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.
Omaha had bad street gangs in the 1960s. I was there for a few weeks.
Omaha had that, and bad racial tensions in the 60s. Omaha has had Republican mayors. It isn't a liberal bastion. It didn't stop Omaha from being one of the top cities for Black homicide victimization.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,486,476 times
Reputation: 12187
You see a similar difference in my region between Louisville and Lexington. Louisville is more than 2X bigger but demographics are pretty similar. Louisville has 70 to 125 homicides a year to Lexington's 15 to 20. I think in high crime cities a couple things happen:
1. People feel unsafe so every packs a gun on them all the time. So a shoving match on a basketball court easily become a homicide investigation because in an instant guns get involved rather than fists. It's easy for gangs to break into cars and houses and steal large amounts of guns.
2. Violence is normalized and ceases to instill horror. In the high crime city it is common to kill other drug dealers to make a point. In low crime cities they probably just get beat up.
3. A city develops 'no go' zones where gangs are in control. They prey upon young men from broken homes to conduct their illegal activities.
Consider that Arizona and California have reasonably similar demographics, reasonably similar gun murder/manslaughter rates (AZ is a bit lower), vastly different gun laws.
I don't understand ,Vermont 2010 =-2016 .70 murders in seven years and with NO gun control. Half the state should be dead. Vermont Crime Rates 1960 - 2016
Yes, the irony is never lost on me as a former resident of IL that has lived both in the rural areas as well as Chicago.
Chicago murder rate is 5x higher than the rest of the state whose murder rate is comparable to Canada.
Yet Chicago blames the problem on the guns from other areas.
Now that works politically I suppose but it tells me the problem is something else.
But hey, diversion programs, jobs programs and other initiatives to give people better options than drugs\gangs cost money where blaming everybody else is free!
It's not like most of the people getting killed have any political power. They're mostly poor, brown and the city only has to give them lip service. Black leadership won't rock that boat, after all they've got cabins in first class despite many blacks still being kept down in "cargo".
There are neighborhoods in Chicago just 2-3 miles apart that have murder rates of 1 and 35 annually. Basically like having Japan vs. Tiajuana murder rates.
Yes, the irony is never lost on me as a former resident of IL that has lived both in the rural areas as well as Chicago.
Chicago murder rate is 5x higher than the rest of the state whose murder rate is comparable to Canada.
Yet Chicago blames the problem on the guns from other areas.
Now that works politically I suppose but it tells me the problem is something else.
But hey, diversion programs, jobs programs and other initiatives to give people better options than drugs\gangs cost money where blaming everybody else is free!
It's not like most of the people getting killed have any political power. They're mostly poor, brown and the city only has to give them lip service. Black leadership won't rock that boat, after all they've got cabins in first class despite many blacks still being kept down in "cargo".
There are neighborhoods in Chicago just 2-3 miles apart that have murder rates of 1 and 35 annually. Basically like having Japan vs. Tiajuana murder rates.
I don't think the irony would be lost on residents of Baltimore or Newark either. Cities in states with strict gun laws, and yet, those are some of the most murderous cities in the country, worse than Chicago. In New Jersey, there's no such thing as "peaceable journey" when it comes to transporting your gun across state lines. And New Jersey borders New York, another strict gun law state. New Jersey isn't especially violent as a whole, but Newark is, and has been for decades. Same for Camden and Irvington. Baltimore has been murderous for a while, and keeps getting worse.
This is the thing. Very few politicians want to spend money on diversion programs and job programs, especially if they suspect it doesn't pay immediate dividends. Consider this. The city of Chicago was willing to spend alot of money on building a new stadium for the Chicago White Sox when they threatened to leave. The Illinois General Assembly managed to find money to build Guaranteed Rate Field. Some residences where mainly poor Blacks were living were torn down in the process. This is my theory. There's more hope in getting tax dollars for a new stadium than programs to reduce crime. Those whom would benefit from job programs and diversion programs are seen by some as people not worth "throwing money" at. It's look at as throwing money into a pit. Where as, many people look at a new stadium as bringing in alot of people who spend alot of money.
No one is going to rock the boat when paid enough to do so. However, consider this. Omaha is general a much safer city than Chicago. However, for Blacks, it is still not that safe. Nebraska has one of the highest Black murder rates in the USA. And much of that takes place in North Omaha. This is happening in Democratic and Republican cities.
Consider that Arizona and California have reasonably similar demographics, reasonably similar gun murder/manslaughter rates (AZ is a bit lower), vastly different gun laws.
Not all that disimilar, but very different.
California.
37.7% Non-Hispanic White
6.5% Black
38.9% Hispanic
14.8% Asian
1.7% Native American
0.5% Pacific Islander
Arizona
54% White
5.1% Black
5.3% Native American
31.6% Hispanic
0.3% Pacific Islander
3.7% Asian
Arizona murder rate (2017): 5.9 murders per 100,000
California murder rate (2017): 4.6 murders per 100,000
You see a similar difference in my region between Louisville and Lexington. Louisville is more than 2X bigger but demographics are pretty similar. Louisville has 70 to 125 homicides a year to Lexington's 15 to 20. I think in high crime cities a couple things happen:
1. People feel unsafe so every packs a gun on them all the time. So a shoving match on a basketball court easily become a homicide investigation because in an instant guns get involved rather than fists. It's easy for gangs to break into cars and houses and steal large amounts of guns.
2. Violence is normalized and ceases to instill horror. In the high crime city it is common to kill other drug dealers to make a point. In low crime cities they probably just get beat up.
3. A city develops 'no go' zones where gangs are in control. They prey upon young men from broken homes to conduct their illegal activities.
Louisville and Lexington are kind of different.
Lexington
73% White
14.5% Black
3.2% Asian
6.9% Hispanic
Louisville
66.5% White
23% Black
5.2% Hispanic
2.5% Asian
Even in small cities drug dealers can get killed.
You brought up an important point about broken homes. This is often a big factor that drives gang membership.
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.
