Chicago crime thread: Place all crime-related posts here (money, robberies)

[jmgg]

Originally Posted by Bitey

Maximum sentence for aggravated discharge of a firearm is 15 years. I bet he gets sentenced to half that. Maybe. And then doesn't even serve THAT full term.




It's not just "news stories" in Lincoln Park any more. The well-to-do neighborhoods have now become target-rich environments for robberies and carjackings.

For almost all my adult life living and working in and around Chicago, I had never known or met anyone who had been carjacked. As of the last two years, I now know three people who have. It's like Johannesburg out there.

Or worse yet, Minneapolis.

[Sunbiz1]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

It's the reversal of decades of hard won progress on crime.

https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-crim...ence/11412290/

Maybe you could let these people know that it used to be worse 30 years ago so no big deal?

I get it, if you live in Lincoln Park or Schaumberg it's just news stories. If you live some parts of Chicago...an extra 100-150 killed are going to be coming out of people you know.

I should have chosen my words better yesterday, as no murder rate should be acceptable; barring zero.
My issue is years worth of media sensationalism on this topic, it seems Chicago is always national; and even international news on an issue statistically more of a problem in 1974.
And as evidenced below in our political section, it has become yet another red vs. blue topic among many.
This, of course; is not healthy for the local economy.

[personone]

Originally Posted by Sunbiz1

I should have chosen my words better yesterday, as no murder rate should be acceptable; barring zero.
My issue is years worth of media sensationalism on this topic, it seems Chicago is always national; and even international news on an issue statistically more of a problem in 1974.
And as evidenced below in our political section, it has become yet another red vs. blue topic among many.
This, of course; is not healthy for the local economy.

This is the key issue, and I've been saying this on these boards since I've been here. It's hurting Chicago's global reputation and economy.

I have also mentioned, that the only way that Chicago will prevent this is to not lead the nation in homicides. The media will see that Chicago (3 million) has more total murders than NYC (8 million) and LA (5 million). Until Chicago is not leading the nation, it will always make media headlines. Because that will mean that there are summer weekends with "50 shot, 20 killed" headlines. This will keep Chicago in the media spotlight. The last few years Philly has taken a little bit of the spotlight for high crime numbers. Although Chicago still had over 200 more murders than Philly, so Chicago still has plenty of work to do to even better Philly.

Until Chicago loses its infamous first place in this category, the unfair media perception will not stop, and it will continue to damage the city in terms of reputation and financially.

[BOORGONG]

Originally Posted by personone

This is the key issue, and I've been saying this on these boards since I've been here. It's hurting Chicago's global reputation and economy.

I have also mentioned, that the only way that Chicago will prevent this is to not lead the nation in homicides. The media will see that Chicago (3 million) has more total murders than NYC (8 million) and LA (5 million). Until Chicago is not leading the nation, it will always make media headlines. Because that will mean that there are summer weekends with "50 shot, 20 killed" headlines. This will keep Chicago in the media spotlight. The last few years Philly has taken a little bit of the spotlight for high crime numbers. Although Chicago still had over 200 more murders than Philly, so Chicago still has plenty of work to do to even better Philly.

Until Chicago loses its infamous first place in this category, the unfair media perception will not stop, and it will continue to damage the city in terms of reputation and financially.

OTOH, Chicago has always had that rep of a tough to the bone city. It has had a tommy gun toting mob cachet since the prohibition, and a worldwide one at that.

The mob/ghetto violence hasn’t really made a dent on the good fortune of the city's financial status. The corruption in politics may have had a more damning result, IMO.

But, the urban flight to other states and climes, both black and white certainly has partially been motivated by the violence. The problem is though, that that level of violence is present in many other American cities, big and small…

[Sunbiz1]

Originally Posted by personone

This is the key issue, and I've been saying this on these boards since I've been here. It's hurting Chicago's global reputation and economy.

I have also mentioned, that the only way that Chicago will prevent this is to not lead the nation in homicides. The media will see that Chicago (3 million) has more total murders than NYC (8 million) and LA (5 million). Until Chicago is not leading the nation, it will always make media headlines. Because that will mean that there are summer weekends with "50 shot, 20 killed" headlines. This will keep Chicago in the media spotlight. The last few years Philly has taken a little bit of the spotlight for high crime numbers. Although Chicago still had over 200 more murders than Philly, so Chicago still has plenty of work to do to even better Philly.

Until Chicago loses its infamous first place in this category, the unfair media perception will not stop, and it will continue to damage the city in terms of reputation and financially.

