Chicago

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

Yea, its been a few decades thankfully.

**djones520**

In other Chicago news.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/08/04/chicago-police-warn-violence-against-law-enforcement-possible-after-shooting-video-released.html

hicago police have warned their law enforcement counterparts across the nation that the release of body camera video showing the fatal shooting of a black man by officers may cause violence against law enforcement.

According to a memo seen by FoxNews.com, authorities said making the video of Paul O'Neal's death public, coupled with the Aug. 9 anniversary of Michael Brown's death in Ferguson, Mo., "may cause an uptick in violence against police nationwide."

O'Neal, 18, was shot in the back on July 28 during a stolen vehicle investigation on Chicago's South Side. Three Chicago police officers have been relieved of police powers after a preliminary determination that they had violated department policy.

Chicago's Independent Police Review Authority says that video from body cameras worn by two of the three officers who shot at O'Neal will be released at 11 a.m. CT Friday. The third officer's body camera was not recording at the time.

The video release conforms to a new city policy requiring the release of relevant video within 60 days of a police shooting. A former Chicago police officer is already awaiting trial for first-degree murder in the 2014 shooting of Laquan McDonald.

Police across the country have been on high alert since a sniper killed five officers during a Black Lives Matter protest on July 7. Three officers in Baton Rouge, La. were killed ten days later in apparent revenge for the shooting of Alton Sterling by police.

**djones520**

2016 murders in Chicago broke 500 this weekend. That puts the rate, so far this year, at 23 per 100,000, or four times the US average.

**Easy E**

What's happening in Chicago? The same thing as during the last Prohibition?

**Frazzled**

Gangs fighting over drug turf. its ok though. Its just "those people," so we don't have to do anything.

Thats the only thing I can figure out why its permitted.

**CptJake**

Ustrello wrote:
whembly wrote:
Ustrello wrote:
Cheap easy to get guns from Indiana are a hell of a thing

Prohibited possessor buying in IN is still... ya know... illegal.

Except it's easier to get guns in Indiana because of laxer laws

NM: point was already made.

**djones520**

Easy E wrote:
What's happening in Chicago? The same thing as during the last Prohibition?

I think the opposite. This all seems to be driven by disorganized gangs.

**SlaveToDorkness**

The big gangs who were Lawful Evil were broken into tons of tiny Chaotic Evil gangs. Utter chaos.

BLM should protest them.

**d-usa**

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

BLM should protest them.

I know this is a waste of bandwith and wear and tear on my poor keyboard, but....they are.

**SlaveToDorkness**

I hadn't seen anything thanks for letting me know. Even in your own puerile fashion.

**Frazzled**

SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I hadn't seen anything thanks for letting me know. Even in your own puerile fashion.

Can you site where BLM is protesting the Chicago murder rate?

**djones520**

Frazzled wrote:
SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I hadn't seen anything thanks for letting me know. Even in your own puerile fashion.

Can you site where BLM is protesting the Chicago murder rate?

http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

Their words on it.

1. The movement doesn’t care about black-on-black crime. The idea that black-on-black crime is not a significant political conversation among black people is patently false. In Chicago, long maligned for its high rates of intraracial murder, members of the community created the Violence Interrupters to disrupt violent altercations before they escalate. However, those who insist on talking about black-on-black crime frequently fail to acknowledge that most crime is intraracial. Ninety-three percent of black murder victims are killed by other black people. Eighty-four percent of white murder victims are killed by other white people. The continued focus on black-on-black crime is a diversionary tactic, whose goal is to suggest that black people don’t have the right to be outraged about police violence in vulnerable black communities, because those communities have a crime problem. The Black Lives Matter movement acknowledges the crime problem, but it refuses to locate that crime problem as a problem of black pathology. Black people are not inherently more violent or more prone to crime than other groups. But black people are disproportionately poorer, more likely to be targeted by police and arrested, and more likely to attend poor or failing schools. All of these social indicators place one at greater risk for being either a victim or a perpetrator of violent crime. To reduce violent crime, we must fight to change systems, rather than demonizing people.

**d-usa**

Frazzled wrote:
SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I hadn't seen anything thanks for letting me know. Even in your own puerile fashion.

Can you site where BLM is protesting the Chicago murder rate?

Not really, no.

People with even a passing interest in what BLM is actually doing already knows what they are protesting.

**Frazzled**

d-usa wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I hadn't seen anything thanks for letting me know. Even in your own puerile fashion.

Can you site where BLM is protesting the Chicago murder rate?

Not really, no.

People with even a passing interest in what BLM is actually doing already knows what they are protesting.

So you can't cite where they've held marches against Chicago's murder rate? I was merely looking for a source to the statement, but now I am intrigued.

**SlaveToDorkness**

I had just assumed they'd be interested in the greater damage done to those lives that seem to matter so much. My mistake.

**d-usa**

Frazzled wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I hadn't seen anything thanks for letting me know. Even in your own puerile fashion.

Can you site where BLM is protesting the Chicago murder rate?

Not really, no.

People with even a passing interest in what BLM is actually doing already knows what they are protesting.

So you can't cite where they've held marches against Chicago's murder rate? I was merely looking for a source to the statement, but now I am intrigued.

I'm sorry, I misread your post. I thought you asked "Care to cite..."

And I don't care to cite.

**Frazzled**

Well I think that definitely answers the question. Thanks.

