Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Murder Rates Rising

Quartz

The rise was covered last month by USA Today, and recent reporting by the New York Times revealed more data behind the trend. The Times analyzed homicide figures for various large cities that have seen more murders so far this year than at the same point in 2014.


Milwaukee has seen murders jump 76%, from 59 at this point last year to 104 today. Other cities also saw big increases over the same period: 60% in St. Louis; 56% in Baltimore.
What explains the reversal? Criminologists and police departments are not quite sure.
One explanation is that people are starting to trust police less. That has led them to settle disputes themselves—often violently—and also led police to back off on aggressive tactics like New York’s stop-and-frisk, which the city’s new mayor has been toning down.
Another explanation is the proliferation of guns. Milwaukee’s police chief, speaking to USA Today, partially blamed his city’s murders on “absurdly weak” gun laws.

29 comments:

  1. Another explanation is the proliferation of guns. Milwaukee’s police chief, speaking to USA Today, partially blamed his city’s murders on “absurdly weak” gun laws.

    Because Milwaukee's gun laws just now became "absurdly weak"? They were nice and draconian for the last 20 years while their murder rate was going down, is that it? It's also pretty hard to take that seriously when we see Chicago, New York, Baltimore, and Washington so prevalent on this chart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's the saturation effect. The scales are tipping.

      Delete
    2. It's the saturation effect. The scales are tipping.

      Good one. But seriously, what actually is the explanation.

      Delete
  2. When I saw the fancy chart, I wondered where DC was in comparison. Fortunately, the New York Times article included it. So we seem to have an increase in violence in large cities that seems to be occurring in states with both strict gun laws and those with progressive gun laws.
    This would suggest that its the ornery "other factors" that is causing it, as the article actually suggests in a very even handed way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cities with weak gun laws are about the same as cities with strong ones. We need to tighten up the whole thing.

      The obvious reason for this is the incredible increase in gun availability over the last 6 or 8 years. The lawful gun sales inevitably trickle down into the criminal world where most of these murders are taking place. But, we also have an increase among so-called lawful gun owners.

      Delete
    2. . . . incredible increase in gun availability . . .

      Um . . . what "incredible increase"? What category of person was prohibited 8 years ago, but is not now?

      Delete
    3. Playing dumb - you've been resorting to that a lot lately. Since you guys got all frightened that Obama was gonna take your guns away, sales have skyrocketed. Millions of guns have gone into the hands of Americans and the inevitable gun flow into the criminal world has resulted in these increases that we're just beginning to see. Wait for next year.

      Delete
    4. Playing dumb - you've been resorting to that a lot lately.

      Nope. Not now, and not lately. Much of the time I have no idea what kind of convoluted nincompoopery your twisted mind has come up with. That makes communication difficult.

      Oh, and I didn't "get all frightened" about Obama. I got prepared.

      Delete
    5. And I'd still like to know how you intend to square this "murder rates rising" trend, caused, according to you, by the "incredible increase in gun availability," with your repeated shrill claim that gun ownership is declining.

      Could it be that disarmament (even if voluntary and unilateral) does more harm than good?

      Delete
    6. Actually, I'm not really invested in the idea of gun ownership declining. I have posted a number of surveys and reports indicating that that's the case, but it's not a big deal to me. I do see the possibility that most of the new guns being sold are bought by people who already own guns and the first time buyers are offset by the old guys dying off and the hidden criminals who are disarmed. But as I say, it's not an important point because you existing gun owners who keep buying more and more guns are sufficient to supply the criminals with all the guns they need. And that's what accounts for most of the problems.

      Delete
  3. Oops, my bad, it is on the first chart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good catch Mr. I'm always right and know what I'm talking about HA HA HA HA HA HA

      Delete
  4. Of course. When you cant recognize an obvious problem then make up a problem and include the guns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I recognize the obvious problem, and so do you. It's gun availability to unfit people.

      Delete
  5. Blackety, blackety, black, black, blacks.

    orlin sellers

    ReplyDelete
  6. How could this be? The gun loons tell us, the more guns, the less crime. We should be murder free since there are 300 million guns in America.

    ReplyDelete
  7. . . . and also led police to back off on aggressive tactics like New York’s stop-and-frisk . . .

    Yeah, that must be the reason for the murder spike--the cops backing off on racist hyper-authoritarianism.

    Milwaukee’s police chief, speaking to USA Today, partially blamed his city’s murders on “absurdly weak” gun laws.

    Um--have gun laws suddenly, within the past 365 days, become "absurdly weaker"? If not, how does this nitwit intend to explain the abruptnness of the spike?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it could be a trickle-down effect from the increased gun sales over the last few years. It's reached the tipping point.

