Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I recently read that the last Republican mayor in Chicago was in 1931. So, good luck finding another Giuliani that can get elected here.
I really don't think there really is hope in finding someone to bring law and order to this city. The odds of an elected Democrat to change his spots and actually going against his party are not very good. If someone actually did make an effort, they had better build more jail facilities because for these weaponized gangsters, that's the only place to put them.
Pardon the NYC perspective on a Chicago thread, but I have to hope that the two cities can learn from one another on what works and what doesn't. I've come to the conclusion that NYC is so blue, so democratic and so liberal, that when the administration is also democratic, the looting of the public coffers is predictable and almost inevitable. IMO, in the last 1/2 century, NYC has ONLY performed well under republican rule. It's like the adult in the room who is stern enough to require order and has a firm hand on the purse strings. In Chicago, does the Dem. machine hold such sway that electing a republican is out of the question? If that's the case, Chicago's challenge will be even harder to execute a true financial and societal turn-around.
BTW, who would you say are the leading Republican figures in Chicago and Illinois? And apologies if I've stepped on anyone's toes.
Yesterday you suggested a population increase may be a factor in the increase of issues. I wonder, if the population increased and there were jobs for everyone and decent housing WOULD that mean the crime would increase?... I have to doubt it.
But I think you are onto something. In Chicago, there was a population increase as you say. But certain areas had many people in a condensed area where there were not as many jobs. So certainly this may definitely be a root of the problem.
Then, you offer this group money if there is no father in the household to help offer stability. Values become different. The gang becomes the family and the gang engages in crimes. Money is acquired by any means necessary. And this becomes the norm for GENERATIONS, now.
This is why teachers and mentors are ONE alternative. They have to replace the loss of a father figure (P.S. IF the father IS in the house, they have to be a GOOD father, obviously!) They have to teach the importance of values, instill pride in the youth, and teach them to be proud and confident.
THAT goes for families of all shades and backgrounds, I would say...
In order to fix a problem you have to find out the cause, can't fix a problem if you don't know what's causing it. Although Chicago doesn't have the highest crime rate, it's crime rate is higher than most major cities. There is something unique about Chicago versus Boston, LA, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, etc...
The best explanation of cause I've heard on here is segregation. Segregation by race and segregation by class. So the solution is integration but if you do this you'll get a lot of push back and it's political suicide. Ogden school in Gold Coast merged with Jenner in Cabrini Green and the parents went ape ****, many pulled their kids out. People wanted housing for people making 25k-75K in Jefferson Park and the residents had a heart attack. People don't want the solution. Status quo is better. Hell my mere suggestion will probably trigger some people.
Except each and every one of those cities you listed are segregated. They also have small African American populations percentage wise compared to Chicago. I mean Portland and Seattle are the whitest big cities in America.
Just like any cities, Chicago has it's own problems. Now, if you love Chicago and its people, should you avoid moving here solely based on the violence? I wouldn't let that stop you from moving here, if you genuinely like it here. The media distorts many things from reality, and the reality is that if you look for trouble, you will find one, but if not, then there shouldn't be any problem. Sorry for the grammar!
I wonder if the media would do more stories on the safer neighborhoods, would THAT make a change in people's minds, since we see how much the media DOES impact some people's perceptions???
OR, would that then be the next places to hold major demonstrations or protests or lootings??? Forgive me if I am being negative with that last statement. But I do understand that some areas are NOT wanting attention brought to them because demonstrators WANT attention, so they might want to jump on that, as well.
For anyone wanting to move to Chicago, I hope they know youtube has some pretty excellent clips of the various neighborhoods that can help shed light on the different neighborhoods. I love to ride my bicycle through the different areas. That is how I get the best exposure to them.
People forget that in the 1960's there were more riots and people were burning flags at anti war protests. Study your history and you'll learn that this is not new and it was much more extreme in the past.
Well, there were more riots in ‘60s but today we’ve seen city-wide rioting and looting. Was Marshall Fields State Street looted? The ‘60s riots were confined to certain areas/neighborhoods. We’re suburbs part of this lawlessness?
Nationwide orchestrated riots nationwide during which big city central and high-end business and retail districts saw looting and arson. Police were held back except in a city like a Detroit, where the police stood their ground and weren’t ordered to stand down.
Not only is the looting etc citywide, today we have marxists disguised as progressive mayors aiding, abetting, and fomenting race and class divisions based on resentment etc..you know, what marxists do.
Add in this reckless and dangerous defund and disband the police...well, you see what’s happening in for starters, Chicago, NYC, and Philly.
You’ve heard of the Ferguson Effect? No doubt you know recent history...lie about “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” perpetrated by race baiters and manipulators who cashed out in that white guilt shakedown while businesses and the Ferguson MO burned.
Well, this is the Floyd Effect...that will be much more grim and deadlier than the Ferguson Effect.
Chicago has 230+ homicides just since May 30, the day war was declared by Lighthead et al. How many kids killed during this short window of time? 20? Let alone the countless number of people shot.
The anti cop, anti U.S. rhetoric all underwritten by The Obama Effect, viral videos, and the myth that there is a holocaust of dead black lives at police hands.
