Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

The Truth Behind Chicago's Violence

No, Chicago is not an exceptionally dangerous city.

The bloodletting in Chicago last weekend, with 74 people shot, 12 fatally, was enough to horrify even locals, who are relatively inured to chronic slaughter at the hands of gun-wielding felons. "Unbelievable," said state Rep. La Shawn Ford, a black Chicago Democrat who went so far as to call on President Donald Trump for help.

The shock was also evident beyond Chicago. Rudy Giuliani blamed Democrats in general and Mayor Rahm Emanuel in particular. The mayor's legacy, he tweeted, is "more murders in his city than ever before." Everywhere, there was agreement that the city's mayhem is out of control and in urgent need of measures to contain it.

But don't believe the hype. There are not, in fact, more murders in Chicago than ever before. The number of homicides peaked at 920 in 1991. The death toll last year was 674—and that was down 15 percent from 2016. This year, even with the latest frenzy of shootings, the number of homicides is 25 percent lower than it was at this point in 2017.

These are real signs of progress, however tardy and insufficient. If this year's trajectory holds, it would mean some 280 fewer people dying violently this year than just two years ago. Another year on this trend line would put the city about where it was in 2013—when the number of homicides hit the lowest level in 48 years.

Contrary to popular myth, cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics, Chicago is not an exceptionally dangerous city. In terms of violent crime, it is less afflicted than a number of large cities, including St. Louis, Baltimore, and New Orleans.

Republicans blame unbroken Democratic control of Chicago for its mayhem. But partisan coloration is an unreliable indicator of crime patterns. Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump. Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.

It's easy to blame the mayor for the persistent bloodshed—and former police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, who is running against Emanuel in the February election, does not pass up the opportunity. McCarthy headed the Chicago Police Department from 2011 to 2015, and he claims credit for the improvement that occurred in that period.

But he was also in charge of Chicago police when an officer shot and killed 17-year-old Laquan McDonald—a gross overreaction that police labored to cover up. The spike in murders began just after the release of dashcam video showing the victim walking away from police before being riddled with bullets. The revelation, which contradicted official accounts, sparked public outrage, particularly among African-Americans.

One problem in Chicago is the dismally low number of homicides that police are able to solve—about 1 in 6. But the department's poor reputation among many of the people most at risk discourages the sort of cooperation from citizens that cops need to catch the killers.

The city's record of failing to discipline officers who resort to unjustified lethal force is corrosive. Last year, WBEZ reported that since 2007, the city's Independent Police Review Authority had "investigated police shootings that have killed at least 130 people and injured 285 others"—and "found officers at fault in just two of those cases, both off-duty" incidents.

The Chicago Reporter provided additional evidence. "From 2012 to 2015, the city spent more than $263 million on settlements, judgments and outside legal counsel for police misconduct," it found. If police want more help from the communities they serve, this is not the way to get it.

Despite these failures, the decline in homicides suggests that the city and the department are doing something right. But what that might be is hard to determine with any confidence.

The fight against crime can't be restricted to more or better policing. Chicago's crime problem is concentrated in a small number of poor, blighted, mostly African-American neighborhoods. Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades.

The conditions that breed rampant crime in parts of Chicago came about not by accident but by policy. The recent attention shows that people here and elsewhere care about the violence. Do they care about fixing the causes?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Lefty cities tend to be shitholes of violence, corruption, and apologists in the media.

    Chicagoans are reaping what they sow. Give a city over to criminals and the criminals take your city over.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    As much as I don't like Steve Chapman, at least he provides some actual statistics which run counter to your reference-free rant:

    Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump. Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.

    Perhaps you would like to provide some actual statistics too.

  • wearingit||

    That would assume he/she as any. Using the terms "lefty, shitholes, and apologists" just sounds too much like someone who spouts off hot air and lives in their own reality.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    someone who spouts off hot air and lives in their own reality

    That describes LoveCons1789 no question.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    According to Jerry B.'s citation, ranked cities for homicide- violent crime rate per 1000- chance of being victim per year:

    4 Baltimore, MD (Mcculloh St / W Preston St) 91.03 1 in 11 (Democrat mayor)
    3 Chicago, IL (Altgeld Gardens) 99.02 1 in 10 (Democrat mayor)
    2 Kansas City, MO (Independence Ave / Prospect Ave) 104.81 1 in 10 (Democrat mayor)
    1 Memphis, TN (E Eh Crump Blvd / S 4th St) 106.27 1 in 9 (Democrat mayor)

  • Huh18?||

    Those are "neighborhoods" . Again, Like the article stated. The ENTIRE city of Chicago isn't even in the top 50 most violent. I am also guessing the people doing these shootings don't vote for either party.

  • 3rd Batt Ranger||

    A rather disingenuous argument. Chicago has a population of millions. The Southside does not. My small town of 60,000 had 4 murders last year, each in the same are of town and each perp'd by the same demographic. The post above comparing neighborhoods/communities is likely more reflective of rates of violence. How does the Southside of "Chicago" stack up compared to other cities? What is the rate of violence for black communities vs non black? Trotting out Chicago isn't even in the top 50 is an argument meant to deflect from the massive amounts of violence and is not comparable to a town of 10,000 that had 10 murders, all of which occurred in the same neighborhood with the same demographic.

  • Radioactive||

    along with some demographic indices?

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Instead of a rather dubious conflation of states with cities, let's break the violence all the way down to the neighborhood and racial demographic level. Or or we not allowed to talk about that here at this bastion of free speech because it's too politically incorrect?

  • Horny Lizard||

    Chapman did break it down to "a small number of poor, blighted, mostly AA neighborhoods."

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Perhaps they'll simmer down once they're off the booze.

  • Jerry B.||

    Here's a list of the top 25 most dangerous neighborhoods in the U.S.

    25 Most Dangerous

    They also have charts for most homicides by city, etc. linked on this page.

  • Juice||

    Delaware?

  • Earth Skeptic||

    So, busing?

  • mad_kalak||

    That's where I thought he was going, when I saw the title "The Truth behind Chicago's violence"...I was mildly shocked to see that this was on Reason not Radix. But then I read the actual article and was summarily dissapointed.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    "Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump."

    And where in those states was the violence taking place? In areas that voted for Trump, or for Hillary?

    "Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001."

    They've only had 17 years to run it into the ground. You'd be better off looking at cities where the Democrats have ruled unchallenged for 50 years, to see what comes of it.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    "Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades"

    And those decades were under what political administration? It does rather beg the question.

  • Jerryskids||

    Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump. Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.

    So Los Angeles is a state now? LA is a state, but LA stands for Louisiana, not Los Angeles. Chicago is not a state, Baltimore is not a state, New York City is not a state, Philadelphia is not a state. I've never once heard anybody ever say "Democrat-run states are shitholes of poverty and crime and violence", it's always *cities* they're referring to. So tell me, how many of those *cities* notorious for being shitholes voted for Trump?

  • FlameCCT||

    Chapman: "Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades. The conditions that breed rampant crime in parts of Chicago came about not by accident but by policy."

    Chicago has been run by Progressive Democrats for over 50 years, especially the city council which writes the laws as well as the State legislature. Progressive Democrats brought their sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence from their old Southern Plantations; turning gov't controlled areas and especially cities into new Progressive Plantations.

  • Rossami||

    Chapman would have been a lot more credible if he hadn't tried to hide a scope-change inside that statistic. Chicago is a city. It can not be fairly compared to states.

    This is especially true when the aggregate level of violence in a state is dominated by a few (or sometimes just one) large cities whose political tendencies may be the reverse of the state government's. The comparison to LA is apt - but that's the only valid datum Chapman offers - and a single data point is inadequate to call it "statistics".

  • Just Say'n||

    If it were white kids being shot up in Lincoln Park, Chapman would take a different perspective. As it is, it's black kids being shot in poor neighborhoods. So, he's fine with that.

