CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

5Shootings are A-Okay as long as nobody was unlucky enough nearby to get shot is hardly a convincing argument.

Can we stop with this type of response? Literally nobody is making this argument and your continued reference to it takes away from any actual discussion.

The entire point is that if ShotSpotter had some evidence or data that supported the idea that their technology lowers crime, they would be posting it and referencing it everywhere. That they aren't implies that they don't have much data to show their product's effectiveness. Thus we are left with the types of anecdotes galleyfox keeps posting.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by twister244

If you have enough data over a year, you can begin to learn where you should allocate/shift police resources around. If there's a neighborhood that shows an anomalously high amount of alerts - Wouldn't it make sense to deploy more resources there?

I completely agree, this is the most logical place that we would see impact. Why can't ShotSpotter or the CPD show it? They have had 10 years of using this technology to show it's impact. Maybe the places ShotSpotter shows with a "high amount of alerts" are the same places we have known about for years? Who knows.

As someone who sells software for a living, when we have the data to show our product's value we shout it from the rooftops. When we don't have the data, we give anecdotes.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

. Thus we are left with the types of anecdotes galleyfox keeps posting.

We're also left with the opinion of our city's police chief.

That means way more to me than the opinion of our clown of a mayor.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

We're also left with the opinion of our city's police chief.

That means way more to me than the opinion of our clown of a mayor.

All the other cities cancelling their contracts provides some more context. Even so, why can't he show the positive impact it has supposedly had? He has the data. If it was compelling, we would see it.

If we want to be cynical about it, I've never seen a manager turn down more spending for their department. On the flip side, $10 million annually could likely support 30-40 more officers.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

Can we stop with this type of response? Literally nobody is making this argument and your continued reference to it takes away from any actual discussion.

The entire point is that if ShotSpotter had some evidence or data that supported the idea that their technology lowers crime, they would be posting it and referencing it everywhere. That they aren't implies that they don't have much data to show their product's effectiveness. Thus we are left with the types of anecdotes galleyfox keeps posting.

Well the logical conclusion of your argument is that police should ignore almost all “shots fired” 911 calls without a victim, and that 911 callers should come to expect a non-response. 911 callers are certainly not more accurate than technology and will just waste even more police time.

Yes, I do consider individual people’s lives to be more than inconvenient anecdotes, and there’s also sound research available from Chicago universities that more people are saved by Shotspotter than by 911 calls.

Research that is much more substantial than certain organizations claiming that shootings are automatically “False Negatives” unless a shooting victim is also present on scene. Which is ridiculous obfuscation.

Obviously a single company cannot prove that they “lower crime” by themselves. Prosecution, courts, demographics and even weather play a more substantial role in lower crime.

[munchymunch]

I’m sorry, but why do I always see arguments whether or not shot spotter lowers crime? Isn’t that not the point of it? It’s an early detection system used to pinpoint gunshots, I don’t get why the goal posts are shifted on what’s it’s actually meant for.

Regardless on how effective it actually is, I don’t understand why having another resource to the number one issue in Chicago is a bad thing.

[sentinel]

Did anyone else watch Johnson's horrifying and ugly press conference introducing his selections for the CPS board? It was beyond awful.

[Steely Dan]

The clowniest clown mayor who ever clowned.

Apparently skin pigmentation alone now determines whether or not a given individual is "legitimate".

What a sad and pathetic excuse of "leader" for our city.

Oh how I wish we could recall his sorry ass.

[lakeshoredrive]

Let’s hope Chicago can survive 2.5 more years of him. I’m really over his ego. Honestly he acts like Trump sometimes. It’s ridiculous.

[left of center]

Johnson is absolutely awful. I honestly wish we had Lightfoot back. That's how bad this guy is.

[twister244]

Yep - He was an awful candidate, and now an awful mayor.

Some of us tried to point this out during the election...... Paul Vallas had his issues, but I would gladly take him over Johnson ANY day of the week.

Johnson has been a joke. The only saving grace is we have a super competent governor to smack him down while accomplishing real economic wins for the area.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by twister244

Yep - He was an awful candidate, and now an awful mayor.

Some of us tried to point this out during the election...... Paul Vallas had his issues, but I would gladly take him over Johnson ANY day of the week.

Johnson has been a joke. The only saving grace is we have a super competent governor to smack him down while accomplishing real economic wins for the area.

I voted for Vallas. Not because of his credentials (which were questionable; his ties to the GOP, him not living in the city, the endorsement by Catanzara, etc.), but because it was clear to see Johnson was the bigger evil. The fact that the CTU fully bankrolled his campaign was such an obvious red flag. I don't think there is a bigger existential threat to the city's financial well being than the ultra corrupt teachers union and their idiotic demands.

