Chicago having more total murders than cities of LA and NY combined leads for calls for Mayor to resign

There was an anti-violence demonstration in Chicago which also called for Mayor Rahm Emanuel to resign. Chicago has had more total murders in 2016, 2017 and 2018 than the combined populations of Los Angeles and Chicago. This is despite having 4.6 times fewer people.

There have been 304 murders in Chicago up until July 31, 2018

There are 2.7 million people in the City of Chicago.
There are 4 million people in the City of Los Angeles.
There are 8.5 million people in the City of New York.

Chicago had 650 total murders in 2017.

In 2017, Chicago had 2,785 shooting incidents and 3,457 shooting victims, which was a decrease from the 3,550 shooting incidents and 4,349 shooting victims in 2016.

There were 282 homicides in Los Angeles in 2017. There were 290 murders in New York in 2017.

Chicago’s murder total was more than Los Angeles and New York combined in 2016.

Chicago had 771 homicides in 2016. New York City logged 334 homicides in 2016, according to NYPD data. LAPD data shows that there were 294 homicides in Los Angeles in 2016.

53 thoughts on “Chicago having more total murders than cities of LA and NY combined leads for calls for Mayor to resign”

  1. God help us. Forgive them they not what they do. No killing in heaven Tickets Available already paid for Just except. God lovsp

    Reply
  2. This is absurd. I live in Los Angeles. You CANNOT get a gun carry permit. In New York City you CANNOT get a permit for ANY Pistol or revolver, home or carry. So NEITHER of those cities let you walk around with a gun on your hip. So much for your theory.

    Reply
  3. In most scientific experiments we don’t use humans as guinea pigs if such would threaten the life of the person. In Chicago, despite a large body of evidence to the contrary, they’ve been experimenting with gun bans to see if such lowers violence … how long will they have to continue this failed experiment? How long until they understand that criminals not only don’t care about bans with regard to themselves, but are actually encouraged by the fact that those who they seek to rob and kill don’t carry guns to defend themselves.

    Reply
  4. Where would we be without regulation? Man that would be an utter cesspool.
    5mpg,
    brown air you can’t see 20 feet ahead in,
    rivers of stinking filth,
    cholera,
    nothing is what it says on the label, and you can’t return anything when it is defective,
    you don’t even want to know what is in the ham can,
    5 megacorps running everything gouging everyone,
    drug pushers getting all the 7-year-olds hooked, when they are not working in a dangerous factory, that could fall down any second.

    Look up the muckrakers and read the books and articles they wrote. Be informed about the ills they got society to address.

    Reply
  5. You ignore how many murders are prevented by having laws against it…which should be obvious to anyone.

    No, millions of other lives are affected by those who have substance abuse problems, which is obvious to anyone. And it is well within the purview of society to deter that negative impact.

    Methods to reduce substance abuse have been dimwitted, but that in no way exonerates the use of these substances.

    You have serious reading comprehension issues.

    Reply
  6. IQs were rising precisely because iodine was in table salt…and people were putting iodized table salt on their food. Iodized salt has never been in processed food. But processed food does have a lot of salt. Enough so that recommendations were given to stop using table salt to reduce blood pressure problems. Add to that, that the people who are still adding salt at the table or are preparing food with salt, are using the lead tainted “Himalayan” salt from Pakistan or Sea Salt neither of which has iodine.

    The lead from emissions has mostly been ended, and that is great, and making a big difference, but we now know that even low levels of lead causes brain damage in the unborn, infants and young children.

    Lead is definitely still a problem. In fact, low levels of lead cause 412,000 premature deaths in the US every year. Almost as many as smoking. ANY amount of lead in children causes damage. That is why it should never be in any baby food. But it is in 36% of baby food products tested!

    Bigger earnings years are in one’s 50’s and 60’s. When people are having families they tend to be younger and have very limited means. This means many, if not most, children are raised in houses that have lead paint. I am not saying the surface you see…under it. It still fakes and peals and all around the foundation it is in the soil because for decades they sanded the house before they panted again leaving all that stuff on the ground.

