.1	28,405	145.7	45,538	233.5	371,837	1,906.7	65,227	334.5	287,361	1,473.5	19,249	98.7
	2012	19,570,261	79,610	406.8	684	3.5	2,848	14.6	28,655	146.4	47,423	242.3	376,140	1,922.0	64,553	329.9	294,239	1,503.5	17,348	88.6
	Percent change		+2.8	+2.4	-11.1	-11.4	+3.5	+3.2	+0.9	+0.5	+4.1	+3.8	+1.2	+0.8	-1.0	-1.4	+2.4	+2.0	-9.9	-10.2
20. Massachusetts / No DP / No CP in S / 10.1%/13.6% poverty rate	2011	6,607,003	28,232	427.3	184	2.8	1,654	25.0	6,768	102.4	19,626	297.0	148,829	2,252.6	36,403	551.0	101,644	1,538.4	10,782	163.2
	2012	6,646,144	26,953	405.5	121	1.8	1,642	24.7	6,552	98.6	18,638	280.4	143,089	2,153.0	34,540	519.7	99,317	1,494.4	9,232	138.9
	Percent change		-4.5	-5.1	-34.2	-34.6	-0.7	-1.3	-3.2	-3.8	-5.0	-5.6	-3.9	-4.4	-5.1	-5.7	-2.3	-2.9	-14.4	-14.9
21. Georgia / DP / CP in S 1.1% / 14.4%/18.8% poverty rate	2011	9,812,460	36,762	374.6	549	5.6	2,066	21.1	12,266	125.0	21,881	223.0	357,235	3,640.6	96,014	978.5	231,543	2,359.7	29,678	302.5
	2012	9,919,945	37,591	378.9	581	5.9	2,124	21.4	12,463	125.6	22,423	226.0	338,329	3,410.6	86,789	874.9	223,004	2,248.0	28,536	287.7
	Percent change		+2.3	+1.1	+5.8	+4.7	+2.8	+1.7	+1.6	+0.5	+2.5	+1.4	-5.3	-6.3	-9.6	-10.6	-3.7	-4.7	-3.8	-4.9
22. Kansas / DP / CP in S .01% (no bruising or red marks allowed) / 12.5%/11.1% poverty rate	2011	2,870,386	10,209	355.7	111	3.9	1,122	39.1	1,448	50.4	7,528	262.3	88,655	3,088.6	18,712	651.9	63,259	2,203.8	6,684	232.9
	2012	2,885,905	10,232	354.6	84	2.9	1,053	36.5	1,500	52.0	7,595	263.2	90,710	3,143.2	18,767	650.3	65,165	2,258.0	6,778	234.9
	Percent change		+0.2	-0.3	-24.3	-24.7	-6.1	-6.7	+3.6	+3.0	+0.9	+0.3	+2.3	+1.8	+0.3	-0.2	+3.0	+2.5	+1.4	+0.9
23. North Carolina / DP / CP in S .2% / 13.1%/14.3% poverty rate	2011	9,651,103	33,421	346.3	498	5.2	1,959	20.3	9,448	97.9	21,516	222.9	337,806	3,500.2	105,534	1,093.5	215,453	2,232.4	16,819	174.3
	2012	9,752,073	34,464	353.4	479	4.9	1,984	20.3	9,392	96.3	22,609	231.8	328,594	3,369.5	99,323	1,018.5	213,151	2,185.7	16,120	165.3
	Percent change		+3.1	+2.1	-3.8	-4.8	+1.3	+0.2	-0.6	-1.6	+5.1	+4.0	-2.7	-3.7	-5.9	-6.9	-1.1	-2.1	-4.2	-5.1
24. Pennsylvania / DP / No CP in S / 11.2%/10.5% poverty rate	2011	12,743,948	46,189	362.4	639	5.0	3,339	26.2	16,165	126.8	26,046	204.4	283,442	2,224.1	57,966	454.9	208,604	1,636.9	16,872	132.4
	2012	12,763,536	44,503	348.7	685	5.4	3,327	26.1	15,673	122.8	24,818	194.4	276,496	2,166.3	56,859	445.5	204,609	1,603.1	15,028	117.7
	Percent change		-3.7	-3.8	+7.2	+7.0	-0.4	-0.5	-3.0	-3.2	-4.7	-4.9	-2.5	-2.6	-1.9	-2.1	-1.9	-2.1	-10.9	-11.1
25. Indiana / DP / CP in S .5% / 12.6%/14.8% poverty rate	2011	6,516,353	21,619	331.8	306	4.7	1,758	27.0	6,977	107.1	12,578	193.0	206,016	3,161.5	50,571	776.1	140,630	2,158.1	14,815	227.4
	2012	6,537,334	22,602	345.7	310	4.7	1,667	25.5	6,598	100.9	14,027	214.6	198,032	3,029.2	47,612	728.3	136,759	2,092.0	13,661	209.0
	Percent change		+4.5	+4.2	+1.3	+1.0	-5.2	-5.5	-5.4	-5.7	+11.5	+11.2	-3.9	-4.2	-5.9	-6.2	-2.8	-3.1	-7.8	-8.1
26. South Dakota / DP / No CP in S / 11.8%/11.6% poverty rate	2011	823,593	2,105	255.6	20	2.4	503	61.1	167	20.3	1,415	171.8	15,299	1,857.6	2,927	355.4	11,423	1,387.0	949	115.2
