US cities see unexplained rise in violent crimes this year

[webfact]

US cities see unexplained rise in violent crimes this year
By LISA MARIE PANE and DON BABWIN

CHICAGO (AP) — Violent crimes — from homicides and rapes to robberies — have been on the rise in many major U.S. cities, yet experts can't point to a single reason why and the jump isn't enough to suggest there's a trend.

Still, it is stumping law enforcement officials, who are seeking a way to combat the problem.

"It's being reported on at local levels, but in my view, it's not getting the attention at the national level it deserves," FBI Director James Comey said recently. "I don't know what the answer is, but holy cow, do we have a problem."

Americans have grown accustomed to low crime rates since a peak in the 1990s. But law enforcement started seeing a spike last year that has continued unabated. What's unusual, however, is that it's not happening everywhere. Chicago and Los Angeles are seeing homicides on the rise, but other places like Miami and Oakland are not.

Chicago, a city long associated with violent crime that plagues its poorer neighborhoods, saw six people fatally shot over the Memorial Day weekend and 56 wounded, ending a bloody month in a bloody year. May's 66 homicides — 19 more than May 2015 and 25 more than May 2014 — raised the total number for the year past the 240 mark. That's more than 50 percent higher than last year, and puts the city on a pace to easily surpass the 500 homicides it saw in 2012.

Perhaps more significant is the number of people who are being shot; well over 1,200 as of Tuesday, which far surpasses the 800 by this time last year.

All of it has left the city on edge.

"Our kids are afraid to go out of the house," said the Rev. Michael Pfleger, a Catholic priest and activist on the city's South Side. "You have children asking teachers to pray for them before they go home."

Some say the splintering of gangs has created deadly rivalries, others say the disbanding of specialized police units has helped embolden gangs. Guns are pouring into the city — with police saying they've seized more guns this year (3,500) than any city police department in the United States — but courts also have overturned or gutted the city's once-tough gun laws.

Add to that concerns, expressed publicly by Mayor Rahm Emanuel and privately by officers, that videos like the one of a white officer fatally shooting 17-year-old Laquan McDonald, who was black, are making officers reluctant to combat crime. That video, which led to murder charges against the officer, exposed and deepened the rift between the community and the police force that many say has made the public less likely to offer the kind of cooperation that the department needs to prevent and solve crimes.

"Quite frankly, trust has broken down between the community and police," new police superintendent Eddie Johnson said.

The Major Cities Chiefs Association, a nonprofit that works with police chiefs in the 50 largest cities in the U.S. as well as the seven largest cities in Canada, began hearing last year that violent crimes were increasing, executive director Darrell Stephens said. In response, the group began collecting data to better document crimes, data that showed an increase in violent crimes in 2015 over 2014.

Already, the first quarter of this year showed across-the-board increases in homicides, rape, robbery and aggravated assaults and non-fatal shootings compared to 2015.

The reasons vary, Stephens said: Chicago and Los Angeles attribute much of it to gang-related violence, while others chalk it up to significant drug problems that lead to violent crime.

Some in law enforcement have speculated that a climate after the 2014 fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Missouri, has made officers reticent about taking the steps needed to stop crime, but Stephens says that tough scrutiny on policing has always been part of the job, even if it's "more visible, more strident" now.

And even with violent crime outpacing past years, it's a far cry from the more notorious early 1990s when there were about 25,000 homicides each year. "We're nowhere near that level," he said.

Plus, other cities are seeing a decrease in crimes, including Miami, where there were 25 homicides in the first three months of 2015 but 12 during that same time frame this year, and Oakland, California, where the number of homicides, rapes, robberies and aggravated assaults were down in the first three months of this year compared to the same period a year ago.

Still, the crime spike has raised alarms among national law enforcement officials, notably the FBI director.

"Sometimes people say to me, well, the increases are off of historic lows. How does that many of us feel any better?" Comey said. "A whole lot more people are dying this year than last year, and last year than the year before. And I don't know why for sure."

In Indianapolis, which saw a record 144 homicides last year, the police department launched a new crime-fighting approach last month. Officers now patrol 19 new beats in crime-plagued neighborhoods where 45 percent of last year's homicides occurred. Those neighborhoods were chosen with help from the capitol city's new crime-fighting technology center, which pinpoints areas where beat patrols could have the greatest impact.

Police spokesman Sgt. Kendale Adams said last year's record homicides and the continued rise in killings this year is being driven by a multitude of factors, including the proliferation of guns, disputes over drugs and fights that escalate into gunfire.

"People want a reason, right? There's got to be a reason, but when we look at the data it's disturbances, it's drugs, it's even simple disputes on Facebook. It's very lifestyle-oriented, that's what the data is telling us," he said Wednesday. "Disputes that normally would have been settled through fighting are being settled through lethal means."