    The lead in Flint is not that rare, it happens all the time. Search “5,300 U.S. water systems are in violation of lead rules” Mostly smaller older towns, but it is not limited to that. And most of the news coverage of the Flint situation gave people the misimpression that you can see the lead in the water. Rust is rust, lead is lead. If there was enough lead in there that you could see it, it would probably send you to the hospital immediately; parts per billion stuff.

    And I did not say lead levels are rising, it is a matter of location. They are elevated in city centers, by busy highways, and in older communities (anything pre 1978). It is also high near small busy airports because most propeller aircraft still uses leaded fuel. And it is higher near firing ranges and some lakes where they have been shooting birds for many decades. Also new faucets can be dangerous. You have to let them run first. They put lead in the brass because the factories that cut the brass save money because lead in the brass make their tools last a little longer. Same with keys. Never give those to a toddler to much on because they are teething.

    And all the lead that was spewed out the tale pipes fell down and is still sitting in the dirt. Some has washed down the rivers. But it is dense, as you know, so is less likely to be washed away quickly.

    We still have a lot to do to clean up the lead.

    Reply
  7. The US RDA is 150µg/L, for everyone except pregnant women and breastfeeding women for which the recommendation is 220µg/L and 290µg/L.

    That does not necessarily mean optimal. But that is not why I think we need a higher target. Those RDA recommendations not nearly achieved. Look at the “NHANES 2015-2016 Laboratory Data” Not very user friendly. I got the median as 129µg/L. The 2007-2008 data is easier to locate. And it shows that pregnant women were only at 125µg/L in 2007-2008. That is well below 220µg/L. And since then the median has fallen 39µg/L. There is no reason to think it has not also fallen in pregnant women as well. And if it fell by the same amount, they are probably averaging well under 100µg/L. If we were squeezing by on fumes in 2007-2008 we are clearly in trouble now. We are talking medians. Half the women are below that.

    “All pregnant women (sample size 184) surveyed during 2005-2008 had a median UI concentration of 125 mg/L (95% CI 86-198), and 56.9% ± 7.9% of this group had a UI concentration of < 150 mg/L. UI concentrations were lower among non-Hispanic black survey participants than non-Hispanic white and Mexican-American participants." 56.9% of pregnant women were below 150µg/L, not below 220µg/L! 95% were below 199µg/L. That was 2005-2008. But it has all fallen from then. Almost certainly more than 95% of pregnant American women today are way below 220µg/L. We absolutely know this is loosing IQ points. I think we want a median higher than 220µg/L or half of pregnant women would not be getting the recommended amount. That is why we should shoot for 400µg/L, because a much higher percentage of pregnant women would then be getting 220µg/L. Higher doses are well tolerated up to 1,100µg/L. There is certainly no harm at 400µg/L or double that with plenty of room to spare. Higher iodine has other benefits for women: reduced breast cancer rates, and lower miscarriage rates.

    Reply
  8. ” The recommended daily intake of iodine for adult women is 150–300 µg for maintenance of normal thyroid function; for men it is somewhat less at 150 µg.[21] ” <-- From Wikipedia. Do you accept or have any citable reason to not accept those figures?

    Reply
  9. It is true everywhere that the middle and upper classes, having much more to lose, are less violently and criminally minded–at least with respect to crime against individuals persons. It is the increase of the poor desperate, and how such are treated, that Democrat policies have the worst effect towards.

    Beggars are after all, easier to please.

    And there are reasons why Chicago is worse than most locales. http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-2012/Gangs-and-Politicians-An-Unholy-Alliance/

    Reply
  10. Ban this, push that.

    You are pro-government fixes everything fanatic, when the truth is government makes damn near everything worse. How about just not telling people the lie salt is bad for them?

    Because unless you actually have a clinically proven sodium processing deficiency, it ain’t so?

    Oh wait, that’s government doing less and not more, so that won’t work for you.

