U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

1999 National

Report Series

Juvenile Justice Bulletin

Shay Bilchik, Administrator

FEBRUARY 2000

Challenging the Myths

As the

Nation

moves into

the 21st

century, the

reduction

of juvenile

crime, violence, and

victimization

constitutes one of

the most crucial challenges of the new millennium. To meet that

challenge, reliable information is essential. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National

Report offers a comprehensive

overview of these pervasive problems

and the response of the juvenile justice

system. The National Report brings

together statistics from a variety of sources

on a wide array of topics, presenting the

information in clear, nontechnical text

enhanced by more than 350 easy-to-read

tables, graphs, and maps.

This Bulletin series is designed to give readers

quick, focused access to some of the most critical

findings from the wealth of data in the National Report.

Each Bulletin in the series highlights selected themes

at the forefront of juvenile justice policymaking and

extracts relevant National Report sections (including

selected graphs and tables).

Administrator’s Message

Earlier this decade, certain researchers promoted

a theory of the emergence of a generation of young,

violent “superpredators” in the next century. Based

on demographic projections of a growing juvenile

population over the next 20 years and a sharp

increase in juvenile arrest rates for violent crimes

beginning in the mid-1980’s, the theory gained

plausibility from a series of highly publicized violent

youth crimes. With the mantle of scientific credibility

and extensive media coverage, these dire predictions

caught the attention of legislators and the public at

large and soon were accepted as conventional

wisdom.

Fortunately, however, these concerns have been

greatly alleviated as juvenile crime indicators have

persistently dropped over the past several years.

The FBI’s recently released 1998 crime statistics

showing a 1-year, 8-percent drop in juvenile violent

crime arrests offer further reassurance that the day

of the superpredator is not at hand.

This Bulletin, extracted from Juvenile Offenders and

Victims: 1999 National Report, takes a close look at the

juvenile crime numbers and demonstrates that the

predicted emergence of a new kind of violent youth is

not supported by the most recent data. Statistical

evidence presented in the Report indicates that

levels of predatory crimes such as rape, robbery,

and murder committed by juveniles have dropped

significantly over the past several years, with robbery

at its lowest level in a generation.

The decrease in juvenile crime will be fleeting,

however, if we fail to temper the good news with

caution. We need to continue focusing our efforts

on combating juvenile crime with programs that

have proven to be effective in reducing juvenile

delinquency and violence. We also need to be vigilant

in countering myths with facts and letting the most

up-to-date data guide policy. As Attorney General

Janet Reno has stated, this is the best way to ensure

that demographics do not become destiny.

Shay Bilchik

Administrator
2 1999 National Report Series

Can future juvenile crime trends be predicted?

well above that of past generations.

The NCVS data also show, however,

that by 1995, the rate had returned

to its traditional level. Rather than

providing evidence for development

of a juvenile superpredator, the

NCVS data indicate that, despite a

temporary increase, the rate of serious juvenile offending as of the mid1990’s was comparable to that of a

generation ago.

The large increase in juvenile violent crime arrest rates reported by

law enforcement agencies between

1988 and 1994 is the data most commonly cited as evidence for a new

breed of violent superpredator. The

increase in the juvenile violent

crime arrest rate was much greater

than the increase in serious juvenile

offending documented by the NCVS.

NCVS data indicate that serious

In the early 1990’s, there were

predictions of a coming wave

of “superpredators”

Juvenile violent crime trends of the

late 1980’s and the early 1990’s led

some to conclude that the nature of

juvenile violence had changed and

that a new breed of juveniles—the

superpredator—was now a threat

to U.S. society. These were juveniles

for whom violence was a way of

life—new delinquents unlike youth

of past generations. Many accepted

this concept. Nearly every State

changed its laws to make it easier

to handle more youth as adult criminals. The fear of a new breed of juvenile delinquent even led many to

wonder if the juvenile justice system

itself was obsolete. In the mid1990’s, this fear was heightened by

the realization that the juvenile

population would increase into the

next decade. More juveniles meant

more superpredators.

What evidence do crime

statistics offer for

superpredators?

The most common crimes juveniles

commit are property offenses. If

there were a change in the nature

of juvenile offending in the last decade, it should generate changes

in juvenile property crime arrests.

The juvenile arrest rate for Property Crime Index offenses, however,

changed little in the 1980’s and

1990’s.

There is evidence that juvenile violence did increase for a few years in

the early 1990’s. The National Crime

Victimization Survey (NCVS) found

that after years of stability the rate

of juvenile serious violence did increase in the early 1990’s—breaking

out of its historic range to a level

After years of relative stability, the juvenile violent crime arrest rate began to

increase in the late 1980’s; after 1994, however, the rate declined, and by 1997,

it had returned to a level near that of 1989

Source: Authors’ analysis of arrest data from unpublished FBI reports for 1980 through 1994 and the FBI’s Crime in the

United States reports for 1995, 1996, and 1997 and population data from the Bureau of the Census for 1980 through

1989 from Current Population Reports, P25–1095, and for 1990 through 1997 from Estimates of the population of States

by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1990–1997 [machine-readable data files].

