Chicago On Pace For Record Year Of Homicides With 400 Murders

Chicago_Police_StarI am in Chicago, my hometown, to celebrate my mother’s 90th birthday.  I always love coming home to his city, but which is beautiful in the summer.  I took the kids swimming in Lake Michigan with huge waves and a perfect day. However, the city is reeling from an ever-rising murder rate.  Just four years ago, the city passed 400 homicides around Thanksgiving.  We just passed that mark in July in what could be a record bloody year in the Windy City.

 President Trump of course has made the Chicago crime levels a running theme.  The statistics can be a bit misleading in terms of the image of a crime ridden city.  The terrible fact is that most of the murders are concentrated on the South and West sides.  Northside City, where Wrigley is located and my family home is located, has not seen as much of this lethal uptick.

The murder rate was declining but began to rise last year again.  This year 16.5 percent of the 2,150 people shot have died.  When added to those dying from other homicidal causes like  strangulations and stabbings, the number of homicides reached 400 on Thursday.

For the first six months of 2017, more than 90 percent of Chicago homicide victims were slain by gunfire, according to Police Department records.

It is obviously a great concern among Chicagoans but the rate seems undiminished.

We will be holding our celebration of Angela Piazza Turley’s 90th Birthday (and my daughter’s birthday on the same day) this afternoon with Italian beef, Italian cookies and cannolis in the backyard of our home near Wrigley and the lake.  We have relatives from all over the country who have come in for the event.

 

74 thoughts on “Chicago On Pace For Record Year Of Homicides With 400 Murders”

    1. Bratton’s fix for New York was assiduously implemented over two decades, though it began to bear fruit within just a few years.

  1. To focus on gun related deaths in Chicago this year, as horrible as they are, misses the point of examining the underlying causes of violence from guns that has swept across the nation. Despair is growing in America, not in just minority communities from overt racism and rampant disregard by government officials, but also in many less affluent white communities where income inequality, drug abuse, low paying jobs, and a shrinking middle class are now endemic. What may be happening in Chicago in minority neighborhoods is but a reflection of a nation in rapid decline. We can find the money to conduct endless wars around the world but can’t seem to come up with the money to address the most pressing problems that ail the country and are only getting worse. When a society becomes only a matter of “free choice” and the “wants” of the individual, it is no longer a “society.” And that is where America is today and why this nation is steadily coming apart.

    1. To focus on gun related deaths in Chicago this year, as horrible as they are, misses the point of examining the underlying causes of violence from guns that has swept across the nation.

      The only underlying cause is original sin.

      As for ‘guns’, they’re in every home in Switzerland (homicide rate < 1 per 100,000) and they're all over the place in non-metropolitan counties in this country. Non metropolitan counties in New York have a collective homicide rate of 1.14 per 100,000. The slum neighborhoods in Rochester have a homicide rate of 35 per 100,000. Guns don't do that. Weak law enforcement conjoined to a large lumpenproletarian population does that. New York City effected an 82% reduction in its homicide rate with no significant changes in New York's firearms regulations.

    2. The middle class is not ‘shrinking’ and the country is not in decline in any economic sense. The data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Census Bureau are available for your perusal.

  2. As long as guns are available to anyone who wants one, everything will be all right. Trump wants cops to rough up suspects but he’d never suggest stricter gun control. That would be silly and would go against his ignorant “ideals”.

    1. You know what you can do with your gun control right?

      Chicago isnt a gun problem. Its a Democrat problem.

      You are not getting the guns. You are never getting the guns.
      So either accept it or move to Australia

    2. Louie Louie You’re Kind of Sc—y,

      Your boy, “Crazy Abe” Lincoln, sent you a note from Peoria,

      Illinois, on October 16, 1854,
      _____________________________________________________

      Dear Louie,

      “I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery].

      My first impulse would be to free all the slaves,

      and send them to Liberia, to their own native land.”

      Yours Truly,

      “Crazy I-killed-Americans-to-save-Americans Abe”
      _____________________________________________________

      He meant, “for their own good as well as ours.”

      This Chicago phenomenon is something akin to the

      deleterious effects of an autonomous Indian reservation.

    3. We already have gun laws prohibiting felons from owning or buying a gun. We have background checks, and a national database that is sadly not updated as it should. Gang members assume they will either die young or waste their life in prison, so the risk of either happening does not discourage them.

      Gangs buy guns on the black market. They do not buy them from a gun store, take a background check, or forego buying one when they are convicted of a crime.

      How do you propose to prevent Rick from illegally selling his firearm on the black market to Steve, who is a convicted felon and a gang member? Even if you went door to door and removed every gun from every home in America, from all of the millions of law abiding gun owners, there is no defensible border right now. Gun trafficking is common across the Mexican border. And gun traffickers sell to felons like Steve.

      The problem is criminal activity.

  3. I am looking forward to reading your take on the Presidents most recent speech in New York encouraging abuse and brutality of “suspects”.

  4. One of the biggest things influencing the murder rate in Chicongo, is the refusal to admit the negative influence of single black mothers and the savage, violent offspring they bring into the world. The second step in fixing a problem is correctly identifying the cause.

