6
Ten Economic Facts about Crime and Incarceration in the United States
The majority of criminal offenders are
younger than age thirty.
3.
Juveniles make up a significant portion of offenders each year.
More than one quarter (27 percent) of known offenders—defined
as individuals with at least one identifiable characteristic that were
involved in a crime incident, whether or not an arrest was made—
were individuals ages eleven to twenty, and an additional 34 percent
were ages twenty-one to thirty; all other individuals composed
fewer than 40 percent of offenders. As seen in figure 3, this trend
holds for all types of crimes. More specifically, 55 percent of
offenders committing crimes against persons (such as assault and
sex offenses) were ages eleven to thirty. For crimes against property
(such as larceny-theft and vandalism) and crimes against society
(including drug offenses and weapon law violations), 63 percent
and 66 percent of offenders, respectively, were individuals in the
eleven-to-thirty age group.
A stark difference in the number of offenders by gender is also
evident. Most crimes—whether against persons, property, or
society—are committed by men; of criminal offenders with
known gender, 72 percent are male. This trend for gender follows
for crimes against persons (73 percent), crimes against property
(70 percent), and crimes against society (77 percent) (DOJ 2012).
Combined, these facts indicate that most offenders in the United
States are young men.
Some social scientists explain this age profile of crime by appealing
to a biological perspective on criminal behavior, focusing on the
impaired decision-making capabilities of the adolescent brain in
particular. There are also numerous social theories that emphasize
youth susceptibility to societal pressures, namely their concern
with identity formation, peer reactions, and establishing their
independence (O’Donoghue and Rabin 2001).
Chapter 1: The Landscape of Crime in the United States
Sources: DOJ 2012; authors’ calculations.
Note: The FBI defines crimes against persons as crimes whose victims are always individuals. Crimes against property are those with the goal of obtaining
money, property, or some other benefit. Crimes against society are those that represent society’s prohibition against engaging in certain types of activity
(DOJ 2011). Offender data include characteristics of each offender involved in a crime incident whether or not an arrest was made; offenders with unknown
ages are excluded from the analysis. Additionally, incidents with unknown offenders—1,741,162 incidents in 2012—are excluded. For more details, see the
technical appendix.
FIGURE 3.
Number of Offenders in the United States, by Age and Offense Category, 2012
More than 60 percent of known criminal offenders are under the age of thirty, with individuals ages eleven to twenty constituting
roughly 27 percent of offenders, and individuals ages twenty-one to thirty making up an additional 34 percent.
Ages 10 and under
Ages 11–20
Ages 21–30
Ages 31–40
Ages 41–50
Ages 50 and over
Number of off
enders (in thousands)
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Crimes against persons
Crimes against society
Crimes against property
Total
The Hamilton Project • Brookings 7
Disadvantaged youths engage in riskier
criminal behavior.
4.
Youths from low-income families (those with incomes at or below
200 percent of the federal poverty level) are equally likely to commit
drug-related offenses than are their higher-income counterparts.
As seen in figure 4, low-income youths are just as likely to use
marijuana by age sixteen, and to use other drugs or sell drugs by age
eighteen. In contrast, low-income youths are more likely to engage in
violent and property crimes than are youths from middle- and high-
income families. In particular, low-income youths are significantly
more likely to attack someone or get into a fight, join a gang, or steal
something worth more than $50. In other words, youths from low-
income families are more likely to engage in crimes that involve or
affect other people than are youths from higher-income families.
A standard economics explanation for the socioeconomic profile
of property crime is that for poor youths the attractiveness of
alternatives to crime is low: if employment opportunities are
limited for teens living in poor neighborhoods, then property
crime becomes relatively more attractive. The heightened
likelihood of violent crime among poor youths raises the issue
of automatic behaviors—in other words, youths intuitively
responding to perceived threats—which has become the focus of
recent research in this field. However, the similar rates of drug
use across teens from different income groups is consistent with
a more general model of risky teenage activity associated with the
so-called impaired decision-making capabilities of the adolescent
brain.
Some intriguing recent academic work has proposed that adverse
youth outcomes are often the result of quick errors in judgment
and decision-making. In particular, hostile attribution bias—
hypervigilance to threat cues and the tendency to overattribute
malevolent intent to others—appears to be more common among
disadvantaged youths, partly because these youths grow up with
a heightened risk of having experienced abuse (Dodge, Bates, and
Pettit 1990; Heller et al. 2013). Some experts have consequently
begun promoting cognitive behavioral therapy for these youths
to help them recognize and rewire the automatic behaviors and
biased beliefs that often result in judgment and decision-making
errors. Promising results from several experiments in Chicago—
in particular, improved schooling outcomes and fewer arrests for
violent crimes—suggest that it is possible to change the outcomes
of disadvantaged youths simply by helping them recognize when
their automatic responses may trigger negative outcomes (Heller et
al. 2013).
Chapter 1: The Landscape of Crime in the United States
Source: Kent 2009.
Note: Original data are derived from the 1997 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Adolescent risk behaviors are measured up to age eighteen, except for
marijuana usage, which is measured up to age sixteen. Low-income families are those whose incomes are at or below 200 percent of the the federal poverty level
(FPL). Middle-income families have incomes between 201 and 400 percent of the FPL. High-income families have incomes at or above 401 percent of the FPL.
FIGURE 4.
Adolescent Risk Behaviors by Family Income Level
Although youths from low-income families are as likely to use or sell drugs as are their higher-income counterparts, the former are
significantly more likely to engage in criminal activities that target other people.
Per
cen
t of y
ouths
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Use marijuana
Use other
drugs
Sell drugs
Attack
someone/get
into a fight
Become a
member of
a gang
Steal something
worth more
than $50
Carry
a gun
Youths from low-income families
Youths from middle-income families
Youths from high-income families