While it's a crime issue, it's a media fixation/disease going all the way back to Al Capone.
Headlines don't take into account where the murders are generally occurring.
Or the fact cities such as Portland, Oregon; have downtown areas nobody(including locals)wish to visit anymore. Murders generally are not random, while property crimes and theft are opportunistic; of which crime rates are higher in other cities.
But we cannot ignore the numbers, as per city population; it stays in the news b/c people want to know why murder rates here have always topped the nation.
Is it culture?, LA has plenty of gang-bangers...so??.

[personone]

Originally Posted by Sunbiz1

While it's a crime issue, it's a media fixation/disease going all the way back to Al Capone.
Headlines don't take into account where the murders are generally occurring.
Or the fact cities such as Portland, Oregon; have downtown areas nobody(including locals)wish to visit anymore. Murders generally are not random, while property crimes and theft are opportunistic; of which crime rates are higher in other cities.
But we cannot ignore the numbers, as per city population; it stays in the news b/c people want to know why murder rates here have always topped the nation.
Is it culture?, LA has plenty of gang-bangers...so??.

This is the million dollar question. How can NYC and LA, both being exponentially larger and both having plenty of rough neighborhoods and large gang culture (particularly LA), still have lower total crime numbers than Chicago.

Former police commissioner McCarthy said something to the effect when he was on 60 Minutes, that there were 2 major issues. One, the Chicago PD was prohibited from aggressive “proactive” policing. NYC and LA are notorious for investing in having large undercover task forces in bad neighborhoods, which I’m sure have been helpful in proactively preventing crime before it happens rather than simply responding to crime “after the fact.” Two, he mentioned that many times violent criminals are released right back on the street. New York and California both have “3 strike laws” I believe which is a helpful deterrent. Illinois does not, and with weak prosecution, it’s likely that many of the most violent repeat criminals are back on Chicago streets causing trouble.

You would think that someone in some office in Chicago would be dedicated to studying NYC and LA inside out (from policing to policies to technology, etc) to see what they are doing to have less crime than Chicago, despite being exponentially larger. Sadly, it’s clear there is nobody/ no office in Chicago that is doing that, and as a result I’m not optimistic of seeing any major improvements when it comes to crime.

[BOORGONG]

Originally Posted by personone

This is the million dollar question. How can NYC and LA, both being exponentially larger and both having plenty of rough neighborhoods and large gang culture (particularly LA), still have lower total crime numbers than Chicago.

Former police commissioner McCarthy said something to the effect when he was on 60 Minutes, that there were 2 major issues. One, the Chicago PD was prohibited from aggressive “proactive” policing. NYC and LA are notorious for investing in having large undercover task forces in bad neighborhoods, which I’m sure have been helpful in proactively preventing crime before it happens rather than simply responding to crime “after the fact.” Two, he mentioned that many times violent criminals are released right back on the street. New York and California both have “3 strike laws” I believe which is a helpful deterrent. Illinois does not, and with weak prosecution, it’s likely that many of the most violent repeat criminals are back on Chicago streets causing trouble.

You would think that someone in some office in Chicago would be dedicated to studying NYC and LA inside out (from policing to policies to technology, etc) to see what they are doing to have less crime than Chicago, despite being exponentially larger. Sadly, it’s clear there is nobody/ no office in Chicago that is doing that, and as a result I’m not optimistic of seeing any major improvements when it comes to crime.

Good points , all. If L.A. and NYC were able to do it, Chicago should inherit the toolset that did it for them.

[Bitey]

Originally Posted by Bitey

For almost all my adult life living and working in and around Chicago, I had never known or met anyone who had been carjacked. As of the last two years, I now know three people who have. It's like Johannesburg out there.

As of this week, make that four: jacked in an obscure, nondescript neighborhood of half-million-dollar homes -- the Elmhurst of Chicago neighborhoods if you will -- and having to beg the jackers to let him get his two kids out of the car.

This is one big reason why people are willing to spend half a million dollars to live in an obscure, nondescript suburb like Elmhurst.

[personone]

Originally Posted by Bitey

As of this week, make that four: jacked in an obscure, nondescript neighborhood of half-million-dollar homes -- the Elmhurst of Chicago neighborhoods if you will -- and having to beg the jackers to let him get his two kids out of the car.

This is one big reason why people are willing to spend half a million dollars to live in an obscure, nondescript suburb like Elmhurst.

Moving to the suburbs is just something that happens as you get older. Outside of C-D (in the real world) people don't have disdain for suburbs. Safety, more greenery/nature, more space, better schools, easier driving/parking, etc.....

If the suburb has easy access to the city, so you can enjoy all of the amenities, the popularity increases even more. That's why in the real world, some of the most popular suburbs in the country (based on home values, high COL) are those that have all of the best suburb amenities and have easy access to the city.

[Robert9]

Good old chiraq. Thugs rule the streets and City Hall lmao


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIRqnLpXpI0