Murder in Oakley, armed robberies in Hyde Park plaza (Columbus: high crime, neighborhoods)

[Love-Cinci]

Originally Posted by Sarah Perry

I do wish we could have some kind of limits on private ownership of assault weapons, which simply aren't needed for self-defense and which make possible the killing of larger numbers of innocent people. I really don't think the framers of the Constitution had AK-47s in mind when they talked about the right to bear arms.

And would the law breakers who murder innocent people actually obey more gun laws?

What about enforcing the laws in place?

I guess this could lead into a gun debate, which I will refrain in the context of a robbery victim being murdered.

[Sarah Perry]

Originally Posted by Love-Cinci

And would the law breakers who murder innocent people actually obey more gun laws?

What about enforcing the laws in place?

I guess this could lead into a gun debate, which I will refrain in the context of a robbery victim being murdered.

Yeah, I don't really debate this issue, either. I can see valid arguments on all sides of the question. But just to clarify, my thinking is that the crazy people--the ones it really IS almost impossible to protect against--wouldn't be able to kill as many people as they often manage to if they didn't have access to guns designed for maximum killing efficiency in a military context. It might make life safer for our law enforcement people, too.

But certainly agree, your average thug on the street who guns down a fellow drug dealer with a cheap, sawed off shotgun won't be deterred at all by laws controlling assault weapons.

[Love-Cinci]

Even in spite of gun control laws any and all guns are readily available on the street, from sawed off shot guns to sophisticated assault weapons.

I respect your views though. It's a tough topic with a lot of political spin from the main stream media that seem to vulture in on select tragedies to promote an agenda. Meanwhile, folks like you and I are here trying to make sense of it all.

[yayoi]

Originally Posted by Sarah Perry

The young man who was shot may very well have been guilty of nothing more than poor choice of acquaintences, but I suspect the perps at least knew something about him, even if they didn't know him personally. I doubt that his shooting was a random event.

That may be but I know criminals will watch anyone that they consider an easy target. My car was stolen not even a month after moving into a new neighborhood. I didn't hang around any shady characters, in fact I lived like a hermit. My neighbor's rims were stolen shortly after he moved in. Criminals will target random people especially if they're "new".

[Sarah Perry]

Originally Posted by yayoi

That may be but I know criminals will watch anyone that they consider an easy target. My car was stolen not even a month after moving into a new neighborhood. I didn't hang around any shady characters, in fact I lived like a hermit. My neighbor's rims were stolen shortly after he moved in. Criminals will target random people especially if they're "new".

Understand. If I'm recalling correctly, the victim's mother thought he was targeted for the $100 cash he had after getting paid. In cases like this, I always assume the police aren't telling everything they know. That's the basis for my other comment.

[motorman]

Originally Posted by unusualfire

I have a few idea's. Change some laws. Start stripping people of their citizensship and ban them from the country if they are convicted of 2 felonies. I would if i had the power to do it.

Why not counter primitive savages with primitive punishments -- give each of 'em a dose of maximum-strength SHARIA LAW ! You think they'll feel our pain then?? (we can be THE FIRST to apply it here -- after all, it's coming our way, like it or not...)

[wolden]

Originally Posted by jjakucyk

Neighborhood decline? Seriously? Stuff like this happens everywhere.

So, since it happens everywhere its not a problem? We should ignore it?

You don't get what's happening in this city historically. It is blight, blight, blight that has been spreading so consistently and slowly over the last 50 years, like a mold, driving hundreds of thousands of people out of the city to the burbs, ruining most of the neghborhoods that used to be nice places. But most people don't want to think about it and just want to pretend everything's fine and anyone who says otherwise is just a "coward".

Nothing has been effective to stop the blight, to stop the tens of thousands of lawless criminals from spreading their decay across the whole city. Nothing!

This post is about my outrage at a breakdown of society, that has been going on and keeps going on, not just a few individual acts.

Go ahead and leave your head in the sand and pretend that nothing is wrong and anyone who points problems out is just some "coward".

