City Murder Rates

[J. Will]

Originally Posted by LordMandeep

what the hell someones math is way off.

Well we have around average 60-70 murders a year. But people said because we have 70 or so now the rate went from below 2 all the way up to 3????

I gave the numbers in my post. There should be no confusion whatsoever.

[Muji]

Mr. D, I'm sure that the previous posters were referring to Europe as a whole as opposed to Denmark, which we all know has had a significantly less violent past than most of its neighbors. I'm sure we don't need to be reminded of western Europe's brutal imperialism in Africa and Asia, or the mind-numbing cruelty of English and Iberian colonists in America...There's no point in turning this discussion into a competition.

That said, the United States does have its own oft-discussed history of violence which in many ways has lead to much of the everyday violence that takes place in the streets of our cities. However I'm confident that we could easily put an end to this if we really wanted to...The hundreds of billions of dollars our government spends on its wars could work wonders if it were reinvested in public education and urban development.

[Capsule F]

Philadelphia: 262 murders in 239 days thus far.

[tech12]

San Francisco just had its 70th murder this morning.

If anyone is interested, here's a website i created a couple weeks ago:

www.sfcrime.blogspot.com

[FREKI]

Originally Posted by Muji

Mr. D, I'm sure that the previous posters were referring to Europe as a whole as opposed to Denmark, which we all know has had a significantly less violent past than most of its neighbors.

Are we comparing continents or countries here?

Europe is not and will never be a country - so let's please not get into this discussion again..

If it's continents then be it - I'm sure alot have happened around the North American continent in the last 400 years...

( oh and btw Denmark wasn't exactly a peaceful nation in it's past... heck we enjoyed the world's second largest navy for a good deal of years until the damn Brits attacked Copenhagen where the fleet was docked without warning fearing we would side with Napoleon )

Originally Posted by Muji

I'm sure we don't need to be reminded of western Europe's brutal imperialism in Africa and Asia, or the mind-numbing cruelty of English and Iberian colonists in America...There's no point in turning this discussion into a competition.

If you want to compare the US with Spain, Portugal or Britain by all means do that, just remember that that's only 3 countries on a continent of ~44 countries and 2.5 times the population of the US..

Originally Posted by Muji

That said, the United States does have its own oft-discussed history of violence which in many ways has lead to much of the everyday violence that takes place in the streets of our cities. However I'm confident that we could easily put an end to this if we really wanted to...The hundreds of billions of dollars our government spends on its wars could work wonders if it were reinvested in public education and urban development.

I fully agree..

Crime and violence mostly comes from income inequality and lack of goverment provided options ( ofcause widely available guns doesn't make it better ) - remove these factors and most problems will go away - it's well tested and it works!

[alex1]

IMO, a lack of percieved freedom leads to more violence. Let's be honest with ourselves, Americans aren't the freest of people. Not by means of education parity, not by economic parity and definitely not by racial equality. As long as better off Americans & government see little reason to create a better environment (through opportunity and increased education) for the folks raised in less then ideal circumstances, we'll see high murder rates as a side effect of our system.

there's something really sick that happens to people when they feel hopeless.

[pazzo83]

Originally Posted by alex1

IMO, a lack of percieved freedom leads to more violence. Let's be honest with ourselves, Americans aren't the freest of people. Not by means of education parity, not by economic parity and definitely not by racial equality. As long as better off Americans & government see little reason to create a better environment (through opportunity and increased education) for the folks raised in less then ideal circumstances, we'll see high murder rates as a side effect of our system.

there's something really sick that happens to people when they feel hopeless.

I would have to profoundly disagree with you if you were implying that MORE gov't in the US is the answer to giving Americans more freedom. Gov't and freedom/liberty are inversely proportional. I think the US needs less gov't interference in our lives to ensure the maximum amount of freedom is available to everyone.

Now to murder rates:

Washington, DC: 110 as of Aug 17
Charlotte, NC: 40 as of mid July, probably mid 46-50 now.

[James Bond Agent 007]

Just a reminder . . .

Homicide rates in America weren't always high. Prior to about 1900, they were as low as any European nation, or Canada.