	2012	833,354	2,682	321.8	25	3.0	585	70.2	158	19.0	1,914	229.7	17,168	2,060.1	3,258	391.0	12,845	1,541.4	1,065	127.8
	Percent change		+27.4	+25.9	+25.0	+23.5	+16.3	+14.9	-5.4	-6.5	+35.3	+33.7	+12.2	+10.9	+11.3	+10.0	+12.4	+11.1	+12.2	+10.9
27. West Virginia / No DP / No CP in S / 15.4%/11.3% poverty rate	2011	1,854,908	5,497	296.3	87	4.7	372	20.1	802	43.2	4,236	228.4	39,009	2,103.0	10,245	552.3	26,656	1,437.1	2,108	113.6
	2012	1,855,413	5,869	316.3	72	3.9	421	22.7	838	45.2	4,538	244.6	43,878	2,364.9	11,291	608.5	30,378	1,637.3	2,209	119.1
	Percent change		+6.8	+6.7	-17.2	-17.3	+13.2	+13.1	+4.5	+4.5	+7.1	+7.1	+12.5	+12.5	+10.2	+10.2	+14.0	+13.9	+4.8	+4.8
28. Colorado / DP / CP in S less than .1% / 11.4%/14.8% poverty rate	2011	5,116,302	16,085	314.4	155	3.0	2,285	44.7	3,299	64.5	10,346	202.2	132,781	2,595.3	25,725	502.8	96,054	1,877.4	11,002	215.0
	2012	5,187,582	16,023	308.9	162	3.1	2,113	40.7	3,395	65.4	10,353	199.6	139,270	2,684.7	26,157	504.2	101,021	1,947.4	12,092	233.1
	Percent change		-0.4	-1.8	+4.5	+3.1	-7.5	-8.8	+2.9	+1.5	+0.1	-1.3	+4.9	+3.4	+1.7	+0.3	+5.2	+3.7	+9.9	+8.4
29. Ohio / DP / CP in S .04% (banned in 2009) / 12.3%11.9/% poverty rate	2011	11,541,007	35,218	305.2	500	4.3	3,679	31.9	15,991	138.6	15,048	130.4	380,572	3,297.6	112,901	978.3	246,744	2,138.0	20,927	181.3
	2012	11,544,225	34,595	299.7	495	4.3	3,658	31.7	15,235	132.0	15,207	131.7	359,883	3,117.4	103,421	895.9	236,950	2,052.5	19,512	169.0
	Percent change		-1.8	-1.8	-1.0	-1.0	-0.6	-0.6	-4.7	-4.8	+1.1	+1.0	-5.4	-5.5	-8.4	-8.4	-4.0	-4.0	-6.8	-6.8
30. New Jersey / No DP / No CP in S / 6.8%/12.2% poverty rate	2011	8,834,773	27,203	307.9	380	4.3	1,006	11.4	12,209	138.2	13,608	154.0	189,719	2,147.4	43,238	489.4	129,066	1,460.9	17,415	197.1
	2012	8,864,590	25,727	290.2	388	4.4	1,035	11.7	11,385	128.4	12,919	145.7	181,481	2,047.3	42,338	477.6	122,662	1,383.7	16,481	185.9
	Percent change		-5.4	-5.7	+2.1	+1.8	+2.9	+2.5	-6.7	-7.1	-5.1	-5.4	-4.3	-4.7	-2.1	-2.4	-5.0	-5.3	-5.4	-5.7
31. Washington / DP / No CP in S / 10.2%/11.2% poverty rate	2011	6,823,267	20,152	295.3	163	2.4	2,320	34.0	5,627	82.5	12,042	176.5	244,209	3,579.1	56,561	828.9	162,828	2,386.4	24,820	363.8
	2012	6,897,012	20,386	295.6	206	3.0	2,193	31.8	5,745	83.3	12,242	177.5	252,333	3,658.6	60,725	880.5	165,206	2,395.3	26,402	382.8
	Percent change		+1.2	+0.1	+26.4	+25.0	-5.5	-6.5	+2.1	+1.0	+1.7	+0.6	+3.3	+2.2	+7.4	+6.2	+1.5	+0.4	+6.4	+5.2
32. Connecticut / No DP / No CP in S / 9.7%/11.1% poverty rate	2011	3,586,717	9,889	275.7	129	3.6	689	19.2	3,689	102.9	5,382	150.1	77,205	2,152.5	15,468	431.3	55,067	1,535.3	6,670	186.0
	2012	3,590,347	10,160	283.0	146	4.1	919	25.6	3,687	102.7	5,408	150.6	76,834	2,140.0	14,711	409.7	55,674	1,550.7	6,449	179.6
	Percent change		+2.7	+2.6	+13.2	+13.1	+33.4	+33.2	-0.1	-0.2	+0.5	+0.4	-0.5	-0.6	-4.9	-5.0	+1.1	+1.0	-3.3	-3.4
33. Wisconsin / No DP / No CP in S / 10.2%/10.7% poverty rate	2011	5,709,843	14,268	249.9	138	2.4	1,190	20.8	4,600	80.6	8,340	146.1	139,912	2,450.4	27,167	475.8	104,472	1,829.7	8,273	144.9
	2012	5,726,398	16,064	280.5	173	3.0	1,219	21.3	4,622	80.7	10,050	175.5	140,513	2,453.8	27,945	488.0	104,352	1,822.3	8,216	143.5
	Percent change		+12.6	+12.3	+25.4	+25.0	+2.4	+2.1	+0.5	+0.2	+20.5	+20.2	+0.4	+0.1	+2.9	+2.6	-0.1	-0.4	-0.7	-1.0
