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.
Take into consideration gangs from LA has a lot to do with the increase in crime in several other cities during that time period. Chicago didn't.
Quote:
There were a record 97 murders here in 1995, at least 50 percent higher than in each of the past four years and making the city's rate worse than in New York. Killings are running at a brisk pace again this year.
In Minneapolis, the murders have often been linked to drugs, especially crack.
"The lads from Chicago are coming up here to sell their pharmaceutical products," said Sgt. Charlie Miles, of the homicide division, referring to illicit drug dealers, "because they have seen Minneapolis as a new market for them."
People here tend to blame bad-apple newcomers from out of state for the trouble.
Chicago gangs cause Indiana to declare a state of emergency '96
Quote:
First, Gary officials called in the Indiana State Police. Then they called a state of emergency and imposed a citywide curfew.
On Thursday, in the most sweeping effort this year to curtail rampant drug dealing and violence, much of it from Chicago-based street gangs, Mayor Scott King announced the formation of a joint federal, state and local task force on crime.
Chicago gang takes over drug trade and increases violence in Missouri town in mid-90s
Quote:
The prosecution, a joint effort of local and federal authorities, provides a detailed, inside look at how Chicago's largest street gang set up an out-of-state branch to seize upon an economic opportunity. In places such as Springfield, a lack of competition on the streets can mean a fatter bottom line for sophisticated gangs like the Disciples, while a lack of savvy among police can make it easier to operate.
Said one investigator: "We really had trouble figuring out who some of these people were. They had it down. They used other names, different birth dates. They were prepared."
Random gunfire became common. "They would drive down the street, firing guns into the air," one investigator said. "It was intimidation."
Some of the gunfire was not so random.
"We started having drive-by shootings," said Tom Snow, chief deputy in the U.S. Marshals Service in Springfield. "And we don't have those in little old Springfield."
Gary and Compton had similar levels of murder rates and violent crime during their worst periods. The difference is Gary had 100+ murders within a single year at least twice in the 90s. But if we take into account smaller cities well below 100k, then East St. Louis is the most dangerous city. And yes, the city is mainly dominated by Chicago-based gangs. Strangely enough, right across the river, St. Louis proper, is mainly dominated by LA gangs such as Crips and Bloods.. As far as major cities, I think St. Louis has the highest murder rate.
It seems as though LA gangs are more influential on a global scale and maybe even in terms of national. And popular media may have some part in that widespread impact. You can find Crips and Bloods in every major region (West, Northeast, South, and even Midwest) in the country, and also in Alaska and cities like Salt Lake City, apparently. I think some of it has to do with that LA based gangs (particular Crips and Bloods) are a bit easier to copy and paste than Chicago-based gangs. From the 1970s to 90s, Chicago gangs functioned almost akin to the Italian mafia or drug cartels with clear hierarchy and even scriptures that gang members had to remember and oblige by. Some of these gangs even took on religious and militia undertones. The Crips and Bloods on the other hand, from what I understand, were/are strictly about gang banging, and things like fighting over drug turf may have been secondary reasons(or had no factor at all) as to why the gangs feud compared to simply wearing a different color. It's not that Chicago gangs do not have colors and gang bang like the Crips and Bloods do, but the feuds sometimes were a bit more complex than that.
Gary and Compton had similar levels of murder rates and violent crime during their worst periods. The difference is Gary had 100+ murders within a single year at least twice in the 90s. But if we take into account smaller cities well below 100k, then East St. Louis is the most dangerous city. And yes, the city is mainly dominated by Chicago-based gangs. Strangely enough, right across the river, St. Louis proper, is mainly dominated by LA gangs such as Crips and Bloods.. As far as major cities, I think St. Louis has the highest murder rate.