  • Huh18?||

    Actually, I'm fine with that too. Those areas of the city do NOT want the police there and never want to help when crime does happen.

  • Fats of Fury||

    Chapman is conflating apple cities with orange states.

    One thing that I can't find is the actual number of shootings compared to homicides. Medical care may be saving a lot more victims these days compared to the 90s. Shootings may be way up compared to deaths.

    heyjackass.com keeps a running total of shootings in Chicago. So far a little over half the year in,
    Shot & Killed: 305
    Shot & Wounded: 1585
    Total Shot: 1890
    Total Homicides: 360

    Treatment estimates for the wounded is $101,278,200. about $55000 each. Coroner cost $800 each.

  • JFree||

    Medical care may be saving a lot more victims these days compared to the 90s. Shootings may be way up compared to deaths.

    That's a very good drill-down. But it doesn't matter re Chicago - because its an average 20-30 minute ambulance drive from the South Side to the nearest trauma centers that can deal with gunshot wounds. Along with a longer time for ambulances to get to the scene there too. And that has been the case since 1988 when UChicago shut its trauma center.
    So - if you're shot as a bystander on the South Side, you're far more likely to die before you get to medical care.

    Reality is - the homicide rate went down in Chicago because gang bosses were locked up for longer. Which hurt gangs that were more hierarchical then. They are going back up because the gangs fractured into more disorganized independent sub-gangs - and social media is now providing them with an alternative way of taunting, celebritizing, and organizing retaliations. And gangs are, by far, the main cause of all urban homicides - and have been for decades.

  • Huh18?||

    Yep. If you stay out of those areas, your fine. If not, your rolling the dice with your life. It's really not that hard to figure out.

  • Azathoth!!||


    As much as I don't like Steve Chapman, at least he provides some actual statistics which run counter to your reference-free rant:


    Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump. Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.


    Perhaps you would like to provide some actual statistics too.

    Actually, he doesn't. He simply states this, without source or cite. Likewise, you, like he, casually replace 'city' with 'state' and expect no one to notice.

    But most of the "10 states with the highest rates of violence" have those high rates because they include some famously shitty blue cities. New Orleans, Detroit, St Louis and one could infer that the reason the states that house these hellholes went for Trump is because the people are just hoping for someone who might finally DO something.

  • Social Justice is neither||

    Congratulations for being as dumb as Chapman. He uses state voting as a counterpoint to stated city level violence statistics in order to confuse the issue (or it's just him and fellow travelers). Now look at who is in charge of the cities listed and get back to us.

  • ravenshrike||

    The fact that you think statehood is a granular enough metric by which to judge shows you know jack and shit violence statistics.

  • JesseAz||

    Why did you jump to a statistic using States as the metric instead of cities.... hmmmm...

  • tommhan||

    BS spin, the cities are Democrat that are violent. GEEZE!!!!

  • bobby b||

    It's a bit misleading to cite to a state's votes in a federal election in this situation. More important would be the actual violent city's votes for local and state offices. I think you'll find that high crime rates are generally confined to the cities within those states.

    Plus, the overall crime rate in Los Angeles is 13% higher than the national average. ( https://www.areavibes.com/los+angeles-ca/crime/ )

  • mswen||

    Haven't you seen those memes about how Democratic cities are dens of crime? That's all the reference I need.

  • edictzero||

    The top 10 cities with the highest crime rates all have Democrat mayors. Just Google the list and check the parties of the mayors. Kansas City is on the list for example and while it straddles 2 red states it has a Democrat mayor

  • David Nolan||

    We're all seeing ... now ... why TODAY'S Republicans are such failures.

    Remember Jack Kemp and what it once was, when libertarian Republicans were dominant.

    What America can be. If we choose to.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano conflates Democrat-run urban shitholes with Republicans.

  • Flinch||

    Yes and no. I like Chicago, except when paying for parking downtown. If you want pure midwestern 4th of July fare, they've got that. If you want to rage in a crack zone, they've got that too. Seems to me much of their problems weren't self selected but federal in origin. The hangover of gangster politics would not have arrived but for prohibition. And, the people double dipping the welfare system taking the train back and forth from there and points in Wisconsin wouldn't be causing static but for LBJ's system for pickpocket politics putting alot of americans on what I call the New Virtual Plantation [but that's a different topic]. Speaking of prohibition... could the rise in heroin use be connected to the smugglers that had to shift to different products as state after state rejects marijuana prohibition? Product does not matter for some... just margins per cubic inch. Nixon [being the godfather of the war on drugs] did something dumb: increase the number of smugglers operating in the US who have developed "business relations" with local police and politicians in the course of their survival.

  • Huh18?||

    Except, as the article stated, the facts don't support your idiotic statement. Try reading AND comprehension.

  • Huh18?||

    That was for LovCon

  • David Nolan||

    Thanks for clarifying, Huh18?. These are the days to see what the core of Trump's base is.
    For those who missed it at Charlottesville.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    Impressive being first, LC1789, what with Trump's cock in your mouth at all times.
    How do you type?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Probably the same way you do with your dad's cock in your ass.

  • Conchfritters||

    I've been to Chicago many times and have never felt unsafe. Of course I don't hang out where the people are ritually slaughtering each other, but even towards the end of the Cabrini Green era there were high end sushi bars a block away, and the "bad" places were really one block here and one block there, not the entire city. But it appears the BGDs and the other gangs in the city follow the police code and don't allow anyone to snitch, so good luck in solving any murders.

  • DiegoF||

    My understanding is that that pattern is more typical of Chicago's North Side, which is more like the Bronx and Manhattan in its relatively compact demographic regions; whereas the enormous sprawling South Side is more like Queens (in fact much more like Queens than Queens). The late Cabrini Green was highly unique among the city's characteristic mammoth Le Corbusier style megaprojects (NYC, e.g, the only remaining major city yet to make any move to phase out the concentrated midcentury high-rise public housing model, always had it at a much smaller, more scattered scale) in that it was deliberately constructed in the middle of what was even then an upscale neighborhood.

  • wreckinball||

    Cabrini Green is gone. Has been for a long time. And guess what happened when you removed those residents. Crime went down. Go figure?

  • Huh18?||

    That's actually part of the problem. The gangs that had been geographically separated are now living close to each other. It's still a good thing tearing down those shooting galleries over all.

  • Pebar||

    There's been a nationwide decrease in crime since the 90s, Chicago is not special. Just because other cities are worse does not mean their high crime is a myth.

  • David Nolan||

    You missed his point. Or did you ignore it?

  • Some Engineer||

    I think his point is that just because Chicago has declining homicide rates does not in a vacuum make their issues into non-issues.
    It would be fair to compare Chicago's drop in homicides with the drops across the nation and in other dense urban settings.

  • David Nolan||

    I think his point is that just because Chicago has declining homicide rates does not in a vacuum make their issues into non-issues.

    Correct, and a lie about what Chapman said. A blatant lie.

    Contrary to popular myth, cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics, Chicago is not an exceptionally dangerous city. In terms of violent crime, it is less afflicted than a number of large cities, including St. Louis, Baltimore, and New Orleans.

    He also called out Giuliani's psycho lie.

    Saying Chicago is not the worst for violent crime is hardly the same as saying their crime is a myth,

    These are real signs of progress, however tardy and insufficient.

    That means too little and too late.

    And Chapman gives many other examples, with tribal Republicans responding exactly as he said, this showing his larger point,

    He also balanced the blame between low-income black neighborhoods and lack of discipline on police shootings. The bastard.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano and his pathetic deflection.

  • David Nolan||

    Exact quote = Deflection!

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano thinks Democrat-run urban shitholes are just peachy.

  • tommhan||

    No he didn't. The crime rate may be lower but we still believe it is ridiculously high. Democrat cities are just too damn violent.