34. Montana / DP / No CP in S / 13.8%/10.5% poverty rate3	2011	997,667	2,755	276.1	29	2.9	366	36.7	171	17.1	2,189	219.4	23,885	2,394.1	3,347	335.5	19,089	1,913.4	1,449	145.2
	2012	1,005,141	2,736	272.2	27	2.7	379	37.7	191	19.0	2,139	212.8	25,970	2,583.7	3,894	387.4	20,387	2,028.3	1,689	168.0
	Percent change		-0.7	-1.4	-6.9	-7.6	+3.6	+2.8	+11.7	+10.9	-2.3	-3.0	+8.7	+7.9	+16.3	+15.5	+6.8	+6.0	+16.6	+15.7
Puerto Rico/ No CP in S /No DP	2011	3,706,690	10,540	284.4	1,136	30.6	45	1.2	6,465	174.4	2,894	78.1	51,717	1,395.2	16,591	447.6	29,273	789.7	5,853	157.9
	2012	3,667,084	10,041	273.8	978	26.7	32	0.9	6,298	171.7	2,733	74.5	51,679	1,409.3	15,287	416.9	30,545	833.0	5,847	159.4
	Percent change		-4.7	-3.7	-13.9	-13.0	-28.9	-28.1	-2.6	-1.5	-5.6	-4.5	-0.1	+1.0	-7.9	-6.9	+4.3	+5.5	-0.1	+1.0
35. Mississippi / DP / CP in S 7.5% / 20.1%/17% poverty rate	2011	2,977,457	8,009	269.0	232	7.8	863	29.0	2,496	83.8	4,418	148.4	89,809	3,016.3	30,722	1,031.8	54,179	1,819.6	4,908	164.8
	2012	2,984,926	7,786	260.8	220	7.4	822	27.5	2,284	76.5	4,460	149.4	83,906	2,811.0	28,076	940.6	51,508	1,725.6	4,322	144.8
	Percent change		-2.8	-3.0	-5.2	-5.4	-4.8	-5.0	-8.5	-8.7	+1.0	+0.7	-6.6	-6.8	-8.6	-8.8	-4.9	-5.2	-11.9	-12.2
36. Iowa / No DP / No CP in S / 11.3%/7.9% poverty rate	2011	3,064,097	7,883	257.3	44	1.4	866	28.3	824	26.9	6,149	200.7	72,043	2,351.2	17,573	573.5	50,472	1,647.2	3,998	130.5
	2012	3,074,186	8,112	263.9	45	1.5	871	28.3	962	31.3	6,234	202.8	69,839	2,271.8	17,096	556.1	48,720	1,584.8	4,023	130.9
	Percent change		+2.9	+2.6	+2.3	+1.9	+0.6	+0.2	+16.7	+16.4	+1.4	+1.0	-3.1	-3.4	-2.7	-3.0	-3.5	-3.8	+0.6	+0.3
37. Nebraska / DP / No CP in S / 9.5%/9.1% poverty rate	2011	1,842,234	4,672	253.6	68	3.7	699	37.9	993	53.9	2,912	158.1	50,894	2,762.6	8,725	473.6	38,060	2,066.0	4,109	223.0
	2012	1,855,525	4,814	259.4	53	2.9	711	38.3	1,130	60.9	2,920	157.4	51,118	2,754.9	8,735	470.8	38,236	2,060.7	4,147	223.5
	Percent change		+3.0	+2.3	-22.1	-22.6	+1.7	+1.0	+13.8	+13.0	+0.3	-0.4	+0.4	-0.3	+0.1	-0.6	+0.5	-0.3	+0.9	+0.2
38. Rhode Island / No DP / No CP in S / 12.1%/12.2% poverty rate	2011	1,050,646	2,586	246.1	20	1.9	319	30.4	744	70.8	1,503	143.1	27,976	2,662.7	6,836	650.6	18,765	1,786.0	2,375	226.1
	2012	1,050,292	2,651	252.4	34	3.2	288	27.4	713	67.9	1,616	153.9	27,017	2,572.3	5,949	566.4	18,440	1,755.7	2,628	250.2
	Percent change		+2.5	+2.5	+70.0	+70.1	-9.7	-9.7	-4.2	-4.1	+7.5	+7.6	-3.4	-3.4	-13.0	-12.9	-1.7	-1.7	+10.7	+10.7
39. Oregon / DP / No CP in S / 12.0%/13.3% poverty rate	2011	3,868,229	9,643	249.3	84	2.2	1,239	32.0	2,237	57.8	6,083	157.3	121,869	3,150.5	20,704	535.2	92,059	2,379.9	9,106	235.4
	2012	3,899,353	9,653	247.6	92	2.4	1,140	29.2	2,413	61.9	6,008	154.1	125,723	3,224.2	21,901	561.7	93,619	2,400.9	10,203	261.7
	Percent change		+0.1	-0.7	+9.5	+8.6	-8.0	-8.7	+7.9	+7.0	-1.2	-2.0	+3.2	+2.3	+5.8	+4.9	+1.7	+0.9	+12.0	+11.2
40. North Dakota / No DP / No CP in S / 11.2%/8.4% poverty rate	2011	684,740	1,699	248.1	24	3.5	266	38.8	91	13.3	1,318	192.5	13,334	1,947.3	2,458	359.0	9,891	1,444.5	985	143.9
	2012	699,628	1,712	244.7	28	4.0	272	38.9	131	18.7	1,281	183.1	14,063	2,010.1	2,377	339.8	10,535	1,505.8	1,151	164.5
