City Murder Rates

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Guns are efficient at killing people. If you weight a death higher than a non-lethal assault, then of course the place where most assaults are carried out by gun will rank higher. That doesn't mean more people get assaulted in one place versus the other. Overall incidents of crime in the U.S. are in line with western peers. But the U.S. has far higher rates of gun violence, for obvious reasons.

I have actually heard that things like fistfights among adults are more common in Europe because people don't need to worry about someone pulling a gun. Europeans are explicitly warned not to instigate any fights when they come to the U.S.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have actually heard that things like fistfights among adults are more common in Europe because people don't need to worry about someone pulling a gun. Europeans are explicitly warned not to instigate any fights when they come to the U.S.

I'd still be scared of getting stabbed. Especially in a big city like London or Paris, where that is extremely common. OTOH, stabbings are fairly uncommon in a city like New York.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have actually heard that things like fistfights among adults are more common in Europe because people don't need to worry about someone pulling a gun. Europeans are explicitly warned not to instigate any fights when they come to the U.S.

I once spent some time visiting a friend in a northern English city back in my younger days. He took me out on the town on Saturday night, and over the course of 5 hours of drinking and 4 different pubs/clubs we witnessed a half dozen fist fights break out amongst patrons at the various establishments, one of which was serious enough to result in a couple of teeth knocked out onto the floor.

After the 3rd one, I asked my friend who grew up there "what the fuck is going on with all these fights?" and he nonchalantly responded "that's just what some blokes around here do for fun on Saturday nights".

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have actually heard that things like fistfights among adults are more common in Europe because people don't need to worry about someone pulling a gun. Europeans are explicitly warned not to instigate any fights when they come to the U.S.

Kind of related, but when we first started travelling to the US, I warned my kids not to make faces or hand gestures to other motorists.

Not that they normally would have (even here) so I guess that was overkill, though my wife is prone to "passenger rage" when someone cuts me off, and throws her hands in the air and makes grimaces at other drivers.

It freaks me out here where almost no one has a gun in their glove box so you can imagine how I feel in the US when we're driving around!

[Crawford]

The fistfights theory sounds plausible.

The only place I've seen streetcorner brawls is in Western European countries with very low murder rates, and few guns. Once in the seedy part of Montmartre, Paris (a mid-day scrum that appeared to be a business dispute) and once in Cologne, Germany (a nightime scrum that definitely appeared to be alcohol-fueled).

If there were a vague possibility of deadly weaponry, and trigger-happy cops, maybe less likely? Sounds at least plausible.

[nito]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I'd still be scared of getting stabbed. Especially in a big city like London or Paris, where that is extremely common. OTOH, stabbings are fairly uncommon in a city like New York.

I couldn’t find 2021 detail for New York, but homicides committed in 2020 using a knife or sharp implement:
New York: 92
London: 72

[suburbanite]

An end of the night brawl is just part of the night's itinerary in some English cities. I've been out in Newcastle a few times with rugby guys when a friend was doing an exchange there in the last year of university, and it is quite an experience.

When I'm drinking or partying in certain places in the U.S., I've often thought about how many people may be carrying (or have a gun in their glovebox in the parking lot). I remember drinking one night in Birmingham, Alabama on the way to Tuscaloosa to watch the football game, and I just went full Canadian. I'm 6' 5" and fairly big and every time someone bumped into me I was just "Oh sorry bud" "Oh my bad man" "Hey can I just sneak by you there?"

I find the occurrence of fights in Canada to be much more similar to the U.S. than the UK, despite a similar lack of guns. Even going out with hockey guys, I find most conflicts never ended up in a full-on brawl.

[Chisouthside]

In my younger years I was probably more of a hot head but now whether in the Bay or Chicago I just assume everyone is packing and I havent had any issues in years at bars.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Chisouthside

In my younger years I was probably more of a hot head but now whether in the Bay or Chicago I just assume everyone is packing and I havent had any issues in years at bars.

yeah, that and fights are a teens and twenty somethings problem for the most part, as are shootings and traveling in packs in bars. its developmental.

[Minato Ku]

Originally Posted by nito

I couldn’t find 2021 detail for New York, but homicides committed in 2020 using a knife or sharp implement:
New York: 92
London: 72

It's a bias due to the visibility of the information.
It's not that getting stabbed is more common in London or Paris than New York City, it's just that those crimes are more likely to make headlines in London or Paris.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Columbus feels very white suburban and so probably reads as safe. Indy has a similar feel, and I bet you suburban Karens will swear that Indy is much safer than a San Francisco.