    Instead of blathering about “black girl magic” like Hillary, we should be talking about “black girl destructiveness”. Like Tommy Sotomayor does in this Chicongo story:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQlj9EeiRYI

    This is a really good chat to listen to, because he talks about how these kids are being raised.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. You’re just keep running the tape even though you don’t know what you’re talking about.

      The homicide rate in New York City (prior to 2015) was 5 per 100,000. That in Chicago was 16 per 100,000. That in Baltimore was 37 per 100,000. Ba**ardy is as common in one locale as another. What differentiates them is police manpower and police competence.

      1. And you keep spouting off statistics instead of looking at what it going on. People knew back in the late 1800s that smoking cigarettes killed people. My father has a book from that era, and there are advertisements in the back of the book. IIRC, it was called “the smoking disease”, and talked about how healthy 35 year old men would suddenly keel over from heart attacks and other problems. And if you bought their product, it would help you kick the smoking habit. I think the book was from 1898 maybe.

        It darn near took another century for it to be “proven” that smoking causes cancer and heart attacks, and for all the statistics to come together. But smart people, who were not overly impressed with finding a statistical validation, knew it a century earlier.

        You need to put your stat book up, and start using your head. You are a very smart person, so I know you can do this. Start looking at what are common factors for these black savages. Listen to Tommy Sotomayor above, and he will walk you through it. The most common factor is they are the children of single black mothers. And there is no strong male authority figure in the family.

        I am sure that better policing and other factors can influence the actual number of deaths, as well as the availability of Trauma Centers. BUT the common factor of b*st*rdy is pretty blatant. And think about it logically. . . Is a savage less of a savage because a cop is on the corner? Or is the inner savage always there, just waiting for a place to pop out. And in a way, isn’t a strong police commissioner or police chief kind of a father figure. Who, when he is on the ball, then savage youths moderate their behavior.

        You are kind of making my point for me, that when somebody in power gets on the ball, then the savagery goes down. Wouldn’t a father in the home do the same thing? And wouldn’t the absence of a father lead to the opposite happening?

        Plus, I am not sure that “less deaths” is any more of a valid way to look at this, than enemy body counts were a way to look at the Vietnam War.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

  5. “For the first six months of 2017, more than 90 percent of Chicago homicide victims were slain by gunfire, according to Police Department records.” This statement does not reflect the most relevant facts. According to what I’ve read, the African American gangs have fractured into smaller groups, and most of their disputes are now over personal insults. You know, the you-looked-funny-at-me-so-I-shot-you mentality. The Latino gangs are still intact, so their armed violence is mostly over territory disputes, which do not occur as often as merely insulting a thin skinned gang member who’s entire manhood apparently hinges on his willingness to do violence over minor offenses. Both gangs have shown a remarkable stupidity, in that members have been posting their locations on social media as a kind of dare-you move. That makes them easy to pick off. Each gang has differences in behavior and require a customized approach.

    The gangs are behind the overwhelming majority of violence. When you write things like, most homicide victims were killed by gunfire, people could think that merely removing that one tool would solve the entire problem. I think that the public views guns differently when they live in a bombed out gang infested shell of a neighborhood, with idiots shooting at each other in the street, and a rural area, where almost everyone is armed and we manage to heel toe it through the day without slaying anyone over parking spaces.

    Gang members are violent criminals. Remember that line about “I’m gonna pick up a rock” after their gun is empty in “Shake that A^*&^”? Well, that’s what violent criminals do. They shiv each other in prison, beat each other to death. The law does attempt to disarm them, once they are convicted, as felons are prohibited from owning firearms. But they still get them easily, especially with their network of criminal associates. You would have to go from house to house and do a search, get rid of all the firearms in America, and then build a 10 foot thick wall around the entire country to keep any more from getting in, in order to disarm the gangs. And then they would have knives, rocks, rope, pipes, or whatever they’re using nowadays to go wreak havoc on law abiding citizens and each other.

    If you want to stop the violence in Chicago, then you’ve got to break the gangs. You’ve got to profile people based on where they are loitering, what colors they are wearing, their associates, demeanor, etc. And you’ve got to go after the gangs. They are a blight on society, a clear and present danger to every innocent little kid there, and they’ve got to go.

  6. 2150 people shot?! And going up every day? How can this be when Chicago is a gun-free zone, thanks to its “progressive” leadership?

    Take note folks. This is what happens when the 2nd Amendment is obliterated. The law abiding folks suffer and the criminals don’t care. By definition, the latter are those who will pay no attention to the laws.

    1. You’re absolutely right, we all need more guns, yup, that’s the ticket.

  7. Hiroshima, Japan, today is a bustling, vibrant city. How’s Detroit 72 years after the bomb?

  8. Like I said before, need a lawman with a big iron

    Big Iron on his hip. Stranger didn’t have to much to say. No one dared to ask his business. 20 men tried to take him. He was an Arizona Ranger after outlaw Texas Red.

    It was 11:20am. Folks were watching from their windows & everybody held their breath.

