Is crime really dropping in Chicago? Not long ago, the public would have been forced to rely on some pretty unreliable sources for an answer:
- academicians who worship at the ‘the public’s crime fears are overblown‘ altar
- mainstream reporters who worship at the “academicians who worship at the ‘the public’s crime fears are overblown’ altar” altar
- Chicago politicians
From sources like that, you get contradictory numbers like this, in the Chicago Sun-Times:
Five men were killed and at least 19 other people — including two children — were hospitalized after violence in the city this weekend.
Despite the violent weekend, Chicago Police announced Sunday that violent crimes have decreased for the 30th consecutive month and there have been 31 fewer murders this year than through June of last year, a 14.4 percent decrease. The crime stats also indicate a decrease in aggravated batteries, aggravated assaults and criminal sexual assaults.
Five people blown away, 19 others shot or otherwise injured, in one unremarkable weekend that featured the sort of bad weather that tends to drive people off the streets, so that’s good news: crime is down! (**Update: 11 more shot overnight Sunday, ten homicides total)
Sure, murders are down. They don’t say how much agg. assaults and batteries dropped, nor do they offer what might be the most accurate measure of non-safety — the number of shootings, as oppose to the number of entirely successful gun murders. Let’s not reward bad aim, or good doctoring.
At least the public has alternative sources of information, now that cops are blogging. Second City Cop speculates about other possible explanations for the alleged “drop in crime”:
Are there any actuaries out there who can determine the per capita rate of homicides? We lost at least 200,000 people in the recent census, and since rates are measured in terms of crimes per 100,000, is this a real drop in crime or just a statistical equivalent? And are we still doing that thing with people shot during robberies? And the other thing that negates the FBI ever using Chicago numbers in their crime stats because they’re so hinky?
SCC’s commenters (also cops) knock a little more gild off the lily:
What about property crimes? Criminal damage reports? Thefts? And what of the clearance rates, esp. for violent crimes, like robberies? Oh, I forgot, robberies are property crimes, acc. to Cline.
Crime has gone down for over 30 straight months with the shortage of cops? We don’t need any more cops. In fact lets get rid of all of them and let the animals run the asylum.
With severe police shortages, crime reports fall through the cracks. So is the public “over-reacting” or is crime under-reported?
It also appears from the cop blogs that Chicago authorities are camouflaging crime numbers by classifying gun robberies as “property crime” instead of violent crime. I imagine this sort of free pass gets carried over to Chicago courtrooms, where felons who stick guns in peoples’ faces get off easy because it’s just a “property” offense. And remember all the criminals robbing other criminals who aren’t about to call 911, and the residents intimidated into silence.
How many violent crimes go unreported in a city like Chicago? This demoralizing Chicago Tribune must-read offers some insights:
Whatever you do, don’t use my name, said the 83-year-old widow, and the fear in her voice was palpable. . .
We [the reporters] met a lot of longtime residents on many blocks fighting to hang on to and regenerate their communities. We wanted to tell their stories, but more often than not they would not let us if we used their names. They are terrified of retribution by the criminal elements — gangs and drug dealers — whose activities mushroomed in the newly vacant houses around them. . . “It’s like young people are berserk around here,” said the elderly widow. “It’s like they’re destroying themselves. Practically every other night or so, we hear shooting just west or east of us, or in the alley. It sounds so close, it scares you.” She has lived in her house for 54 years, one of the early black families to move into the community. . . After years of watching, [the elderly residents] know by sight most of the players in the nightly drama. The one they fear most is a soft-spoken boss of street crews selling drugs. “He is just an ordinary-looking person,” said one of the block club’s men. “He doesn’t dress fancy or drive flashy cars. He is very quiet and usually very courteous with people on the street. But he is a vicious killer who is all business.
“Everybody knows who he is.”
If the drug boss knew people were reporting his activities to the police, club members agree he would strike back at them. It’s a frightening prospect because they say he calmly shot a man to death in front of witnesses near their block several years ago and walked away free. The fear of reprisal for reporting criminal activity seems well-founded. Police recognize that gangs and drug dealers plant their own people into community meetings as spies, taking notes on which residents speak out against illegal activity. Community policing experts tell residents to report crimes in strict privacy, not in public forums.
Does any of this sound like good news about the crime rate? Is Chicago really getting safer, or is the opposite true, despite any temporary drop in murder stats? The reporters here lay too much blame on the “subprime mortgage crisis,” instead of on the thugs or the justice system that allows them to get away with murder, empty houses or no empty houses. But, otherwise, the story serves as a fierce corrective to the “crime is down” boosterism coming out of city hall. For the senior citizens trying to hold their neighborhoods together for the uptenth time in fifty years, it’s horror show:
They are terrified of retribution by the criminal elements — gangs and drug dealers — whose activities mushroomed in the newly vacant houses around them . . . crime problems didn’t seem epidemic, block club members say, until the recent foreclosures as a result of the subprime mortgage crisis. According to the census, Englewood and West Englewood lost nearly 20,000 residents in the last decade. Now, 3,500 boarded-up houses and empty lots dot the communities
This actually confirms Second City Cop’s musing about population and statistics: high-crime areas experienced large population losses during the recent mortgage crisis. So it might be that crime rates, adjusted for population, have not dropped at all.
Gee, you’d think some city statistician or publicly funded academic would have caught this. No, they’re all far too busy denying the existence of crime and lobbying to empty the prisons. Meanwhile, back on the block:
Because their street is quieter than nearby streets, the longtime residents say police don’t patrol their block as frequently as they do adjoining ones. “The drug dealers and addicts know that,” said an 80-year-old woman who is also a longtime block club member. “The addicts buy their drugs around the corner and then park in their cars on our block to use their drugs and have their sexual encounters (to pay for drugs). At night, you know they are smoking crack from the blue flame that flares up.”
She talks despairingly of how the crime surge has changed her life.
“I don’t want shooting outside my house or out in the alley. I just want to go to the store and not be afraid, and to get on the bus without fear.”
Is crime really down? Or have the official statistics merely been pummeled by fear of reprisals and thinned by the cop shortage . . . then massaged by statisticians, pled down by attorneys, and shiatsu-ed again by academics, until that hard metal barrel pointed at someone’s face has metamorphosed into a property crime, or maybe just drug possession, if victims are too afraid, or too felonious, to come forward?
Then the anti-incarceration activists can claim that we need more “alternatives to prison” for all those “drug and non-violent offenders” who fill cells. And the cycle starts over again.