Who commits crime?

Crime isn’t diffuse. It doesn’t come from “general population.”

It comes from a narrow slice — persistent offenders, repeat players, the “frequent flyers.”

Fifty percent or more of violent crime? Often traced back to 5 to 10 percent of offenders.

If you care about public safety, you ignore that small group — or treat them like a problem you can bail out of existence — and you’re kidding yourself.

What works isn’t moralizing about “root causes,” or hoping for universal redemption. What works is realistic: track the frequent offenders, monitor risk factors, pressure the system to keep eyes on those who’ve already demonstrated repeated criminal patterns.

At the same time — don’t treat them as throwaways. Many are repeat property or drug offenders with mental-health or substance problems — changeable conditions, if we treat them seriously.

The takeaway: if researchers and policymakers want impact, they need to put their findings where people outside the academic echo chamber will see them. Data on recidivism, chronic offenders, risk-factor analysis — that’s the stuff worth fighting for. Not just another “reform plan.”