City and Metro homicides 2019 (live, state, rates, crime) - City vs. City - Page 160 - City-Data Forum

woxyroxme · 01-02-2020, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

9 of those 51 include the mass shooting, but even omitting that one event still would put Dayton right below 30 per 100K basically the same as Cleveland and Kansas City.

That or maybe they are counting Trotwood in Dayton’s numbers, Trotwood is a neighboring city but it’s a crime magnet.

marothisu · 01-02-2020, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woxyroxme

That or maybe they are counting Trotwood in Dayton’s numbers, Trotwood is a neighboring city but it’s a crime magnet.

They aren't. This is strictly the city numbers.

newgensandiego · 01-02-2020, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

LOL........ you most definitely do not know Chicago if you think that the area from 35th street south of downtown all the way to 10 miles north of downtown following I-90 including some areas west of I-90 all the way to O'Hare airport is even close to majority wealthy. The majority of that area minus a few areas is solidly working class no more than dead center middle class (again, apart from a few areas). And there are actually some definitely lower middle class areas included in that entire area too.

Oh I am certainly no expert on Chicago! But I may be confused by the area...or I haven't communicated well.

I believe the OP stated everything between the lake and I-90 (including some areas west of the interstate) from 35th St to O'Hare/northern city limits.

While I agree that not individual single neighborhood in this geography is "the wealthiest", the area as a whole represents the wealthiest continuous stretch of Chicago that equals 1.4 million people. I was comparing it in the context of San Diego, which also happens to have 1.4 million people.

Quote:

That area comprises 32 different community areas. 18 of those areas have a median income below the United States Median Household Income ($63,179) which in total has a population of 720,607 people, or a little over half of that whole area's population living in areas where the median income is below the US's median income. 2 of the areas I included have median incomes of less than $30,000/year with another 3 areas between $30K and $40K median (well below the US MHHI).

But how do they compare to the areas outside this boundary? Areas south of 35th or further west of I-90? If you had to create a separate city of 1.4 million people within Chicago, wouldn't you agree that the boundary described by the OP is more or less the wealthiest continuous stretch of the city? I mean sure, you can gerrymander a bit more to get the true wealthiest 1.4M, but I felt the generalized area was adequate.

I'm basing this off median household income: Moderator cut: link removed, competitor site

Quote:

If I just carved out the actual wealthiest parts of downtown and a little north of it, the rate wouldn't be 4.2 per 100K. It would be a bit lower. If you take solidly downtown community areas and include a handful of more areas on the north side that does comprise what would be considered mostly well off - total population is about 557,000 people (larger than Atlanta and Miami, and about the same population as Baltimore) with a homicide rate of 2.08 per 100K in 2019.

I wasn't trying to compare the wealthy neighborhoods of Chicago to San Diego. I was comparing populations of similar size and noting that, even if excluding the worst parts of Chicago, San Diego still has a lower crime rate.

Our superlatives are referring to different things...

newgensandiego · 01-02-2020, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluefox

Well it’s also worth pointing out that San Diego was largely spared the sort of systemic gang culture and violence that you see in places like LA and Chicago. The gang problem in LA proper has certainly subsided in a meaningful way as gangs are pushed out into more fringe areas of the metro area, but in SD it was never a problem of the same magnitude. In Chicago on the other hand, gangs are still very much prevalent in the city proper which directly corresponds to its murder rate.

This is very true. In 2018 there was a whopping total of 4 gang-related homicides in San Diego County, a region of 3.4 million people.

marothisu · 01-02-2020, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newgensandiego

Oh I am certainly no expert on Chicago! But I may be confused by the area...or I haven't communicated well.

I believe the OP stated everything between the lake and I-90 (including some areas west of the interstate) from 35th St to O'Hare/northern city limits.

While I agree that not individual single neighborhood in this geography is "the wealthiest", the area as a whole represents the wealthiest continuous stretch of Chicago that equals 1.4 million people. I was comparing it in the context of San Diego, which also happens to have 1.4 million people.

