http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/19/145012/084 There were <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011603624.html?hpid=topnews"> 1.2 million abortions</a> performed in US in 2005, latest year for which records have become available. That was fewer abortions than in any year since 1976. Number of US abortions dropped 9% between 2000 and 2005, and dropped <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/us/18brfs-DECLINEINNUM_BRF.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin">25%</a> since 1990. en-us Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:07:39 EST Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:13:08 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/19/145012/084#4 "Unwanted children" + government that lets poor people suffer in name of ideology (may well) = crime. Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:13:08 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/19/145012/084#3 My comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek.  But it does strike me that the birthrates of those below the poverty level would probably be a better proxy for predicting crime, if there is indeed such an effect. Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:34:40 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/19/145012/084#2 Not if "access to contraceptives" explains significant portion of drop, since "unwanted children" that article blames crime on would be prevented by contraceptives even more easily than by abortion. Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:23:40 EST http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2008/1/19/145012/084#1 So can we now expect a concomitant increase in crime rates?  <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/33569/entry/33571/">http://www.slate.com/id/33569/entry/33571/</a> Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:17:37 EST string http://www.treesandthings.com/search/