Why, in recent years, has the subject of violence and insecurity taken such an important place in the public debate in Rennes?
At the national level, the theme became central in political discourse around 2002 (qualification of Jean-Marie Le Pen in the second round of the presidential election, Editor's note). Rennes was then preserved. This has come to a head in recent years. When I arrived in Rennes, in the 1980s, the phenomenon was very limited, particularly around rue de Saint-Malo, de Sainte-Anne. There were one or two murders a year. Since then, drug trafficking has expanded in certain neighborhoods, with shootings more regularly. Young people have imported the Marseille “model”. Switching to firearms is an effect of mimicry. However, if there has been an increase in acts of violence, this does not make Rennes a city like Chicago, as some members of the opposition suggest.
Do these kinds of comparisons increase feelings of insecurity?
It’s complicated to define precisely because it’s a feeling. The feeling is not the same thing as experiential insecurity. That is to say the experience of a reality close to home. Residents of neighborhoods where there are shootings are legitimately worried. They are afraid for themselves. They fear being caught by a stray bullet, that their children will be recruited by dealers or that they will become consumers. This is a real insecurity that certain populations experience in certain neighborhoods. And there is the feeling. We must clearly distinguish the two: the nebula of insecure discourse which targets everything and anything, and what people are really experiencing. In Rennes, the risk remains quite low for the majority of the population. People walk around with cell phones in hand. They're not afraid of having it ripped away.
Do you think there is confusion between the situation in priority neighborhoods and that in the center?
If you don't live in certain neighborhoods, you don't realize the violence in concrete terms, except when you read the newspaper. However, there are associations of ideas. For example, when unaccompanied minors sell drugs in République, it gives the feeling that neighborhood problems are being imported into the city center.
However, the city center concentrates the most incidents of delinquency and violence…
There is a decorrelation between delinquency as recorded by the police and insecurity. What happens in the city center gives rise to more complaints and police checks. In fact, there is more police presence than in the outlying neighborhoods. So statistically, there is a concentration of offenses in this urban space. In the neighborhoods, there is drug trafficking every day at all hours. Except that it's not always recorded by the police.
So the solution would be police – more law enforcement in public spaces, more video surveillance cameras or even arming the municipal police?
That's all those who carry themes of insecurity have to offer. Arming the municipal police is more symbolic for the police than for the population. The police think that with a weapon, they will be better protected. But this is a kind of deception because most of the offenders are not armed. We should rather have a debate with all the actors – national, municipal police, gendarmerie, private security, etc. – on organization and complementarity to gain efficiency. As for video surveillance, it secures certain public spaces such as the metro and stations. They have a deterrent role. But they require having an effective control post and a capacity for rapid intervention. However, this does not solve the underlying problems. People are rarely identifiable. And traffic moves out of camera range.
The city of Rennes was a pioneer in fining cannabis smokers in 2020. Is this repressive approach a solution to deal points and the acts of violence that result from them?
Almost half of delinquency incidents are linked to trafficking, mainly cannabis. One of the solutions, on the contrary, is to decriminalize cannabis. Verbalization gives the impression that politicians are taking action, but it does not solve the problem of consumption, particularly with the rise of technologies and devices like “Uber Shit”. On the contrary, the facts move into increasingly private spaces, less accessible to the police.
In terms of prevention, what are the levers to ensure that young people do not fall into drugs, trafficking and, ultimately, violence?
We need to raise awareness among young people at school, in MJCs. We need an approach in terms of public health, but also on violence and social networks. Young people are increasingly faced with the risk of harassment and aggression. Harassment on networks creates offensive violence among those who commit these acts. And it gives victims the impression that violence is a solution.
Related News :