I am the OP that you are referring to. Again, the area I detailed contains 32 community areas, and 18 of those community areas have LOWER than the US Median Household Income. Total population of that area is over 50% of the overall area I was talking about. There are 2 areas with lower than $30,000 median household income - the US MHHI is over $63,000 by comparison. While it contains some of the wealthiest areas of the city, it does not actually contain all of the wealthiest areas of the city as a few of the wealthiest areas of the city are actually on the south side not contained within the area I was talking about.

Quote:

But how do they compare to the areas outside this boundary? Areas south of 35th or further west of I-90? If you had to create a separate city of 1.4 million people within Chicago, wouldn't you agree that the boundary described by the OP is more or less the wealthiest continuous stretch of the city? I mean sure, you can gerrymander a bit more to get the true wealthiest 1.4M, but I felt the generalized area was adequate.

I'm basing this off median household income: Moderator cut: link removed, competitor site

Actually I did it to not add certain areas that are low crime on the south side that would look like crazy gerry mandering. I could have easily done that and actually reduced the overall homicide rate if I really wanted to. I chose not to. The geographic area I picked is a pretty solid shape that's not really doing anything crazy.

Actual median household incomes by official community area in Chicago are here. Anybody who knows the economic makeup of Chicago by area would know that the area I am talking about is vast majority solidly middle class with only a small handful of areas that have upper middle and upper class people in it: https://www.cmap.illinois.gov/data/c...ommunity_Areas

If you want to know about the south side, it completely depends upon where you are. There are many perfectly safe parts of the south and south west sides that form a continuous geographic area contrary to popular belief.

* The 7 areas on the SW side that are right around Midway airport had 10 homicides this year with over 187,000 people - a homicide rate of 5.3 per 100K. Not super low but also pretty moderate. That rate is very similar to Boston and Portland for 2019.

* 2 adjacent areas on the very far south side recorded 0 homicides this year. Only 40,000 people there but still. Also, the area with University of Chicago and the area directly north (where Obamas have a mansion) recorded 1 total homicide this year with a population of 45,000 people

* In total, there were 13 areas on the south and southwest side that recorded at most 1 homicide each with total population of about 237,000 people. All in all, that totaled 6 homicides for a rate of 2.53 per 100K. If you expand that out to areas that had at most 2 homicides each, then you're now talking about an area only on the south and southwest side with 330,000 people and 14 total homicides for a rate of 4.25 per 100K. The biggest geographic area for this as I mentioned above is on the SW side near Midway airport (187K people). There are scattered areas where there's no homicides.

On the flip side of things, the statistic you should know is that nearly 75% of the homicides in the city this year occurred in community areas where only 26% of the city's population lives. Part of that is on the far west side in a few areas and part is on the south side, but there are numerous areas on the south and southwest side of the city that are completely not dangerous either.

---

Oh and here's a fun statistic. For 2019, St. Louis' homicide rate was 64.06 per 100K. If you take all the 77 community areas of Chicago, and take the areas of town with the most homicides and add their populations up to be close to St. Louis in population then the combined per 100K rate is 62.84 per 100K. The areas of Chicago that have the absolute most amount of homicides which add up to about the same size of St. Louis still have a lower homicide rate than St. Louis (which is even crazier as it includes lower crime areas of St. Louis but this area of Chicago doesn't include any low or even moderate crime areas). And if you expand that out to take all those highest homicide areas closest in total population to Baltimore, then that area is still lower than Baltimore's homicide rate by a little bit.

So combined, the highest crime areas of Chicago are very similar to Baltimore or St. Louis in terms of homicide rate but not actually greater than it combined, at least for 2019.

newgensandiego · 01-03-2020, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

I am the OP that you are referring to. Again, the area I detailed contains 32 community areas, and 18 of those community areas have LOWER than the US Median Household Income. Total population of that area is over 50% of the overall area I was talking about. There are 2 areas with lower than $30,000 median household income - the US MHHI is over $63,000 by comparison. While it contains some of the wealthiest areas of the city, it does not actually contain all of the wealthiest areas of the city as a few of the wealthiest areas of the city are actually on the south side not contained within the area I was talking about.

While I am by no means a Chicago expert, I thought I'd download the datasets myself because I was skeptical. Based on my findings, your conclusion/assertion is pretty disingenuous.

