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.
sorry,but I find that hard to believe. watch the news on any given night in Atlanta, and there are several murders, shootings, rapes and robberies on a daily basis. plus,the city limits are arbitrarily drawn and so a lot of the murders occur in parts of Atlanta that may be considered unincorporated or nearby counties. it's more accurate to post the number of murders for the entire metro area. do you have those numbers? i'd bet it's more than Chicago and Detroit. Atlanta has a serious crime problem, easily on the level of those cities.
As far as metro murder rates, they are listed below. I pulled Gary out of Chicago for comparison, just because it was such an isolated pocket of violence that I didn't see in either Atlanta or Detroit. Gary has 28% of all suburban murders in suburban Chicago and is only 1% of the suburban population. It's so isolated in Northwest Indiana surrounded by the lake and so much heavy industry. People in the main Chicago suburbs forget just how horribly VIOLENT it really is. It's worse than almost any neighborhoo in Chicago pound per pound.
City: City Population - City Murders - Murder Rate
Atlanta:
City of Atlanta: 451,020 - 84 - 18.6/100,000 Suburban Atlanta: 5,060,192 - 239 - 4.9/100,000
Detroit:
City of Detroit: 699,889 - 316 - 45.2/100,000 Suburban Detroit: 3,596,739 - 95 - 2.6/100,000
I wasn't trying to "cheat" for Chicago or anything. If there is an overwhelming area of suburban Atlanta or Detroit with over 25% of murders for less than 1% or so of the population let me know.
I was just reading that. They're just a few murders away from reaching their all-time high murder rate for the city. Higher than the rough times of the 70's and 90's. Crazy.
I was just reading that. They're just a few murders away from reaching their all-time high murder rate for the city. Higher than the rough times of the 70's and 90's. Crazy.
What's happened to Baltimore is noteworthy because it stands out among large cities who haven't decreased in crime the way the vast majority of this nation has. Sharper police efforts and sentencing since the 90s have led to drastic crime reduction in some of the historically worst cities...
Otherwise, Baltimore's murder rate wouldn't cause second thought were this another era. During the "war years" (war on drugs, war on gangs, etc), Baltimore was substantially less violent death than its two neighbors to its south, Washington and Richmond. As it is, Baltimore's record murder rate of 49.65 was set in 1993, when the city had 353 murders. That same year, Richmond had a murder rate of 55.22 and Washington had a murder rate of 78.55. In fact, while Baltimore has never had a murder rate of 50 per 100,000, Richmond eclipsed that mark 9 straight years (89-97), and DC eclipsed that mark 10 straight years (88-97)....
Baltimore is on pace for a 2015 year-end murder rate of ~55.22, which would be a record for the city. Not only have DC and Richmond topped that figure many times, the record homicide rates for the City of Washington and City of Richmond completely blow Baltimore's current 1993 record and likely new 2015 record rates out of the water: DC had a record rate of 80.6 in 1991; Richmond had s peak rate of 80.5 in 1994....DC had a murder rate higher than Baltimore in every year of the 80s/90s except 1985 and 1986; Richmond had a higher murder rate than Baltimore every year from 1982-1998, and more recently, from 2003-2005....
Baltimore is a city plagued by corruption, incompetence, and habitually poor leadership. How else can you explain that cities that were FAR WORSE, historically (of which DC and Rich are only two), have dramatically reversed their violent histories, while Baltimore continues to have similar murder rates since the 90s?
Richmond and The Capital are historically two of the most violent cities in the nation's history, where carnage was once of such epic proportion that 2015 Baltimore would be deemed a "good year" in those cities not even fully two decades ago. I don't know how to fix Baltimore, but it's a shame when one of America's historically premier cities---which comparably wasn't 'that' bad during the war years in America's streets, compared to other cities--is mired in such a cycle of instability. There is no way Richmond and DC have been able to revamp their images, and Baltimore hasn't. That city's government needs to be cleaned top to bottom...
What's happened to Baltimore is noteworthy because it stands out among large cities who haven't decreased in crime the way the vast majority of this nation has. Sharper police efforts and sentencing since the 90s have led to drastic crime reduction in some of the historically worst cities...
Otherwise, Baltimore's murder rate wouldn't cause second thought were this another era. During the "war years" (war on drugs, war on gangs, etc), Baltimore was substantially less violent death than its two neighbors to its south, Washington and Richmond. As it is, Baltimore's record murder rate of 49.65 was set in 1993, when the city had 353 murders. That same year, Richmond had a murder rate of 55.22 and Washington had a murder rate of 78.55. In fact, while Baltimore has never had a murder rate of 50 per 100,000, Richmond eclipsed that mark 9 straight years (89-97), and DC eclipsed that mark 10 straight years (88-97)....
