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 victim-reported 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.

1999 National Report Series, Juvenile Justice Bulletin: Juvenile Justice: A Century of Change	February 2000