1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17

Violent Crime Index

According to victims, the rate at which juveniles committed serious violent crimes

changed little between 1973 and 1989, peaked in 1993, then declined by 1997 to the

lowest level since 1986

Note: Serious violent crime includes incidents involving rape and other sexual assaults, robbery, and aggravated assault.

Data are collected through personal interviews with persons ages 12 and older; thus, murder is not included for obvious

reasons. Data collected prior to 1992 were adjusted to be consistent with newer data collection procedures.

Source: Authors’ analyses of the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ 1973–1997 National Crime Victimization Survey data [Web

site data files].
FEBRUARY 2000 3

juvenile offending returned to traditional levels by 1995, but the juvenile

violent crime arrest rate did not follow this pattern. Even after a large

decline that began in 1994, the juvenile violent crime arrest rate in 1997

was still far above levels of the early

and middle 1980’s.

Violent crime arrest rates

increased for all age groups

To understand disparities between

NCVS data and arrest data, it is necessary to analyze arrest rate trends

for all age groups, not just for juveniles. Age-based patterns for Violent

Crime Index arrest rates are similar

in 1980 and 1997. In both years, the

rates reach their peak in the late

teens and early twenties and decline

consistently and substantially

through the older age groups. For

all age groups, however, the 1997

rate is higher than the 1980 rate.

The data show that, in the 1990’s, the

Nation experienced an overall increase in violent crime arrest rates

among all age groups, not just juveniles. It is hard to use the superpredator argument to explain this

broad-based increase in violent

crime arrests. The age group with the

greatest increase in violent crime arrest rates is persons in their thirties

and forties. No one has argued that

there is a new breed of middle-aged

superpredator, but the data provide

more support for that conclusion

than for the concept of a juvenile

superpredator.

To explore further the disparities between NCVS data and arrest data, it is

necessary to analyze age-specific arrest rate trends for the individual offenses that comprise the Violent Crime

Index. Most arrests for violent crimes

are for robberies and aggravated assaults. The arrest rates for these two

offenses have different trends.

In contrast to robberies, aggravated

assault arrest rates increased substantially between 1980 and 1997 for

all age groups. Aggravated assault arrests clearly are the driving force

for the overall increase in violent

crime arrest rates.

The 1997 robbery arrest rates are

lower than the 1980 rates in nearly all

age groups. Therefore, robberies are

not responsible for the overall increase in violent crime arrest rates

during 1980–1997.

Some have speculated that the increase in aggravated assault rates was

due to law enforcement reclassification of simple assaults as aggravated

assaults. This does not appear to be

the case, because simple assault rates

also increased substantially during

1980–1997 for all age groups.

As with the increase in the overall

violent crime arrest rate, the increase for aggravated assault was

found in all age groups and was, in

fact, highest among persons in their

thirties and forties. Again, the juvenile superpredator theory is not the

most straightforward explanation for

the pattern of increase.

Note: The Violent Crime Index includes murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery,

and aggravated assault. Robbery and aggravated assault account for the majority of Violent Crime Index

arrests.

Source: Authors’ analysis of arrest data from an unpublished FBI report for 1980 and the FBI’s Crime in

the United States 1997 and population data from the Bureau of the Census for 1980 from Current Population Reports, P25–1095 and for 1997 from Estimates of the population of States by age, sex, race, and

Hispanic origin: 1997 [machine-readable data file].

The increase in violent crime arrests between 1980 and 1997 was common across all

age groups and linked to large increases in arrests for aggravated assaults

Simple assault

Violent Crime Index Aggravated assault

Robbery
4 1999 National Report Series

Arrest rate trends reflect

changes in public attitudes and

law enforcement policy

Any explanation of the changes in

violent crime arrests between 1980

and 1997 must accommodate certain

facts. It must explain why:

■ Juvenile violent crime arrest

rates were higher in 1997 than

in 1980 even though victims’

reports of juvenile violent crime

did not increase during this

period.

■ Aggravated and simple assault

arrest rates increased, but robbery arrest rates did not.

■ Assault arrest rates increased in

all age groups.

Other arrest data point to some possible explanations.

After years of consistency, juvenile

arrests for curfew law violations

doubled from 1993 to 1996. It is unlikely that more youth were violating curfew in 1996 than in 1993.

Some communities, however, decided that keeping youth off

the streets would reduce juvenile

violence. As a result, law enforcement began arresting more juveniles

for curfew violations. The increase

in juvenile arrests for curfew violations reflects a change in public attitude and a resulting law enforcement response, not a change in

juvenile behavior.