It seems as though LA gangs are more influential on a global scale and maybe even in terms of national. And popular media may have some part in that widespread impact. You can find Crips and Bloods in every major region (West, Northeast, South, and even Midwest) in the country, and also in Alaska and cities like Salt Lake City, apparently. I think some of it has to do with that LA based gangs (particular Crips and Bloods) are a bit easier to copy and paste than Chicago-based gangs. From the 1970s to 90s, Chicago gangs functioned almost akin to the Italian mafia or drug cartels with clear hierarchy and even scriptures that gang members had to remember and oblige by. Some of these gangs even took on religious and militia undertones. The Crips and Bloods on the other hand, from what I understand, were/are strictly about gang banging, and things like fighting over drug turf may have been secondary reasons(or had no factor at all) as to why the gangs feud compared to simply wearing a different color. It's not that Chicago gangs do not have colors and gang bang like the Crips and Bloods do, but the feuds sometimes were a bit more complex than that.
Only people with unaffiliated with LA gangs think that LA people were all about colors. Many of those neighborhood beefs in LA predate the Crip and Blood culture, so when that beef started, people from already opposing sides picked different sides...
The colors mean nothing other than the alliance your section rode with, and who ride for you. Just like the Chicago Folk and People Nation are alliances, the Bloods and Crips are alliances of many unrelated neighborhood gangs. The alliances have always meant more in prison than the streets. There was a time the alliances were very strong on the street but honestly, the internalized wars and fractures of the alliances pretty much crumbled 25 years or so ago (early to mid 90s)...
The Hoovers, a traditional Crip area and definitely one of the more well known Crip gangs, deciding to seperate themselves from Crip identity...even before then, the 83s and 60s starting a Deuce v Tray internal Crip war that lasts until now....Compton Pirus fighting amongst each other...Compton Pirus warring with Watts Bounty Hunters which began the fracture of the Blood car and Pirus beginning to distance themselves from Blood identity. All these things and more are a product of 1990s LA. The color thing flew out the window a long time ago...
LA is considered one if the inventors of the crack era, with LA dudes going coast to coast putting drug crews in cities and states that never heard of Bloods and Crips and it just organically happened that those other places picked up the Blood and Crip identities. People who think LA guys traveled just to spread gang culture have it all wrong. It was always about illicit drug money and control. Always--and in these other cities and states where Bloods and Crips didn't exist, you could make some money without the added pressures of set tripping rivals because (initially) there were no rivals in these other places...
People who think LA dudes just go at it over colors have it all wrong. Just like in Chicago, gangs in LA predate the Crips and Bloods. Neighborhood beefs predate the Crips and Bloods. Crips became a unification of like minded hoods that had no banner, and there was no colors associated with the Crips initially, there was no bandanas. Just if you're from over there, and I'm from over here, we're both Crips. No colors, nothing...
Bloods was a response alliance a few years later by gangs who were not Crips and gangs who already had issues with Crips. The color red is just a symbolism for the name. And all the non-Crips who chose to be Bloods started wearing red...
The late 70s into the 80s is when both movements spread like wildfire and already existing gangs began picking a side, either through pressure and being forced to or because they already were at war with one side, so they chose the other. Very, very, very rarely were Crip and Blood sets started---hoods with already existing gangs, that were unaffiliated with either, joined one alliance or the other. Simple as that...
It was about gang banging and killing rivals too, but it was never only about that, ever, at any point in B or C history...
People who think Chicago gangs are/were so different are horribly misinformed. The gangs in Chicago functioned differently but at the root, the "nations" and alliances in both cities formed from similar points and spread similarly as well. The biggest difference is Chi gangs were more political and organized and LA gangs were more flashy abd flamboyant with very loose organization. Many of the same stories one can tell about Chicago gangs, one can tell about LA gangs, too!
The neighborhoods, districts, etc in smaller cities like Baltimore, St Louis, New Orleans, etc with really high murder rates per capita are about as dangerous as neighborhoods and districts in Chicago, given they have a similar population but they are not MORE dangerous. For example, the western and central districts in Baltimore had a total of 87 murders with a combined population of about 75,000 while the 11th district on Chicago's west side recorded a total of 93 murders with a population of about 74,000. With that being said, a lot of these cities experience very similar levels of murder but none are actually worse than Chicago especially if you factor in the amount of total gun violence I.e. gun murders and non fatal shootings.