  • David Nolan||

    Chicago and Detroit get the hysterics because the racists. Cleveland, where I'm from, had the same rap for decades. Then they get it backwards. The Dems dominate because the Reps have always been poor with minorities, even before Trump empowered full racism.

  • Nardz||

    You know, David, you probably wouldn't look quite as stupid if you just didn't post.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Thanks to progress generated by America's liberal-libertarian alliance, racists no longer wish to be known as bigots, at least not publicly. Instead, they bristle when others direct attention to old-timey intolerance.

    Carry on, clingers.

  • Radioactive||

    panties really tight for this early in the week! doesn't give you much wiggle room to get to full blown hysteria by Friday.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Mary Stack already posting under multiple user names on the same thread, to make up for a slow weekend I guess!

  • David Nolan||

    In the entire world, there is only one person who's libertarian, and she posts under multiple user names to defend libertarian values. On a libertarian website.

    And Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim from Kenya. There were over 3 million illegal Presidential votes in 2016. Hundreds of Muslims openly cheered the 9/11 attacks. Trump will pay off the entire federal debt in eight years (2025). North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat.. Donald Trump Jr did not confess to conspiring with Russia in Trump Tower.. And Melania's parents did not get citizenship via the totally corrupt "chain migration." Full stop,

  • rferris||

    It is good that you share your view of reality with us.
    You can not differentiate from probably true, possibly true, probably not true and absurdly not true.
    By lumping all these dissimilar together you have shown us how clueless and indoctrinated you are. Parroting others talking points is all you seem to do.

  • David Nolan||

    I'm indoctrinated on myself?
    You missed obvious sarcasm?

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    And they vote.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano employs two sockpuppets in this thread.

  • JSinAZ||

    Tight panties means the handful of bugs in there will head right up that ass.

  • Radioactive||

    nah, he'd still look just as stupid...

  • David Nolan||

    Chicago and Detroit get the hysterics because the racists. Cleveland, where I'm from, had the same rap for decades. Then they get it backwards. The Dems dominate because the Reps have always been poor with minorities, even before Trump empowered full racism.

  • ace_m82||

    Back to that old shtick, Hihn?

    Let's check out my "History of the dumbest things Hihn has said" Word doc...

    Yep, here it is:

    www.reason.com/blog/2017/01/31.....nt_6728797

    Says precisely the same thing using 2 different handles. Begins with a quote of mine "If the child is a living human".

    www.reason.com/blog/2017/02/26.....nt_6778904

    Hihn uses another handle, gets caught by 3 different people, and continues to deny it.

    The question you've got to ask is, does he know that he's not David Nolan?

  • David Nolan||

    The question you've got to ask is, does he know that he's not David Nolan?"He" keeps saying he's not.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    His links don't show anything close to what he claims.
    Some in this commentariat can be downright scary.

  • ace_m82||

    Ah, so you're just admitting you're Hihn now? Then why not just post under your own name?

  • John Galt is back||

    Wyatt says

    Some in this commentariat can be downright scary.

    Followed by immediate proof!

    Ah, so you're just admitting you're Hihn now?

    Also delusional.

  • ace_m82||

    Thanks for replying using a new (old) handle to prove my point, Hihn.

    After all, my links show you responded as David Nolan, John Galt Jr, and John Galt II.

    "As a dog returns to his vomit, so [Hihn] repeats his folly."

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano pulls out his third sockpuppet.

    Don't make me put another tumor in your skull, Hihnsano.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "But he was also in charge of Chicago police when an officer shot and killed 17-year-old Laquan McDonald—a gross overreaction that police labored to cover up. The spike in murders began just after the release of dashcam video showing the victim walking away from police before being riddled with bullets."

    Why would police misconduct have anything to do with a general increase of people murdering other people who weren't cops?

  • This Machine Chips Fascists||

    Maybe, like the cops in Baltimore, they are in a passive-aggressive funk and can't bring themselves to get out of their cars for anything more dangerous than more coffee and pastries.

  • FlameCCT||

    You mean like Baltimore; where the Progressive Dems pushed the cops to clean up minority areas then blamed them for disparate impact because the majority of arrests were of minorities from those areas?

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Flame those torches ....

  • DiegoF||

    I thought about that a bit myself. Surely Chapman did not mean that Chicagoans are so feral that they begin jumping about hysterically in their cages and tearing each other to bits when they are stressed by mistreatment from their cruel keepers. My best guess is that he meant something like perhaps an acute general worsening of attitudes toward the relationship on the part of both cops and civilians--like maybe the cops took an (even more) "hands-off" attitude toward their job with a sense of both fear and "fuck 'em"; and/or the civilian world descended into the lawlessness of an atmosphere of (even more) reduced trust in the authorities. But he may also have worked out nothing specifically in his mind, perhaps nothing at any rate he'd be confident venturing on paper.

  • David Nolan||

    He said what he meant, which destroys your narrative. It's not the other shootings, it's the consequences from distrust of the police. Here it is again.

    One problem in Chicago is the dismally low number of homicides that police are able to solve—about 1 in 6. But the department's poor reputation among many of the people most at risk discourages the sort of cooperation from citizens that cops need to catch the killers

    Facts are so very inconvenient.

  • DiegoF||

    What fucking "narrative" do I have? When did I narrate anything? I wasn't even aware I had a particular opinion on this piece.

  • David Nolan||

    I wasn't even aware I had a particular opinion on this piece.

    Riiiiight

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano lying like a rug again.

  • DiegoF||

    Oh is Mr. Nolan a sock? I did not know that.

  • David Nolan||

    Can you dispute my FACTS?

  • Azathoth!!||

    Michael, you never have facts, you're just dementedly pounding the keyboard your carers let you play with.

  • DiegoF||

    I have no desire to--even if I knew what FACTS of yours you are referring to (in my subthread you just blockquoted Chapman citing some fact you imagined was "inconvenient" to a "narrative" you imagined I have some attachment to). I am not your adversary. I have expressed no particular opinion on this piece and do not hold any. I don't know how I can be clearer on this.

  • DiegoF||

    Please inform me as to what agenda I indeed do have, since you are so sure I have such a strong one; I am honestly unaware of any opinion on the piece I do have but maybe I have an unconscious one that is revealing itself. Otherwise I concede to your superior intellect and bow out gracefully. You have bested me in this battle of wits, sir; it is as little a shame to me as it is an accomplishment to you.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    I'm relatively new here. Is it common for a bigot to deny his own words in plain sight?
    And have an entire klavern rush to defend him or her?
    See what Trump has empowered, (shudder for America)

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano manically employs his sockpuppets in a sad attempt to prove he's not a hicklib.

  • JFree||

    Most homicides in Chicago are gang-related. When the cops send messages that they are not going to respond to crimes anymore - and when the neighbors think its too dangerous to talk to trigger-happy cops; that's exactly the time for gangs to settle scores.

    Combine that with a fracturing of gangs (when gang bosses are imprisoned) into more 'independent' groups - and social media which now makes it easier for those gangs to trade insults, identify targets, and gain celebrity 'clout'. Interesting story about the dynamics of these gangs

    And since there isn't a trauma center hospital on the South Side, the ambulance to hospital takes well over 20 minutes so bystanders who get hit seriously are much more likely to die en route.

  • JFree||

    IMO - the only real solution in a lot of these areas where gangs are the driving forces of most problems in a neighborhood, is to undermine the NEED for that sort of protection/expression thru a gang.

    The usual cop/pol solution - go after already formed gangs after they cross some threshhold (making too much money selling drugs, too much violence, etc) that voters don't like - is guaranteed to fail. It's playing whack-a-mole. Those kids need:

    a)some opportunity to become a normal part of a normal economy (street corner dealing and gangsta rapping ain't it)

    b)some way of productively channeling excess teenage testosterone - like restoring a militia. Course to white voters that'll go over as well as the Black Panthers.

    c)long-term, restore some proxy of 'family' in the community - so younger kids see something beyond being a gangsta or a bitch/ho when they hit puberty.