    Reply
  11. ” It may be … these destructive behaviors. ” <-- No, we can't. That is why murders are still prosecuted, because merely making something against the law does nothing and can do nothing to change human nature. " No idea what "ETSU" is supposed to mean. " <-- That totalitarian idiots such as yourself Eat That S-- Up. You get off on thinking you are controlling people. It's a mental disease on your part, a sociopathy at worst and an immaturity at best. " How many lives ... alcohol and tobacco? " <-- It doesn't matter. It is their lives and not yours to put in order as you see fit. In fact, nothing has killed more people than your conception of the proper role and scope of government. Government cannot be Mommy or Daddy, it is after all, only what a sufficiently powerful majority (or minority) have agreed they will kill people about. " "Saving lives" is a "false virtue"? Sounds like someone is in extreme denial. " <-- Says the delusional person imagining they are saving lives with the War on Drugs. Your insistence on counterfactuals will get all the respect from me such idiocies deserve--in line with Moon Landing or Holocaust denial on your part, were you to do so.

    Reply
  12. You were not unclear. What you are is drastically implausible.

    Food has been “processed” for over 100 years now, and for most of that time, IQ’s have been rising steadily. Are you claiming the salt used in processed food was once iodized, but that is no longer required?

    There is no plausibility at all that blood levels of lead are rising, except in Democrat run Flint, MI.

    Reply
  13. It may be human nature to kill someone who makes you angry, but we can rise above such things by outlawing these destructive behaviors. No idea what “ETSU” is supposed to mean. The internet says it is a university.

    How many lives have been destroyed by drugs including and alcohol and tobacco?

    “Saving lives” is a “false virtue”? Sounds like someone is in extreme denial.

    Reply
  14. The salt in processed food currently is not iodized. That is a fact. Only table salt is iodized. If I was somehow unclear. That is a big part of why iodine levels are falling like a rock.

    Milk naturally has iodine if the cows were fed feed grown where iodine is in the soil. And no it is not terribly noticeable.

    Search “9 Healthy Foods That Are Rich in Iodine”.

    Milk substitutes do not have iodine, and while calcium levels are monitored in cow milk, they are not monitored in these other products. Which may be why children given these alternatives end up shorter.

    Reply
  15. ” We also need to add iodine to salt in processed foods, less than in iodized. ”

    You know it is not iodized?

    ” All milk and milk-substitutes need to have good levels of iodine and calcium. ”

    Can’t think of a better way to get people to hate milk than to make it taste of iodine. At least in salt, it’s doesn’t stand out so much.

    Reply
  16. ” There is a reason habit forming drugs are criminalized ” <-- Yes, it makes evil idiots think they have the power to change human nature, and they ETSU, all that preening and signalling false virtue.

    Reply
  17. I don’t buy the “culture” argument. Sure, there is some homing in on reaching requirements for benefits, and that is detrimental, but that is human nature, not culture. And it is poor foresight in policy making, not to take into account human nature, and people gaming the system.

    I believe, general public amenities available to everyone but less appealing than what you could get, makes more sense. And some HIGH QUALITY services should be available to everyone: free childcare, free boarding schools (schools in general should be dramatically improved), free college education (standardized and always 100% transferable) and free skills programs.

    The reality is that murder and crime in general has dramatically receded. The evidence is strong that the heavy crime earlier was because of lead exposure from auto emissions.

    I think it is clear that lead is continuing to generate crime through old lead paint, lead fallout from those decades of lead exhaust, and continued permitted lead exposure such as leaded aviation fuel, lead ammunition/propellant, fireworks, brass faucets and keys, fishing sinkers, lead-acid batteries, lead fallout on cropland, and in the water from fallout that landed on land or leached from old pipes.

    We need the lead gone. Lead paint homes and apartments torn down or at least all the windows removed and replaced, and any lead pipes replaced with ceramic/plastic. We need the soil tested block by block in every city, and every farm tested. Food needs to be tested especially baby food. Zero lead tolerance in baby food. “After about 530 baby food products were tested, researchers found 65% of products tested positive for arsenic, 36% for lead, 58% for cadmium and 10% for acrylamide. All of these chemicals pose potential dangers to developing infants.” USA Today.