	Percent change		+0.8	-1.4	+16.7	+14.2	+2.3	+0.1	+44.0	+40.9	-2.8	-4.9	+5.5	+3.2	-3.3	-5.4	+6.5	+4.2	+16.9	+14.4
41. Hawaii / DP / No CP in S / 8.6%/18.0% poverty rate	2011	1,378,129	3,465	251.4	20	1.5	353	25.6	994	72.1	2,098	152.2	43,874	3,183.6	8,165	592.5	31,240	2,266.8	4,469	324.3
	2012	1,392,313	3,330	239.2	29	2.1	285	20.5	1,040	74.7	1,976	141.9	42,817	3,075.2	7,979	573.1	31,233	2,243.2	3,605	258.9
	Percent change		-3.9	-4.9	+45.0	+43.5	-19.3	-20.1	+4.6	+3.6	-5.8	-6.8	-2.4	-3.4	-2.3	-3.3	*	-1.0	-19.3	-20.2
42. Minnesota / No DP / No CP in S / 8.1%/10.7% poverty rate4	2011	5,347,299	12,323	230.5	75	1.4	2,113	39.5	3,385	63.3	6,750	126.2	136,183	2,546.8	25,681	480.3	102,354	1,914.1	8,148	152.4
	2012	5,379,139	12,419	230.9	99	1.8	1,638	30.5	3,475	64.6	7,207	134.0	138,152	2,568.3	25,378	471.8	104,316	1,939.3	8,458	157.2
	Percent change		+0.8	+0.2	+32.0	+31.2	-22.5	-22.9	+2.7	+2.1	+6.8	+6.1	+1.4	+0.8	-1.2	-1.8	+1.9	+1.3	+3.8	+3.2
43. Kentucky / DP / CP in S .3% / 14.8%/13.2% poverty rate	2011	4,366,814	10,465	239.6	151	3.5	1,499	34.3	3,705	84.8	5,110	117.0	119,037	2,725.9	32,750	750.0	79,586	1,822.5	6,701	153.5
	2012	4,380,415	9,752	222.6	195	4.5	1,272	29.0	3,535	80.7	4,750	108.4	111,826	2,552.9	29,587	675.4	75,571	1,725.2	6,668	152.2
	Percent change		-6.8	-7.1	+29.1	+28.7	-15.1	-15.4	-4.6	-4.9	-7.0	-7.3	-6.1	-6.3	-9.7	-9.9	-5.0	-5.3	-0.5	-0.8
44. Idaho / DP / CP in S .5% / 9.9%/11.6% poverty rate	2011	1,583,744	3,202	202.2	35	2.2	444	28.0	188	11.9	2,535	160.1	32,875	2,075.8	6,915	436.6	24,629	1,555.1	1,331	84.0
	2012	1,595,728	3,318	207.9	29	1.8	479	30.0	243	15.2	2,567	160.9	31,651	1,983.5	7,186	450.3	23,101	1,447.7	1,364	85.5
	Percent change		+3.6	+2.8	-17.1	-17.8	+7.9	+7.1	+29.3	+28.3	+1.3	+0.5	-3.7	-4.4	+3.9	+3.1	-6.2	-6.9	+2.5	+1.7
45. Utah / DP / No CP in S / 9.2%/9.5% poverty rate	2011	2,814,347	5,547	197.1	50	1.8	901	32.0	1,079	38.3	3,517	125.0	84,084	2,987.7	13,170	468.0	64,727	2,299.9	6,187	219.8
	2012	2,855,287	5,876	205.8	50	1.8	943	33.0	1,100	38.5	3,783	132.5	85,424	2,991.8	12,943	453.3	66,482	2,328.4	5,999	210.1
	Percent change		+5.9	+4.4	0.0	-1.4	+4.7	+3.2	+1.9	+0.5	+7.6	+6.0	+1.6	+0.1	-1.7	-3.1	+2.7	+1.2	-3.0	-4.4
46. Wyoming / DP / CP in S however it is rarely if ever used / 10.6%/9.0% poverty rate	2011	567,356	1,245	219.4	18	3.2	146	25.7	71	12.5	1,010	178.0	12,878	2,269.8	1,864	328.5	10,493	1,849.5	521	91.8
	2012	576,412	1,161	201.4	14	2.4	154	26.7	61	10.6	932	161.7	13,222	2,293.8	2,125	368.7	10,513	1,823.9	584	101.3
	Percent change		-6.7	-8.2	-22.2	-23.4	+5.5	+3.8	-14.1	-15.4	-7.7	-9.2	+2.7	+1.1	+14.0	+12.2	+0.2	-1.4	+12.1	+10.3
47. Virginia / DP / No CP in S / 9.2%/11.7% poverty rate	2011	8,104,384	16,014	197.6	304	3.8	1,591	19.6	5,425	66.9	8,694	107.3	182,902	2,256.8	30,656	378.3	142,476	1,758.0	9,770	120.6
	2012	8,185,867	15,564	190.1	314	3.8	1,452	17.7	4,706	57.5	9,092	111.1	176,985	2,162.1	29,511	360.5	138,398	1,690.7	9,076	110.9
	Percent change		-2.8	-3.8	+3.3	+2.3	-8.7	-9.6	-13.3	-14.1	+4.6	+3.5	-3.2	-4.2	-3.7	-4.7	-2.9	-3.8	-7.1	-8.0
48. New Hampshire / DP / No CP in S / 5.6%/10.4% poverty rate	2011	1,317,807	2,864	217.3	16	1.2	581	44.1	509	38.6	1,758	133.4	32,756	2,485.6	6,244	473.8	25,398	1,927.3	1,114	84.5