  • Radioactive||

    the only "real" solution is to wall off the "bad" areas, get all the civilians out, and leave large quantities of guns & ammo in convenient locations and let Darwin wreak his revenge...oh yeah and no services of any sort

  • Nuwanda||

    Yeah, and then the president's plane will crash into one of those areas and Snake Plissken will have to go in.

  • mtrueman||

    Didn't work in Syria.

  • Echospinner||

    "Most homicides in Chicago are gang-related."

    Yup. And there is the blowback as you pointed out when the gangs are broken up. The gangs at least in the past had some control. The cops never did.

    When I lived there on the north side it was the Popes. The area around Devon Ave. has an orthodox Jewish population. There have been issues for decades.

    Last I heard about it from family there. The city organized foot patrols. So on Shabbat when the Jewish population are out walking and had been harassed there are police walking with them. They are very well appreciated and never need to think about what is for lunch.

    Police there need that kind of community involvement. They need to know what is happening on the street.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump. Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.

    More wingnut myth unskewed.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    I skewered lc1776 for his hypocrisy of not quoting any statistics. You and Chapman are just as bad, using cherry-picked statistics.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I cited stats.

    Top 4 worst violent crime cities are run by Democrats (Lefties).

    You could not skewer a kabob.

  • I can't even||

    Some of us can tell the difference between a city and a state.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Wingnut myth claims federal welfare programs are causing gang violence but removing fathers from their roles. But then when it becomes convenient wingnuts blame Democratic mayors.

    Wingnut myth is so confusing until you realize conservatives lie about everything.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Plugged butt myth isn't limited to a few misleading and cherry picked statistics, it extends to everything it says.

  • Horny Lizard||

    Fuck man these rightwinger blame expanding Medicare for opioid addiction. The stupid never ends.

  • Horny Lizard||

    *Medicaid

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    When the GOP came up with Medicare Welfare Part D for prescription drugs in 2003 I doubt it extended to Medicaid as well.

    But give them time. TRUMP DONT LIKE DRUG PRICES!

  • David Nolan||

    Part D was a massive scandal by Republicans. They needed Democrat votes and got snookered again, It was "paid for" by looting the income tax for deficit, not the Trust Fund. Nearly half of Medicare (45%) may be paid by income taxes, nit the Trust Fund, whih is over 3X the cost of Medicare Prescriptions.

    Medicare subsidies now take over 20% of the entire personal income tax, over $300 billion -- which alone is greater than the entire Trust Fund (290B), which would have been bankrupt many years ago,

    So a Republican President insulated and protected a "liberal" Trust Fund. The Republican Welfare State!

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Medicare was passed in 1965 by LBJ. Cute trick of conflating all of Medicare with part D though. That's the typical lie that you and the plug engage in.

  • David Nolan||

    BJ. Cute trick of conflating all of Medicare with part D though. That's the typical lie that you and the plug engage in.

    HUH? You cannot believe Republicans fucked up so badly? The law permits 45% of ALL Medicare to be subsidized by income taxes. When Medicare was passed is irrelevant. When was Plan D passed, and how was it paid for?

    Finally, Medicare has a source of funding that Social Security doesn't: the general fund of the U.S. federal budget. In 2014, fully 41% of Medicare's money needs came from general tax revenue, making it the most important source of funding on which retirees and other Medicare participants rely.

    Medicare Triustees The Trustees are issuing a determination of projected excess general revenue Medicare funding in this report because the difference between Medicare's total outlays and its dedicated financing sources6 is projected to exceed 45 percent of outlays within 7 years.

    Do you believe Pl;an D is 45% of Medicare

  • David Nolan||

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Oh, and the trust fund is only for part A hospitlizations, dumbass. Part B has been drawing from the general fund since the day the law went into effect.

  • David Nolan||

    Oh, and the trust fund is only for part A hospitalizations,

    Totally irrelevant as proven by The Medicare Trustees above.

    Part B has been drawing from the general fund since the day the law went into effect.

    Irrelevant for the same reason. Plus the vast majority comes from premiums.

    The Part B premium for 2018 is $134.00,

    Same Trustees link , page 8

    dumbass.
  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    So aside from the fact that opioid addiction IS worse in the states who expanded Medicaid via Barry are, your point is...?

  • David Nolan||

    Source?

  • Brett Bellmore||

    "Contrary to popular myth, cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics, Chicago is not an exceptionally dangerous city. In terms of violent crime, it is less afflicted than a number of large cities, including St. Louis, Baltimore, and New Orleans."

    Ok, this is particularly stupid. Chicago IS exceptionally dangerous in terms of violent crime, even if there are somewhat more dangerous cities. Chicago looks like a war zone compared to almost everywhere in the country except a few urban centers.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    The thing is, most of Chicago really DOESN'T look like a war zone. It's only one particular neighborhood that's a war zone. Of course, we're not allowed to talk about what distinguishes that neighborhood from all the others.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    "Chicago's crime problem is concentrated in a small number of poor, blighted, mostly African-American neighborhoods. Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades."

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    The second sentence of course is provable bullshit.

    We know it's bullshit because the explosion in violence didn't start until the late '60s and early '70s; it barely existed earlier when the discrimination and poverty was even worse.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    So you agree with my statement above?

    Wingnut myth claims federal welfare programs are causing gang violence by removing fathers from their roles.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Was there more racism and racial discrimination in the 1970s or the 1940s?

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Weigel's Cock Ring|8.13.18 @ 8:53AM|#
    The second sentence of course is provable bullshit.

    Which you of course fail to do.Will you be proving it any time soon?

  • JFree||

    We know it's bullshit because the explosion in violence didn't start until the late '60s and early '70s; it barely existed earlier when the discrimination and poverty was even worse.

    MLK was exactly right. Northern whites were perfectly OK with civil rights protests when they were directed against inbred southern racists and de jure Jim Crow elsewhere. They had less-than-zero interest in hearing about block-busting, school segregation, union blacklisting, bank/FHA redlining, GI Bill exclusions, and all the other de facto and de jure Jim Crow in the north.

    You obviously STILL don't want to hear about that since you are dating this to the mid/late 60's - which is merely when MLK began to lose influence to northern blacks like Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael, Huey Newton. So you can ignored the slew of other voices of peaceful protest dating back to the early parts of the 1st Great Migration from the south to the north.

  • Jerryskids||

    Actually, we do talk about what distinguishes that neighborhood from all the others. It's where the primary source of industry and jobs involve illegal trade, which means there's no access to courts and police for uniform contract enforcement and the locals develop their own procedures for dealing with fraud, restraint of trade and labor law issues.

  • Jerryskids||

    Extend "my body, my choice" to drugs and prostitution and most of that problem goes away. Unfortunately, the Republicans who run Chicago aren't pro-choice.

  • Some Engineer||

    Republicans?

  • Drake||

    I think he meant to say Democrats, and that they aren't "pro-choice" with regards to drugs and prostitution like they are on abortion rights, and is suggesting that they should consider broadening their horizons. Right, Jerry? Then the sentence makes sense, haha.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    So, if only Whole Foods and Tesla opened major retail centers there and hired locals?

  • JFree||

    All that's really needed is a land tax - rather than a property tax.

    Much of the 'property' in those areas has NEGATIVE value. It's a blight. But with a property tax system, a slumlording business model can work very well and is very profitable.

    The raw land in Chicago is worth roughly $860 billion. That is way more than enough to fund the city's budgeted spending (roughly $10 billion - with federal grants) - while pretty much eliminating all taxes on capital/property, income, sales, those federal grants, and many of the micro-management types of taxes. Even in modern Chicago, the old pre-mortgagedebt Henry George system can work to a major degree.