I mean, most perceptions about relative safety have little basis in reality, and I'm not even sure if homicide rate is the best proxy for safety. Are people really worried about being murdered in a gang war next time they're in Memphis, or is it fear of more common crimes like home invasions, carjackings and assaults?

Good point. However, murders are a decent proxy. You typically can't not report a murder. It isn't like a street fight or some random theft. So it gets reported and if your murder rate is on fire, I would assume other crimes are also high.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

No, not to you, as an outsider without any perspective.

But if you had any first hand experience of actually living in a nicer Philly or Chicago neighborhood, you would not be living in daily fear of a stray bullet or some other such shit. I certainly don't.

Yeah, it absolutely could happen, the risk is not zero, but I could also just as likely get hit by a bus crossing the street tomorrow.

In fact, I actually was hit by a bus years ago (spoiler: I didn't die) and I still routinely cross city streets every day.


Most people seem to have terrible risk assessment senses.

"I would never take my famly into a city like Chicago, it's soooooooo dangerous, but I have never given a single moment of thought to the actually dangerous activity of loading my young children into a car and driving down high speed suburban stroads twice every single fucking day of their lives bringing them to and from school".

Yeah, I have to dispel myths from my family all the time. I am like, dude, you guys go to St Louis but you're worried about Chicago?!

I treat crime like I do Covid, I try not to let it impact my life in any measurable way but be smart enough.


My issue with Chicago isn't the crime, its the insanity coming from leaders who either deny the crime, enact policies that will only make it worse, or excuse the crime. I can't live with that.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

Good point. However, murders are a decent proxy. You typically can't not report a murder. It isn't like a street fight or some random theft. So it gets reported and if your murder rate is on fire, I would assume other crimes are also high.

I don't think it's a great proxy:

• San Francisco's murder rate is about 1/8 Detroit's, but the two cities have similar rates of reported robbery.
• San Francisco's robbery rate is also much more similar to Chicago's robbery rate than SF's murder rate is to Chicago's murder rate.
• Houston's robbery rate is higher than Detroit's robbery rate, and despite Detroit regularly having one of the top 3 murder rates in the country.

You can pick through a lot of inconsistencies with the metrics. We focus on murder rate because it's a media talking point.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I don't think it's a great proxy:

• San Francisco's murder rate is about 1/8 Detroit's, but the two cities have similar rates of reported robbery.
• San Francisco's robbery rate is also much more similar to Chicago's robbery rate than SF's murder rate is to Chicago's murder rate.
• Houston's robbery rate is higher than Detroit's robbery rate, and despite Detroit regularly having one of the top 3 murder rates in the country.

You can pick through a lot of inconsistencies with the metrics. We focus on murder rate because it's a media talking point.

I definitely think it's within the realm of possibility, though, that jaded Detroiters, who also tend to be more socio-economically disadvantaged than San Franciscans, might say after being robbed: fuck it, it ain't worth it to report to this to the cops, as they even have trouble inquiring on murders!

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I definitely think it's within the realm of possibility, though, that jaded Detroiters, who also tend to be more socio-economically disadvantaged than San Franciscans, might say after being robbed: fuck it, it ain't worth it to report to this to the cops, as they even have trouble inquiring on murders!

If you're talking about absolute numbers, there tends to be far more robberies (burglaries, etc.) in high-traffic areas like central business districts. Predatory crime happens where there are victims after all, and bustling commercial areas have far more victims than blighted impoverished neighborhoods where only 1/4th of the homes are standing.

Murder is different - tends to be closely associated with the black community no matter where you are unfortunately.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I definitely think it's within the realm of possibility, though, that jaded Detroiters, who also tend to be more socio-economically disadvantaged than San Franciscans, might say after being robbed: fuck it, it ain't worth it to report to this to the cops, as they even have trouble inquiring on murders!

I think that's a little too speculative. Way more people have direct experience with robberies than murder. Also, Detroit's assault numbers are high which is in line with their murder stats. If people will report assault, they'll probably report robberies.

[edale]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Years back, I remember reading the Stephen Pinker Book Better Angels of Our Nature. It was mostly concerned with detailing how the level of violence in society had more or less continually decreased since the dawn of civilization. But he did note that one of the few examples where this didn't happen was the black population in the United States. If you look at 19th century murder rates, there was a black/white gap, but it wasn't as big as today, with black people more like 2-3 times more likely to be murdered. White people started being killed way, way less, and black people started being killed way, way more.