Western and Central district (Baltimore):
Population-75,000
Murders-87
Number of people wounded by gunfire-155
Murder rate-116 murders per 100k
Shooting rate-207 shooting victims per 100k
11th district (Chicago):
Population-74,000
Murders-93
Number of people wounded by gunfire-429
Murder rate-125 murders per 100k
Shooting rate-580 shooting victims per 100k
"in smaller cities like Baltimore, St Louis, New Orleans, etc with really high murder rates per capita are about as dangerous as neighborhoods and districts in Chicago"
You understood that is what im talking about. Higher per capita but as far as more dangerous isn't my aim. You could do the same with any of the smaller cities as well by that breakdown.
St Louis:
GreaterVille, Wells Goodfellow, JeffVanderLou, Dutchtown combined population would br around Englewood population. Those St Louis communities have a combined 53 homicides giving it a rate around 160. About little higher than Englewood ( not that combination with West Englewood). It's pickings per say. But overall im stating what you already acknowledged : Higher Per Capita. Nothing about being more dangerous.
Only people with unaffiliated with LA gangs think that LA people were all about colors. Many of those neighborhood beefs in LA predate the Crip and Blood culture, so when that beef started, people from already opposing sides picked different sides...
The colors mean nothing other than the alliance your section rode with, and who ride for you. Just like the Chicago Folk and People Nation are alliances, the Bloods and Crips are alliances of many unrelated neighborhood gangs. The alliances have always meant more in prison than the streets. There was a time the alliances were very strong on the street but honestly, the internalized wars and fractures of the alliances pretty much crumbled 25 years or so ago (early to mid 90s)...
The Hoovers, a traditional Crip area and definitely one of the more well known Crip gangs, deciding to seperate themselves from Crip identity...even before then, the 83s and 60s starting a Deuce v Tray internal Crip war that lasts until now....Compton Pirus fighting amongst each other...Compton Pirus warring with Watts Bounty Hunters which began the fracture of the Blood car and Pirus beginning to distance themselves from Blood identity. All these things and more are a product of 1990s LA. The color thing flew out the window a long time ago...
LA is considered one if the inventors of the crack era, with LA dudes going coast to coast putting drug crews in cities and states that never heard of Bloods and Crips and it just organically happened that those other places picked up the Blood and Crip identities. People who think LA guys traveled just to spread gang culture have it all wrong. It was always about illicit drug money and control. Always--and in these other cities and states where Bloods and Crips didn't exist, you could make some money without the added pressures of set tripping rivals because (initially) there were no rivals in these other places...
People who think LA dudes just go at it over colors have it all wrong. Just like in Chicago, gangs in LA predate the Crips and Bloods. Neighborhood beefs predate the Crips and Bloods. Crips became a unification of like minded hoods that had no banner, and there was no colors associated with the Crips initially, there was no bandanas. Just if you're from over there, and I'm from over here, we're both Crips. No colors, nothing...
Bloods was a response alliance a few years later by gangs who were not Crips and gangs who already had issues with Crips. The color red is just a symbolism for the name. And all the non-Crips who chose to be Bloods started wearing red...
The late 70s into the 80s is when both movements spread like wildfire and already existing gangs began picking a side, either through pressure and being forced to or because they already were at war with one side, so they chose the other. Very, very, very rarely were Crip and Blood sets started---hoods with already existing gangs, that were unaffiliated with either, joined one alliance or the other. Simple as that...
It was about gang banging and killing rivals too, but it was never only about that, ever, at any point in B or C history...
People who think Chicago gangs are/were so different are horribly misinformed. The gangs in Chicago functioned differently but at the root, the "nations" and alliances in both cities formed from similar points and spread similarly as well. The biggest difference is Chi gangs were more political and organized and LA gangs were more flashy abd flamboyant with very loose organization. Many of the same stories one can tell about Chicago gangs, one can tell about LA gangs, too!