    There are obviously some differences in the value of land within Chicago. But far less than the other differences (capital, income, etc). Which would mean it would be far easier for spread-out infrastructure to be funded by spread-out taxbase - without the politics/corruption/cronyism/rentseeking of the current system.

    Course it would break the slumlording/speculation business model. So it won't likely happen.

  • MWG||

    "Of course, we're not allowed to talk about what distinguishes that neighborhood from all the others."

    We aren't? You and a couple others have already made multiple comments about it on this thread alone.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    It's about all he talks about.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Of course, we're not allowed to talk about what distinguishes that neighborhood from all the others.

    How many times can you repeat that lie on this page> Chapman said it like this

    Chicago's crime problem is concentrated in a small number of poor, blighted, mostly African-American neighborhoods

    But the wingnuts are going hysteria on this entire story. .

  • tommhan||

    So what the hell does that have to do with this? They have a violent city, period.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Chicago has almost single-handedly raising US violent crime stats for the past few years.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Shameful lie.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Oh its shameful alright. Shameful that Chicago is a violent Democrat shithole.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Oh its shameful alright.

    It's your bullshit that is shameful. Now you're totally shameless. Since you insist, you are TOTALLY full of shit that "Chicago has almost single-handedly raising US violent crime stats for the past few years." Chicago ranks #25.

    Typical Trumpster.

  • ravenshrike||

    True, they had an assist from Baltimore and Detroit.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    True

    Bullshit.

    they had an assist from Baltimore and Detroit.

    They rank 2nd and 3rd behind St Louis. Chicago ranks 25th

    Chapman nailed it.

    Contrary to popular myth, cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics,
  • ravenshrike||

    Wunderbar. Now if we were talking about something besides the national delta in homicide rates that occured starting in 2014/15 you might have some sort of point.

  • David Nolan||

    We can all see where your point is.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Atop his head?
    Yeah, I can see that.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano displays his dissociative personality disorder.

  • Shirley Knott||

    The conditions that breed rampant crime in parts of Chicago came about not by accident but by policy.


    It is sad that we've degenerated to focusing on team rather than policies.
    It barely matters which team put what policies in place. Neither team has a lock on bad ideas.

    So how about some analysis of policies, and suggestions for policy improvement, rather than a rather pointless analysis of how it's not about team and "Chicago isn't really that bad, really"?

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Blaming crime rates on the partisan affiliation of the mayor is a rather reductionist approach intended to just fan the partisan flames of division, and not to inform.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    To the wingnut mind everything is the fault of black people or liberal response to racial injustice.

    Fuck, these idiots blamed the 2008 financial crisis on blacks. BUT THEY"RE NOT RACISTS!

  • ravenshrike||

    Interesting, apparently Bill Clinton and the Countrywide Board of Directors were all black. Who knew?

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    It was 100% Clinton.

  • sarcasmic||

    It's pretty typical. When things go your way and the guy in charge is on your TEAM, then of course it had everything to do with good governance. When your guy is in charge and things go badly, there is some other cause. When the other TEAM is in charge and things go badly, they are to blame. When the other guy is in charge and things go your way, there is some other cause.

  • Headache||

    I blame libertarians, simply because they can't think beyond the next circle jerk.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Worse than that. It commits the primary assumption that government has responsibility for how people act.

  • sparkstable||

    It isn't a lone or supreme causal factor, no. We are still our own and we still all have independent agency. However, the existence of government along with the services people grow to expect (not out of experience, true... but simply by being told repeatedly that such services are both present and efficacious by the government itself) does creep into people's calculus in determining how to act.

    If there were no social security, on the margins, more people would save more for their own retirement. Not everyone, sure... but more.

    If certain policies make it more lucrative to enter illicit and violent trades then in order to pay the bills I may enter such a vocation. Did the government "make" that choice for me? No... but it certainly may have made it much harder or less advantageous to make other choices (maybe drugs are quicker means than 1000 hours of hair dressing school... and my kids need dinner tonight).

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    And what do we think of claims that it's all caused by racism? That's a talking point that we must take seriously, right?

  • Hamster of Doom||

    I hope not. We can regularly find similar patterns of barriers to legitimate markets leading to an increase in outlawed industries, throughout the globe and history.

    There was an article about Venezuela and the rise in kidnappings. If one still had food or cash, one was apt to experience a child or parent snatched and held for payment. One of these kidnappers was interviewed. He used to work in insurance.

    Racism seems illogical. It looks much more as if being vulnerable to being kicked out of a protected legal economy is the root cause.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I had no doubt the Lefty apologists and trolls would enter stage-left to defend Lefties and the cities they run into the ground.

  • No Yards Penalty||

    Fuck off, LoveCon, right back to the Federalist, Brietard and Daily Stormer.
    Then read a transcript of your comment highlights whe you call into The Big Fat Idiot's Radio show in the morning.
    Then suck your own dick.

  • I am the 0.000000013%||

    Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump

    We need to stop categorizing in such broad terms. There are 'republican' states that have overwhelmingly 'democrat' urban areas.

    I'm guessing if you recategorized this statement by voting district you'd come to a very different conclusion.

  • Horny Lizard||

    Alot of that violence is the result of drug prohibition and a subculture that has grown up around decades drug prohibition. The whole "gangster" mentally is a consequence of drug prohibition.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    True.

    BUT THE BLACKS ARE STILL TO BLAME! MAGA! MAGA!!! MAGA!!! BENGHAZIIIIIIIIII!!!!

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    No, your socialist policies were what caused it.

  • DiegoF||

    And hydraulic lift kits, surely.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Exactly, prohibition created the extreme gang violence. You don't see salesmen in the liquor industry doing drive-byes. Take away the money.

  • DiegoF||

    Not in the legal industry, perhaps. And not with a firearm. But I seem to recall ol' Bo and Luke being mighty handy with a bow and arrow.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    It's actually a combination of three deadly factors: the drug war, deindustrialization (goodbye jobs), and the ongoing leftist welfare policies of the Johnson era that had the (perhaps) unintended consequence of ruining black family life.

  • Vernon Depner||

    I would also throw in leftist public education and the violent Southern "honor culture" that urban Blacks brought with them in the Great Migration.

  • esteve7||

    It was not unintended. At least the Racist leftists of the 30s and 40s were honest. They used to argue for the minimum wage and union protections to keep black people out of white jobs. And Abortion was to keep black people from having black babies...

  • Hamster of Doom||

    Considering at one point welfare workers would do home checks to make sure there wasn't a man in the house, it seems we may charitably give them "unintended" and yet not "unexpected".

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Which only flourished once the welfare state succeeding in dissolving black families. Mission accomplished.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Is anything on earth funnier than the alt-right having a "thoughtful" discussion on race? (lol)

  • No Yards Penalty||

    They're having a circle-jerk, is more like it.

  • John||

    The fight against crime can't be restricted to more or better policing. Chicago's crime problem is concentrated in a small number of poor, blighted, mostly African-American neighborhoods. Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades.

    Crime is caused by the government not doing enough to help poor people. That is a real "libertarian position" there.

    One problem in Chicago is the dismally low number of homicides that police are able to solve—about 1 in 6. But the department's poor reputation among many of the people most at risk discourages the sort of cooperation from citizens that cops need to catch the killers.

    Maybe but without doing some actual work and looking at the facts on the ground, there is no way to tell whether that is true and how much it affects the ability of the police to solve murders. Maybe the gangs' willingness to murder anyone who talks to the police has more to do with it than the public being angry at the police?

    More than anything Chapman is just stupid and lazy. Why does reason continue to publish this clown?

  • sarcasmic||

    Crime is caused by the government not doing enough to help poor people.