Another example of this process

can be found in arrests for drug law

violations. Juvenile drug abuse arrest rates nearly doubled between

1992 and 1996. Self-report studies

do not indicate a large change in

drug use among youth during this

period. Since most of the increase in

drug abuse arrests was attributable

to arrests for marijuana possession,

it seems clear that communities became more concerned about marijuana use among youth and that law

enforcement, responding to this concern, arrested more juveniles for this

offense.

There was a societal change during

this period that arguably could have

caused increases in assault arrest

rates (particularly for middle-aged

persons) without affecting robbery

arrest rates. During this period, legislative and policy changes required a

formal law enforcement response to

domestic violence incidents. This

change would have resulted in more

aggravated and simple assault arrests,

but no additional robbery arrests. It

would have had its greatest impact on

the arrests for middle-aged persons.

It also would have caused arrests to

increase without a change in victimreported crime levels.

Therefore, one could explain the increase in violent crime arrest rates

between 1980 and 1997 by an increase

in law enforcement response to the

crime of domestic violence. Society

has become more sensitive to problems caused by domestic violence

and has chosen to no longer ignore a

crime that has been a part of American culture for generations. Juveniles

are not immune to domestic violence

arrests. Family problems, even some

that in past years may have been classified as status offenses (e.g., incorrigibility), can now result in an assault

arrest. This logic also explains why

violent crime arrests over the past decade have increased proportionately

more for juvenile females than males.

In summary, arrest increases are

not always related to an increase

in crime. They can reflect positive

policy changes. Regardless, it is clear

that national crime and arrest statistics provide no evidence for a new

breed of juvenile superpredator.

Between 1987 and 1994, the female juvenile violent crime arrest rate more than

doubled, while the male rate increased by two-thirds

■ Even though the juvenile violent crime arrest rates declined from 1994 to 1997 for both genders, the

male rate in 1997 was still 24% above the 1987 rate and the female rate was 85% higher.

■ Even with the large increase in female rates, the 1997 Violent Crime Index arrest rate for juvenile

males was more than five times the female arrest rate.

Source: Authors’ analyses of arrest data from unpublished FBI reports for 1980 through 1994 and the

FBI’s Crime in the United States reports for 1995, 1996, and 1997 and population data from the Bureau

of the Census for 1980 through 1989 from Current Population Reports, P25–1095, and for 1990 through

1997 from Estimates of the population of States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1990–1997

[machine-readable data files].

Violent Crime Index

arrest rate

1981 1997

Male 567 671

Female 69 131
FEBRUARY 2000 5

Growth in murders by juveniles

is linked to weapon use

The large growth in juvenile arrests

for murder between 1987 and 1993

was not due to changes in police response. There was an actual increase in homicides by juveniles.

This increase, however, can be explained by factors other than the advent of juvenile superpredators.

Nearly all of the increase in the juvenile arrest rate for murder that occurred between 1987 and 1993 was

erased by 1997. In fact, the murder

rate in the U.S. in 1997 was lower

than it had been since the 1960’s.

This trend raises another question

about the superpredator theory. If

the increase in juvenile homicides

between 1987 and 1993 is explained

by the development of a new breed

of juvenile superpredator, then what

explains the substantial decline after 1994? Nothing in the superpredator notion would predict such a

decline.

Relevant to an understanding of juvenile murder arrest trends is the

link between murder rates and

weapon use. The relationship of the

murder age-arrest curves for 1980

and 1997 is very different from the

relationship for assaults and more

similar to that for weapons law violations. (See murder graph and

weapons graph.) For assaults, rates

were higher in 1997 than in 1980 for

all age groups. For murders, the

rates were lower in 1997 than in

1980 for all persons above age 25,

but there were substantial increases

in murder rates among juveniles and

young adults. The age-specific arrest rate trend profile for weapons

violations is comparable to that for

murder, showing large increases for

juveniles and young adults.

Further evidence concerning the

link between juvenile murder arrest

trends and weapons use can be

found in the FBI’s Supplementary

Homicide Report data, which show

that the overall trend in homicides

by juveniles—the increase from the

mid-1980’s through 1993 and the

subsequent decline through 1997—

is entirely attributable to homicides

committed with firearms. This finding also argues against the existence

of juvenile superpredators. Superpredators probably would not be selective about how they kill. They

would use any weapon available—

guns, knives, clubs, fists, motor vehicles, explosive devices. If superpredators were responsible for the

increase in juvenile murder arrests,

then there would be increases in

murders in all weapons categories.

But this is not the case: the increase

was firearm-related, as was the subsequent decline. Trends in juvenile

homicide arrests are linked to gun

use (as reflected in trends in

weapons-related arrests).