First off, a comparison to U.S. MHHI is irrelevant. Some cities have higher MHHI and some lower. For instance, it would be ridiculous to use this as a point of reference in San Francisco because the U.S. MHHI is basically poverty status. Same goes for cities with lower MHHI.

The objective is to find the wealthiest continuous area of Chicago (city). MMHI for Chicago is $52,497. I tallied 31 communities at 1.42 million using your boundaries. Here are my findings:

Of the 31 community areas in this boundary, 19 have a higher MHHI than the city (63%).
The population weighted average HH income of this area is $68,543, which is 30.5% higher than the Chicago MHHI and 9% higher than U.S. MHHI.
Citywide, there are 28 communities with MHHI higher than the city MHHI. 19 of these are in the area you described. The remaining 9 are all in the southwest and are not continuous with the area you described.

In summary, it seems my assertion was correct. You took the wealthiest (*continuous) portion of Chicago that achieved a population of 1.4 million. It's not an opinion at this point. It's based on the community area data you provided. Again, that doesn't mean that the neighborhoods are all wealthy. But they are collectively wealthier than any other part of Chicago that equals 1.4 million.

I think you are having a difficult time differentiating "wealthy" versus the superlative "wealthiest". One can live in the poorest part of town, but still be in a wealthy neighborhood. It's a comparison, not a definition.

Quote:

Actual median household incomes by official community area in Chicago are here. Anybody who knows the economic makeup of Chicago by area would know that the area I am talking about is vast majority solidly middle class with only a small handful of areas that have upper middle and upper class people in it: https://www.cmap.illinois.gov/data/c...ommunity_Areas

Maybe 70-80% of the land coverage is middle/working class. But those areas also have less population. My original assertion is completely correct.

Quote:

Oh and here's a fun statistic. For 2019, St. Louis' homicide rate was 64.06 per 100K. If you take all the 77 community areas of Chicago, and take the areas of town with the most homicides and add their populations up to be close to St. Louis in population then the combined per 100K rate is 62.84 per 100K.

So combined, the highest crime areas of Chicago are very similar to Baltimore or St. Louis in terms of homicide rate but not actually greater than it combined, at least for 2019.

That is very interesting!

marothisu · 01-03-2020, 09:55 AM

^ As you admitted, you dont know a lot about Chicago and your posts show it. Furthermore, I never actually named the specific community areas I used in my calculation which means you actually dont know how I was doing that 100% other than me trying to describe the boundaries. It's not disingenuous at all. The area that I am describing is mostly solidly middle class with a small amount of upper class and a slightly larger amount than that of upper middle class. I suggest you actually learn about the economic makeup of Chicago before you talk about these things.

Nobody in their right mind who truly knows Chicago would think that areas such as Belmont Cragin, Albany Park, Rogers Park, Portage Park, West Ridge, Hermosa, Avondale, Armour Square, Uptown, Douglas, Oakland, Irving Park, Lower West Side, etc are even remotely considered wealthy. They are middle class at most and some are even lower middle class.

Most of these areas are far from being well off. Solidly middle class and many of these areas are actually solidly working class. If you are going to talk about a city, it's usually beneficial to actually live there and understand the makeup of these areas. I will admit that only a few of these areas are considered poorer on average, but most areas are not even close to upper middle class even.

Ant131531 · 01-03-2020, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

I'm shocked Minneapolis' rate is so high. Really did not expect it to be over 10/100k. I mean, damn, it's cold for half the year. Charlotte feels like it's numbers are starting to get up there as well. Has Dallas ever had 15/100k in the last 10 years? That seems unusually high as well.

Honestly, these numbers look worse across the board....feels like murder rates bottomed out on average in the mid 2010s and have since risen. I don't pay attention to murder rates as much anymore. You'd expect with a good economy, murder rates would be getting lower and lower, but it's the opposite...you felt like things were strangely better during the recession.

SEAandATL · 01-03-2020, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newgensandiego

This is very true. In 2018 there was a whopping total of 4 gang-related homicides in San Diego County, a region of 3.4 million people.

That doesn't surprise me knowing "San Diokyo".

Sharif662 · 01-03-2020, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu

Jackson is 84*.
*: I'm look more into it later. Sometimes news sites include justified & police related.