___

Pane reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Eric Tucker in Washington and Rick Callahan in Indianapolis contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-06-06

[shirtless]

When hope start to fade violence starts to rise.

[NovaBlue05]

Over the last few years, cops are getting shy about what may be perceived as aggressive policing and the elected officials they answer to are exacerbating that

[asiamaster]

The pitchforks are coming!

[reggaebkk]

"Americans have grown accustomed to low crime rates" .... 1st time I hear that one

[ggt]

I thought by now everyone in the world understands while the US has experienced a rise in violent crime...Clinton, Sanders, Mexican mayors, Mexican governors...all agree...Donald Trump single handedly caused a crime wave throughout the United States...

Is this a great election process...or what?

[hdkane]

The "unexplained" rise in violent crime is easily explained by an approved change in policing policy. Police can no longer stop and frisk individuals, mostly blacks, in crime ridden neighborhoods. Police have been warned and are extremely conscious of interacting with blacks. They now are hesitant to patrol vulnerable neighborhoods, for fear of being called racist should they have to arrest a black. Even if police conduct themselves entirely professionally, their fears are genuine: in the past 5 years, more than 100 false accusations of racism have been lodged against officers in Chicago. The charge itself ruins a career and costs thousands of dollars to defend. So, they adopted a more "hands off" policy, and thus the increase in crime. Despite the notion that blacks are merely target practice for the police, most analyses indicate that whites are shot at a higher rate/proportion than blacks. When a black fellow is shot or killed, the claims of racism become the default of the media and offenders.

Recent statistics find that murders would fall 90% if blacks simply stopped killing. Before the Thaivisa editors retract this post, please take a moment to review "The Color of Crime", a 2016 statistical analysis of the most recent FBI crime summary.

[Suradit69]

The "unexplained" rise in violent crime is easily explained by an approved change in policing policy. Police can no longer stop and frisk individuals, mostly blacks, in crime ridden neighborhoods. Police have been warned and are extremely conscious of interacting with blacks. They now are hesitant to patrol vulnerable neighborhoods, for fear of being called racist should they have to arrest a black. Even if police conduct themselves entirely professionally, their fears are genuine: in the past 5 years, more than 100 false accusations of racism have been lodged against officers in Chicago. The charge itself ruins a career and costs thousands of dollars to defend. So, they adopted a more "hands off" policy, and thus the increase in crime. Despite the notion that blacks are merely target practice for the police, most analyses indicate that whites are shot at a higher rate/proportion than blacks. When a black fellow is shot or killed, the claims of racism become the default of the media and offenders.

Recent statistics find that murders would fall 90% if blacks simply stopped killing. Before the Thaivisa editors retract this post, please take a moment to review "The Color of Crime", a 2016 statistical analysis of the most recent FBI crime summary.

"When a black fellow is shot or killed, the claims of racism become the default of the media and offenders."

There's a reason why that stereotypical default response is the one that first springs to mind. If some kid in a upper class white community commits virtually the same crime as a Black or Hispanic kid in some run-down inner city community, the police reaction, the treatment of the perpetrator and the eventual charge & court handling of the case will inevitably be markedly different. In low income, non-white areas the "system" will protect the police allowing them the freedom to act in unacceptable ways. In middle and upper class white communities the police are held more accountable and the systemic protection is more likely to favor the "alleged" criminal.

[elgordo38]

Just more people excersizing their 2nd amendment rights.

[MockingJay]

UNEXPLAINED...

[mopar71]

In another thread someone brought up people get the government they deserve.

Well, besides the reasons mentioned above...over 95% -if not all- of the largest cities with massive crime problems are governed by Democrats and have been for decades. Their policies have destroyed the communities and led to a massive amount of inner-city crime and violent deaths...but as long as the voters keep them in office, expect to see more of the same.

[55Jay]

Not "The" reason, but one of many symptoms and contributing factors.

[Rancid]

Generally areas of high welfare and high unemployment will have higher crime in any country.

The US has its own social problems which factor in, however some cities are going to ruin as the government continues to pretend that unemployment is low.

Also the war on drugs, aside from adding to police and government corruption is a lifestyle beacon to chase easy money.

What lowers crime is a gainfully employed population, but seems those days may be behind us.

[bassman]

Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon" black lives matter. Is AP news starting to get stupid...or like all mainstream media going off the scale liberal? Everyone knows the reason, but no one will say it in public.

[wabothai]

If they can't point to a single reason they are not qualified to be an expert.

[connda]

Just more people excersizing their 2nd amendment rights.

Not really. The cities with the highest firearm related homicides also have the strictest firearm laws. Basically it's a lot of illegal weapons doing the killing.