In summary, this analysis of juvenile

homicide arrests also leads to the

conclusion that juvenile superpredators are more myth than reality. In the early 1990’s this myth

caused a panic that changed the

juvenile justice system and its response to the Nation’s youth.

Weapons

Source: Authors’ analysis of arrest data from an unpublished FBI report for 1980 and from Crime in the

United States 1997 and population data from the Bureau of the Census for 1980 from Current Population

Reports, P25–1095 and for 1997 from Estimates of the population of States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1997 [machine-readable data file].

Murder
6 1999 National Report Series

Changes in juvenile violent crime

arrests are not closely tied to

changes in the juvenile population

History shows that it is a fool’s errand to

try to predict future crime trends. The

first edition of this publication series,

using 1992 data, speculated about future

juvenile violence. Assuming that the arrest rate would continue to grow as it had

in the previous 5 years or that the rate

would hold constant, increased juvenile

violence was anticipated. Some researchers even predicted a coming bloodbath.

Since these predictions, murders by juveniles have declined remarkably, and the

juvenile violent crime arrest rate in 1997

was at its lowest level in the 1990’s.

It would be simple to predict the future if

juvenile violent crime trends were primarily related to changes in the size of the

juvenile population. But as recent arrest

trends clearly show, the number of juvenile arrests for violent crimes is

unrelated to the size of the juvenile

population. From 1987 to 1994, while the

juvenile population grew slightly, juvenile

arrests for violent crime soared. Then, as

the juvenile population increased slightly

from 1994 through 1997, juvenile arrests

dropped precipitously. In fact, the magnitude of the decline in violent crime arrests in the 3-year period between 1994

and 1997 was greater than the projected

growth in the juvenile population over

the next 20 years.

No one has been able to predict juvenile

violence trends accurately. It is clear, however, that the Nation is not doomed to high

levels of juvenile violence simply because

the juvenile population will increase. As

Attorney General Janet Reno has often

said, demography is not destiny. Most of

the violent juvenile offenders in the year

2010 have not yet even entered grade

school. Current and future social and

policy changes will have more effect on

juvenile violent crime and arrest trends

than will population changes.

Source: Authors’ analysis of arrest data from unpublished FBI reports for 1980

through 1994 and the FBI’s Crime in the United States reports for 1995, 1996, and

1997; population data from the Bureau of the Census for 1980 through 1989 from

Current Population Reports, P25–1095, and for 1990 through 1997 from Estimates of

the population of States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1990–1997 [machinereadable data files].

Juvenile population

Murder arrests

Violent Crime Index arrests
FEBRUARY 2000 7

Sources

Information for this Bulletin was

taken/adapted from chapters 3 and

5 of Juvenile Offenders and Victims:

1999 National Report. For a full listing

of sources for these chapters, see

pages 84 and 140 of the National

Report.

Resources

Answers to frequently asked questions about juvenile justice statistics

as well as periodic updates of data

presented in Juvenile Offenders and

Victims: 1999 National Report are

available on the Internet in the

OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book, which

can be accessed through the OJJDP

home page at www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org

through the JJ Facts & Figures

prompt.

Also available from OJJDP is the

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999

National Report CD–ROM. With the 

CD–ROM, users can view the full

report in a portable document format

(PDF). The CD–ROM also provides

a comprehensive “educator’s kit”

that includes the following: statistical information from full-page,

presentation-ready graphs (also

available for display in Microsoft

Powerpoint); data for the graphs (also

available in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets); more than 40 source documents in PDF; and links to government

Web sites to obtain more information.

For information on OJJDP initiatives

related to the reduction of juvenile

crime, violence, and victimization,

contact the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse (JJC) at www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org

or call 800–638–8736.

How To Get Your

Free Copy

Juvenile Offenders and Victims:

1999 National Report is available

online from the OJJDP Web site

(www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org) under the

JJ Facts & Figures section and the

Publications section or can be ordered from OJJDP’s Juvenile Justice

Clearinghouse (hard copy NCJ

178257, CD–ROM NCJ 178991). Send

an e-mail to puborder@ncjrs.org; call

800–638–8736 (select option 2); or

write to the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse, P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD

20849–6000.

Points of view or opinions expressed in this

document are those of the authors and do not

necessarily represent the official position or

policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of

Justice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the

Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the

Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National

Institute of Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

Acknowledgments

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999

National Report, from which this

Bulletin is drawn, was prepared by

the National Center for Juvenile

Justice (NCJJ). The authors are

Howard N. Snyder and Melissa

Sickmund. The National Report

benefited from the assistance of

many individuals in addition

to the authors, including staff at

NCJJ, the Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention, and

the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse.
PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDP

PERMIT NO. G–91

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Bulletin NCJ 178993