	2012	1,320,718	2,481	187.9	15	1.1	449	34.0	472	35.7	1,545	117.0	30,693	2,324.0	5,444	412.2	24,226	1,834.3	1,023	77.5
	Percent change		-13.4	-13.6	-6.3	-6.5	-22.7	-22.9	-7.3	-7.5	-12.1	-12.3	-6.3	-6.5	-12.8	-13.0	-4.6	-4.8	-8.2	-8.4
49. Vermont / No DP / No CP in S / 7.6%/8.3% poverty rate	2011	626,592	925	147.6	11	1.8	146	23.3	99	15.8	669	106.8	15,086	2,407.6	3,838	612.5	10,720	1,710.8	528	84.3
	2012	626,011	893	142.6	8	1.3	121	19.3	112	17.9	652	104.2	15,016	2,398.7	3,965	633.4	10,616	1,695.8	435	69.5
	Percent change		-3.5	-3.4	-27.3	-27.2	-17.1	-17.0	+13.1	+13.2	-2.5	-2.5	-0.5	-0.4	+3.3	+3.4	-1.0	-0.9	-17.6	-17.5
50. Maine / No DP / No CP in S / 12.6%/9.6% poverty rate	2011	1,328,544	1,638	123.3	26	2.0	394	29.7	370	27.9	848	63.8	33,829	2,546.3	7,865	592.0	24,886	1,873.2	1,078	81.1
	2012	1,329,192	1,631	122.7	25	1.9	372	28.0	423	31.8	811	61.0	33,361	2,509.9	7,461	561.3	24,905	1,873.7	995	74.9
	Percent change		-0.4	-0.5	-3.8	-3.9	-5.6	-5.6	+14.3	+14.3	-4.4	-4.4	-1.4	-1.4	-5.1	-5.2	+0.1	*	-7.7	-7.7
Northeast3	2011	55,597,646	196,989	354.3	2,174	3.9	10,879	19.6	68,958	124.0	114,978	206.8	1,180,679	2,123.6	243,085	437.2	861,511	1,549.5	76,083	136.8
	2012	55,761,091	194,609	349.0	2,106	3.8	11,001	19.7	67,672	121.4	113,830	204.1	1,160,127	2,080.5	235,820	422.9	854,688	1,532.8	69,619	124.9
	Percent change		-1.2	-1.5	-3.1	-3.4	+1.1	+0.8	-1.9	-2.2	-1.0	-1.3	-1.7	-2.0	-3.0	-3.3	-0.8	-1.1	-8.5	-8.8
New England	2011	14,517,309	46,134	317.8	386	2.7	3,783	26.1	12,179	83.9	29,786	205.2	335,681	2,312.3	76,654	528.0	236,480	1,629.0	22,547	155.3
	2012	14,562,704	44,769	307.4	349	2.4	3,791	26.0	11,959	82.1	28,670	196.9	326,010	2,238.7	72,070	494.9	233,178	1,601.2	20,762	142.6
	Percent change		-3.0	-3.3	-9.6	-9.9	+0.2	-0.1	-1.8	-2.1	-3.7	-4.0	-2.9	-3.2	-6.0	-6.3	-1.4	-1.7	-7.9	-8.2
Middle Atlantic3	2011	41,080,337	150,855	367.2	1,788	4.4	7,096	17.3	56,779	138.2	85,192	207.4	844,998	2,056.9	166,431	405.1	625,031	1,521.5	53,536	130.3
	2012	41,198,387	149,840	363.7	1,757	4.3	7,210	17.5	55,713	135.2	85,160	206.7	834,117	2,024.6	163,750	397.5	621,510	1,508.6	48,857	118.6
	Percent change		-0.7	-1.0	-1.7	-2.0	+1.6	+1.3	-1.9	-2.2	*	-0.3	-1.3	-1.6	-1.6	-1.9	-0.6	-0.8	-8.7	-9.0
Midwest4	2011	67,145,089	235,138	350.2	3,050	4.5	21,039	31.3	71,231	106.1	139,818	208.2	1,897,790	2,826.4	459,064	683.7	1,300,212	1,936.4	138,514	206.3
	2012	67,316,297	238,712	354.6	3,134	4.7	21,344	31.7	69,498	103.2	144,736	215.0	1,861,182	2,764.8	433,821	644.5	1,293,237	1,921.1	134,124	199.2
	Percent change		+1.5	+1.3	+2.8	+2.5	+1.4	+1.2	-2.4	-2.7	+3.5	+3.3	-1.9	-2.2	-5.5	-5.7	-0.5	-0.8	-3.2	-3.4
East North Central	2011	46,503,756	169,359	364.2	2,342	5.0	14,001	30.1	58,048	124.8	94,968	204.2	1,322,297	2,843.4	338,113	727.1	885,874	1,905.0	98,310	211.4
	2012	46,566,572	171,586	368.5	2,411	5.2	14,703	31.6	56,360	121.0	98,112	210.7	1,280,542	2,749.9	315,744	678.0	872,604	1,873.9	92,194	198.0
	Percent change		+1.3	+1.2	+2.9	+2.8	+5.0	+4.9	-2.9	-3.0	+3.3	+3.2	-3.2	-3.3	-6.6	-6.7	-1.5	-1.6	-6.2	-6.3
West North Central4	2011	20,641,333	65,779	318.7	708	3.4	7,038	34.1	13,183	63.9	44,850	217.3	575,493	2,788.1	120,951	586.0	414,338	2,007.3	40,204	194.8
