Violent crime rates going down

Fifteen unarmed black men were shot by police last year (and that usually doesn't happen unless a crime is taking place). However, about 48 police were killed by criminals (40 white, 7 black, 1 Asian). Obviously, since the number of police is far smaller than the number of young men (the usual demographic), the rate of violence against police is far greater than rate of force against men (usually men). These figures are always disputed, and for some reason the hyperbole is based on total population of blacks (13%) rather than the demographic of 17-40 . And if you want demographics, Hispanics, which is the largest minority in the country, generally have lower crime rates than either whites or blacks.

 Checking victim rates makes more sense--victims are all ages and sex and race. NCVS statistics identify the victims and the offenders. Black victimization is far higher in number and rate, even with a much smaller population. And usually the offender is the same race, and victims can identify them.
The overall rate of violent victimization from 2005-2019 fell 26% (from 28.4 to 21.0 victimizations per 1,000 U.S. residents age 12 or older). However, the rate fell more for blacks (43%) than whites (24%) . Ask yourself, why defund the police if they've been able to reduce the death and violence among blacks? Sounds like another anti-black plan of the Democrats.

Is this crime decrease ever celebrated? That crime has gone down for all races under 3 difference Presidents? Democrats will never concede this. It doesn't fit their narrative that the U.S. is a dangerous, racist, hateful place.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vvre0519.pdf

Prepping for the election debate

USAFacts.org is an excellent source of what local, state, federal entities spend using all the statistical sources that are published such as crime, health, and education.  But because most of these organizations lean left even with interpreting dry statistics, one can still see a bias in how the “facts” are presented.  Today it is outlining which topics might come up in the debate between Biden and Trump, such as “defund” the police.” US Census Bureau’s 2017 State & Local Government Finance Historical Datasets is the source of the data.

It begins with a graph you should be familiar with—the drastic drop in crime since its peak in the early 90s. Then it goes on to break out how much counties and states spend locally on their responsibilities like education, law enforcement, public health, etc.  Education, of course is the biggie—almost 50% of local budgets go for that (very little comes from the federal government). The second highest expense at the local level is law enforcement, but it’s only 9.2%.

So the way this is framed is that it law enforcement is the second highest expense, even though it pales in comparison with education. However, adding together what is traditionally called “social safety net” –public health, aid to disadvantaged, and children’s services—which total 10.4%, law enforcement is actually third.  In per capita spending that is $2,106 for education, $451 for social safety net, and $397 for police protection. 

And I’m sure its no shock to any of us to find out that large counties and metropolitan areas spend more on law enforcement than smaller counties. Yet, NYC actually spends a lower percentage of its budget on policing than the average—7.3%.

“In the 25 most populous counties—counting New York City’s five boroughs as a single county—local governments spent $573 per resident on law enforcement – which includes both police services and corrections. In the next 303 most populous counties, all with at least 200,000 residents, law enforcement spending stood at $388 per person. . .

Among the largest 25 counties, Broward County, Fla. spends the highest share of its local government budgets (18.2% or $723 per person) on law enforcement. The county spent less than average on education (37.4% of the total budget) but higher than average spending on child and social services (4.4%).

New York City, where the city government oversees all five of its boroughs, spends 7.3% of its budget on law enforcement. The city government spends 30.6% of its money on education and 12.4% on social services and aid to the disadvantaged combined. “

Some large metropolitan areas don’t follow the trends in police funding.

“Bexar County, Texas, home to San Antonio and nearly 2 million residents, spent $298 per person on law enforcement and $3,906 per person in total. The city of St. Louis, which as an independent city functions as its own county, spent $795 per person on law enforcement and $6,764 per person in total. St. Louis has a population of just 308,000.”

Is it different policing or different people committing the crimes? Would the people of St. Louis be safer if the law enforcement budget was cut or “defunded?”

Read the article here: https://usafacts.org/articles/police-funding-local-governments/?

2019 crime statistics were decreasing

Before the current staged riots which have increased crime rates for 2020 in major cities, crime was decreasing. (Nine police have been shot in St. Louis since the death of George Floyd)  That must have made some CEOs of victim groups like BLM and ANTIFA very uncomfortable. It made Trump look good. Here's what happened in 2019--fewer women were assaulted and the cities were safer than 2018:

The rate of violent crime excluding simple assault declined 15% from 2018 to 2019, from 8.6 to 7.3 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 12 or older.