What's up Murkrock?
You did an excellent job with the gang explanation that the general mainstream glazed over. I want to add that the L.A Umbrella just more spread out and Chicago gangs are actually more members than L.A gangs since the 70s.
Gary and Compton had similar levels of murder rates and violent crime during their worst periods. The difference is Gary had 100+ murders within a single year at least twice in the 90s. But if we take into account smaller cities well below 100k, then East St. Louis is the most dangerous city. And yes, the city is mainly dominated by Chicago-based gangs. Strangely enough, right across the river, St. Louis proper, is mainly dominated by LA gangs such as Crips and Bloods.. As far as major cities, I think St. Louis has the highest murder rate.
It seems as though LA gangs are more influential on a global scale and maybe even in terms of national. And popular media may have some part in that widespread impact. You can find Crips and Bloods in every major region (West, Northeast, South, and even Midwest) in the country, and also in Alaska and cities like Salt Lake City, apparently. I think some of it has to do with that LA based gangs (particular Crips and Bloods) are a bit easier to copy and paste than Chicago-based gangs. From the 1970s to 90s, Chicago gangs functioned almost akin to the Italian mafia or drug cartels with clear hierarchy and even scriptures that gang members had to remember and oblige by. Some of these gangs even took on religious and militia undertones. The Crips and Bloods on the other hand, from what I understand, were/are strictly about gang banging, and things like fighting over drug turf may have been secondary reasons(or had no factor at all) as to why the gangs feud compared to simply wearing a different color. It's not that Chicago gangs do not have colors and gang bang like the Crips and Bloods do, but the feuds sometimes were a bit more complex than that.
Nice assessment. Chicago gangs were more sophisticated and mafia-like while LA gangs were more of a free-for-all type deal. There is an article from 1993 that illustrates this point as well.
Quote:
Chicago Tribune
SUNDAY WATCH.
L.a. Vs. Chicago Gangs
Where's Their Sense Of Tradition And History Out There On The Coast?
February 07, 1993|By James Warren.
Bob Sipchen, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, generously took on an assignment last week-from the Tribune. He left behind insights into the urban mayhem of which we're all prisoners.
Chicago-born Sipchen, 39, came through on a book promotional tour, touting his "Baby Insane and the Buddha" (Doubleday, $20). It's an engrossing, critically well-received tale of the relationship between San Diego gang-member-turned-government informant Kevin Glass, known as Baby Insane, and Patrick Birse, an obsessed detective who resembles, and is called, Buddha.
As we chatted amid the peace of the Tribune, Sipchen remarked that he suspects that Chicago gangs are "more deeply entrenched" than their West Coast counterparts, particularly in Los Angeles. Gangs out west, he suspected, were more disorganized, though their havoc is ample (about 800 gang-related homicides in Los Angeles County last year).
I wondered if he'd been to any of Chicago's public housing projects and met Chicago gangbangers. He hadn't. Since he'd be staying in town a bit to see relatives, I asked if he'd be game to check out the 28 high-rise Robert Taylor Homes, the nation's biggest public housing project, and some gang members there.
He was. I made a few calls and set him up with good guys and not-so-good guys at Robert Taylor. He went and, upon returning to Los Angeles, reported back: "I don't want to compare the relative toughness of gangs, and thus glorify them, but the Chicago gang members seemed to have a deeper sense of tradition and history.
"I talked to some in Chicago who were descendants of the old Black P-Stone Nation and knew the tradition of the P-Stones going back to the late 1960s. In California, they don't really know where they came from. California strikes me as anarchic. Even though turf is based on neighborhoods, it's more fluid, gangs moving in and out. The Chicago structure seems more of a paramilitary one.
"The Chicago high-rises may be a good metaphor. Chicago gangs are more hierarchical. Out in California, everything is more flat. The term `gang leader' in California tends to be an oxymoron. Things are more flat. In Chicago, the kids talked about summit meetings and talking things out, reminiscent of the old Chicago-style gangster stuff. You're hearing a little bit more of that in California, but it's rare. The leadership there is more diffuse and ad hoc.