    And, I think, similarly that iodine deficiency is bringing about a new crisis. Iodine levels are crashing due to Pakistani “Himalayan” salt, and other expensive salts, and advise not to eat table salt, have displaced iodized salt.

    We have to get iodine back into the food. All salt used in manufactured food should have some amount of iodine in it. Probably less than was put in iodized salt, because people are going to get a lot more salt that way. We also need to ban this Himalayan salt (actually from Pakistan). Though if we banned foods with lead it would be banned anyway because it has lead in it. All table salt should be iodized or taken off the shelf. And we should add kelp to all cattle/dairy feed. That not only adds iodine to the milk, it reduces 99% of the methane cows make. Similarly, all other milk alternatives should have appropriate calcium and iodine.

    Levels of these can be modified based on resulting population iodine levels. I think we should shoot for 400-450 μg/L with a fairly small standard deviation.

    If we are still missing people like vegans and others, maybe we can add it to some other foods like all salad dressings or olive oil.

    Reply
  18. In the event the statement, ” The fact those places are run by Democrats is the problem. “, has implications too occult for you, what the true precepts of the Democrat Party are, are inimical ones to a healthy human society.

    Reply
  19. There is a reason habit forming drugs are criminalized; they destroy people’s lives, harm economies, and lead to a lot of accidental death, in traffic accidents and otherwise.

    Intoxicated people can’t fulfill their basic responsibilities. This endangers children, elderly and disabled in their care.

    Reply
  20. Really, murder is inhumane?

    Low iodine, high lead; my bet.

    Everyone wants to blame drugs, genes or “culture”. But it is about self control, and the ability not to do what you know is a bad idea. If that is not compromised, there is no huge drug market.

    You should see the slide in Iodine levels. It was close to 400µg/L in the 1970’s. In 8 years it has gone from 164µg/L (2007-8) to 129µg/L (2015-16). And in (2007-8) pregnant women were only at 125µg/L. The recommendation is 220µg/L for pregnancy, 150µg/L if not (and not nursing). If it went down 39 like it did for the average American then we are talking 86µg/L during pregnancy. You think we have a problem now, the future could be very bleak. Koreans are at 294 μg/L. Our numbers are refugee level numbers. Who is getting serious about this? No one.

    Why more problems in Chicago vs Los Angeles? There is very little iodine in the soil anywhere near Chicago. The food grown in the Great Lakes, Appalachian, and Northwestern U.S. regions and in most of Canada has virtually no iodine.

    Low iodine during pregnancy can drop the child’s future IQ 25+ points very easily. It also damages the child’s moral compass.

    Then there is lead. There is more lead exposure in older buildings. Areas that are loosing population rarely build much. The population of Chicago peaked at 3,620,962 in 1950. In 2010 it was 2,695,598. So they have lost 925,000 people. Some buildings do become condemned and such but usually they are just boarded up, or torn down and made into parking lots, because you can’t make money building a replacement, because there are other buildings available for buyers considerably cheaper than you can build.

    On the other hand, in Los Angeles, the 1950 population was 4,151,687 and in 2010 was 9,818,605 and has not stopped growing. So more buildings are newer. In 1978 they stopped using lead paint and in 1980 the population was 7,477,657. That means that a lot of buildings have been built since then exposing less people to lead from old paint. Though the level of maintenance is certainly a factor in exposure. Generally, the lower the relative rent in the area, the greater the disrepair, the greater the risk of lead exposure. Lead lowers IQs too, but mainly it damages the self control centers of the brain. This increases substance abuse, impulse buying, violence, crime, teen pregnancy, infidelity, over eating, reckless behavior, and other problems. Lead can be mitigated to some degree by getting enough calcium in one’s diet. Lactose intolerance can be an obstacle to that. There can also be iodine in milk, as long as the soil is not depleted in iodine that the cattle feed was fed.

    Pregnant women and young children need to be routinely monitored for lead and iodine, and measures taken to correct those levels. We also need to add iodine to salt in processed foods, less than in iodized. All milk and milk-substitutes need to have good levels of iodine and calcium.