Among females, the rate of violent victimization excluding simple assault fell 27% from 2018 to 2019.

There were 880,000 fewer victims of serious crimes (generally felonies) in 2019 than in 2018, a 19% drop.

From 2018 to 2019, 29% fewer black persons and 22% fewer white persons were victims of serious crimes.

The rate of violent victimization in urban areas—based on the NCVS's new classifications of urban, suburban, and rural areas—declined 20% from 2018 to 2019.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv19_sum.pdf?

How riots fit in with BLM sympathy and support

A police officer is 18 1/2 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.” Heather MacDonald, via Larry Elder.

With the media's assistance, the black men who have been shot by police--those in the news in 2020--have all had criminal records, have been resisting arrest, and had very serious records, including rape with robbery (several charges by the same woman) in the case of Jacob Blake, Jr. of Kenosha. Not a peep from the MeToo crowd who usually would ruin a man’s career based on a smack on the rear because the founders of Black Lives Matter are radical feminists.

The 3 men who were attacking Kyle Rittenhouse during a "peaceful protest" and were shot by him, a 17 year old, also had criminal records including sexual offense against a child, strangulation and weapons charges. These were not 3 good guys just helping out the community. If Rittenhouse had been black, I doubt we would know his name, but 2 of the 3 would still be dead. Media would get nothing out of that story and it certainly wouldn't fit the BLM narrative.

Police nationwide have close to a million contacts a year with the public who might be misbehaving in some way, whether speeding, disorderly and drunk, domestic abuse, or theft. In 66 years of driving, I've been stopped 2 times for speeding (45 in 35 mph zone) and once for wrong way to get away from a traffic accident. I have been at fault each time and didn't assume it was something about my physical appearance that created the problem. I wasn't drunk or high and didn't have a record, I was just wrong. so I just paid my fine. In keeping us safe, there are some confrontations with police that go badly--but more with whites than blacks and whites are shot at a higher rate. When a white man with a criminal record is shot resisting arrest or trying to kill police, it does not cause riots and looting. It serves no cause to do so.

Why do the media promote black criminals as victims and heroes? Why does the left push this narrative of the innocent (usually a man) black oppressed by the evil "man." Because the public is gullible--and for 3 or 4 decades the schools, churches, and entertainment industry have been pushing the lie. They are believing what they've been taught.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/table-43 This is the latest full year report on crimes by race; obviously based on numbers, whites commit more crimes and have more encounters with police. Based on population percentage and rates, blacks more likely to be victims and assailants. The 2019 half year report showed violent crime was decreasing, as it was in 2018. Well, that record won't stand because certain groups don't want less crime, safer neighborhoods, lower unemployment and more opportunity for minorities.

Joe Biden has saved many Black lives.

A total of 194 shooting incidents involving black victims occurred in New York City in June, a 177% increase from the 70 recorded in June 2019, according to the New York Police Department. The BLM movement and its liberal apologists in white suburbia are taking black lives, particularly young people, at an alarming rate. It sounds terrible, but the violence is still lower than in the early 1990s when the 1994 omnibus crime bill cracked down on violence, giving the states federal money for more police and equipment, and the streets of the major cities became safer by half. Violent crime rate was 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992, and 368.9 per 100,000 in 2018. That was an uptick from 361.6 in 2014.

Many people, both parties (and especially Harris and DeBlasio), have blamed Biden, who advocated for the crime bill. They don't give him credit for the thousands of black lives saved over a 30 year period, because the crime rate for blacks is about 6x higher than whites, therefore, the criminals incarcerated during those years, where not killing other black men. Also, the incarceration rate had been going up for many years before the crime bill. And "experts" (sort of like "scientists") don't agree on why the crime rate was halved. "Restorative justice" (i.e., ignore the crime based on race like the Parkland school shooting) people want to blame the law for high rates of black criminals in jail, but they don't want to credit it for saving black lives.