  9. The failed Mayor Emmanuel ran for re-election in 2015. None of his four challengers ran on a law-and-order platform. The principal challenger was an extension of the gelatinous woman who runs the teachers’ union in Chicago. The Chicago political class simply does not care about crime control.

  10. Thomas Jefferson –

    “Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?”

    “If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”

    Alexander Hamilton –

    “The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”

    Naturalization Act of 1790 –

    “Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof,…”

    Abraham Lincoln –

    “If all earthly power were given me,” said Lincoln in a speech delivered in Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854, “I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery]. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land.” “…he asked whether freed blacks should be made “politically and socially our equals?” “My own feelings will not admit of this,” he said, “and [even] if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not … We can not, then, make them equals.”

  11. Police manpower is ample in Chicago. The police, however, are not efficiently deployed. The blame goes to the man in the mayor’s chair. Sooo, you have a homicide rate 3x or 4x that of New York.

    1. I personally thought that they’ve already reached the point of crisis where temporary martial law is required. The gangs are holding the citizens of their neighborhoods in terror. MS-13 may be labeled a terrorist organization soon. Labeling all gangs domestic terrorists may change the way we approach this problem.

      The funeral parlors in these neighborhoods are burying way too many young people, and the jails are filled with way too many young people who threw their life away. We’ve got to get some traction on this problem, which won’t be solved until one day kids won’t feel like joining a gang is their best option.

      1. Get a grip, Karen. They do not need martial law. They need to redistribute their manpower and change tactics.

  12. Trump offered just tremendous solutions back in January: “They need to smarten up and toughen up in Chicago.” What a statesman.

    1. Trump gives support to the police. Those poor sections of Chicago don’t need less police prevalence. They need more and they need support something not previously provided by the former occupant.

        1. Dave, The President cannot directly support the local police, but he can rally support of the people. That is what people like Jessie Jackson should be doing. Additionally when law and order is maintained federally and demanded it has significant runoff locally. At the very least the police start feeling that what they are doing is worthwhile.

          Go set up a tent in South Chicago and depend upon police action for your safety. Then tell us that what the President is doing isn’t a needed affirmation of their job. It’s not really a platitude since platitudes refer to content frequently used. Since the last President dengrated the police more than affirming their actions this reversal in tone by the President is new so your use of the word platitude is wrong.

    2. Chicago needs to go to school with Wm. Bratton.

      The responsibility for public order in greater Chicago lies with local government, not with the President. And they shouldn’t need the president to tell them to hire one of Bratton’s proteges and back him to-the-hilt.

      1. Absolutely it falls on local and state officials. But the federal government should help where it can. Don’t see much of that.

        1. The federal government’s responsibility in the realm of law enforcement concerns a raft of specialty functions. Some of them are tangential to local law enforcement and could benefit from information sharing and some common projects. That’s it. General crime control does not require federal participation.

          One thing the President can do is withdraw the U.S. Marshall Service from problem jurisdictions should the local district court be infected by some arrogant and officious jerk.

  13. Typical of many of the largest cities that have been run by Democrats for years. Illinois government has been run by Democrats and now a Republican governor is trying to fix things, but still faces the corrupt Democratic Machine that won’t permit changes necessary for the worst run state to avoid heading in the direction of bankruptcy.

      1. Dave, there is violence, but the question is one of quantity. Look at the worst cities like Detroit. Democratically run for years. At one time Detroit was top city in the country. Do a bit of research. You might be surprised.

        1. I didn’t realize blaming Democrats was a solution. I’m sure with Republican leadership, the violence would stop or diminish greatly, especially with right-wing advocacy for increased gun control.

          1. Nearly all core cities are run by the Democratic Party. You can take responsibility for crime control or you can concede responsibility to county governments. You want to control municipal police but claim someone else is at fault for public order deficits. You do that because dishonest is how you roll.

          2. Dave, Not a very thoughtful response. When Guiliani a Republican replaced Dinkins crime quickly fell and the city became cleaner. It was reasonably maintained by former Republican Bloomberg, but as soon as Bloomberg was replaced by D’Blasio crime increased, traffic snarls increased and dirt increased.

            It is absolutely the fault of Democratic policy. Go ahead and do something no one with your type of credentials on this blog does. Provide proof I am wrong.

    1. I should have added how Chicago is a mecca of culture for the rich people that can enjoy it. I love flying to Chicago to see the SOFA art show. I consider it one of the best art shows in America.

        1. When in Chicago I stay in the good and mostly artsy areas where all the more affluent people stay. Unfortuantely though they talk about how concerned they are the affluent leftist pushes policies that causes harm to those that are poor.

      1. Yes, talking about public order and its absence is ‘partisan’. Neither the mayor’s name nor his political party were ever mentioned, but it’s ‘partisan’. In the prog-mind, discussing anything which embarrasses progs is ‘boring’ and ‘partisan’.

          1. You’re bereft of ideas or even excuses. Try to be a little less transparent, Pumpkin.

            1. If you have a substantive complaint, you can offer it. You have nothing.

Comments are closed.