**SlaveToDorkness**

Well color my gast flabbered!

**djones520**

Lets not get this off track please. This is about Chicago's crime issues, not BLM.

**CptJake**

Lots of corridor overlap in the Chicago area.

**d-usa**

Frazzled wrote:
Well I think that definitely answers the question. Thanks.

I know talking about how I don't want to talk about it is stupid.

I'm just tired of the same stupid arguments from the same people repeating the same stupid stuff about what they think they know about BLM based on what their preferred source of information is telling them. And I realize that it's a waste of time to argue against that.

Will you find a "BLM March To End Black-on-Black Crime in The City of Chicago" anywhere, probably not.

But once you go past the "there wasn't a facebook event" or "I didn't see a flier for a protest" mindset you will realize that the problem in Chicago is exactly the kind of thing that BLM is all about. All you have to do is look at two things: what factors are causing the problem in Chicago & what factors is the BLM movement targeting.

And that information is public knowledge and is widely shared, so if people don't know that it is really their own fault and there is no point trying to educate.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

djones520 wrote:
Lets not get this off track please. This is about Chicago's crime issues, not BLM.

Sorry.

**Frazzled**

d-usa wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Well I think that definitely answers the question. Thanks.

I know talking about how I don't want to talk about it is stupid.

I'm just tired of the same stupid arguments from the same people repeating the same stupid stuff about what they think they know about BLM based on what their preferred source of information is telling them. And I realize that it's a waste of time to argue against that.

Will you find a "BLM March To End Black-on-Black Crime in The City of Chicago" anywhere, probably not.

But once you go past the "there wasn't a facebook event" or "I didn't see a flier for a protest" mindset you will realize that the problem in Chicago is exactly the kind of thing that BLM is all about. All you have to do is look at two things: what factors are causing the problem in Chicago & what factors is the BLM movement targeting.

And that information is public knowledge and is widely shared, so if people don't know that it is really their own fault and there is no point trying to educate.

"Look to where a man spends his money and you will see his interest. "
BLM is correct in that Chicago police has a history of abuse.

But I agree, back to topic.

**dogma**

djones520 wrote:
2016 murders in Chicago broke 500 this weekend. That puts the rate, so far this year, at 23 per 100,000, or four times the US average.

You might want to adjust that for the metro. There are a lot more people in Chicago than those who actually live there, about 7 million more at my last count.

**djones520**

dogma wrote:
djones520 wrote:
2016 murders in Chicago broke 500 this weekend. That puts the rate, so far this year, at 23 per 100,000, or four times the US average.

You might want to adjust that for the metro. There are a lot more people in Chicago than those who actually live there, about 7 million more at my last count.

That could definitely skew it, I just googled Chicago population, and it told me 2.7 million.

Edit: Story I saw that said 500 seems to just be referencing the city itself, not the metro area.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-violence-labor-day-tuesday-20160906-story.html

**dogma**

djones520 wrote:

That could definitely skew it, I just googled Chicago population, and it told me 2.7 million.

And that's about right for Chicago's population, as a city, but there is more to it than that.

djones520 wrote:

Edit: Story I saw that said 500 seems to just be referencing the city itself, not the metro area.

Right, murders committed in the city.

**djones520**

dogma wrote:
djones520 wrote:

That could definitely skew it, I just googled Chicago population, and it told me 2.7 million.

And that's about right for Chicago's population, as a city, but there is more to it than that.

djones520 wrote:

Edit: Story I saw that said 500 seems to just be referencing the city itself, not the metro area.

Right, murders committed in the city.

Right, so the Metro's population doesn't really count, since we don't have the murder total for the metro area.

**dogma**

djones520 wrote:

Right, so the Metro's population doesn't really count, since we don't have the murder total for the metro area.

Well, yeah, it does because people regularly move in and out of Chicago proper. This isn't LA where a suburb can be 2 hours away, without traffic.

**djones520**

dogma wrote:
djones520 wrote:

Right, so the Metro's population doesn't really count, since we don't have the murder total for the metro area.

Well, yeah, it does because people regularly move in and out of Chicago proper. This isn't LA where a suburb can be 2 hours away, without traffic.

Well, studies done on firearm violence in Chicago that I've found don't incorporate the metro population into their calculations, so I'm going to keep not doing it.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614000987

Example of said study.

**CptJake**

dogma wrote:
djones520 wrote:

Right, so the Metro's population doesn't really count, since we don't have the murder total for the metro area.

Well, yeah, it does because people regularly move in and out of Chicago proper. This isn't LA where a suburb can be 2 hours away, without traffic.

And those people moving in and out, and what ever murders they commit while 'out' or if they get killed 'out' count against the Metro numbers and not the city numbers. And vice versa.

The city numbers are what they are, regardless of how many people live in the metro area. It would be silly to water down per 100k murders in a city by adding in enough metro area people but not also factoring in the metro area murders.

Murder per 100k in Chicago is just that, and the population of Chicago is what you use. People from out of town getting capped (or capping someone) count against the city numbers. Just the way it works.

**dogma**

CptJake wrote:

Murder per 100k in Chicago is just that, and the population of Chicago is what you use. People from out of town getting capped (or capping someone) count against the city numbers. Just the way it works.

So Cook County doesn't count? That's 5.3 million people, almost double the 2.7 million djones520 cited.