As Senate Judiciary chairman, Biden was a prime mover of the 1994 law, promising that "there will be fewer people murdered," and "fewer children will be turning to crime." (Politico) And he was. His efforts saved lives. But times have changed. His legacy must be denied to get him elected.

This is not to say that Joe Biden should be president for something that harmed/helped Blacks in 1994, only to say his party is a bunch of hypocrites who have so much hate for President Trump they will continue to lie, cheat and steal to get him out of office.

The assumption of rising violence against Blacks

Every article I read about BLM--left, right, middle, Christian, secular, black or white--begins with the obligatory statement about violence against Black Americans by whites. Nonsense.

Violence was at an all time high in the early 90s--over 25 years ago--and is half what it was then. And violence has decreased far more in the black community than white. The only systemic violence against Blacks is from the left, in the killing chambers of abortion clinics. Otherwise, Blacks outside the womb are far safer now than 25 years ago.

Then the next error in these articles, posts or memes, and this one usually from the Christians who vote for Democrats, or Christians who don't vote at all or Democrats who don't like Christians is that more government money or programs, in other words, doing more of what we've been doing for 60 years, will somehow work the next time. (Kind of like the socialism thing--we'll get it right the next time.) For some reason, usually lack of information from MSM (CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, NYT) which they slavishly watch or read, they don't know these programs have been bipartisan, supported by both parties, in fact, some of the most successful like EITC have been from Republicans. By ignoring our bipartisan failures, they get to demonize Republicans and demand everyone vote for Democrats--again.

A third error is white people who rend their garments about systemic racism can't even tell you what they personally are doing wrong even though they say they are part of the system. Or if they can think of something, they won't remedy it without demanding other people change.

The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people. Not police. Not the schools. Not the government. And it’s the same for whites, Asians, lesbians, etc. although higher for blacks.  This not "whataboutism." Listen to the Chicago statistics for this past week-end. Where are the marches, riots and looting for these invisible victims?

Police brutality, blacks and whites

Listening to people call the Mike Gallagher show to talk about what's open during this Covid19 crisis in their town. One from Virginia called to complain that during this time of protest and pandemic his governor (Mr. blackface) is addressing removing statues. Another from North Carolina (a Democrat) reports gathering for protests is encouraged and winked at, but the Republican convention which would have brought millions to the state coffers, is cancelled. Another (I think he was from California) complained that only 10 people are allowed at a private party and social distancing must be maintained, but 100 are allowed at a protest, and no social distancing. Now tell me folks, what part of this whole mess isn't political?

Grieving for a man who was killed in a terrible way during an arrest is understandable; allowing the nation to be destroyed based on a myth of police brutality is an evil, ugly plot to destroy the lives and living of millions. In 2019, 9 black men died at the hands of police during a confrontation. 19 white men died during a confrontation with police. Most were in the act of committing a crime. This information is from the Washington Post data base and is real, deep digging research investigating all the circumstances. So who blows it up? Our news media and social media.

39 black men had fatal confrontations with police in 2015 and 9 in 2019. We are a nation of 330, 000,000. Even for Obama's era, that's a tiny, tiny percentage of millions of confrontations with police.  However the drop is significant under Trump.

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877 is the link to the research. Probably to save their P & T promotion, the authors of this article, which makes perfectly clear that more whites are at risk than blacks in confrontations with police are trying to walk it back. I guess too many people were quoting it to bust the myth that unarmed black men are at terrible risk.

Academe is so far left, it's amazing anything but the party line ever got in to print. The hurdle would be funding, probably figured it was an easy thing to prove--systemic racism and police brutality. Then the next hurdle, finding a publisher--all the journals are also liberal with gate keepers who can shut the door. Then to get a group of people to do a peer review--that must have been a challenge once the results of the study were known. Of course, purchasing it had already been done. PNAS is on subscription and librarians (also gate keepers) probably couldn't reject it. I fully expect that after their clarification and apology, and after they've been run out of town, tarred and feathered, their careers have been ruined and the offending volume will be removed from library shelves.