    That's not what I read.

    but without doing some actual work and looking at the facts on the ground, there is no way to tell whether that is true

    You mean like the recently researched articles about how entire neighborhoods refuse to talk to the police?

  • John||

    Why don't they? How much of that is fear of being murdered by the gangs for it?

    hose areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades.

    I don't know how else you can read that than "the government didn't do enough". What else is "official neglect" if not that?

    I get it you see it as your sacred duty to always defend reason writers. But, really, defending Chapman is not a hill anyone should want to die on.

  • sarcasmic||

    Why don't they?

    Because that's how they are raised. It's part of the culture. Don't talk to cops.

    Not only that, but likely very few if any of them have had any positive interactions with the police. They're used to being stopped and harassed for little or no reason.

    How much of that is fear of being murdered by the gangs for it?

    I didn't see that in any of the recent articles on the subject. It was more of a local culture thing.

    What else is "official neglect" if not that?

    Cops ignoring crime in certain neighborhoods? I see your point.

    I get it you see it as your sacred duty to always defend reason writers.

    Um, no. And Chapman is a Chicago Tribune writer.

    Thing is, as stupid as most of his articles are, that doesn't mean they can't contain grains of truth. To dismiss everything he says because you don't like him is to apply the same prejudice as the left who supports and dismisses ideas based solely on the source, and not the content.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Interesting that Sarcasmic defends Chapman so much.

    It must be hard work.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    You lied again. Why so often?

  • wreckinball||

    Crime is caused by the residents not the government. And when the CPD tries to enforce the law the outrage machine starts. Because the folks committing the crimes are of the wrong skin tone.

  • AustinRoth||

    Top ten murder rates in US CITIES (not states):
    10. Milwaukee, WI
    9. Salinas, CA
    8. Hartford, CT
    7. Baton Rouge, LA
    6. Jackson, MS
    5. Birmingham, AL
    4. New Orleans, LA
    3. Detroit, MI
    2. Baltimore, MD
    1. St Louis, MO

    Not a single Republican led city on that list. Actually, none of the top 25 cities are Republican led.

    p.s. - Chicago is "only" #25 due to its size.

  • John||

    Chapman's listing of states rather than cities is just him flat out lying. Chapman is dumb as a post but even he is not that stupid. It is beyond me why reason continues to publish this idiot.

  • sarcasmic||

    "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."

  • DiegoF||

    So San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Cruz, Camden, Gary, Canton, etc. are off the list nowadays? Hmm who'd have thunk? Good for them! Most of the others are decades-old presences though.

  • John||

    DC is off the list. It was at or near the top for decades.

  • AustinRoth||

    D. C. Is #11

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    It has been slowly dropping down the list because of gentrification (the academic term that means whitey is moving in).

  • esteve7||

    Same with Oakland, but now do Pittsburg and Antioch and Richmond

  • DiegoF||

    Ah forgot Richmond! Always a classic presence.

  • esteve7||

    How can this be Democrats fault when Republicans control Congress, the Presidency, and the Supreme Court?

    /Reason

    Yes this is straight up lying. Break down violent crime areas by representatives. How many voted for Trump, have a Republican mayor, Republican city councilman, Republican congressman, etc. instead you go to, well sure Philly is violent but the state voted for Trump. Yeah one of the only areas of the state that didn't..

    LA isn't violent? Do all of the gang neighborhoods around that. Or what about the homeless that could filll Dodger stadium

  • AustinRoth||

    The rest of the top 25 (2017 stats):
    25. Chicago, Illinois
    24. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    23. Dayton, Ohio
    22. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    21. Kansas City, Kansas
    20. Richmond, Virginia
    19. Atlanta, Georgia
    18. San Bernardino, California
    17. Oakland, California
    16. Memphis, Tennessee
    15. West Palm Beach, Florida
    14. Cincinnati, Ohio
    13. Savannah, Georgia
    12. Kansas City, Missouri
    11. Washington, D.C.

    Still looks pretty blue to me.

  • Ron||

    California wins with three cities in the top 25

  • AustinRoth||

    But Kansas City gets listed twice! That deserves some kind of special participation trophy.

  • markm23||

    I hope that was a joke. If not, there are two Kansas Cities, divided by the Missouri river as well as the state line.

  • esteve7||

    Get down to the local level even at the precinct or polling place level. How many voted for Trump? How many had even 15% vote for Trump, Romney, McCain, or any Republican? How many have any Republican repsentative at the local level?

    Yeah let's gaslight people instead and say these areas really arnt that bad. Would you live in those areas or send your kids to school there?

  • Dizzle||

    If you made maps of the country that show county by county who voted for whom, an overwhelming swath of the region voted for trump with only counties with urban centers showing as blue. Now overlay that map with things like sources of spending and debt, graduation rates, crime rates, employment rates, etc, etc. You will see patterns and correlations. Why aren't libertarians investigating these concept?

  • In Vino Veritas||

    "Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades."

    Perpetrated over decades by.........wait for it...........Democratic control!!!!!!

    What did LBJ say about iner city blacks voting for Democrats ???

    Reason seams to have some dim witted millinials working for them these days.........

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    So, you blame the inner-city residents for GOP failures to attract African-American votes!
    Shall we blame the same people for the violence and mayhem inflicted by Republican white nationalists and neo-nazis?

  • NashTiger||

    The violence and mayhem inflicted amounts to 1 vehicular homicide per year

    Blame away

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Deny away. You're as bad as Trump. And I can prove it. Alt-right racist/sneo-nazis attacked peaceful counter protesters, with clubs, in Charlottesville. Trumpster sneers there weren't enough victims to give a shit about. In Trump's 'Merica

  • ||

    The death toll last year was 674—and that was down 15 percent from 2016. This year, even with the latest frenzy of shootings, the number of homicides is 25 percent lower than it was at this point in 2017.

    For decades the total population of the City of Chicago has been around 3 million people. The total population of the collar counties, in IL, has hovered around 3 million people. The murder rate in the City proper, *every year* has been more than double that of the surrounding counties. Chicago murders more people, every year, than the other 9 million people in the state. There is one way you get roughly equivalent homicide statistics between the collar counties and Chicago proper is if you include Lake County, IN, which includes Gary. Gary having had a streak of Democratic Mayors since 1943.

    Chicago is an exceptionally dangerous place, unless you compare it to other exceptionally dangerous democratic shitholes.

  • ||

    Chicago murders more people, every year, than the other 9 million people in the state.

    Sorry, more people per capita.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Then your statement is meaningless. Compare any major city versus its state.

  • Naaman Brown||

    Google "homicides in Chicago 2016" "homicides in Illinois 2016"

    Chicago. 762 homicides.
    Illinois. 1,054 murders. (Disaster Center)
    Illinois - Chicago = 292 homicides
    Pop. Chicago: 2,716,450
    Pop. Illinois: 12,801,539
    Pop. Illinois - Chicago = 10,085,089
    Chicago: 1 homicide per 3,565 people.
    Illinois: 1 homicide per 12,145 people.
    Illinois - Chicago: 1 homicide per 34,538 people.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Your own stats show that the rest of Illinois has a lower homicide rate.

  • ||

    "Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001."

    Give them time.

    It takes talent, effort and patience to run a place into the ground.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    An article containing a really good chart comparing Chicago to the other large cities.

    Its bad, very bad, but there are a couple of worse places, St Louis, Baltimore, and Detroit.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/.....story.html

  • Ron||

    come visit Chicago, fewer people murdered here than in 10 other cities. heck of an advertisment

  • Sevo||

    "Chicago! At least we're not St. Louis."

  • wreckinball||

    Reason you never cease to crack me up.

    "Chicago is not an exceptionally dangerous city. In terms of violent crime, it is less afflicted than a number of large cities, including St. Louis, Baltimore, and New Orleans."

