At 01:15 PM 1/18/99 -0500, Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
>> In that mouse study, it seems plausible to
>> say that depravation of hunting was not a
>> causal factor in the observed increase in
>> aggression upon crowding, since noncrowded
>> mice in the laboratory were not (I assume)
>> hunting for food, but eating the very same
>> lab-rat chow that the crowded mice ate.
>I'm not denying that there is a density effect. However, US cities have
>population densities than many other cities, in both Japan, China, Germany,
>France, and England, yet have higher crime rates. If it were merely
>expect violent crime to be far higher in the denser cities. Granted we
>guns available (even though they are banned in the cities with the highest
>rates!), but the incidence of mental illness as well is not noticably
>denser cities, which has nothing to do with guns. I think that no human
>anywhere near the crowding levels necessary for the rat/mouse effect in
>to be as pronounced.
IAN: Good point, however, a possibility could be (just speculation backed with no known research) that our cities are more violence since they are not homogenous cultures, that is, the U.S. is a classic "melting pot," and urban communities in the U.S. are quite often divided by voluntary selection into ethnic areas. In areas with multiple cultures, or "gangs," we tend to see more aggression. Look at the problems in India between Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs, look at Yugoslavia, look at East L.A.'s gangs. But look a Japan, a monoculture with low crime.
"The more restrictions and prohibitions in the world, the poorer people get." Lao Tzu, "Tao Te Ching"