Source

[forumly_chgoman]

Originally Posted by alex1

chicago is flat with last years figures (through end of June). 201 murders so far.

overall crime is down 7.3%. One of the few big cities in the midwest with crime moving in the right direction.

per capita chi is less violent than san fran..interesting

[forumly_chgoman]

yeah the WAR ON DRUGS has been so effective..fire the generals, impeach those in charge and start with a whole new ball game

[pazzo83]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

Just a reminder . . .

Homicide rates in America weren't always high. Prior to about 1900, they were as low as any European nation, or Canada.


Source

And our gun/firearm laws were LESS restrictive.

[LordMandeep]

And our gun/firearm laws were LESS restrictive.

that explains nothing...

I say rising social problems are the cause...

[tech12]

71 for san francisco...

plus 2 people killed in seperate hit and runs on sunday (within 20 minutes of each other)...I'm pretty sure hit and run is not usually considered murder though...anyone know?

[Rusty van Reddick]

Originally Posted by pazzo83

And our gun/firearm laws were LESS restrictive.

Yes, everybody on the farm had a GLOCK in 1900. What. exactly, was there to restrict?

Studies I've seen on frontier violence in the 1800s in the US are completely shocking- murder rates were MUCH higher than what we'd see now. You can't just look at official stats from 1900 (which are bound to be unreliable) and declare them the good old days.

[NewYorkYankee]

Originally Posted by pazzo83

I would have to profoundly disagree with you if you were implying that MORE gov't in the US is the answer to giving Americans more freedom. Gov't and freedom/liberty are inversely proportional. I think the US needs less gov't interference in our lives to ensure the maximum amount of freedom is available to everyone.

Now to murder rates:

Washington, DC: 110 as of Aug 17
Charlotte, NC: 40 as of mid July, probably mid 46-50 now.

Finally, common sense comes home to roost.

[alex1]

Originally Posted by pazzo83

I would have to profoundly disagree with you if you were implying that MORE gov't in the US is the answer to giving Americans more freedom. Gov't and freedom/liberty are inversely proportional. I think the US needs less gov't interference in our lives to ensure the maximum amount of freedom is available to everyone.

My my, you're seeing things a bit black and white. While I can go on for days on the concept of freedom through capitalism, I won't.

While government can take away freedom (all men created equal my ass) it can create something quite amazing. Like a well educated population (schools), safety (fire and police force, armed forces), a healthy people (universal healthcare system) and much more. Things that do lead to certain types of freedoms. Peace of mind is a "freedom" for instance.

The more educated a person, the more opportunity that person aquires. Universal healthcare increases opportunity & peace of mind as well. For instance, I'm off to Yale to get my masters in a few weeks while my girlfriend struggles with the fact that she will be without healthcare. There's no freedom in worrying and hoping that a job exists that can give her at the very least, decent benefits.

In any regard, my point was this: as long as better off Americans & government see little reason to create a better environment(through opportunity and increased education) for the folks raised in less then ideal circumstances, we'll see high murder rates as a side effect of our system.

As you can see, I'm not arguing for more government. I'm arguing for the creation of a better environment through more opportunity and more efficient education. Do you disagree with that?

[pazzo83]

Originally Posted by LordMandeep

that explains nothing...

I say rising social problems are the cause...

It highlights the fact that one reasons erroneously that a causal relationship exists between the mere presence of firearms and violent crime.

[pazzo83]

Originally Posted by alex1

My my, you're seeing things a bit black and white. While I can go on for days on the concept of freedom through capitalism, I won't.

While government can take away freedom (all men created equal my ass) it can create something quite amazing. Like a well educated population (schools), safety (fire and police force, armed forces), a healthy people (universal healthcare system) and much more. Things that do lead to certain types of freedoms. Peace of mind is a "freedom" for instance.

The more educated a person, the more opportunity that person aquires. Universal healthcare increases opportunity & peace of mind as well. For instance, I'm off to Yale to get my masters in a few weeks while my girlfriend struggles with the fact that she will be without healthcare. There's no freedom in worrying and hoping that a job exists that can give her at the very least, decent benefits.

In any regard, my point was this: as long as better off Americans & government see little reason to create a better environment(through opportunity and increased education) for the folks raised in less then ideal circumstances, we'll see high murder rates as a side effect of our system.

As you can see, I'm not arguing for more government. I'm arguing for the creation of a better environment through more opportunity and more efficient education. Do you disagree with that?

