NYT: Violent Crime In Cities Shows Sharp Surge

[Hissyspit]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/us/09crime.html?hp

Violent Crime In Cities Shows Sharp Surge

By KATE ZERNIKE
Published: March 9, 2007
Violent crime rose by double-digit percentages in cities across the country over the last two years, reversing the declines of the mid-to-late 1990s, according to a new report by a prominent national law enforcement association.

While overall crime has been declining nationwide, police officials have been warning of a rise in murder, robbery and gun assaults since late 2005, particularly in midsize cities and the Midwest. Now, they say, two years of data indicates that the spike is more than an aberration.

“There are pockets of crime in this country that are astounding,” said Chuck Wexler, the executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, which is releasing the report on Friday. “It’s gone under the radar screen, but it’s not if you’re living on the north side of Minneapolis or the south side of Los Angeles or in Dorchester, Mass.”

Local police departments blame several factors: the spread of methamphetamine use in some Midwestern and Western cities, gangs, high poverty and a record number of people being released from prison. But the biggest theme, they say, is easy access to guns and a willingness, even an eagerness, to settle disputes with them, particularly among young people.

MORE

[billbuckhead]

1. America's gun culture is killing more far more Americans than terrorism

Who will stand up to the NRA bullies?

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FyurFly]

6. Guns will never go away Bill except that fact

Stop poverty and drug prohibition, that would work alot better.

[Kelvin Mace]

8. I agree with you on that

but handguns have got to go. You can keep rifles and assault rifles.

[FyurFly]

10. How about zero tolerance laws….

If you are caught with an illegal gun…. 10 years

Use a gun in a crime ….20 years

Discharge a gun in a crime …..30 years

Injure or kill someone during a crime with a gun ….life


Sounds fair to me, punishes bad guys protect good guys RKBA.

[Bandit]

24. Doesn't California already have such laws

How is that working out for them anyway? How much gun violence is there in Canada or Japan?

[Kelvin Mace]

25. The problem with such laws is that they are ripe for abuse

The allow prosecutors to pretty much control the show, instead of judges and juries, since prosecutors decide what charges to bring. Such laws result in false confessions and false testimony against third parties, because the prosecutor uses the possibility of such a charge to extract cooperation from accused criminals. (Now Mr. Smith, you can wave the DNA testing, plead guilty to this rape and get five years, or we can charge you with possession of a handgun and get you ten years. What? You claim the police planted the gun? Oh, Mr. Smith, who do you think the jury will believe?")

Simpler measure: Outlaw handguns. They are, by and large, the most dangerous items out there, killing more people in robberies, domestic disputes, suicides and accidents. The Constitution was written at a time when "arms" referred to rifles and shotguns, not pistols (such items being pretty much useless for anything except duels.

People still may "bear arms", including assault rifles. However no one may legally possess (except law enforcement) a firearm less than 30" in length. The government will buy back all fire arms turned in during the six months after the law is passed. All such weapons will be destroyed except police-grade weapons that may be kept in armories to equip police forces nationwide. After that, no more buybacks. People may still turn in handgun discovered, but they will not be bought back. Persons found in possession of a handgun will be prosecuted, no deals, no discretion. Mitigating factors may be considered by a judge/jury, but not prosecutors. They file the charge, present the evidence, the accused presents his defense, a verdict is rendered. Regardless of the outcome, the handgun is forfeited and destroyed.

Also, handgun ammunition will also be illegal to possess (with the same exceptions as above). The .22LR being the exception, since it is used in rifles.

The ban will also prohibit US companies from selling handguns outside the US to ANYONE, including governments and military forces. It is time for the US to get out of the at least part of the death business.

[Pavulon]

34. We outlawed cocaine and heroin,

takes two phone calls to get it delivered to your house. If you look up mass casualty events the most "effective" involve shotguns. Most pistol shootings are non fatal.

Pistols were military ISSUED items when the constitution was written.

What you propose is worthless and political suicide.

Why punish people who obey the law. Jail the people who break the law.