It’s not fake, but it is false

There is so much propaganda using statistics about men who commit crimes--black and white. It's not exactly "fake," but it is meant to mislead. A man (or occasionally a woman) committing a crime is more likely to be shot or restrained by police than one who is out at a ball game not committing a crime. That's their job. Blacks commit crimes at a higher rate than whites or Hispanics or Asians, but for their numbers are less likely to be shot or restrained. It's something like 8x the rate of crime of whites, and blacks have a victim rate 6x that of whites. They are not being victimized by police--they call the police and report the crime. They want police protection. The police come, it's their job, and the assailant is black 93% of the time.

So how do the anti-police researchers figure this? By percentage of total population, not by percentage of criminal acts that put them in harm's way. The number of blacks killed by police has dropped dramatically since 2015 (although it was very small even then). Why? We may never know since the media won't investigate, but it is probably that the economy improved and they had hope with Trump as president instead of that slippery, feel-good guy who never lived in the 'hood, but preached hope and change because he had brown skin.

Here's the irony. When Obama was president that awful Dylan Roof shot a number of black people in a church, and the president blamed the Republicans for their deaths and demanded more gun control. When Chauvin killed Floyd in Minneapolis with an all Democrat controlled government top to bottom, governor to mayor to attorney general to senators (one a former prosecutor who should have put him away), the Republican president Donald Trump is blamed, and people rise up all over the nation demanding reform, when police killings are so much lower under Trump than Obama.
Republicans are so lame in defending themselves. Some even kneel and squeal. I used to be a Democrat and the spineless wimps in the GOP was quite a pill to swallow.

The Arbery shooting in Georgia

The Arbery shooting in Georgia reflects the need for Democrats to make everything about race. Nothing is ever a love affair gone sour, an innocent inquiry mistaken as a robbery or bad blood between co-workers. At least if the victim is black and the perp is white. Out of 100 black men who are murdered, 94 are victims of a black man (or occasionally a black woman). Four will be brought down by white, Hispanic or Asian men (or occasionally a woman). And statistics are similar for whites and Hispanics. For every 100 white or Hispanic men who are murdered, 83 will be victims of a same race assault. In most cases both the victim and assailant will be young.

The female mayor of Atlanta with no evidence whatsoever, called it a lynching, and blamed President Trump! I pity the family of the black man who never get justice because he was killed by another black man, and no one paid any attention. Certainly not the mayor and the major news media.

After 1994, violent crime dropped drastically--maybe 50%. Thousands of black lives have been saved. Experts don't agree on the reason. Because of the bias in research based on political and religious views, it’s difficult to tease out the details, but one thing is for certain, the media distorts reports of violent crime. It can sell more papers, or get more TV revenue or encourage more clicks on line for profit if it involves a black man being killed by a white man, and particularly if police are involved.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/05/this-was-a-lynching-atlanta-mayor-ahmaud-arbery-shooting/

Violent Crime statistics—no agreement, but not difficult to find

Violent crime. All the data show violent crime went down after the early 90s--by about half. (Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, 1994) There isn't any agreement on why. Was it Clinton's Crime Bill or the aging of baby boomer males, or the incarceration of so many young black men? In any case, Democrats own it--they controlled all 3 branches in 1994. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2019/05/10/469642/3-ways-1994-crime-bill-continues-hurt-communities-color/

The data also show it bumped up again during the last 2 years of the Obama administration. Again, no answer, but nowhere near the rate of the 80s and 90s. And it is going down again the last 3 years in all categories--murder, rape, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, larceny and arson. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/preliminary-report/tables/table-3/table-3.xls

Read if for yourselves.

https://www.justice.gov/resources

How safe are our schools?

Highlights on school crime.  https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018036.pdf   It's decreased in this century, but would you know from the news? Reported hate-words have decreased. Would you know that from memes and posts on social media? Also, crimes among juveniles, girls and boys, have decreased 65% since 1996, and arrests significantly from 2006-2015.