I agree that gov'ts should provide some form of education. I support this, AT THE STATE LEVEL. Bureaucrats in Washington are clueless when it comes to this, and this will remain true given the current entrenchment of the lobbyist culture on K St. The Federal gov't cannot possibly manage an educational system in what is arguably the most diverse country on the planet.

Universal Health Care is debatable. For one, it removes an individual's ability to choose his own care. That, by definition, restricts individual liberty. A lot of our health care problems are caused by a conflation of the industry itself (HMOs etc) and federal gov't. Simply adding MORE gov't isn't going to solve anything. The gov't should not be in the business of BECOMING business. This is not its function, because there is no real check on gov't. If a private entity violates your rights, you can use the gov't to enforce your rights. However, if the gov't violates your rights, what real recourse do you have?

Your girlfriend (I've been here too, I have to purchase my own health insurance presently) has the gov't to blame when it comes to prohibitively expensive health care coverage. The influence of HMOs and similar special interests in DC is really unbelievable. Legislation is slanted towards them and against the individual, it is a travesty. I don't trust this same gov't to then turn around and become the 'good guy' and offer every single American top-notch health care. Not without my taxes going through the roof.

I think what you are advocating does not consider unintended consequences. First, universal health care and other social programs: how are we to pay for them? We have $9 trillion in debt thanks in part to our ridiculously stupid foreign policy. If you raise taxes, that takes money from the individual, which is without a doubt a loss of liberty. Continuing to mount up our debt puts that burden back on the people in the long run when China et al come calling. Again, a net loss of liberty. Seems like at this point, only with less gov't will one be able to truly realize individual autonomy.

[alex1]

Originally Posted by pazzo83

Universal Health Care is debatable. For one, it removes an individual's ability to choose his own care. That, by definition, restricts individual liberty. A lot of our health care problems are caused by a conflation of the industry itself (HMOs etc) and federal gov't. Simply adding MORE gov't isn't going to solve anything. The gov't should not be in the business of BECOMING business. This is not its function, because there is no real check on gov't. If a private entity violates your rights, you can use the gov't to enforce your rights. However, if the gov't violates your rights, what real recourse do you have?

Universal Healthcare is not a business. In fact, the healthcare system can save a ton of money by: 1. removing the need for profit 2. removing administrative waste within the insurance industry 3. instilling a strong preventative medicine policy.

Unfortunately, this country will not move to a single payer system even when universal healthcare is enacted.

Your girlfriend (I've been here too, I have to purchase my own health insurance presently) has the gov't to blame when it comes to prohibitively expensive health care coverage.

this is partly true. but IMO, government is mostly to blame because they've caved to the insurance companies for decades now (on how to shape legislation to help save them more money).

but to get back on subject, my girlfriend could also do what she went to school for and loves to do if universal healthcare was available to her. See, she's not even free to practice her passion. A perfect example of a loss of freedom within our framework. And please don't tell me she's "free" to choose between acting or having insurance.

I think what you are advocating does not consider unintended consequences. First, universal health care and other social programs: how are we to pay for them? We have $9 trillion in debt thanks in part to our ridiculously stupid foreign policy. If you raise taxes, that takes money from the individual, which is without a doubt a loss of liberty. Continuing to mount up our debt puts that burden back on the people in the long run when China et al come calling. Again, a net loss of liberty. Seems like at this point, only with less gov't will one be able to truly realize individual autonomy.

first of all, roll back the taxes on the rich. That's a no-brainer to me. secondly, put a ton of money on preventative medicine. when the U.S. pays 14%-15% of GDP on health for 70% of it's population while the Canada pays 11% of GDP for 100% of its population, the system is broken. Insurance companies will do little to fix the problem and will actually make it worse. Lastly, fix our stupid foreign policy as you say. Get out of Iraq, invest in the right types of fuel so that we are self dependent in that regard.

China will trump us. No doubt. I'd worry more about our health then them being a bigger world power.

I also don't care about the idea of more government as long as it's smarter government. It's something we're capable of doing. Our country's socialized sectors (fire, police, army and schools) can be downright good at times. Healthcare can be the best in the word while providing health for everyone.

when 50% of bankruptcies are health related, there's little freedom in how we function in the regard to healthcare.

[J. Will]

Universal Health Care is debatable. For one, it removes an individual's ability to choose his own care.

Nonsense. Us Canadians are free to choose our own doctors. We just don't have to pay out of our own pockets for visits and hospital stays.