[Kelvin Mace]

7. Anti-gun

"bigot"?

Oh, please...

[Hissyspit]

13. Wow, I don't see any anti-gun bigotry at all in that post.

What I see is a comparative analysis of how guns function in our culture versus what terrorism has done, and a question about the suppressive distorted function of the National Rifle Association.

I own a gun and pretty much agree with everything I see in the post.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. It's been really bad here in KC lately

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/16855962.htm

[salin]

17. in Indy as well

last year was a spikey record year for murders... so far this year - the rate far surpasses last year.

[Patiod]

18. Oh, please

you guys are amateurs. We had over 400 murders in Philadelphia last year, most committed with guns.

[John Q. Citizen]

3. We have criminals at the top who settle disputes with guns, too. Must be fashionable

[ProudDad]

4. The bottom line

is the same as here in Oakland, CA, the PHONY "war on drugs"

Decriminalize, put the drug war money into treatment facilities and you'll see the violent crime rate drop like a stone!!!!

[-..__...]

9. Except, that doesn't seem to be the case anymore.

“There’s really no rhyme or reason with these homicides,” said Edward Davis, the police commissioner in Boston. “An incident will occur involving disrespect, a fight over a girl. Then there’s a retaliation aspect where if someone shoots someone else; their friends will come back and shoot at the people that did it.”

It's not like it was 20 years ago when it could easily be determined if a homicide or shooting was drug or gang related or not. Now, the shootings occur over the slightest street/respect infraction.

I agree, the "War on Drugs" needs to end, but the current problem goes much deeper than that.

[ProudDad]

12. I would still submit

that it's the drug war and the attitudes that it fosters that's still the major cause. In addition, it's mostly the "drug warriors" who are armed.

If those idiots would check, it's probably the "legal" drugs, mainly alcohol, that's another major cause.

I also think that police commissioner is an ass.


Without the drug war, there's no reason for so many guns.

Without guns the normal (stupid but normal) friction between people in highly stressful environments, especially adolescents, would not end so often in death.

Of course, now that the NRA and it's buddies in legislatures have promoted the wholesale proliferation of guns -- it's going to be hard to put the genie back into the bottle.

But...an end to the phony "war on drugs" would be a hell of a start.

[truthisfreedom]

11. In South Minneapolis we hear a constant stream of stories about people being assaulted and robbed by

gangs. They are robbed and then beaten mercilessly, with no apparent reason other than their assailants enjoy the violence.

I have heard more than 10 stories from friends who either experienced this or knew of someone who did during the past year alone. It's completely insane. We walk our friends to their cars if they leave the bar early... we never let any woman walk alone to her car in South Minneapolis proper. And it's a beautiful community, with lovely lakes and lots of development!

[Eugene]

14. AP: Big-city murders jump more than 10 pct.

Big-city murders jump more than 10 pct.

By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer

Thu Mar 8, 10:21 PM ET

WASHINGTON - The murder rate jumped by more than 10 percent among
dozens of large U.S. cities since 2004, a study shows in the latest sign of the
end of a national lull in violent crime.

Robberies also spiked, as did felony assaults and attacks with guns, according
to the report to be released Friday by the Police Executive Research Forum,
a Washington-based law enforcement think tank.

-snip-

"Two years worth of double-digit increases in violent crime demonstrates an
unmistakable change in the extent and the nature of crime in America," said
Chuck Wexler, executive director of the nonprofit think tank that is funded
in part by the Justice Department, as well as corporations and private
foundations.

"There are those that say this is a statistical blip, an aberration," Wexler
said. "After two years, this is no aberration."

-snip-

Full article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070309/ap_on_re_us/crime_cities

[area51]

15. crime rates

It seems crime rates always jump when the economy gets bad.

[AngryAmish]

19. Demographics is the main cause

The echo Boomers - children of Baby Boomers - are now in the main violent crime age cohort - 16 to 35. (Very few violent crimes by those over 35, a statistical fact.)

Highest crime rates were when the Boomers were in this group. THe crime reduction of the 90s mostly because of less folks (read men, cause women do so few violent crimes proportionally) this age.