"The Chicago guys seem to have an awe of the crazy ruthlessness of California gangs, the way they open up fire with automatic weapons. Conversely, the California gangsters seem impressed with the idea of high-rises and snipers, by the old-style Mafia structure and the long traditions. Whether it's true or not, they have a sense of real discipline in Chicago."
"in smaller cities like Baltimore, St Louis, New Orleans, etc with really high murder rates per capita are about as dangerous as neighborhoods and districts in Chicago"
You understood that is what im talking about. Higher per capita but as far as more dangerous isn't my aim. You could do the same with any of the smaller cities as well by that breakdown.
St Louis:
GreaterVille, Wells Goodfellow, JeffVanderLou, Dutchtown combined population would br around Englewood population. Those St Louis communities have a combined 53 homicides giving it a rate around 160. About little higher than Englewood ( not that combination with West Englewood). It's pickings per say. But overall im stating what you already acknowledged : Higher Per Capita. Nothing about being more dangerous.
No I'm not sure what you mean. The murder rate in Englewood is 191 murders per 100k. What I'm saying is cities like St. Louis and Baltimore have a higher murder rate per capita than Chicago because the murder rate in Chicago is diluted by good areas but when you compare the worst of the worst for each city Chicago is worse. This is because the violence in Chicago is extremely concentrated more than anywhere else in the country.
Quote:
Sub-Chicago and America’s Real Crime Rate
Neighborhood, not citywide, crime data show how deadly some portions of American cities have become—especially Chicago’s West and South Sides.
Rafael Mangual
The NYU School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice, in its annual report on crime, finds that the murder rate in America’s 30 largest cities rose 13.1 percent in 2016—an alarming figure, especially considering last year’s identical increase. Striking a calming note, the Brennan Center’s press release accompanying the report begins by reminding us that “Americans are safer today than they have been at almost any time in the past 25 years.” But downplaying the recent uptick in the homicide rate distracts from the fact that there is more than one America when it comes to violent crime: indeed, 51 percent of all U.S. murders are committed in just 2 percent of the nation’s counties, according to the Crime Prevention Research Center.
No city more starkly illustrates this disparity than Chicago. Many scoffed at President Trump’s tweets about federal help to stop the “carnage” there. “Chicago’s murder rate wasn’t even in the top 10 among large cities,” tweeted USA Today law and justice reporter Brad Heath in response. The Atlantic observed that “there are a number of cities . . . that have much, much higher homicide rates.” A CNN column argued that “a deeper dive into the numbers shows fears over the city’s violence can be overblown when compared to cities much smaller.”
But Chicago—which, the Brennan Center concedes, “accounted for 55.1 percent of the total increase in urban murders” in 2016—deserves its reputation as an American murder capital, or at least a significant part of it does. If policymakers, journalists, and others really wanted to take the “deeper dive” into the numbers that CNN suggests, they should try looking at neighborhood crime statistics. Doing so reveals that, within Chicago, a large sub-city exists that is, in fact, the most dangerous big city in the United States.
It’s true that Chicago, with a citywide homicide rate of 27.9 per 100,000 people, has relatively fewer murders than seven other large cities, including St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, and Detroit. Much of Chicago sees few murders. A better way to understand Chicago homicides is to break them down by police district. To see how concentrated the city’s murders are, I isolated the precincts in which approximately 75 percent of the homicides occur and compared that area—call it Sub-Chicago—with the U.S. cities that are supposedly more dangerous than the Windy City.
During the 365-day period beginning June 7, 2016, Chicago had 711 first- and second-degree homicides. Of those, 556 (or 78.1 percent) occurred in just ten of the city’s police districts. Those districts—which are contiguous—constitute a geographical area almost half the city’s size and house 40.3 percent of the city’s nearly 2.7 million residents. With a population of almost 1.1 million, Sub-Chicago would itself be one of America’s largest cities, and, with a homicide rate of 51.2—almost double Chicago’s 2016 citywide rate—it would be in the running for the title of America’s most dangerous, as it is just shy of surpassing the 2016 citywide rates of Baltimore and St. Louis. Nowhere else in the country is there an area so large and so heavily populated with a murder rate this high.