Last edited by Castlebar; 08-04-2020 at 08:56 AM..
After reading your post, I looked up the best high schools and prep schools in Chicago. You know, the ones that cost $50,000 + per year to send your kid to the the 10th grade, etc. I'm taking a leap here but I don't think it's these kids who stalk out an inner city, elderly woman whom they rape and beat to death (as here in NYC last month and may she RIP) between two parked cars just a block from her home.
It's poverty. It's poverty of finances and of the soul. I bring this up because I think you touched upon the problem and the solution. It's class. Class! In America, where we weren't supposed to be divided among class. They said we're all EQUAL!!!??? Turns out now we're more divided by class than they are in many countries in Europe from which our ancestors fled.
Another reason I think it's class (as opposed to race alone) is when you look in the wealthy neighborhoods of Asians, Blacks, Latinos and Whites, you don't find people stooping to such levels of depravity. They're busy living the American Dream. And yes some of them, some of US, will commit white collar crimes as opposed to violent acts.
If we could raise up everyone to a life of prosperity, we'd find the peace we seek. I'm thinking of three places I've been to prove the point: Dubai, Singapore and Monaco. I can already see the jokes coming about caning people for spitting on the sidewalk and the moral rules in the UAE
This is too long, too wordy (apologies!) But getting people jobs (and responsibilities) is the first step. INCENTIVES of some sort could help make this happen and that gets political. If we really want to find a SOLUTION, there's likely going to be a cost. In my humble opinion. In the end, I think we are divided by class, income and financial worth. It does seem like a chicken and egg, intractable dilemma.
I agree that class has a lot to do with it, although if you look at the amounts of violent crime in Chicago. Many Hispanic neighborhoods are of the same class/income as neighborhoods in the South Side; yet the Hispanic neighborhoods (while not what anyone would consider "safe") have way less crime than those on the South Side.
All that to say, that it's not as easy to just boil it all down to "class." A lot of it has to do with family structure and culture. Even during the looting going on a couple of weeks ago; Latin Kings made national news of how they were preventing looting and crime in their neighborhood. Now they are not saints by any means (many are cold hard criminals); but the fact is that these Hispanic neighborhoods have a lot less violent crimes than many others in the South Side, yet many of the residents would be considered of the same "class" (income level) as those in the South Side.
It goes beyond Class. There is a generational, culture component to it. And I don't mean culture strictly related to race, but more in mentality.
Hey all...
Not to go off topic but it seems nearly everyone thinks 30 shootings in a weekend is a problem. The PR is a nightmare. It's perpetuating the belief that the city is lawless and people and businesses decide to stay away. And Chicago deserves better. So I'd like to know what's the SOLUTION to all of this? Or will we all be in front of our terminals a year from now, still shaking our heads at the ongoing, daily carnage? Anybody out there have any ideas? If we wait for the politicians to lead when they are feeding at the trough of special interests, nothing will happen, unless you have a Rudy Giuliani or a Michael Bloomberg waiting in the wings. (NYC was becoming a cesspool for anyone who remembers the '70's, '80's and early '90's)
I'm not about the naming, blaming and shaming. It's probably safe to say though, it's not the Swedish grandmothers, the Brownies or the AlterBoys that are acting out. So how do we find a way to get this to STOP?
There aren't enough jail cells to house all the perps. Or is the worst carried out by a few? Gangs, for instance? Do we have to spend money to make the problem go away? In training? Schooling? Or as someone suggested, give them $10,000 to leave the city limits and never return?
I guess I'm curious how other cities that were once in this situation managed to turn things around. Anyone know or have any ideas?
This is the million dollar question that I always ask. As a few others have alluded to; the cities that did the best at completely reversing crime, did it with more aggressive policing. I watched interview with former police chief McCarthy who said that when NY fixed its crime problem, they "proactively" policed rather than "reactionary" policing. LA had a similar tactic with all the gangs. They had tons of officers (undercover and regular officers) who actively patrolled those neighborhoods before crime occurred (not just responding to crime after the fact).
Unfortunately, tough policing is a hard thing to do nowadays.
The Irish, Italians and Jewish gangs were notoriously bloody and violent a mere 100 years ago. I don't know if the then- Hispanic and African-Americans were as notorious.
By the 1960s is when gangs of all colors were fighting, and even killing over turf.
By 1990, I'd say any non- Black and non-Hispanic gangs were essentially non-existent.
I mean, in the year 2000 it would be rare to hear about White hangs (even the Italian Chicago Outfit was beginning their decline).
So what does this mean? If White gangs went away, will the Black and Latino gangs faze out as well?... Not if there is any perceived reason to NOT be a gang member. There need to be stable families, role models, outlets, employment, etc.
Cities never really solved their crime problems of the 70s-early 90s; they just got too expensive for the hoodrats and other maniacs to continue terrorizing to those extremes. See NYC and LA.
Chicago is vastly cheaper than those cities, and so our crime numbers haven't receded like other peer cities. We just don't have the wealth, hyper wealth, and international investments of safer cities.
In short criminals can afford to live here in great numbers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