• Based on the 2017 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), students ages 12 to 18 experienced 827,000 total victimizations (i.e., theft and nonfatal violent victimization) at school and 503,800 total victimizations away from school.
• From 2000 to 2017, there were 153 casualties (67 killed and 86 wounded) in active shooter incidents at elementary and secondary schools and 143 casualties (70 killed and 73 wounded) in active shooter incidents at postsecondary institutions.
• In 2017, about 6% of students ages 12 to 18 reported being called hate-related words at school during the school year, representing a decrease from 12% in 2001. This percentage also decreased between 2001 and 2017 for male and female students as well as for white, black, and Hispanic students.
• Between 2001 and 2017, the percentage of students ages 12 to 18 who reported that gangs were present at their school during the school year decreased overall (from 20% to 9%), as well as for students from urban areas (from 29% to 11%), suburban areas (from 18% to 8%), and rural areas (from 13% to 7%).
• During the 2015-16 school year, 47% of schools reported one or more crime incidents to police. The percentage of public schools reporting incidents to police was LOWER in 2015-16 than in every prior survey year.

Rank, rate, percent and number

When reading statistics, watch the terms. Rank, rate, number, percent. For instance, Alaska RANKS 4th in the nation for black homicides. Wow. The RATE of homicide for blacks in Alaska is 29.22 per 100,000 (the national homicide rate is 4.62; 2.67 for white Americans). Must be a very violent place, that Alaska! In most states many fewer women are lost to this violence (about 12%), but in Alaska it's over 37 PERCENT. However, in NUMBERS only eight blacks were killed, 5 men and 3 women. 100% were killed by someone they knew, and 50% of those deaths were because of an argument. (2015 statistics from Violence Policy Center, April 2018, p. 3, state rankings)

I checked 4 sources--each had different figures for black male homicides. But I did see one in VPC that reported of the 7,014 black homicides, 121 were killed by law enforcement--of those where a relationship between victim and assailant could be determined, 75% were killed by someone they knew. Which is more likely to be breathlessly reported for days on the news, followed by a trial and protests?

Fact checking the criminality of the illegal aliens

In President Trump’s speech Tuesday, January 8 from the Oval Office:

“In the last two years, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records, including those charged or convicted of 100,000 assaults, 30,000 sex crimes, and 4,000 violent killings.”

Trump’s arrest numbers are correct, according to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement numbers compiled in 2017 and 2018.

The number of illegal immigrants arrested by ICE is the highest since 2014, according to a December report by the agency.

The ICE report says 158,581 illegal immigrants were arrested in fiscal year 2018, and 138,117 of those had a criminal history. This is an 11 percent increase over 2017, when 143,470 illegal immigrants were arrested, 127,992 of them with a criminal record.

“The number of people with pending charges arrested by ICE was 48 percent higher in 2018 than in 2017, while arrests of those with criminal convictions dropped slightly,” Reuters reported.

According to The Washington Post, the report “shows that 145,262 of those deported were convicted criminals and that 22,796 had criminal charges pending against them.”

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/01/09/fact-checking-5-of-trumps-claims-in-border-speech/?

So why are Democrats against a wall?  They were for it before Trump became president.

USAFacts—a new way to gather government statistics

This non-profit has been launched by Steve Ballmer and wife Connie.  Although most non-profits established by wealthy capitalists claim to be non-partisan and unbiased, we’ll have to see about that.  When Ballmer gives interviews we’ll see the clues. But since I frequently use government statistics myself in making my points about medical costs, education, immigration, sex/gender, religion, animals, housing, etc., I welcome any source which can make sense of it all, particularly the blending of federal, state and local.  Federal dollars, for instance, are only 3% of total spending on education.

https://www.geekwire.com/2017/full-interview-steve-ballmer-discusses-usafacts-new-10-k-government/

“USAFacts is a new data-driven portrait of the American population, our government’s finances, and government’s impact on society. We are a non-partisan, not-for-profit civic initiative and have no political agenda or commercial motive. We provide this information as a free public service and are committed to maintaining and expanding it in the future.

We rely exclusively on publicly available government data sources. We don’t make judgments or prescribe specific policies. Whether government money is spent wisely or not, whether our quality of life is improving or getting worse – that’s for you to decide. We hope to spur serious, reasoned, and informed debate on the purpose and functions of government. Such debate is vital to our democracy. We hope that USAFacts will make a modest contribution toward building consensus and finding solutions.”

https://usafacts.org/

  

The plan is to divide all government statistics by the four items in the Preamble’s mission statement.

