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 want to think most closely about Philadelphia, Chicago, and D.C. here. Why are Philadelphia and Chicago constantly disparaged for their violent crime rates, when D.C.'s homicide rate per capita is in their same tier?
As of June 2022, homicides per 100K residents:
Philadelphia: 15.1
DC: 14.6
Chicago: 11.3
All of these homicide rates are unacceptable and must be changed. And these cities have plenty of (smaller population) peers in regards to homicide rates that you rarely hear about, such as Birmingham, AL and Richmond, VA.
Obviously, a big part of it is politically motivated. For example, in 2020, Oklahoma had the 16th highest crime rate of all states, but you didn't hear anyone blaming the governor or state legislature for that.
But I think when it comes to these big Democratically-led cities, a big part of it is people's subconscious misperception of what makes an environment safe or not. Namely, along with a proportionally high homicide rate, D.C. has a proportionally high affluence rate. There is a huge wealth gap in the city. So it is easier to cluster amongst "your own" in D.C. and forget about the down-and-out, or simply working class, parts of town. While Chicago and Philadelphia certainly don't lack affluent residents, the cities have a higher proportion of working class and poor residents. I think this is a key driver to why people are more likely to think of Philadelphia and Chicago as "unsafe" as opposed to D.C.
I think another big driver of this phenomenon is subconscious (or not) bias toward clean and "polished" built environments as equating with safety. Obviously D.C. is a more well-kept city than Philadelphia in this regard. But interestingly, Chicago is also a very clean city. There are "clean" parts of Chicago that I am sure are statistically less safe than "dirty" parts of NYC. I wonder in which setting visitors of both cities would feel safer? I guess of all cities in the USA, Chicago probably gets the most media attention regarding its violent crime rate, so there is that factor as well.
I am curious about others' thoughts. I don't really want this thread to delve into the whies of violent crime rates in these various cities. I definitely don't want this thread to delve into a political discussion about crime, because obviously that is OT for this forum. Really, I just want thoughts about the whies regarding how some cities get picked on way more for their violent crime rates than do others.
I suspect the main reason, is simply size. Philly and especially Chicago are much larger cities. It's a shocking headline to read about 50 people shot in a weekend in Chicago. Chicago having more murders than NYC despite being much smaller is more dramatic than DC having more killings than San Diego despite a larger population.
But, I suspect there are a few additional reasons:
1) Locally, the narrative has been that the DC has been relentlessly gentrified and all the poor pushed out of the city. The persistent high crime is inconvenient to that narrative.
2) the citys electorate is extremely liberal. There was surprisingly talk about crime in the recent mayoral or AG elections despite crime at recent decade highs. Compare that to Philly's contentious DA election.
3) DC dosent have a downtown shopping district to loot like Chicago. Chicago seems to have an issue with massive crowds of teens converging on the downtown to rob shops, fight and and just cause general mayhem. DCs core is a big office district so it doesn't have the same dynamic.
As to the question of whether it is simply easier to forget about crime among the affluent in DC. I think it depends. Chicago and Philly account for a larger share of their MSAs. DC is more of a sprawling post war MSA. A larger percentage of the DC MSA is completely indifferent to DC proper. Chicago and Philly also have more of the going downtown on the weekends culture among it's suburbanites. Plus you have a lot less transplants (especially among the white population), so there is a lot more of going to the old neighborhood to go to a bakery or whatever.
But, among city residents I'm not sure. Upper NW is basically a low density streetcar suburb, so crime isn't much of a concern. But in the center of the urban center of the city: Columbia Heights, 14th north of U, eastern U Street/Florida Ave/Georgia Ave, Shaw, H Street, SW have very persistent crime next to relatively trendy areas. Chicago with it's stark N-S divide may offer more out of sight out of mind protection from violent crime.
Generally, it's the sheer numbers Chicago puts up that gets the attention imo. I don't feel unsafe in Chicago at all when I go there, and coming from Oakland, I can certainly relate with people having overreaching misconception due to crime rates and feeling that it is unfair to blanket an entire city with stigma due to crime in certain parts of town, but the media is ever thirsty to paint the most sensationalized story to get ratings and viewership. It's pathetic and tawdry but sadly, the way of the world.
I think it’s as simple as DC is in the news all the time for things that have nothing to do with crime. Philly really isn’t. So for DC crime is part of its reputation, for Philly it is its reputation. Plus for residents themselves DC is more heavily transplants which are by and large socially separate from the people victimized. a city like Philly you have more people who likely know someone, or knows someone who knows someone who has been a victim of violent crime.
Because (thankfully) in almost every US city violent crime isn’t something most people actually experience. So it’s based on what they hear.
I think a big part of the misperception comes from the media. Take my Family for example. We go on summer vacation trips every year. And I'm talking about my Parents, Siblings, nephews and nieces. I recommended visiting Chicago this year and I was immediately shot down with a resounding HELL NO. Chi-raq, drill music, 50 people shot over a weekend immediately came out their mouth. Mind you we just took a trip to St. Louis 2 summer ago and me and we've been to New Orleans several times over the years.