    Like saying Charlie Manson is not exceptionally dangerous when compared to other serial killers?

    Or does Reason desire to morph into the Onion?

  • JeffreyL||

    Republicans blame unbroken Democratic control of Chicago for its mayhem. But partisan coloration is an unreliable indicator of crime patterns. Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump. Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.

    Instead of obfuscation. Do the following. Rank Cities by homicides. Than, list the last time that that city had a republican mayor. FYI. The last time a republican was may of any of your cities mentioned with high murder rates is as follows:

    Chicago - 1931
    New orleans - 1868
    St. Louis - 1949
    Baltimore - 1967

    Essentially half a century was the most recent last time when these high murder cities saw a republican mayor. Tells you something, doesn't it.

    From what i remember, the governor of a state does not control city police departments, the mayor the city does, no?

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""the mayor the city does, no?""

    I'm going with the police control the mayor.

  • Brendan||

    Chicago is just another large city that has a small number of neighborhoods that are basically itinerant war zones and a significant number that are nearly tranquil.
    https://heyjackass.com/

    The city leaders really can't be bothered with addressing this because it might be uncomfortable, and would take away from micromanaging the high class areas and making various things in their own image.

  • Just Say'n||

    Shorter Chapman: All those killings happen in poor black neighborhoods. All of my neighbors in Lincoln Park think the city is really safe. So, I'm satisfied.

  • Agammamon||

    . . . Chicago is not an exceptionally dangerous city. In terms of violent crime, it is less afflicted than a number of large cities, including St. Louis, Baltimore, and New Orleans.

    So its just 'normally' dangerous - for a large American city with a Democratically controlled government?

    Republicans blame unbroken Democratic control of Chicago for its mayhem. But partisan coloration is an unreliable indicator of crime patterns. Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump.

    How many voted for non-Dem city council members?

    Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.

    And how long have the Democrats had or not had a supermajority on the city council? The mayor - like the President - doesn't have the power to shape the city all on its own.

  • Agammamon||

    The conditions that breed rampant crime in parts of Chicago came about not by accident but by policy.

    Yes. That's what people have been saying. They've just pointed out that the people making policy are the Democrats. The ones that *say* they're on the side of those minorities most hurt by their policies.

  • Uncle Jay||

    OK, Mr. Chapman.
    If Chicago is not a dangerous city, then walk down Michigan Avenue at 10:00 PM on a Saturday night, and report back to us...and make sure you don't have a gun on you.
    Good luck.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    If Chicago is not a dangerous city,

    Not what he said. Shame on you,

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Look at new poster and how great he is with blockquotes.

    Amazing!

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Look at new poster and how great he is with blockquotes.

    Look at the fucking retard.
    The use of blockquotes is a low-level skill, and quite common.

    Agammamon

    Diane Reynolds (Paul)

    Those are even visible without scrolling!

    Amazing?

    No, typical of his ilk.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano thinks Chicago isn't a violent city.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    The issue is "blockquotes" -- and I linked to proof - so you're still the dumbest fuck of all

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano thinks bolding his words makes him less of a dumbfuck.

  • Echospinner||

    I have done that. Back a few decades.

    Was about 16 years old. Had a date. We took the el from north side downtown. Walked around there and made it all the way to Sears tower. Got on the train to go back. It was late at night by then.

    Wrong train. We went south. By the time we knew it we were in a bad place. Two young women looked at us and one of them said "you are in the wrong color neighborhood".

    We got off and waited for the next one north on the platform.

    A dozen come marching up the steps and surrounded myself and my girl friend.

    The whole deal. Gangsters watching the turf.

    I am Jewish and was in religious school. I reached in my pocket. The knife and can of mace will get us killed. I had taken off my kippah (yarmulke) so as not to attract attention. I put it on.

    Gang leader is pacing, thinking. He looked us up and down. I knew we can die here.

    "What are you doing here?"

    I told him. He says "what is that thing on your head?"

    I said "I am a Jew. I am studying to be a Rabbi. It is my religion." (I am not a rabbi left the school, on with the story)

    He takes a step back. Looks us over again. He has never seen one before.

    Makes a circle with his hand. The gangsters follow him down the steps. We came home.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Contrary to popular myth, cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics, Chicago is not an exceptionally dangerous city.

    Um,

    "Unbelievable," said state Rep. La Shawn Ford, a black Chicago Democrat who went so far as to call on President Donald Trump for help.

    So by 'outside critics' we're referring to Chicago Democrats?

    Of the 10 states with the highest rates of violence, seven voted for Trump. Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001.

    I'm a little more curious about cities with high violence, not an aggregate across the state-- especially when most crime occurs in the urban areas.

    The top 5 highest homicide cities are:

    1. St. Lous
    2. Baltimore
    3. Detroit
    4. New Orleans
    5. Birmingham

    Starting with St. Louis, the party composition of the city council: (formatting will be dicey)
    Year (D) (R) (I)
    1953 21 7 0
    1955 24 4 0
    1957 24 4 0
    1959 24 4 0
    1961 24 4 0
    1963 24 4 0
    1965 26 2 0
    1967 22 6 0
    1969 24 4 0
    1971 24 4 0
    1973 25 3 0
    1975 26 2 0
    1977 27 1 0
    1979 26 2 0
    1981 26 2 0
    1983 27 1 0
    2009 27 1 0
    2011 27 0 1
    2013 27 0 1
    2015[7] 28 0 0
    2017 28 0 0

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Baltimore is the city where Democrats "outnumber republicans nine to one."

    I can't find the same nice table I found for Baltimore, but the city council president (to name just one position) has been Democrat since 1923.

    I believe Detroit's elections are officially "non partisan" but I don't get the impression that Detroit is a big Republican stronghold.

    A quick glance at New Orleans shows a city council 100% controlled by Democrats. There was a Republican elected to the council back in 2002. Again, can't find a historical table like Baltimore, but I'm guessing Democrats have ruled the roost for some time in New Orleans.

    So that leaves Birmingham, and I'm having trouble finding the breakdown as those may be non-partisan. Of the five, that might be the only one that might have Republicans nominally control it.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics,

    So by 'outside critics' we're referring to Chicago Democrats?

    Umm, no.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    "Unbelievable," said state Rep. La Shawn Ford, a black Chicago Democrat who went so far as to call on President Donald Trump for help.

    Umm, yep.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Umm, that's NOT "outside"
    A Chicago Democrat is ..... INSIDE Chicago!
    Another Trumpster in severe denial.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano demonstrating his ignorance again.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    A Chicago Democrat is ..... INSIDE Chicago!
    Another Trumpster in severe denial.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano's been in denial of his senility and incontinence for years.

  • KAO||

    Preach Diane. This article was very well, poor. It was trying to make the case, without outright saying it, that Democratic policies don't make a difference in violence. That is 100% a joke....

  • johngray0||

    Perhaps things have leveled off. One stat that seems impossible to get is shootings by year. As opposed to homicides by year. In other words, is the reduction in gun murders due to less shooting? Or better emergency care? I can't see the stats to show this either way.

  • KAO||

    Great question/point.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades.

    I don't mean to get all Daniel Patrick Moynihan on anyone here, but uhh, this is kind of what happens when you create a population entirely dependent on welfare and social engineering programs.

    Thomas Sowell on this subject.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    To be sure, it wasn't neglect, it was the attention that caused their problems.

  • NoVaNick||

    Nobody wants to admit it, but cities that see a big drop in their crime rate also tend to be the ones that have lots of rich white people moving in.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades."'

    And someone said the democrats are racist anymore.

  • Paulpemb||

    "The conditions that breed rampant crime in parts of Chicago came about not by accident but by policy."

    But we can't blame the people who have been making that policy for decades!

