Compare and contrast two statements.
Richard Murphy: “We can never solve all crime”
Richard Murphy: “Yes I am saying there isn’t an efficient level of crime”
If we can never solve all crime then there is a level of crime that it is efficient to have. Only if we can solve (or prevent, clean up, stop) all crime can it be efficient to do so.
If we cannot solve all crime then we have to make a decision about which bits we’re not going to solve: otherwise we will be devoting ever more resources to solving that last bit of crime even while we know that we cannot in fact reach the goal.
Thus there is an efficient level of crime to accept that we have.