Baltimore is on pace for a 2015 year-end murder rate of ~55.22, which would be a record for the city. Not only have DC and Richmond topped that figure many times, the record homicide rates for the City of Washington and City of Richmond completely blow Baltimore's current 1993 record and likely new 2015 record rates out of the water: DC had a record rate of 80.6 in 1991; Richmond had s peak rate of 80.5 in 1994....DC had a murder rate higher than Baltimore in every year of the 80s/90s except 1985 and 1986; Richmond had a higher murder rate than Baltimore every year from 1982-1998, and more recently, from 2003-2005....
Baltimore is a city plagued by corruption, incompetence, and habitually poor leadership. How else can you explain that cities that were FAR WORSE, historically (of which DC and Rich are only two), have dramatically reversed their violent histories, while Baltimore continues to have similar murder rates since the 90s?
Richmond and The Capital are historically two of the most violent cities in the nation's history, where carnage was once of such epic proportion that 2015 Baltimore would be deemed a "good year" in those cities not even fully two decades ago. I don't know how to fix Baltimore, but it's a shame when one of America's historically premier cities---which comparably wasn't 'that' bad during the war years in America's streets, compared to other cities--is mired in such a cycle of instability. There is no way Richmond and DC have been able to revamp their images, and Baltimore hasn't. That city's government needs to be cleaned top to bottom...
I have been saying this for years, although I thought Baltimore did reach 53 per 100k but Im not stats expert. I sarcastically route for Baltimore for being #1 in murders because they've tried so long but never been #1. If it weren't for St. Louis it could've happened this year. Also it kills me when some of the long time Baltimore residents from the Cal Ripken days say "I wish things were like back in the day". But back in the day going back almost 50 years has the murder rate been damn near the same as today. If you look at Baltimore's murder rate on a line graph, it would almost be straight line with very little variation.
What's happened to Baltimore is noteworthy because it stands out among large cities who haven't decreased in crime the way the vast majority of this nation has. Sharper police efforts and sentencing since the 90s have led to drastic crime reduction in some of the historically worst cities...
Otherwise, Baltimore's murder rate wouldn't cause second thought were this another era. During the "war years" (war on drugs, war on gangs, etc), Baltimore was substantially less violent death than its two neighbors to its south, Washington and Richmond. As it is, Baltimore's record murder rate of 49.65 was set in 1993, when the city had 353 murders. That same year, Richmond had a murder rate of 55.22 and Washington had a murder rate of 78.55. In fact, while Baltimore has never had a murder rate of 50 per 100,000, Richmond eclipsed that mark 9 straight years (89-97), and DC eclipsed that mark 10 straight years (88-97)....
Baltimore is on pace for a 2015 year-end murder rate of ~55.22, which would be a record for the city. Not only have DC and Richmond topped that figure many times, the record homicide rates for the City of Washington and City of Richmond completely blow Baltimore's current 1993 record and likely new 2015 record rates out of the water: DC had a record rate of 80.6 in 1991; Richmond had s peak rate of 80.5 in 1994....DC had a murder rate higher than Baltimore in every year of the 80s/90s except 1985 and 1986; Richmond had a higher murder rate than Baltimore every year from 1982-1998, and more recently, from 2003-2005....
Baltimore is a city plagued by corruption, incompetence, and habitually poor leadership. How else can you explain that cities that were FAR WORSE, historically (of which DC and Rich are only two), have dramatically reversed their violent histories, while Baltimore continues to have similar murder rates since the 90s?
Richmond and The Capital are historically two of the most violent cities in the nation's history, where carnage was once of such epic proportion that 2015 Baltimore would be deemed a "good year" in those cities not even fully two decades ago. I don't know how to fix Baltimore, but it's a shame when one of America's historically premier cities---which comparably wasn't 'that' bad during the war years in America's streets, compared to other cities--is mired in such a cycle of instability. There is no way Richmond and DC have been able to revamp their images, and Baltimore hasn't. That city's government needs to be cleaned top to bottom...
^ well again though, it's not really unstable, it's an uptick in the number of murders. Murders are alway such a small number given the huge population base - although of course they're extremely traumatic to the community!
DC's numbers are up, but it's the difference between 0.013% of the population being murdered and 0.020% of the population murdered.
^ well again though, it's not really unstable, it's an uptick in the number of murders. Murders are alway such a small number given the huge population base - although of course they're extremely traumatic to the community!
DC's numbers are up, but it's the difference between 0.013% of the population being murdered and 0.020% of the population murdered.
You can say that about any country, even the most violent. Crime is still crime.
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.
boredatwork
