How is life after 8 years of Obama? What's the murder rate in Chicago

homicides and shootings have spiked in the first three months of 2016. The 131 homicides so far represent an 84 percent increase over that period last year, and the 605 shootings in that stretch are almost double last year's total.

Some experts blame the mild winter; others say that social media has sped up the pace of gang retaliations. Still, others note that after the criticism following the McDonald case, the Chicago police have avoided confronting citizens whenever possible. Although analysts generally reject that as a cause for the rising number of shootings, the statistic in the Times is striking:
Since January, officers have recorded 20,908 instances in which they stopped, patted down and questioned people for suspicious behavior, compared with 157,346 in the same period last year. Gun seizures are also down: 1,316 guns have been taken off the streets this year compared with 1,413 at this time last year.
Despite the increase, the numbers are far below the figures from the early 1990s, during the crack epidemic, when the homicide count hovered around 900.

:palm: Look at the statistics from the Chicago Police Department again, and then get back to me.
 
How was life in Chicago before eight years of Obama? Let's start with the bush years.

2001: 667 2002: 656 2003: 601

Now what happened in 2004? "After adopting crime-fighting techniques in 2004 that were recommended by the Los Angeles Police Department and the New York City Police Department,[SUP][11][/SUP] Chicago recorded 448 homicides, the lowest total since 1965. This murder rate of 15.65 per 100,000 population is still above the U.S. average, an average which takes in many small towns and suburbs."[SUP][12][/SUP]

However, there was a rise in the last year of the bush administration.

2004: 453 2005: 451 2006: 471 2007: 448 2008: 513[SUP]

[/SUP]The Obama years:

2009: 459 2010: 436 2011: 435 2012: 516 2013: 441 2014: 432 2015: 488[SUP]
[/SUP]
Looks like the homicide rate during the Obama years is pretty much the same as what it was during the bush years, with the exception of 2001, 2002, 2003 when it was much higher. And the rate change is credited to the adoption of LAPD and the NYPD crime-fighting techniques.

Ergo, your contention that any of the Chicago homicide rates tie to the Obama administration is just so much BS.
[SUP]

[/SUP]

z43y99.gif
 
It's interesting, you look at the list of the most dangerous cities in America and Chicago doesn't even rank in the top 30. That's a very deceiving statistic however. Chicago is arguably the most racially segregated city in America. So the well to do largely white North side of the City is very safe. The largely black and minority South Side can be very dangerous. Very deceptive numbers
 
Does Obama not care about black people? How many blacks died in Katrina vs Chicago?

Thanks for bringing up Katrina, as moving people back into these below sea level areas is unacceptable. They actually installed pumps to pump the water back into the flooding ocean. How does that save lives the next time?
 
Thanks for bringing up Katrina, as moving people back into these below sea level areas is unacceptable. They actually installed pumps to pump the water back into the flooding ocean. How does that save lives the next time?

There have been pumps installed for flood control in NO since the 1830s. :palm:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_in_New_Orleans
 
Thanks for bringing up Katrina, as moving people back into these below sea level areas is unacceptable. They actually installed pumps to pump the water back into the flooding ocean. How does that save lives the next time?

Most of the city is @ or below sea level.... They have had pumps for a long time & they are pretty effective getting water out of the city..

It most likely is a moot point anyway.. Assuming the city is even there in 50-100 years it may be a mere island, in a very precarious place..pict_large_problem.jpg
 
True, but it has a lot to do w/ a lack of sediment coming down the pipe... It is no longer the "muddy" Mississippi..

I say pipe, & not river because when I lived there they said the water was drunk 10 times before it got there, & if you saw it, you would believe it..:(
 
Most of the city is @ or below sea level.... They have had pumps for a long time & they are pretty effective getting water out of the city..

It most likely is a moot point anyway.. Assuming the city is even there in 50-100 years it may be a mere island, in a very precarious place..View attachment 3062

First of all you can not pump water back into an ocean that has flooded the city as you are just pumping water back into the flooding body of water, which creates more water to flood. Second once the ocean enters the damage is done, one tenth of a second is too much time for water to be in a home, so how fast you pump it out will not dry out the wiring or insulation, so the pumps have no purpose except to sucker poor people into buying homes below sea level. It makes no sense.
 
True, but it has a lot to do w/ a lack of sediment coming down the pipe... It is no longer the "muddy" Mississippi..

I say pipe, & not river because when I lived there they said the water was drunk 10 times before it got there, & if you saw it, you would believe it..:(

Too thin to plow and too thick to drink.
 
First of all you can not pump water back into an ocean that has flooded the city as you are just pumping water back into the flooding body of water, which creates more water to flood. Second once the ocean enters the damage is done, one tenth of a second is too much time for water to be in a home, so how fast you pump it out will not dry out the wiring or insulation, so the pumps have no purpose except to sucker poor people into buying homes below sea level. It makes no sense.

Are you pretending to care about poor people?

Please, educate yourself about the levee system.
 
Back
Top