	2012	20,749,725	67,126	323.5	723	3.5	6,641	32.0	13,138	63.3	46,624	224.7	580,640	2,798.3	118,077	569.1	420,633	2,027.2	41,930	202.1
	Percent change		+2.0	+1.5	+2.1	+1.6	-5.6	-6.1	-0.3	-0.9	+4.0	+3.4	+0.9	+0.4	-2.4	-2.9	+1.5	+1.0	+4.3	+3.7
South3,5	2011	116,022,230	498,306	429.5	6,367	5.5	31,834	27.4	132,877	114.5	327,228	282.0	3,911,383	3,371.2	1,017,157	876.7	2,634,208	2,270.4	260,018	224.1
	2012	117,257,221	496,773	423.7	6,466	5.5	31,760	27.1	131,862	112.5	326,685	278.6	3,783,683	3,226.8	946,081	806.8	2,586,999	2,206.3	250,603	213.7
	Percent change		-0.3	-1.4	+1.6	+0.5	-0.2	-1.3	-0.8	-1.8	-0.2	-1.2	-3.3	-4.3	-7.0	-8.0	-1.8	-2.8	-3.6	-4.6
South Atlantic5	2011	60,545,194	259,180	428.1	3,297	5.4	14,619	24.1	74,188	122.5	167,076	276.0	1,999,058	3,301.8	507,261	837.8	1,358,090	2,243.1	133,707	220.8
	2012	61,188,567	254,911	416.6	3,293	5.4	14,634	23.9	71,446	116.8	165,538	270.5	1,924,730	3,145.6	470,185	768.4	1,327,951	2,170.3	126,594	206.9
	Percent change		-1.6	-2.7	-0.1	-1.2	+0.1	-0.9	-3.7	-4.7	-0.9	-2.0	-3.7	-4.7	-7.3	-8.3	-2.2	-3.2	-5.3	-6.3
East South Central3	2011	18,547,747	77,535	418.0	1,062	5.7	5,827	31.4	19,189	103.5	51,457	277.4	612,938	3,304.6	177,421	956.6	399,104	2,151.8	36,413	196.3
	2012	18,643,607	80,781	433.3	1,145	6.1	5,422	29.1	19,008	102.0	55,206	296.1	582,274	3,123.2	161,325	865.3	387,105	2,076.3	33,844	181.5
	Percent change		+4.2	+3.7	+7.8	+7.3	-7.0	-7.4	-0.9	-1.5	+7.3	+6.7	-5.0	-5.5	-9.1	-9.5	-3.0	-3.5	-7.1	-7.5
Percent change		-2.8	-3.0	-5.2	-5.4	-4.8	-5.0	-8.5	-8.7	+1.0	+0.7	-6.6	-6.8	-8.6	-8.8	-4.9	-5.2	-11.9	-12.2
West South Central	2011	36,929,289	161,591	437.6	2,008	5.4	11,388	30.8	39,500	107.0	108,695	294.3	1,299,387	3,518.6	332,475	900.3	877,014	2,374.8	89,898	243.4
	2012	37,425,047	161,081	430.4	2,028	5.4	11,704	31.3	41,408	110.6	105,941	283.1	1,276,679	3,411.3	314,571	840.5	871,943	2,329.8	90,165	240.9
	Percent change		-0.3	-1.6	+1.0	-0.3	+2.8	+1.4	+4.8	+3.4	-2.5	-3.8	-1.7	-3.0	-5.4	-6.6	-0.6	-1.9	+0.3	-1.0
West3	2011	72,822,851	275,598	378.4	3,070	4.2	20,423	28.0	81,706	112.2	170,399	234.0	2,062,891	2,832.8	465,834	639.7	1,355,164	1,860.9	241,893	332.2
	2012	73,579,431	284,370	386.5	3,121	4.2	20,271	27.5	85,490	116.2	175,488	238.5	2,170,446	2,949.8	488,065	663.3	1,415,674	1,924.0	266,707	362.5
	Percent change		+3.2	+2.1	+1.7	+0.6	-0.7	-1.8	+4.6	+3.6	+3.0	+1.9	+5.2	+4.1	+4.8	+3.7	+4.5	+3.4	+10.3	+9.1
Mountain3	2011	22,345,433	82,979	371.3	981	4.4	8,410	37.6	17,981	80.5	55,607	248.9	660,023	2,953.7	147,477	660.0	457,278	2,046.4	55,268	247.3
	2012	22,617,874	85,645	378.7	880	3.9	8,233	36.4	19,141	84.6	57,391	253.7	680,071	3,006.8	148,743	657.6	474,961	2,099.9	56,367	249.2
	Percent change		+3.2	+2.0	-10.3	-11.4	-2.1	-3.3	+6.5	+5.2	+3.2	+2.0	+3.0	+1.8	+0.9	-0.4	+3.9	+2.6	+2.0	+0.8
Pacific	2011	50,477,418	192,619	381.6	2,089	4.1	12,013	23.8	63,725	126.2	114,792	227.4	1,402,868	2,779.2	318,357	630.7	897,886	1,778.8	186,625	369.7
	2012	50,961,557	198,725	390.0	2,241	4.4	12,038	23.6	66,349	130.2	118,097	231.7	1,490,375	2,924.5	339,322	665.8	940,713	1,845.9	210,340	412.7
	Percent change		+3.2	+2.2	+7.3	+6.3	+0.2	-0.7	+4.1	+3.1	+2.9	+1.9	+6.2	+5.2	+6.6	+5.6	+4.8	+3.8	+12.7	+11.6