"Ohhh that America! Land of crazy gun nuts."

Really? What about most of North Africa, most of the Middle East, the Balkans, and the various 'Stans' where military grade weapons are within the reach of most folks on the street? I don't hear the anti-gun crowd moaning about the rest of the highly armed world. Actually, not as much as a word. Just the US and it's 'legal' guns in the hand of the citizenry. Gotta make those illegal. Then only criminals have guns.

Exactly. And it's the criminal element in large cities with the toughest gun laws where gun crime grows rampant. But shhhhhh never mind most of North Africa, most of the Middle East, the Balkans, and the various 'Stans' where military grade weapons are within the reach of most folks on the street. They don't count. <head shake> Don't look over there. And ignore the man behind the curtain too. Uncle Smedly? Uncle Smith. Uncle.....??? Can't seem to remember.

Edited June 6, 2016 by connda

[hdkane]

The "unexplained" rise in violent crime is easily explained by an approved change in policing policy. Police can no longer stop and frisk individuals, mostly blacks, in crime ridden neighborhoods. Police have been warned and are extremely conscious of interacting with blacks. They now are hesitant to patrol vulnerable neighborhoods, for fear of being called racist should they have to arrest a black. Even if police conduct themselves entirely professionally, their fears are genuine: in the past 5 years, more than 100 false accusations of racism have been lodged against officers in Chicago. The charge itself ruins a career and costs thousands of dollars to defend. So, they adopted a more "hands off" policy, and thus the increase in crime. Despite the notion that blacks are merely target practice for the police, most analyses indicate that whites are shot at a higher rate/proportion than blacks. When a black fellow is shot or killed, the claims of racism become the default of the media and offenders.

Recent statistics find that murders would fall 90% if blacks simply stopped killing. Before the Thaivisa editors retract this post, please take a moment to review "The Color of Crime", a 2016 statistical analysis of the most recent FBI crime summary.

"When a black fellow is shot or killed, the claims of racism become the default of the media and offenders."

There's a reason why that stereotypical default response is the one that first springs to mind. If some kid in a upper class white community commits virtually the same crime as a Black or Hispanic kid in some run-down inner city community, the police reaction, the treatment of the perpetrator and the eventual charge & court handling of the case will inevitably be markedly different. In low income, non-white areas the "system" will protect the police allowing them the freedom to act in unacceptable ways. In middle and upper class white communities the police are held more accountable and the systemic protection is more likely to favor the "alleged" criminal.

Again, it's not race that is the deciding factor per se...when income/IQ is controlled, the whites are universally held to a higher standard...for example, whites are executed at a rate higher than blacks...when researchers match according to IQ/income, those seemingly apparent discrepancies in arrests disappear...

[hdkane]

The "unexplained" rise in violent crime is easily explained by an approved change in policing policy. Police can no longer stop and frisk individuals, mostly blacks, in crime ridden neighborhoods. Police have been warned and are extremely conscious of interacting with blacks. They now are hesitant to patrol vulnerable neighborhoods, for fear of being called racist should they have to arrest a black. Even if police conduct themselves entirely professionally, their fears are genuine: in the past 5 years, more than 100 false accusations of racism have been lodged against officers in Chicago. The charge itself ruins a career and costs thousands of dollars to defend. So, they adopted a more "hands off" policy, and thus the increase in crime. Despite the notion that blacks are merely target practice for the police, most analyses indicate that whites are shot at a higher rate/proportion than blacks. When a black fellow is shot or killed, the claims of racism become the default of the media and offenders.

Recent statistics find that murders would fall 90% if blacks simply stopped killing. Before the Thaivisa editors retract this post, please take a moment to review "The Color of Crime", a 2016 statistical analysis of the most recent FBI crime summary.

"When a black fellow is shot or killed, the claims of racism become the default of the media and offenders."

There's a reason why that stereotypical default response is the one that first springs to mind. If some kid in a upper class white community commits virtually the same crime as a Black or Hispanic kid in some run-down inner city community, the police reaction, the treatment of the perpetrator and the eventual charge & court handling of the case will inevitably be markedly different. In low income, non-white areas the "system" will protect the police allowing them the freedom to act in unacceptable ways. In middle and upper class white communities the police are held more accountable and the systemic protection is more likely to favor the "alleged" criminal.

Again, it's not race that is the deciding factor per se...when income/IQ is controlled, the whites are universally held to a higher standard...for example, whites are executed at a rate higher than blacks...when researchers match according to IQ/income, those seemingly apparent discrepancies in arrests disappear...

Forgot to mention that blacks are overrepresented on the Chicago police force...moreover, if a particular group was responsible for 90% of a particular crime, it only makes sense to "profile"...