Legalizing Abortion Decreases the Crime Rate

I. Common Sense in Theory Okay your first sentence immediately contradicts one of your defences. People who are have substantially low income are very unlikely to be able afford an abortion; a cheaper abortion will cost 4% roughly what the 'single women' earn a year. So poor unwanted children will still most probably be born. Your second paragraph stereotypes and categorises a lot of people. It's understandable being in a poor background leads to a poor upbringing, but not every pauper is a thief. '50 percent more likely to live in poverty' so the other half is just as likely to be out of poverty, this covers no ground for your defence. The text you quote from seems very unreliable; it often says there is no complete accurate way of measuring this and that they are usually making assumptions. e.g. 'Testing that hypothesis is complicated by the fact that the age of criminals is not directly observable.' they then go on to say 'Thus, we can analyse whether arrests by cohort are a function of the abortion rate.' basically they don't have the data yet so they're making assumptions that correlate with their view. How does having any number of parents, or being sexually abused affect abortion? The environment that someone is brought up in is out of their control. Abortion stops them being born, determining what will happen in their upbringing impossible. Again it's making a blind assumption on somebody and their lifestyle. 'By logic, if you reduce the numbers of the highest risk to criminality groups, you are going to have reduced crime. And, most women who seek abortions are poor and in high risk groups'- that's a very corrupt view. By killing the off the problem the world will be a better place, when has that ever worked. Also to re-establish my point, abortions are expensive for those cannot afford them, a child may cost a lot in the long run, but an abortion each month for 18 years (I know unrealistic, but it's the point of funding I want to establish) would cost $136800 (without the increase penalty of having more than one abortion), the physical effort and planning required for an abortion and the fact that the background you keep referring to will never afford $157410 over 18 years, shows that they are 1.) Both of similar value financially 2.) Abortion is an immediate cost instead of a payment over time, financially keeping the child would be smarter. On the point of your sources, I found that you could actually raise a child for $130320 using one of the sources you provided for 18 years that's a big difference and is in fact cheaper than an abortion. Also shows a way of how you can pick and choose information to defend your argument. II. Statistics and Proof You should by now realise that my belief is that your statistics are unbelievable and corrupt. 'In fact, it is kind of hard to see how this theory can be disproven.'- it can't, but it cannot be proven either 'Low-Abortion States Actually INCREASE'- this goes against your argument, abortion may be low, but there's still abortion, so it isn't working you're selecting data that defends your argument instead of general data 'Low-Abortion States'- all of these fall under low income states, all but 1 of the bottom 5 for abortion rates fall in the lower band of income. 3 conclusions can be made from this 1.) Low income = cannot afford abortion 2.) Your studies have been conducted in more prosperous areas, places where crime rate will inevitably drop regardless of abortion 3.) Abortion in fact has no effect on crime rates as places where there is still abortion, crime rates are increasing. 'Our original data ended in 1997. If one updated the study, the results would be similar' - nope it wouldn't by any logical explanation crime rate would remain the same from that point. Concluding that crime rate would continue to decrease would lead too no crime, or better yet nobody being born. Also you never show ratios, statistically how many people are still being arrested to people who aren't. There were 15,284,300 reported arrests in 1997, and 266,490,000 people that's a ratio of 1 crime to 17 people 14,094,186 reported arrests in 2005, and 281,421,906 people that's a ratio of 1 crime to every 19 people So this could potentially be beneficial for you, however population increase (this means abortions are not happening as often) and the added crime drop (which abortion could not possibly take credit for) shows that even though abortion is still happening crime continues to drop, the overall affect it would have had on the crime drop would have stopped by this point. Not only, surely if by your reasoning if more people are being born there should still be more crimes, if less people are being born there should be less crimes the ratio should remain the same. ‘4.1 percent in low-abortion states. Panel data estimates confirm the strong negative relationship between lagged abortion and crime. ‘This again shows the flaws, one: poor states cannot afford abortion, two: Crime rates are still not decreasing in place where there is legal abortion. The first state to legalise abortion was New York, which is one of the higher class states. Abortion was introduced in 1970 http://www.disastercenter.com..., look at the table the information shows that there is a steady decrease continually before the effects of abortion could be presented. So any observation made over any period of time cannot be directly linked to abortion the gradient in better off states for crime always tend negatively. "...the cumulative decrease in crime between 1982–1997 for early-legalizing states compared with the rest of the nation is 16.2 percent greater for murder, 30.4 percent greater for violent crime, and 35.3 percent greater for property crime." – Again higher earning states always have lower crime rates, that's how the world works ‘II.iii. Real Evidence' just to quote the whole section really The fact that you say that this is real evidence as opposed to what was said earlier isn't makes no sense. III. Internationally ‘The evidence from Canada, Australia, and Romania also support the hypothesis that abortion reduces crime.' Again selected information, the UK introduced abortion in 1967 homicide rates continued increasing even after the ‘lagged' period of time. When stats work in your favour it is easy to use them, but when there is no evidence or evidence that combats or contradicts your statement re-think your position don't ignore the facts.