“Revenue And Spending

Government revenue and expenditures are based on data from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Census Bureau, and the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Each is published annually, although due to collection times, state and local government data are not as current as federal data. Thus, when combining federal, state, and local revenues and expenditures, the most recent year shown is 2014, the most recent year for which all three sets of data are available. We show government spending through two different lenses:

Spending by segment: We recategorized several programs and functions to align them with four constitutional missions based on the preamble to the constitution:

• Establish Justice and Ensure Domestic Tranquility
• Provide for the Common Defense
• Promote the General Welfare
• Secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity

This approach is modeled after what businesses do for their own management accountability and shareholder reporting. Public companies present their businesses in segments – a logical framework for discussing the areas in which the they operate. We do the same for government. In using this constitutional framework, we have made judgements in how we group programs. . .

Spending by function: We also show spending by functional categories such as compensation for current and past employees, capital expenditures, transfer payments to individuals, interest on the debt, and payments for goods and services. “

Hate crime statistics for 2015

Most people don't follow crime statistics, and probably not hate crime statistics, but I do. The law that hate crimes had to be collected and analyzed is 26 years old, signed by GHW Bush with a Democrat Congress in 1990. It's been revised twice, and most recently in 2009 to add more categories for sexual orientation. Race/ethnicity and religion are the majority. Hate crimes are a small niche in crime given the attention it gets on TV--5,850 crimes of all types from assault to murder--person, business, institution, or society as a whole. And now there are 3 categories for sex: gender, gender identity and sexual orientation--that should goose the numbers a little. It must be tough to mark the box for a bi-sexual Muslim who assaults a transgender woman who is a lesbian Jew. Since we already have laws against all these crimes I've never understood a special hate motivation law. Only one rape (legacy definition) in the 2015 report was counted as a hate crime compared to 255 larcenies. https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2015/topic-pages/victims_final

It's unclear to me if the San Bernardino murders of Dec. 2015 by Muslims were ever called a hate crime even though 14 people died and 22 were injured, 3 of them immigrants, and many Christians participating in a quasi-religious holiday party. Even though the FBI said the shooters were inspired by jihad and terrorist ideas, it wasn't a hate crime?

San Bernardino did however, inspire Donald Trump to say all immigration from Muslim countries should end until the U.S. had a better way to vet them. For this he was condemned--by Obama, Gov. Brown, the Pentagon, and most global leaders. When polled right before the election about 57.4% of American voters agreed with Trump on immigration, including 58.5% of Hispanic voters. (Zogby)

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/17/us/san-bernardino-attackers-discussed-jihad-in-private-messages-fbi-says.html?_r=0

Southern Poverty Law Center, which I consider a hate group, blames Pamela Geller for San Bernardino terrorists. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/03/southern-poverty-law-center-blames-san-bernardino-jihad-massacre-on-pamela-geller

Are we being manipulated by trending stories on social media?

I think it was either Wall Street Journal or Washington Post that posted a side by side view of what trends on Facebook on various issues. I suppose they calculate from hashtags, which I rarely use. You can check any of about 10 issues and see how we are being told completely different versions by the (mostly) on-line media which are often connected to mainstream TV and print. For instance, much on the left about bathrooms is posted by an LGBQT rights organization that probably few on the right have ever heard of.  I see I'm not the only one posting statistics about percent of white offenders shot by police exceeding black, but that news isn't crossing over. Some reporters definitely don't know the difference between percentage and rate, and believe crime should reflect percentage of population. If that were so, 50% of homicides would be by females. Although both left and right could read Department of Justice reports that homicide rate declined from 9.3 homicides per 100,000 in 1992 to 4.8 homicides per 100,000 in 2010, they disagree on why, and rarely cite it in #blacklivesmatter stories, even though blacks have benefitted the most. Unfortunately, there is something called the Ferguson affect and crime is on the uptick--again, disagreement on why.