    Reply
  21. I live in Chicago, in a transitional part of the city between lots of affluence and lots of working class folks. I walk to get groceries. I walk to see my dentist. My mailman walks his route and we exchange a friendly hello when we pass each other on the sidewalk. I live by four elementary schools and a ball field. The sidewalks are full of kids each afternoon buying popsicles after school. I can hear little league games from my roof. I grew up in a small rural town (100 miles from a mall), but have lived in the city for 20 years. In a very real way, *I* am living the traditional American life my hometown friends imagine that they are living–grilling with neighbors and healthy, independent children buying candy at the corner store. My friends from home and my parents and relatives–they spend most of their time driving 10 miles to school or driving 14 miles to Walmart, at Walmart or driving 14 miles back from Walmart.

    Reply
  22. Fewer guns, especially handguns will reduce the number of killings in homes or an fistfight become an gunfight. Criminals will still get them without much problems.

    Reply
  23. I think the theme here is that Chicago has become sufficiently broken that the Mayor is in political danger.

    Part of that may be due to other revelations, such as the fact that they’d been “disappearing” defendants, moving them to secret detention facilities where their lawyers couldn’t find them. Even Democrats can get upset about something like that.

    Reply
  24. There are solutions, but none I can think of that are compatible with our constitutional limits on governmental power.

    The basic problem here is a combination of “the war on poverty” and the Curley effect; Jobs moved, and people were paid not to move. This resulted in local pockets with fairly high population densities, and no jobs.

    Normally the response to this would have been people moving away, to find work. But welfare short circuited that response, enabled to people to stay put anyway. Worse, it created an incentive to not marry, because single women with children got more support. And the people who ran those cities certainly didn’t want their populations to drop, more population meant more power an money for them.

    This caused rapid cultural devolution. And that’s what we’re looking at now: A sub-culture that was artificially created, with very counter-productive values. Which are actually leaking out into the general population, like a gangrenous limb poisoning the rest of the body.

    You’d amputate the limb, but these are still people, you can’t amputate them. What is needed is some way to interrupt the transmission of that toxic culture, and reintegrate these people into the still functional culture. Cultural genocide is what’s needed!

    The only way I see of doing that is to end the support that’s keeping those people there in hopeless situations. Reverse it! Require them to move to places with healthy cultures and economies, and not in large groups that would form new ghettos. No, divide and isolate them from each other, so that they will adopt the culture of the people surrounding them.

    But I don’t see any way to do this consistent with our constitutional structures and civil liberties. The best I can see is providing opportunities that the least damaged can take advantage of, while maybe paying those who won’t take them to accept sterilization, so that the problem naturally dies out in a couple of generations.

    The sterilization incentive plan would be entirely constitutional, but very controversial, I don’t see it being politically feasible. Unless maybe we see another summer of widespread urban riots, and the functional majority just totally lose their patience.

    Reply
  25. In the US, most of the murders take place in small areas with extremely high population densities and sub-par economics. “Ghettos”, in other words. I expect the same is true in France and Germany.

    It really is in the US the case that most of the murders are taking place in areas that haven’t seen rule by Republicans in 50 or more years. So those of us living outside those areas don’t really feel any responsibility for what’s going on inside them. WE have no control over policy in those 1 party states. They’re foreign inclusions in the body politic, a result of local rule by a party almost all of the country, geographically anyway, has rejected.

    And they, insanely, demand to change the laws in the areas that are peaceful, on the basis of the crime rates where THEY get to make the rules. Madness. It’s like the gangrene blaming the rot on the immune system in the healthy part of the body.

    Reply
  26. See denser populations. France, Germany and the UK have 1.5 to 2 times the population density yet murder rates are 1/4 that of the US as a whole. Urban and rural it does not matter. Birmingham Alabama has a population 1/20th of Paris but has 3x the murder rate. Maybe there is something to this Democratic Socialism thing they have in western Europe?

