More democratic systems are better at stopping crime

Elections themselves are not a problem provided the preponderance of people are liberal. Compared to the anarchist position, provided the majority of people are liberal it is hard to argue that government by democracy is objectively bad. If most people are liberal then in a democracy liberal freedoms will be protected which is as much as anarchists can fairly request. On the other hand it is possible to make arguments in favour of a democratic government... with democracy we can see what people think without having to guess what a typical person will tolerate in a stateless society. Democracy has advantages because we know what is and is not legal whereas in an anarchist situation you are vulnerable to the whims of individuals who may have a very different interpretation of morality than yourself.

Elections are also a form of abstraction of what each voter considers to be acceptable. We can think of each vote cast in a general election to be similar to a vote cast by a jury member in a trial. We are giving the government permission to prosecute against certain activities (now defined as crimes) and not against others. This means that our view of what behaviours are tolerable in society is abstracted via the ballot box and we do not have such a great need to protect ourselves. It is the difference between dialogue and conflict. We can learn from each other what we consider criminal and what we consider a public right.

Assuming there is a government and it serves this anti-criminal role then when there is an election, the more choice that is available better enables the voters to protect themselves from crime. We can deduce that overall the people are anti-crime, as history has shown, so limiting the ability of voters to choose a true representative limits their ability to protect themselves from crime (in society). Voters rely on the government to protect them from crime but if there is less democracy the people are less well able to communicate to the government what they deem to be a crime, which is bad because this lets more crime happen. More democratic systems are worse for criminals because the people are better able to express their revulsion at crime if they have a broader choice of candidate.