[sentinel]

Scorched earth.

Editorial: Mayor Brandon Johnson hitting new lows, one news conference at a time

By The Editorial Board | Chicago Tribune
PUBLISHED: October 9, 2024

"Mr. Mayor, when ABC 7’s Sarah Schulte asked your new members of the Chicago Board of Education at your news event Monday whether or not they supported the high-risk, payday-style $300 million loan that you and your Chicago Teachers Union cronies want to push through, she was not being “disrespectful,” she was doing her job.
Mr. Mayor, when you paraded your replacement board members before members of the media at your news conference — inappropriately held at a church, we might add, given that the topic was a public school system that serves students of all faiths — you should have prepped them for a question or two. Your absurd line in the sand that no questions are to be allowed until those persons have had their first meeting is precisely that. Absurd. And, frankly, your tone with Schulte was such that you owe her an apology, not that a skilled reporter like Schulte expects or needs one...

..All of that is part of the cut and thrust of politics. But Monday’s press event, held in front of a silent group of replacement board members installed at the behest of the all-powerful mayor but looking anything but comfortable at the circumstance, was a low point for you. Frankly, the whole staging felt like a strong-arm Soviet event, not a civic conversation about the education of Chicago’s children.
At the end of Monday’s news conference, you said you were different from other mayors because you do not have to do things alone and that you do not have to intimidate people.
Mr. Mayor, nothing that came before bolstered either of those claims."

https://archive.is/g3fvp#selection-1921.0-1929.69

[Steely Dan]

^ his defenders have all gone dead silent.

Is there anyone left who still supports this unrelenting jack-ass?

[sentinel]

It apparently gets better:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/loca...hnson/3570529/

Why does his wife need an office, one that was renovated by city employees??

[Klippenstein]

Unfortunately Johnson is acting like the alt-right condemning accountability, fact-checking and journalism. They are not attacking his personal life or decision, but the power he is using as mayor of Chicago. It's pretty sad to see since this isn't his only option. All politicians face pushback and opposition. He started by making it seem that he would find common ground and move the city forward by finding the positive things in many disparate viewpoints and work to build coalitions. Unfortunately, I suppose his base thought he was compromising too much and now he's entrenching himself against a vast majority of alderpeople. I don't see this going well for him the way he's going.

I hope the leaving board members testify at the city council hearings so we can get a better understanding of how Johnson was handling this process.

[Steely Dan]

The last major poll I saw on BJ's job approval rating was from early September, when he garnered a pathetic approval rating of only 25%.

After his shameful and embarrassing antics of the past two weeks, I'd guess he's sunk down into the teens now.

If we were able to, and someone initiated a recall movement this afternoon, he'd be out of a job by Monday (we'll, I suppose he can always crawl back to the CTU, his true masters).

Just remember, Brandon Johnson does not work for you, he works for the CTU.


My God, what a terrible mayor for our city.

[sentinel]

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/...inances-audit/

Shocked SHOCKED! Well, not really...

[sentinel]

I'm not optimistic about the current development landscape in Chicago, at least while the current administration is in power. Regardless of the financial borrowing landscape, an anti-establishment Mayor's office that is very self-involved and unwilling to see the reality of things, is not helping and will inevitably turn developers away, especially developers who are not based in Chicago.

[Chicago Shawn]

Originally Posted by sentinel

I'm not optimistic about the current development landscape in Chicago, at least while the current administration is in power. Regardless of the financial borrowing landscape, an anti-establishment Mayor's office that is very self-involved and unwilling to see the reality of things, is not helping and will inevitably turn developers away, especially developers who are not based in Chicago.

It's already happening. The anti-business attitude of the mayor's office as well as his allies in city council, combined with the already high property tax burden and rather unpredictable nature of the tri-annual reassessment, plus the extralegal process of obtaining alderman approval where they can just simply kill off a concept after spending thousands of dollars on design and community outreach, and then add our generally slow population growth and the presently tough lending environment.

Real estate investment is bypassing Chicago. Crain's recently published a story about how even our hometown developers are making bigger investments in other cities because the metrics just aren't as favorable here at present.

Chicago is presently not even in the top 30 cities in terms of the number of anticipated dwelling units to be delivered through the next 5 years. Even Columbus, Ohio is building more units than we are presently.

I'm very bullish on Chicago's longer term future, but development wise, we are going to be in the doldrums for a while. In the meantime though, expect rents to go up, up and up. Supply is going to get very tight and property taxes are about to explode further upward as well. While we have a long way to go before housing costs here match coastal cities, the big affordability discount Chicago enjoys over other big cities is going to be fading away.