      Delete
    2. I think it could be a trickle-down effect from the increased gun sales over the last few years.

      But wait a second, aren't we told with monotonous regularity that the vast majority of the increased gun sales is accounted for by guns being bought by people who already own one (or several, or lots), thus gun ownership is not increasing (or even, according to some anti-gun sources, is decreasing)?

      Delete
    3. Can you elaborate some more on your "tipping point" theory? why do you think crime would decrease while "gun flow" increases for 6-8 years, and then suddenly spike as it passing this "tipping point"? Wouldn't that suggest the optimum would be just under this "tippling point" which still means lots and lots of guns in citizens' hands? And how does this new theory of yours jive with your previous agreement with me that the criminal gun market is saturated?

      Delete
    4. You play dumb too, TS. Time will tell. The FBI stats should be interesting this year and the next.

      Delete
    5. Why weren't they interesting in 2008-2014 while this buying frenzy was going on?

      "Time will tell", you say. You're just going to wait, and wait, and wait until a year when murder rates start to go up and then say, "ah ha! It's because of the guns! I told you this would happen." However long it takes... time will tell.

      Delete
  8. We also have to remember that this post should be titled: "murder rates rising... in these ten cities:"

    I haven't seen any comprehensive data on 2015 yet. Our murder rates have been historically low for quite a while, so I've been waiting for them to start going back up. Maybe this is the year, but we don't know that yet. And of course the antis will shout, "now it's because of the guns!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guns are involved in most murders. No one in this post is talking about gun murder rates - except you, I guess. You're a hard guy to please.

      Delete
    2. I wasn't talking about "gun murder rates". I never do. What are you talking about?

      Delete
  9. I find it very interesting that Dallas is even on that chart. Dallas doesn't have any gun laws. None, zip nada. In fact no Texas town, city, county or district has them. It is only state gun laws, state has had preemption since 1995.

    So while the city of Dallas may have ticked up slightly, the rest of the state has ticked down dramatically. Since Dallas doesn't have gun laws, it shouldn't be on that chart. Its a dishonest chart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Howdy BG,

      I think the chart actually shows quite well that the increase isn't really a gun issue, but rather what many of these articles refer to as the "Ferguson Effect", something much different.
      If anyone does want to make it about guns, one has but to look at the much steeper slopes of Chicago and Baltimore.

      Delete
    2. SG, gun control isn't really about "gun control". Its about people control, period. People are the ones using them. Criminals use them illegally. The pols cant touch the criminals so they write laws that will only affect the law abiding. As you know, you cant legislate wrong doing away so they can only do one thing, persecute law abiding citizens for the wrong doing of the criminals. Everything they do under the guise of "I support the Second Amendment, BUT" is the ultimate goal of total confiscation, incrementally, bit by bit.

      I live in the Texas DFW area. I watched the Ferguson effect in Dallas. It was a big flop, almost no one here was really all that interested. There were more white (hippie) protesters here than black. In fact about 95% white. And lasted about two and a half days and then almost totally forgotten. Looking at the up tick in crime is mostly due to pure economics. The black population in Dallas is mostly unemployed. Thank you Obama. And they are starting to eat their own. Its bad here, getting worse but with that, I have seen a LOT worse here before. A LOT worse! All though I am white (mostly) I deal with black people all the time. I listen to their complaints and problems in their communities as a part of the problems they bring to me and I am trying to figure out how to help them while not giving away my services. I cant go broke and out of business helping broke people get on their way. And their biggest complaint? OBAMA! Thanks Obama! The more people you un-employ the less customers, PAYING customers I get and that makes it hard to keep employees to do the jobs that are left to do. And those job numbers have been steadily declining since Obama has been in office, worse since his second term.

      This hits the larger cities harder that the rest of the rest of the state. There is the argument that Texas has been recruiting big businesses into the state. That's true. But these opportunities have been moving into the rural slower moving money areas, not the big metro areas where money moves much faster, or it used to.

      Dallas and the rest of the DFW area, Houston and Austin doesn't have it as bad as Ferguson does, at least not yet. But if we don't elect someone who cares for the country and its people instead of themselves and their causes, it will get that bad here or worse.

      But I will stick with the obvious, Dallas should not be on that chart.

      "Milwaukee’s police chief, speaking to USA Today, partially blamed his city’s murders on “absurdly weak” gun laws."

      Dallas doesn't have the power to have any kind of gun laws. Dallas has the same laws as Lubbock, Amarillo, Plano or any other city in Texas. So taken the insinuation that since other cities have weak gun laws that includes Dallas is just flat wrong. Its state preemption. Either put Texas on there or nothing. And Texas will be a lot lower in the wave.

      Delete