Plus I also buy the fact that to a certain extent we have aborted many of our criminal class. That link is not proven but it seems to make sense to me.

Finally, remember that a 10% increase from a historically low figure does not mean it is Dodge City (or Detroit) out there.

[zanne]

29. Anything but blaming gunowners, right?

The gun people on DU twist themselves into contortions trying to justify their radical notions about gun ownership. Any attempt to point out the fact that guns are dangerous will bring out the whackos.

[benEzra]

30. What changed since 1992?

Anything but blaming gunowners, right?

The gun people on DU twist themselves into contortions trying to justify their radical notions about gun ownership. Any attempt to point out the fact that guns are dangerous will bring out the whackos.

Gun ownership rates were constant or increasing during the years of steep decline. Legal gun availability didn't change.

The question is, what IS different now than then?

I'll tell you. Crumbling social infrastructure. Underfunded social programs. Tanking economy. Job outsourcing and the trickle-down ramifications thereof. A more widespread sense that the government exists more to "keep citizens in line" (TSA, Patriot Act, warrantless searches, Surveillance Nation). The de facto abandonment of Community Policing by some cities in favor of a more in-your-face model, most notably Boston. Fewer police on the street overall, and those who are there are too often kept busy chasing their tails or busting the nonviolent for possession of non-approved herbs, instead of protecting the citizenry. More people without basic health care. More people without mental health care. The Iraq war, and the drain on the economy it represents. Fear. Uncertainty. And so on.

But, anything's better than blaming the variation on the variables, right? Better to blame the constant instead... :eyes:

[Pavulon]

31. A fork is dangerous

mixing bleach and ammonia is dangerous. Any person willing to kill another person is not going to stop to consider the gun laws.

[zanne]

32. Nice try.

Did you get that from Rush Limbaugh?

[Pavulon]

35. No life long experience

I have been around weapons my entire life. Grew up around them, never a problem. Carried scary black rifle in the NG, sidearms, LAWs, mines, explosives, even rode on a tank (against the regs for some reason). No one got shot. People stole shit, but never decided to shoot one another, even when pissed off and miserable away from home.

Violent PEOPLE are responsible for their actions.

[Zynx]

38. Gun ownership has not increased by any notable amount since the mid

90s and crime was decreasing then. What has changed in the law to make crime spike?

[benEzra]

42. Law hasn't changed significantly, either.

Socioeconomic factors HAVE changed quite a bit, though. (See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2760348&mesg_id=2762261">post #30).

[Hissyspit]

16. .

[ArmchairMeme]

20. Poverty makes choices for people

I remember seeing an interview on t.v. a while ago. They were talking to a young man of highschool age. When asked why he was selling drugs his answer was where could he make that kind of money without a highschool or college education.

Like Jesse ? robbed banks because that was where the money was.

It seems to me this year there have been many many more bank robberies this year and even with the security and photo evidence people are doing it. Some wear disguises but, they rob several banks in an area.

I also agree that the war on drugs has been a failure. I think that drug addiction should be treated as the illness it is. Only the sellers are criminals.
If drug trafficking were not such a lucrative business then there would be no reason for Afghanistan to plant and harvest a mega bumper crop.

[benEzra]

21. Considering that gun availability HAS NOT CHANGED in the last 20 years...

then guns cannot be the causative factor here, particularly since some the cities with big increases (such as Boston) are cities with harsh gun laws.

I'd suggest it has more to do with the tanking economy, fewer police on the street, diversion of police and social resources from crime prevention to "Homeland Security" stuff, and the deterioration of the social infrastructure in the inner cities in question.

[BluePatriot]

26. Seconded

My first thought was "well, duh, the economy is tanking although no one will admit it"

[brentspeak]

36. Where'd you get the notion that "gun availability has not changed in the last 20 years'?

[benEzra]

41. From the fact that the laws regulating same are mostly unchanged, with the only deltas

being in the direction of stricter controls (such as the imposition of mandatory background checks, which weren't passed until the early 1990's).