[jjakucyk]

I said running away is cowardly, read my post. I agree with you that the breakdown of society is a lamentable condition, but that's not solvable by moving to the suburbs. It's not an issue of proximity, for if it were then Mt. Adams and Hyde Park would be crime-ridden while Madisonville and Westwood would be idyllic bastions of lawfulness. There's other things at work. For one thing, suburban flight is as much about racism and fear than any real problem. Avondale turned over from white to black very quickly due to block busting by realtors. Good neighborhoods don't topple over so easily, it requires external forces and many overlapping issues to do that.

You say lawless criminals can't be stopped, but that is just as naive as thinking that running away fixes anything. Neighborhood watches, community improvement associations, liaisons between the public and the police, and even little old ladies who sit on their porches, or attendant shopkeepers can have a huge impact on crime, but only if they and the community want to. In places like Detroit or St. Louis, neighborhoods like East Walnut Hills or North Avondale would be abandoned and crumbling. There IS a crime problem in both those neighborhoods, and the low house prices reflect that, but they're almost fully occupied and well cared for. Those are neighborhoods that people know are worth caring for, and they're doing what they can to address the problems.

So I'm not the one putting my head in the sand, that's the people who cry about how "this used to be such a safe neighborhood" when in fact there was always an element of risk, and it only wakes people up to reality when their number is finally drawn from the bucket. Pointing out the problems is a GOOD thing. The solution is dealing with those problems, and they CAN be dealt with, but yes, running away is cowardice.

[wrightflyer]

Random acts are random acts. It's when a pattern becomes noticable that a place or neighborhood will start to waver. Even if that pattern is perceived, such as the problem of white flight when bussing was instituted in the 70's. The point is that one random event won't kill a place's "vibe".

Easton in Columbus is a great example. I doubt the Nordstrom and Burberry set will vacate the premesis because of one random act of violence (which actually was more accidental violence or violence against other's of a criminal element). Still, as NE Columbus falls further down the slope of having a dangerous crime element, and if more robberies and murders occur around or in Easton, it might flop. I say might, because as a previous poster stated, there are many variables to a rise and decline of an area.

Back to Cincy. If Hyde Park sees an uptick of crime (perceived, real, or a mix of both), then it will start to tumble. Other elements that I personally think affect people's migration attitudes (whether I or we like it or not), include demographic changes such as race and socio-economic as well as job situations. The latter can be influenced by cheaper rents or home prices because of a less desirable element (crime), thus people will migrate there who once couldn't afford the neighborhood. Sometimes, that means a further increase in crime because part of those in poverty include the criminal element. To me, it appears to feed on itself, and where it starts can be sort of like asking whether the chicken or the egg came first.

Another example could be Boston-Edison in Detroit. It was a neighborhood that was relatively stable until the housing crisis caused a number of problems. Now, as the buffer zone around B-E shrinks and disappears, this once bright, quiet neighborhood is being engulfed by Detroit's serious problems. Crime is increasing here and people are leaving just as many others before them have left inner-city Detroit.

Let's face it, people have left Cincy for the suburbs. Maybe not as many as in Detroit, but it still is occuring. In fact, every metro in Ohio has this problem, because despite the small increase in Ohio's population, the suburbs have expanded dramatically. Dayton sees this as well as Cleveland and Columbus, though Cbus has kept it's city pop. steady, but that could be from annexing growth outside the traditional center.

Personally, I'd advocate an increase in law enforcement, but that can't be afforded, unless new tax money is voted in, yet no one can afford it. People can't afford it cause businesses moved, or the wealthier tax base fled to other cities or states. So, as long as everything (law enforcement, schools, gov't sevices in general) is cut back, and the services get stretched, we won't be able to have physically large entities keep up with increase in crime. It is the sprawl and stretching that worries me, espcially for large cities. Again, it is kind of feeding on itself when it comes to people leaving, thus taxes drop, services drop, more people who can leave, leave.

I think I've ranted enough. This is what you get when you study Geography and population movement for a 1 1/2 years.

[joyeaux]

Off the top... many young, uneducate people are bored ...they don't know how not to be bored...they crave excitement...they have no values...I think many of the previous posts have eluded to these common characteristics...it's very ________________; you can fill in the blank. I'll start with:dangerous.