    Reply
  27. AFAIK, Portugal only decriminalized ‘personal use’ – not trafficking. I would expect the majority of drug-related homicides to be related to the latter? The most balanced/objective analysis I’ve found (evaluating both ‘success’ and ‘failure’ claims) seems to indicate mildly positive results overall for Portugal, including homicides.

    The recent (2016) increase in violence in Chicago after years of mostly decline might be related to disintegration of larger marijuana gangs into a larger number of smaller local gangs in the wake of 2013 medical marijuana, meaning less money to go around and the gangs not yet having either declined or moved to some other profit center?

    Reply
  28. Also, compare the US to countries like France, Germany and the UK where they actually have denser populations than we do and in the case of France, have nearly the same amount of ethnic diversity in their populations due to high immigration. Those countries are pretty much Democratic Socialist governments with a higher overall standard of living than the US and they have a murder rate 1/4 of the US, a nation that has far more conservative elements than any major EU nation.

    Reply
  29. States with the top 5 highest murder rates:

    Alabama
    Louisiana
    Alaska
    Missouri
    South Carolina

    4 out of 5 consistently vote red and are Republican controlled. The other (Louisiana typically votes red as well). Also, 6 of the bottom 8 states are heavily Democrat. Your argument is flawed. Texas and California have identical murder rates (~4.8 per 100k). New York has the lowest of any state with over 10 million people. The murder rate gets high when you have red states that refuse to fund anything that might help.

    Reply
  30. Anything from setting up a functional police force with enough rights and means to be effective (but it conflicts with the “freedom” of people) to more drastic ones. If you exterminate troublesome groups they can’t murder each other or others. Though probably just offing actual convicted murderers without fail would help a lot.

    Reply
  31. Do note that as bad as Chicago murder rate is that it is still below the top historic rate. And that if you want the rate to go down then you need to put assign cops based on the murder rate.

    Reply
  32. L.A. and NYC have a below average murder rate for a large U.S. city. Chicago’s is about average. It spiked up a couple years ago, but over the last five years, the murder rate is basically the same as Atlanta or Houston’s and lower than D.C.’s. Or basically equivalent to San Francisco in 2007.

    If the number of murders in an area is the metric that matters, then, sure, Flint is safer than Toronto because Toronto has more murders.

    Reply
  33. “ban guns like the UK”

    And get UK levels of knife murder greater than levels of murder in New York where guns are legal?

    Clearly guns aren’t the problem. Guns are available across the US and yet few places have Chicago’s level of murder. (Baltimore comes to mind). So if you want to correctly identify what is causing this problem then you need to do something more productive than reflexively blame firearms.

    Reply
  34. No, no lives will be saved. China kills every drug dealer they catch, and they catch a new crop every year and have never gotten rid of their drug problem. Duterte is a thug with a long history of using the excuse he is being tough on crime, to execute his political enemies.

    He should stretch a rope.

    Reply
  35. So you lurch from abandoning one kind of stupid and evil into attempting another?

    [META comment]I love how the comment “pre-rating system” calls the comment above 87% likely to be perceived as toxic, when only 31% of Americans are silly, evil, or ignorant enough in any combination to be Democrats.

    Reply
  36. “There are many solutions” — yes? Care to share? It’d be enlightening to hear of solutions that don’t just “sound good, but can’t be done”. Or sound promising, but ignore the tension of responsibility-taking versus pleasure-seeking.

    “But you pretend” – who’s this “you” buddy? Neither what I’ve immediately written, NOR what I’ve written over my long and checkered past, indicate i’m “pretending”. Maybe “you” in the rhetorical plural sense — the sense where “you” refers to a lot of people like “us” who actually live moral lives upholding your denigrated list of “hollow gunk” laws?

    Again, MZSO — I invite you to take a few minutes to list out some of the “many solutions”. If you would.