I was speaking of the last 15 years or so, though (1992-2007), which is really the interesting period:



What makes you think guns are "more available" now than in 1992, when the crime rate was far higher than it is now? Or "more available" than in 2000 or 2004, when the rate was somewhat lower than now?

The spectrum of guns available for civilian purchase hasn't changed significantly, other than the shift toward more modern-looking carbines through the '90s, but long guns are pretty much irrelevant to the crime stats. The Feinstein law introduced some .380-sized 9mm's to the market, but I doubt they made much of a crime rate impact.

[paparush]

22. Gee, I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that there are now 900+ BILLIONAIRES?

As the wealth gets concentrated, the poor get poorer.

[donkeyotay]

23. To those stated factors add the trickle down effect

Meth, gangs, poverty, and the willingness to use guns. Part of that willingness is a reflection of our national agenda. It's terra and war all the time. And, that national mission is supported by popular culture with shows like 24. America used to be about hope, now it's about torture. Surely that creates an atmosphere that supports more violence.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

27. Many children grow up familiar with the sound of gunfire...

With the immense wealth that America has how could we have allowed ourselves to reach the point where thousands of children grow up familiar with the sound of gunfire?

[benEzra]

28. I grew up familiar with the sound of gunfire...

from responsible target shooting and such. I made a lot of that noise myself, under parental supervision. 40% of U.S. households own guns, you know...

:popcorn:

But you are sadly correct that there are a lot of places where children grow up to the sound of people shooting at each other, sleep in bathtubs or on the floor at night, and such. Those are mostly places where the economy is crap, where jobs and education are almost impossible to get, where the only way out of poverty is the drug trade, and (more often than you'd think) where guns are difficult to legally own and use.

Check out the following graph:



What has changed since the early 1990's? It's certainly not gun availability, or civilian gun ownership rates (the ownership of "assault weapons" at least tripled between 1993 and 2004, and pistol ownership also showed sharp increases).

You know what IS different now? Crumbling social infrastructure. Tanking economy. Job outsourcing and the trickle-down ramifications thereof. A more widespread sense that the government exists more to "keep citizens in line" (TSA, Patriot Act, warrantless searches, Surveillance Nation). The de facto abandonment of Community Policing by some cities in favor of a more in-your-face model, most notably Boston. Fewer police on the street overall, and those who are there are too often kept busy chasing their tails or busting the nonviolent for possession of non-approved herbs, instead of protecting the citizenry. The Iraq war, and the drain on the economy it represents. Fear. Uncertainty. And so on.

You reap what you sow...

[KitSileya]

33. Does the decreasing availability of legal abortions also have an effect?

I believe there were those who claimed the decrease in crime during the Clinton presidency had as one of its main factors the fact that many potential criminals had been aborted by women, so that there were fewer poor, unwanted children growing up. However, legal and available abortion has been under attack by the christofascists on the right, and with only one abortion provider in some states, poor women without the financial or psychological means to raise children are the first to suffer - and the children born as a result suffer with them. Can this be a factor in the reverse of these crime stats? It wouldn't surprise me the least.

[piedmont]

40. Not unless there's been a spike in crime by six-year-olds.

But in ten years, look out!

[KitSileya]

43. Yes well, Bush has been in power for six years,

But Congress turned in 1994, right? And they've been building a grassroots following since before that - getting people elected for dogcatcher on upwards. I would have thought the boldening of the anti-abortion movement came before 2000.

But yes, we know that there are certain risk factors when it comes to who will become criminals and who will not, and poverty, violence, unstable homes are some of the biggest. Thanks to the reichwingers, these factors will be increased due to both their religious and economic legislation.

[piedmont]

39. Being familiar with the sound of gunfire makes one more apt to murder?

Go ahead and lock me up before I pop a cap in somebody, then!
:crazy:

[Zynx]

37. In Milwaukee crime has gone absolutely apeshit.

It's got to be drug trade related. That's the only thing that sends crime rates up so far so fast.