---

Simply showing a correlation between various potential causes or perceived deterrents and high crime rates should not be considered hard evidence of causation; however it does imply a potential connection of some sort; and it might indicate where to look for additional evidence or support other research that has been done using different methods. I discussed some of this in my last post about Politics, not technology, caused botched executions which indicates why it doesn't appear as if the death penalty has a deterrent effect. I also went into more details about how early abuse, including corporal punishment either in the home or school leads to escalating violence in Does child abuse and bullying lead to more violence? and Child abuse and bullying link in study long over due. This review hasn't been peer reviewed but all the sources for information have been shown so that they can be verified. Additional information that has been peer reviewed comes to similar results including extensive research either done or reviewed by Murray Straus who specializes in this subject.

It is unlikely that corporal punishment in schools is the sole cause of higher violence; however in many cases parents in states that support its use in schools might also be inclined to use it more often in the home. Otherwise there might be more opposition to it in the schools making it more likely that they would abandon it use. There might also be many examples where there are high rates of use of corporal punishment, even in states that abandon it in schools but it is probably more difficult to gather that information. So far Delaware is the only state to virtually ban its use in the home but this is very recent and it is to soon to determine the results. The actual law doesn't say it is banned but some of the media reports have said that and the law does allow for prosecution if corporal punishment leads to injury. Without further evidence from states that have banned corporal punishment in schools it could help to look at Sweden which banned corporal punishment in 1979. According to Sweden and United States Compared by Crime their rates of violent crime is much lower than the United States. When it comes to the murder rates even the least violent of the US states usually has more murders per 100,000 people than Sweden. There was one year in the past seventeen where one of the states murder rates was lower than the statistics cited in the comparison of the two countries.

While the US continues to keep a record percentage of the population in prison compared to the rest of the world Sweden is closing its prisons; it is almost certainly worth a much closer look to determine why and if part of it is their ban on corporal punishment or other social policies. According to most reports including Wikipedia's Human Poverty Index Sweden does a much better job reducing poverty, the best in Europe and far better than the US. However according to the Guardian Even in Sweden, the social security system is failing people although not nearly as bad as in the US. Our media rarely if ever spends much time comparing our system to others; which is highly unfortunate since if they did them much more people would recognize the problems with ours and possible solutions.

Between 1979 and 2000 there were and additional ten countries that completely banned corporal punishment and they all have lower murder rates than the USA, most of them are less than half. An additional twenty-three banned it since then and most of them also have lower murder rates; those that don't are mostly countries that have many other political problems, even worse than the USA.

According to a study done in 2002, "Correlation Between High Rates of Corporal Punishment in Public Schools and Social Pathologies," "Of the states with the ten highest murder rates in the United States, educators paddle children in eight of them; Of the states with the ten lowest murder rates in the nation, educators paddle children in one of them; Of the ten states with the highest percentage of the population in prison, educators paddle children in nine of them; and Of the ten states with the lowest percentage of the population in prison, educators do not paddle children in any of them.” Current crime statistics indicates that this correlation may have continued although it isn’t an exact correlation, presumably due to additional contributing factors, and four states have eliminated it since then.

The most recent year that I could find figures for both these specific categories was 2008 and I also found the murder rates in an organized fashion from 2012; these sources include List of U.S. states by incarceration rate and Murder Rates by State at DPIC. In 2008, of the states with the ten highest murder rates in the United States, educators paddle children in seven of them; Of the states with the ten lowest murder rates in the nation, educators paddle children in two of them; however one of those two is Wyoming which practically never uses corporal punishment; Of the ten states with the highest percentage of the population in prison, educators paddle children in all of them; and Of the ten states with the lowest percentage of the population in prison, educators do not paddle children in any of them. In 2012, of the states with the ten highest murder rates in the United States, educators paddle children in seven of them, one of the states without paddling, Delaware, only stopped using it in 2003; Of the states with the ten lowest murder rates in the nation, educators paddle children in one of them. This indicates a consistent correlation over an extended period of times for high murder and incarceration rates with states that use corporal punishment in schools.