Quote:
Even when you look at the areas of concentrated homicide in other cities—i.e., those that encompass close to 75 percent of a city’s murders—Sub-Chicago stands out. In St. Louis, for example, 184 murders were committed during the period beginning May 1, 2016, and ending April 30, 2017. Of those, 136 (or 73.9 percent) occurred in three of the city’s six police districts (Sub-St. Louis). Those three districts cover 50.6 percent of the city’s 63.8 square miles, which, according to the city website, house 135,920 (or 42.5 percent) of the city’s 319,294 residents. A similar tract of Sub-Chicago, made up of police districts 11 and 15, with 140 murders and a population of 129,932, posted an annual murder rate of 107.7 per 100,000 during the 365-day period studied—slightly higher than the area constituting Sub-St. Louis (100.05).
In Memphis, murders in 2016 were more evenly distributed than in Chicago and St. Louis. Last year, 76.3 percent of the city’s 228 murders occurred in six of the city’s nine police districts, which cover about 80 percent of the city’s land area and house 76 percent of its population. The murder rate of those six districts was 34.8 per 100,000—less than three points higher than the citywide rate and almost 20 points lower than that of Sub-Chicago.
Analyses of Detroit and Baltimore yield similar results. In Detroit, 72.8 percent of the city’s 302 murders in 2016 occurred in seven of the city’s 11 police precincts—an area that constitutes 64.1 percent of the city’s 137 square miles and accounts for almost 70 percent of its 672,972 residents. Sub-Detroit’s 2016 homicide rate was 47.1 per 100,000 residents—significantly lower than Sub-Chicago’s and less than three points higher than Detroit’s citywide rate.
Seventy-six percent (242) of Baltimore’s murders occurred in six of the city’s nine precincts—an area that houses 53.1 percent of the city’s 624,271 residents. That area’s murder rate is a scary 72.9 per 100,000 residents. But Sub-Chicago has almost double the population of Sub-Baltimore. Sub-Chicago’s four most dangerous police districts—the 11th, 7th, 15th, and 16th—experienced 273 murders during the period analyzed. With a population of 291,844, it posted a murder rate of 93.5—more than 20 points higher than that of Sub-Baltimore.
What this analysis shows is that, in many American cities, a substantial number of residents live through what can only be described as a homicide epidemic. And, despite assurances to the contrary, nowhere is that epidemic more pronounced than in Sub-Chicago, which happens to be 88 percent black and Latino. If we’re serious about improving life in places like South and West Chicago, we must confront the uncomfortable truths about crime concentration in U.S. cities. Step one is recognizing that while most of the country is relatively free from such violence, a portion of the country lives in the urban equivalent of a killing field. These Americans don’t need to be told that crime is down nationwide; they need protection.
No I'm not sure what you mean. The murder rate in Englewood is 191 murders per 100k. What I'm saying is cities like St. Louis and Baltimore have a higher murder rate per capita than Chicago because the murder rate in Chicago is diluted by good areas but when you compare the worst of the worst for each city Chicago is worse. This is because the violence in Chicago is extremely concentrated more than anywhere else in the country.
We understand Rate while im not stating it's more dangerous. Im stating what you've also mentioned, Rate is higher due to size difference. That's what i meant. Also, I stated Englewood stand alone not Englewood & West Englewood combine stats.
That Sub-city article is quite recent indeed but i disagree with referencing police departments geographic jurisdiction. Instead just combine the most crime ridden communities sq miles. Those police jurisdiction covers various sizes; Memphis's covers roughly 36.6 sq mi, Chicago's 10 sq mi, St Louis should be more concentrated then Chicago. Since St.Louis is 68 sq miles.
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.
Chicago gangs cause Indiana to declare a state of emergency '96