November 2011, NCJ 236018

What if you read a story about Chicago murders and that most occur on street and alleys and parking lots, in fact that the outdoor rate of murders had gone from 61.3% in 1991 to 82.4% in 2011.  Scary, right?  But what if you read that in 1991 the outdoor murder number in Chicago was 928, and by 2011 had dropped to 435, and the streets of Chicago are safer than 20 years ago?  Both figures are true, but it depends on the slant the reporter chooses to use to manipulate the reader. Black Lives Matter will probably not tell you that most of the falling crime rate in the last two decades has been for blacks, because the white rate was low 20 years ago, and is still low.  It is the black community, the one complaining about increased police presence in the neighborhood and more black criminals in prison that has benefitted the most from the Clinton era omnibus crime bill.

Chicago murder analysis, 2011

Cleveland Browns running back Isaiah Crowell posted a drawing/cartoon of someone dressed all in black (a message?) slitting the throat of a policeman. He's since apologized for his poor decision. Sorry. That's not good enough for me. He needs to hear from President Obama and AG Lynch and lose his flying privileges and the Browns should fire him. Where was his outrage at black men being killed by black men, which is about 4,500 a year or 40— criminal or innocent — for every one killed by a cop, and where was his rage when whites, mostly committing crimes, were killed by police to protect him, his family, and job--that number is higher than blacks. He's disgusting. And the media can step up and take the blame for race pimping and never telling the truth, only reporting about blacks, and often erroneously.

Mrs. Clinton's platitudes

The murder rate within the black male population of Baltimore is about 156 per 100,000. Young black men being killed by other young black men. The national rate is 5 per 100,000. So what is Mrs. Clinton's solution?

"There needs to be a concerted effort to address the systemic racism in our criminal justice system. And that requires a very clear agenda for retraining police officers, looking at ways to end racial profiling, finding more ways to really bring the disparities that stalk our country into high relief."

Why do thinking people vote for someone who babbles these platitudes that no one believes, not even her?

 http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police/homicides/

 https://www.baltimorebrew.com/2015/08/07/baltimore-surges-past-detroit-in-number-of-homicides-in-2015/

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-homicide-updates-20151221-story.html

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/14/us/Baltimore-homicides-record.html

How to report violent crime

Academics still blame the higher rate for violent crime on poverty and discrimination.  Not so.

“The formula for escaping poverty as an adult also has nothing to do with race: Graduate from high school, wait until you are married to have children, and work full-time. Whites who eschew those bourgeois behaviors are as likely to be poor as blacks who eschew them. Only 2 percent of individuals who follow those rules are in poverty, according to Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution; 72 percent of those who follow them earn at least $55,000 a year. The American poverty rate would be cut by 70 percent if the same percentage of Americans engaged in those responsible behaviors as did in 1970, regardless of race.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420565/charleston-shooting-obama-race-crime

Why is Obama in Oregon?

Chicago, Obama's home town, probably wonders why he didn't go there instead of Oregon to talk about the problem of gun violence.  Mike at Homicide Watch Chicago (Suntimes) notes: "More children have been victims of gun violence in the city of Chicago in the past 2 years, than all of U.S " mass school shootings " in the last decade. " 

I didn't check his stats--he was commenting on the death of a 15 year old this week, but nationally the rate of firearm homicide in 2010 for blacks was 14.6 per 100,000, compared to 1.9 for whites. Washington Post said it was twice as high in one article, another 4x and another 6x. Dept. of Justice figures says 6.3x.  (NCJ 243035)

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-84653981/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois

Chicago has no gun stores.  Chicago's police department seizes more illegal weapons than any other in the nation — nearly 20 a day for a total of 5,500 so far this year. Black Illinois law makers have blocked stiffer penalties for illegal gun possession saying it would lock up more black men.  Duh!

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-84647473/

The Omnibus Crime bill made us safer

but it did fill up the prisons.

The Omnibus Crime Bill was passed in 1993 providing stiffer sentences and more money for crime control. Firearm-related homicides declined 39%, from 18,253 in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011. Nonfatal firearm crimes declined 69%, from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 victimizations in 2011. In 2010, the rate of firearm homicide for blacks was 14.6 per 100,000, compared to 1.9 for whites, a decline of 51% for blacks and 48% for whites.

If I can find these BJS stats, then why can't the media? What will decrease mass shootings are armed security guards in schools and malls.