And to be honest even I let the media cloud my judgement when I was looking to choose between Chicago and GUESS WHAT PHILLY for a anniversary trip last year. We ended up going to Philly because I saw a few news clips of crime going up in River North. While I was in Philly though, crime was all over the news. That's generally all they spoke about but guess what that didn't stop me from enjoying Philly. Even walked back to our hotel in Rittenhouse Square from The Franklin Fountain at night. Won't lie certain corners did feel like the most intense walk of my life LOL but I survived. It wasn't till we left Philly where I said to myself, I could have easily done the same thing in Chicago and felt safe for the most part. And at least Downtown Chicago is cleaner than Philly.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
Generally, it's the sheer numbers Chicago puts up that gets the attention imo. I don't feel unsafe in Chicago at all when I go there, and coming from Oakland, I can certainly relate with people having overreaching misconception due to crime rates and feeling that it is unfair to blanket an entire city with stigma due to crime in certain parts of town, but the media is ever thirsty to paint the most sensationalized story to get ratings and viewership. It's pathetic and tawdry but sadly, the way of the world.
This. Never once felt unsafe in Chicago when I lived there, or the dozens of times I've visited. For profit media is all about ratings. When it bleeds, it leads, is more true than ever. With a 24/7 news cycle instead of an hour a night, people are made to feel like the world is a very dangerous place, when the reality is its been getting safer by the decade.
I agree with most of the above, local and national media sensationalizing crime to pull people in.
And I always find it funny (yet maddening) when the folks from rural PA or rural IL make outlandish claims about crime and safety in Chicago or Philadelphia and haven't been to either since 1985, or if at all!
But why DC gets more of a pass could be for a lot of reasons, all frustrating.
Obviously, I am not excusing the high rates of violent crime in these cities (and others), but some cities definitely have more unfair and uninformed assumptions about crime and general safety.
I agree fully with jpdivola that it's the headlines that sell, so it's the headlines that matter most. A headline that reads 20 shot labor day weekend in Chicago probably sells a whole lot better than 5 shot in D.C. I also think there is pressure to suppress D.C. from those lists due to it being the Capital of our country and the political pressure to not highlight any of D.C's failures.
While politicians argue over what the solution is to fix "Chicago's crime problem", it would be inconvenient to the narrative to point out that they can't even fix issues in their own city.
I've lived in Chicago for most of my life and although I ALWAYS felt safe, within the past couple of years I have felt less safe. That's mostly due to the general riff raff of being in a major city today. I wouldn't say it's realistic to feel like I will be shot, but I do think it's realistic to worry about muggings and car jackings.
The police force in Chicago is overwhelmed. On top of that, masks give people a great excuse to remain hidden from prosecution for non violent crimes like grand theft or petty robbery. The increase in those sorts of things are much higher than you'd ever see announced on the news.
IMHO, homicide rates are a poor way to gauge deaths caused by crime. I think murder rates should be used rather than homicide rates.
Homicide includes murder, manslaughter, justifiable homicide, and felony murder.
Murder is intentional killing.
Manslaugher is incidental or accidental killing, and encompasses many things outside of crime such as someone getting killed by a gun they thought was not loaded. Alec Baldwin killing his staffer was manslaughter.
Justifiable homicide is exclusive of a crime. A wife who kills her husband who is coming at her with a knife has done so in self defense and committed no crime.
Then you have felony murder, where a getaway driver is convicted because his passenger shot and killed somebody.
I think it would be much more informational if we compared murder rates between cities as well as homicide rates.
I want to think most closely about Philadelphia, Chicago, and D.C. here. Why are Philadelphia and Chicago constantly disparaged for their violent crime rates, when D.C.'s homicide rate per capita is in their same tier?
As of June 2022, homicides per 100K residents:
Philadelphia: 15.1
DC: 14.6
Chicago: 11.3
All of these homicide rates are unacceptable and must be changed. And these cities have plenty of (smaller population) peers in regards to homicide rates that you rarely hear about, such as Birmingham, AL and Richmond, VA.
Obviously, a big part of it is politically motivated. For example, in 2020, Oklahoma had the 16th highest crime rate of all states, but you didn't hear anyone blaming the governor or state legislature for that.
But I think when it comes to these big Democratically-led cities, a big part of it is people's subconscious misperception of what makes an environment safe or not. Namely, along with a proportionally high homicide rate, D.C. has a proportionally high affluence rate. There is a huge wealth gap in the city. So it is easier to cluster amongst "your own" in D.C. and forget about the down-and-out, or simply working class, parts of town. While Chicago and Philadelphia certainly don't lack affluent residents, the cities have a higher proportion of working class and poor residents. I think this is a key driver to why people are more likely to think of Philadelphia and Chicago as "unsafe" as opposed to D.C.
I think another big driver of this phenomenon is subconscious (or not) bias toward clean and "polished" built environments as equating with safety. Obviously D.C. is a more well-kept city than Philadelphia in this regard. But interestingly, Chicago is also a very clean city. There are "clean" parts of Chicago that I am sure are statistically less safe than "dirty" parts of NYC. I wonder in which setting visitors of both cities would feel safer? I guess of all cities in the USA, Chicago probably gets the most media attention regarding its violent crime rate, so there is that factor as well.
I am curious about others' thoughts. I don't really want this thread to delve into the whies of violent crime rates in these various cities. I definitely don't want this thread to delve into a political discussion about crime, because obviously that is OT for this forum. Really, I just want thoughts about the whies regarding how some cities get picked on way more for their violent crime rates than do others.
In the case of Chicago, it really comes down to amount of shootings, not homicides. That, and how much of a weekly statistic it has become for the media recycle.
As of July, there were ~2000 shootings in the city of Chicago, down ~20% from last year.
As of today in Philadelphia, there have been ~1700 shootings. Not as large of a delta as some might think, but it's still a 25%+ swing between the two.
Funny enough, you can't find the number of shootings in DC anywhere. Interesting eh?
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.
