According to 2014 FBI stats related in June, 2014 was a 50 year low for the us homicide rate. Two takeaways: first, FBI data hasn't been released for 2015 yet. Second, as the denominator is getting smaller, small variance leads to bigger year on year percentage shifts.
Ah, correction. FBI data is out for 2015. Murder nationwide has gone from about 13k to about 15k. The point about small denominators stands, especially in light of a 50 year low in 2014. Is this a new murderous America or a reversion toward the mean?
Only you can prevent the grievous misuse of statistics.
You could also easily make the argument that the murder rate is up due to increased weapons sales.
It's all about the policy you want to sell. You're seeking to silence legitimate criticism. I'm seeking to reduce the likelihood someone will do something irrational with a loaded weapon.
If you're interested in facts, there's only one side supported by evidence [0] but hey, don't let that deter your campaign. Keep championing the destruction of black bodies.
The link is about guns and suicide, how is that meaningful as a response to my comment? Suicide is not crime, and I didn't mention guns at all... or anything about black people.
I'm not trying to silence anybody, in fact I'm saying something that mainstream media is unwilling to say. I just pointed out that recent criticism of police is by far the most likely reason crime rates are increasing in big, poor cities.
I'm pointing out that irrational acts of violence - whether homicide or suicide - are made more prevalent and lethal in the presence of cheap, abundant weaponry. As a result of the 37 mass shootings that have occurred during the last administration, gun sales have hit record levels[0], and following from that, homicide rates have increased. I'm connecting the dots in this way, you are connecting the dots in another.
You are making an assertion that there is a negative impact of "recent criticism of police" and that it has directly led to this outbreak of homicide. What criticism, specifically? By which groups, specifically? And what should be done about it, specifically?
Both ways of connecting the dots leads to the same conclusion. Crime has been increasing in large, poor cities.
These people by vast margin are not legal gun owners, so I think it's a bit premature to connect gun sales to rising crime rates.
The biggest thing on the news radar before the increased crime statistics is recent critisicm of police. Even police chiefs and mayors of many of these cities have gone on record saying that the public backlash against police was going to cause officers to be more cautious and patrol problem areas less. And a year later this is exactly what happened.
Nobody can even prove correlation=cause for anything but the evidence in this case is pretty overwhelming.
Chicago specifically, which is pointed out as one of the largest increases, had it's police chief resign and was under state and federal investigation.
What do you think this does for the public perception of the police dept? The police are fearful of causing the next Freddie Gray and the political machine doesn't want their hands anywhere near anything involving the police dept, which would surely affect the ability for them to operate effectively at least at some level
>These people by vast margin are not legal gun owners
Anti-gun control people keep making this argument, and fail to take into account the larger economic impact of more inaccessible guns. If they are restricted it makes them more expensive to obtain on both the legal and illegal markets. Like you said
> large, poor cities
If in fact these cities are as poor as you say - which, speaking as a resident of Chicago, is a grave distortion of our reality - then this only bolsters my argument. Guns shouldn't be affordable or accessible to the average everyday criminal. Controlling the supply allows us to control the price.
> a bit premature to connect gun sales to rising crime rates
This is directly addressed by the evidence I provided. Gun deaths are inexorably connected to gun sales.
>What do you think this does for the public perception of the police dept?
CPD is taking steps to address its image, getting rid of the poor leadership that led to this crisis is exactly what they should be doing. They're hiring people from disempowered communities, organizing outreach, building trust. CPD is busy busting its ass demonstrating its ability to operate effectively in this environment. You need to be aware that police departments originated[0] not as public defense organizations, but as union-busting, organizer-murdering hired security. Things have changed, but as recent events[1] have shown, there is still work to do. As someone with family members in the CPD AND as someone with family members of color, I am keenly aware of the tightrope both sides must walk. There is no perfect solution, but burying your head in the right-wing propaganda machine does none of us any good.
At least I'm proposing a solution. Again, you make an assertion that there is a negative impact of "recent critisicm[sic] of police" and that it has directly led to this outbreak of homicide. What criticism, specifically? By which groups, specifically? And what should be done about it, specifically?
Criticism is causing increasing crime? What kind of Blue Lives Matters bs logic is that. And have there not been repeated case she of glaring misconduct where justice was not served. And the police wanna play victim now? I'm all for increasing police training and even better pay to attract better candidates, but there are many more factors at play than criticism.
It's a direct result of police backing off due to protests.
I'm not going to post the obvious glib response, but it's threadbait to say something like this without support. "Probably" doesn't cut it, so consider this a challenge.