Ohio banned corporal punishment in schools in 2009 and New Mexico banned it in 2011; however the rates used are from the year 2005-6. A significant amount of research indicates that corporal punishment almost certainly contributes to escalating amounts of bullying and additional violence. But this doesn’t necessarily mean that banning it will result in immediate reductions in violence.

Seven out of twenty one states with corporal punishment have above average poverty rates up to 20.1%; one has average, 16.6%; and thirteen have below average poverty rates, as low as 9.9% in Idaho, which uses it often and 10.6% in Wyoming which rarely if ever uses corporal punishment in schools and .

The percent changed from 2011 to 2012 states with corporal punishment are, in order of those from top of the list to those at the bottom, Tenn. +5.9, N M -2.4, SC -6.4, La. -10.4, Fla. -5.4, Ok +2.6, Ark. -2.7, Missouri +.8, Ala. +7.2, Arizona +3.5, Tx No change, Ga. +1.1, Ks. -.03, NC +2.1, Ind. +4.2, Colorado -1.8, Ohio -1.8, Miss. -3.0, Kentucky -7.1, Idaho +2.6, Wyoming -8.2.

Nine out of the nineteen states that continue to use corporal punishment had violent crime rates that went up; one had stable rates and eleven including the two that no longer use them all went down. Six of the nine that had rising violent crime rates are among the ten states that use corporal punishment the most often. Fourteen out of the twenty nine states that didn’t use corporal punishment prior to 2008 had rising violent crime rates. The rate of violent crime from 2011 to 2012 was virtually unchanged; the difference between those that used corporal punishment and those that didn’t percentage wise was negligible; however those that used it most often were more likely to increase than those that used it less often.

Corporal punishment was allowed, prior to 2008 in schools for 45% of the population; 48.5% of violent crimes were reported in these states during 2012. Based on the crimes that were reported 50.7% of murders, 49.8% or forcible rapes, 43% of robberies, 50.9% of aggravated assaults, 47.4% of property crimes, 56.2% of burglaries, 51.7% of larceny thefts, and 43.6% of motor vehicular thefts in states allowing corporal punishment in schools. The only two categories where the figures were below their representation of the population were robberies and motor vehicle theft.

Seven out of the ten states that used corporal punishment the most were in the top half of the population, implying that when it was used more often it correlated with higher crime rates than when it was used less often.

Recently an article was published about a Kansas lawmaker that wanted corporal punishment that leaves kids bruised, which shocked a lot of people; the bill didn't pass. What received much less attention is that some of the other states already allowed this and it continues, as allowed in Ingraham v. Wright, which injured the student so bad that physicians advised him to stay home for eleven days, based on the word of a teacher who said he didn't leave the stage fast enough. Many reports about Kansas imply that it is among the most extreme of the religious right; and in many ways they might be; but their policy of using corporal punishment is actually less radical than most of those that use it, to some degree. If you adjust the crime rates according to population it is actually in the lower half, since the top eighteen include some of the most populous, covering half the population. Wyoming, which actually uses it the least, if they use it at all of those that allow it, is the one with the lowest crime rates including the four that abolished it most recently.

There are of course other contributing factors that almost certainly lead to higher crime rates and one of them appears to be large cities. Only three of the ten states with the lowest violent crime rates had any cities with over 250,000 people and only one of the ten states with the highest rates of violent crime didn’t have any according to Wikipedia (Crime rate for cities above 250,000 population).

Five out of the ten states with the most violent crime had above average poverty rates; however when adjusted geographically it rises to eight out of ten. Only one out of the ten least violent states had above average poverty rates; when adjusted geographically it rises to two out of ten.

A close look at some of the inner cities that have the highest crime rates also have some of the lowest funds for their schools; yet those that argue against more funds for either schools or for social workers to educate low income parents about how child abuse and corporal punishment leads to escalating violence, also argue for much more spending on prisons security and police that almost certainly wouldn't be necisary if they funded prevention programs instead and they would almost certainly save much more in the long run, although in the short run they might wind up spending on both schools and prison.

Regrettably the best research on the causes of crime gets very little attention by the commercial media and it is rarely a leading factor when making many of the major decisions that could potentially reduce crime significantly more. There has been a significant amount of progress over the past few decades; and the commercial media hasn't always done such a bad job covering it but now the majority of the progress that is still going on is the result of grass roots efforts to educate the public and push for reform despite the lack of attention it receives from the politicians although occasionally when grass roots efforts succeed in convincing politicians to act credit is often given to politicians for implementing changes without much mentioning the grass roots efforts, like when Beau Biden, son of Joe Biden and Attorney General of Delaware, who was cited as the leading proponent of the law virtually banning corporal punishment.

The media coverage didn't put much if any emphasis on the grass roots efforts that encouraged Biden or any other politician that passes laws banning corporal punishment in schools when they cover it. Giving most of the credit to a politician seems to be standard operating procedure whenever grass roots efforts convince lawmakers to pass laws with popular support.