  • drisco304||

    Democrats like to keep the African-Americans down because it makes them angrier and thus more reliable as Democratic Party voters.

  • Bob Meyer||

    "Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001"

    In 2015 (latest data on Wikipedia) Los Angeles' murder rate was 7.1 (per 100,000) hardly enviable since New York's was only 3.4 and El Paso, Texas was 2.5. Juarez, just across the border was once the murder capital of the world but has recently shown real improvement dropping down to 20th place with a murder rate of 56!

    Chapman picked the wrong city to argue that Democratic mayors have nothing to do with high murder rates.

    About 10 years ago I looked for correlations with high murder rates and I found two, both of which will piss off the Left and the Right. The largest correlation was percentage of black people in the population - the correlation was about 0.65. The second was church attendance - the correlation was about 0.6. Of course men commit ten times the murders that women do.

    My conclusion was that if I wanted to live in a really safe community I would pick a community of white, female atheists. Unfortunately, I'm not female and would be banned from such a community as much as I might enjoy living there.

  • Bob Meyer||

    "Los Angeles, whose homicide rate is enviably low, has had only Democratic mayors since 2001"

    In 2015 (latest data on Wikipedia) Los Angeles' murder rate was 7.1 (per 100,000) hardly enviable since New York's was only 3.4 and El Paso, Texas was 2.5. Juarez, just across the border was once the murder capital of the world but has recently shown real improvement dropping down to 20th place with a murder rate of 56!

    Chapman picked the wrong city to argue that Democratic mayors have nothing to do with high murder rates.

    About 10 years ago I looked for correlations with high murder rates and I found two, both of which will piss off the Left and the Right. The largest correlation was percentage of black people in the population - the correlation was about 0.65. The second was church attendance - the correlation was about 0.6. Of course men commit ten times the murders that women do.

    My conclusion was that if I wanted to live in a really safe community I would pick a community of white, female atheists. Unfortunately, I'm not female and would be banned from such a community as much as I might enjoy living there.

  • Bob Meyer||

    Sorry about the double posting, slow browser.

  • CE||

    Felons can't own guns in Chicago, so these stats must be wrong somehow.

  • Bob Meyer||

    It's too expensive to own guns in Chicago. The criminal rent them.

  • tommhan||

    Yes it is dangerous, 600 odd murders is still a huge amount of people to die by violence. It is sickening how violent the Democrat cities are now and how they have been for decades.

  • rferris||

    Steve Chapman lives in Chicago, it is what he thinks of as normal. He is not an objective source on this subject.

  • Fooseven||

    Nah he probably lives in Naperville, and only goes to wacker drive for work/shopping.

  • CE||

    Chicago has been particularly dangerous twice -- the first time following the national prohibition of alcohol by constitutional amendment, and the second time following the nation prohibition of drugs by executive fiat/political maneuvering. Creating a large market for contraband created the opportunities. Cities where those opportunities develop to the worst extent are those with corrupt or ineffective police and local government structure, and areas that are economically disadvantaged.

  • WillyC||

    Discouraging that "irresponsibility on the part of the residents" is not listed in the last sentence of the next to the last paragraph where the causes are given. Also no mention of the % of single parent households in those neighborhoods.

    Will we ever emphasize the responsibility on the part of individuals that comes with our freedoms?

  • mtrueman||

    The painful truth is that rural murderers just aren't pulling their weight.

  • Bill Adams||

    Chapman makes a few good points, assuming they would check out, amid some phony ones.

    From https://www.reference.com/government-politics/
    top-20-cities-united-states-murders-crime-
    8a9f906bc521efb4# :


    Based on data released by the FBI in 2013, the top cities in the United States in regard to violent crime are Flint, Mich.; Detroit, Mich.; Oakland, Calif.; Bridgeport, Conn.; New Orleans, La., Cleveland, Ohio; St. Louis, Mo.; Jackson, Miss.; Baltimore, Md. and Newark, N.J. The FBI measures the numbers of murders, forcible rapes and robberies as compared to the total population of each city. The next 10 most crime-laden cities, per the FBI, are Birmingham, Ala.; Philadelphia, Pa.; Memphis, Tenn.; Little Rock, Ark.; Baton Rouge, La.; Cincinnati, Ohio; Stockton, Calif.; Buffalo, N.Y.; Dayton, Ohio and New Haven, Conn.


    Despite caveats (see link), these city rankings give a much more meaningful picture than Chapman's overall crime rate for states. And at a quick check the mayors of all twenty cities are registered Democrats, usually the latest in a long chain. If cities "owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades" and "not by accident but by policy," surely it's not irrelevant to notice who was running their governments?

  • Galane||

    "The conditions that breed rampant crime in parts of Chicago came about not by accident but by policy."

    And who writes and enacts and enforces the policies in Chicago? Democrats. Who trumpets all instances of white on black/latino crime and police shootings while all but ignoring the larger number of incidents of black VS latino? The Democrat controlled news media.

    Democrats keep insisting that opportunities must be *given* to blacks and latinos. That's not how it works. Opportunity exists for people to *take*, or they have to *make* their own. To have the best chance to succeed one must actively seek out opportunities to exploit.

    Democrats tell their constituents to sit on their butts and wait to be *given* stuff, most often stuff that the 'rich white racists' are hoarding and/or have obtained by some nebulously unfair means at the expense of non-white people.

  • Galane||

    When 15 year old Damon Grimes was shot with a Taser while riding an ATV, he was shot by a black police officer from his moving patrol car. The officer committed two violations of policy, tasing a person on a moving vehicle and firing the Taser from a moving vehicle. Damon lost control of the ATV and crashed into the back of a pickup truck at 35 MPH and died. If the officer had been *white* it would have instantly been all over television and BLM would've organized riots in the streets. At least the officer is going to be tried for murder. Probably will only end up fired, could even get hired by some other police department in another city instead of getting sent to prison for a long time.

  • vek||

    Look, let's be honest here. You only need to know one statistic to guess at the crime rates, including murder rates, in any given city anywhere in the country. The population demographics. Areas with lots of whites, Asians, and Jews and few others have very low crime rates, even if they're large cities. Areas with other groups have higher crime rates. There are a small number of exceptions to this, but by and large if you know the demographics of a city you can get a good idea of crime rates.

    Now you can bitch and moan about what reasons there may be underpinning this, but that's just the way it is. As far as the "It's all racist whitey's fault!" argument, I'm gonna have to mention:

    1. Asians. Lower crime levels than whites.

    2. Hispanics, while higher crime than whites, commit a lot less crime than blacks... Despite lower education levels (lower levels of high school and college graduation if you can believe it), often not even speaking English, etc. In other words they usually have more disadvantages than blacks do, and whites are supposedly just as racist against them...

    Sooo SORRY, the blaming it on somebody other than yourself argument just doesn't hold up. I have my theories on what is going on, but the bottom line is ethnic communities need to get their own shit together, because it isn't whitey forcing them to kill each other in the streets.

  • WJack||

    From the article:
    "Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systemic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over decades."

    Actually the origin of the problem is closely correlated with Johnson's war on poverty (billions spent) and the consequent breakdown of black family unity.

  • Fooseven||

    This article is embarrassing...guy is basically saying that Chicago is okay because there are a million white residents there who are NOT being shot every weekend.

  • Elilis Wyatt||

    Thanks for showing us the depth of Trumpist hatred.
    Who drains your swamp?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano thinks violent cities are okay when run by Democrats.

  • vek||

    That's how every city is... If you want to know the murder rate in any given area, easiest way is to just look up the demographics. Hence white flight. I actually like a lot of black dudes as far as hanging out, or bullshitting with them or whatever... But I would never live in a majority black neighborhood because I know how to read statistics!

  • Rick Stewart||

    Perhaps we don't know what is causing the violence.

    But how about we eliminate the Drug War, just to see what happens?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online