He detailed how the vast majority of modern-day murder in the black community is not predatory. It's more what could be termed "rough justice" - one person retaliating against another's perceived slight against them and their own with deadly force. It's exactly the same sort of thing that the founding fathers would have dealt with via duels, or earlier history would have through blood feuds.

His hypothesis was essentially that while white Americans were able to set aside this stuff because they developed trust in the criminal justice system to punish those who sought to wrong them, the law and police have always been more akin to an occupying force to the black community than anything. Hence retribution was never outsourced to the state, and people continue to take the law into their own hands.

An interesting parallel he noted is that while both totalitarian and democratic states tend to have low murder rates, authoritarian states have high ones. Essentially murder seems to flourish in systems where the state isn't actively feared in personal life, but is widely seen as corrupt and ineffective. Which is exactly the relation that black Americans have traditionally had with the government.

This is an extremely interesting post. I normally avoid this thread, but I'm glad I clicked through to read this.

[liat91]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Years back, I remember reading the Stephen Pinker Book Better Angels of Our Nature. It was mostly concerned with detailing how the level of violence in society had more or less continually decreased since the dawn of civilization. But he did note that one of the few examples where this didn't happen was the black population in the United States. If you look at 19th century murder rates, there was a black/white gap, but it wasn't as big as today, with black people more like 2-3 times more likely to be murdered. White people started being killed way, way less, and black people started being killed way, way more.

He detailed how the vast majority of modern-day murder in the black community is not predatory. It's more what could be termed "rough justice" - one person retaliating against another's perceived slight against them and their own with deadly force. It's exactly the same sort of thing that the founding fathers would have dealt with via duels, or earlier history would have through blood feuds.

His hypothesis was essentially that while white Americans were able to set aside this stuff because they developed trust in the criminal justice system to punish those who sought to wrong them, the law and police have always been more akin to an occupying force to the black community than anything. Hence retribution was never outsourced to the state, and people continue to take the law into their own hands.

An interesting parallel he noted is that while both totalitarian and democratic states tend to have low murder rates, authoritarian states have high ones. Essentially murder seems to flourish in systems where the state isn't actively feared in personal life, but is widely seen as corrupt and ineffective. Which is exactly the relation that black Americans have traditionally had with the government.

Poverty and population density are fuel to this fire.

Middle class and up communities with any significant black population don’t have high black on black murder rates. Inconsistencies city by city would seem to provide some clues about the phenomenon as well.

Imo, anti blackness and poverty are the primary reason for black on black violence. Can’t forget the overall social/community levels of societies. Black women straightening their hair with caustic chemicals at the rate they do is evidence of this circumstance.

[biguc]

That is a good post. It bears out when you look at the history of, say, LA. It's a young but expansive and large city. It grew large as a frontier town before it had a chance to grow up. In trying to shape an identity on the fly, many communities were left out of the official picture. The genesis of LA's infamous gangs was as de-facto governments, militias, police forces. It's even evident in their use of Old English letterforms in gang graffiti. Elysian Valley, socially isolated and physically cut off from the rest of the community by highways, railways, and the river, was literally fortified and defended by the local gang, according to Stefano Bloch.

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have actually heard that things like fistfights among adults are more common in Europe because people don't need to worry about someone pulling a gun. Europeans are explicitly warned not to instigate any fights when they come to the U.S.

The English, yeah. But I've not known western and central Europeans to fight much. I wouldn't take that warning as a tell that they do fight--just that everyone in Europe thinks Americans are all gun-toting psychos.

Anglo culture is given to producing bad drinkers, whether it's Australians, Canadians, Americans... But nobody gets as fighty as the English.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by biguc

The English, yeah. But I've not known western and central Europeans to fight much. I wouldn't take that warning as a tell that they do fight--just that everyone in Europe thinks Americans are all gun-toting psychos.

Anglo culture is given to producing bad drinkers, whether it's Australians, Canadians, Americans... But nobody gets as fighty as the English.

While I agree the Brits are the "winners" in this idiocy, you go to a nightlife district in Hamburg, Cologne or Amsterdam, at least pre-Covid, you'll see fights. Definitely an alcohol-fueled weekend fight culture, at least outside of Med Europe. I haven't seen this in the Club Med nations, excepting France, but Northern France is culturally Northern Europe.