    GoatGuy

    Reply
  37. Actually a lot of violence is because of drugs. And a lot of other crime in general is caused by drugs. Amsterdam had a huge problem with heroin in (I think the 80s/70s). They had a central park where needles were stuck in trees and looked like a porcupine. They then legalized pot. The number of NEW heroin addicts fell buy 90%!!
    The old theory was that one drug led to the use of another harder drug. I liken that to all people start by using oxygen when when breath and then move on to heaver drugs like coffee and alcohol and heroin and crack. What was really happening was people dealt in the illegal market to get pot and they were up-sold on heavier addictive drugs. With doctors and drugs companies pimping heroin the rates of addiction to heroin will not fall as fast but it could help. Already where pot has been legalized cases of heroin overdoses have fallen by 30%. One Middle East veteran from Kentucky ran for state senate and won after being nearly killed for going against the political system . He proposed legalizing heroin and was told no by other senators and one said that the drug companies opposed this and that is why it will not gain support. Iran Contra has never gone away.

    Reply
  38. “There is NO ready solution. Not a single one”

    There are many solutions. But you pretend that arbitrary laws, morals, ideologies and other hollow gunk of what you live in are absolutes.

    Reply
  39. Goatguy
    There is a simple solution for this problem , exterminate drugsdealers . You can save thousands of lives .
    Ever heard of Duterte ?
    Just take the district in Chicago with the most murders and prohibit drugs . Use television , radio and flyers for a month to point out the consequences . After thirty days you execute anyone on the spot who deals drugs .
    Problem solved .
    After the first district you go on with the next until you have cleansed the whole of Chicago .
    Now you can make your calculations to give the number of lives that will be spared over a 10 year period .

    Reply
  40. Parenthetically, that’s an interesting cover-photo.

    80 out of 96 victims are Black / African-Americans. I quote: [i]“Chicago Demographics. The racial composition of Chicago (based on the results of the 2010 census) is 45% White (31.7% non-Hispanic White), 32.9% Black, 5.5% Asian, 2.7% from two or more races, 0.5% American Indian. In addition, 13.4%of the population is Hispanic”[/i].

    ⁸⁰/₉₆ × 100 → 83% of the victims are Black.
    83% ÷ 32.9% = 253% (153% higher) incidence of homicide in Black population over all combined.

    ¹⁶/₉₆ × 100 → 17% of the victims are non-Black.
    17% ÷ 67.1% = 24.8% (75.2% lower) incidence of homicide in non-Black population over all combined.

    253% ÷ 24.8% = 10.2 TIMES the incidence of homicide, per 1,000 residents, for Blacks over non-Blacks.

    THAT IS ABSOLUTELY ASTOUNDING.
    RIDICULOUS, TRAGIC, INHUMANE.

    I rarely use all-caps (but VUUKLE has no bold, italic, underline or blockquote… but I mean the above is just shocking. A black man, woman or child in Chicago has a 10 times higher chance of being killed as do peoples of all the other races, combined. That’s about the same as the difference in lethal car accidents for people not-wearing and properly wearing seat belts at the time of an accident.

    Sadly, there is no easy “seat belt law” that’ll fix the black-on-black homicide rate.
    And indeed — with a lifetime of thinking on this, and talking it up broadly…
    There is NO ready solution. Not a single one.

    GoatGuy, very saddened.

    Reply
  41. I wonder when it “became the norm” to express numeric proportions like this: “Even though Chicago has 4.6 times fewer people than New York and Los Angeles combined”.

    While — thru absolutely mind-numbing repetition — I’ve gotten used to the concept, it still is terrible “math English”.

    The accurate Math-English would be, “Even though Chicago has only 22% of the number of people of both NYC and LA combined”. Highlight “22% of”. Another way which is Math-English accurate (and making better ‘talking points’ from a Newsspeak perspective) would be “Even though Chicago has 78% fewer people than NYC and LA combined”. The only “4.6 times” in this context would be something like “Even though NYC + LA have 4.6 times as many people as Chicago, Chicago’s gross homicides this year already exceed NYC + LA”.

    Just saying.
    I’m tired of “NNN times LESS than …”

    It doesn’t make mathematical sense.
    Grrr… grumble…. arrgghhh….
    GoatGuy

    Reply

Leave a Comment