urbanSTL

I wonder what the crime rate in the city would be if accounting for visitors from outside city limits, including those going to restaurants/bars, parks, cultural attractions, school, work, etc.

^ that would more accurately portray relative crime

ImprovSTL wrote:Anyone read or seen Freakanomics? I found the study on where the reduction in overall crime from 1980 to 2010 came from and was traced back to Roe V. Wade. I feel like having a proactive approach to really teaching men and women living in poverty, how to avoid having unwanted kids would eventually lead to lower crime in STL.

Unwanted kids usually lead to bad parents which leads to bad kids and crime.

Absolutely. For those who haven't read the book or watched the movie Freakonomics, look up the "Donohue-Levitt hypothesis", an utterly fascinating analysis and study on correlation patterns between decreased violence in major US cities and the lagging effect of 20 years time past since the Roe v. Wade ruling.
Hypothesis: That legalized abortions in a society reduces crimes within that society
Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_ ... ime_effect

Have no doubt, the creation of clean, affordable, safe, convenient, and strategically located abortion clinics would do more to end crime and poverty in the ignored urban environment than anything short of a neutron bomb (according to the Dead Kennedys). If one was placed in East STL and one in NW City (already one in South City), we'd see a massive drop in criminal activity with 15-20 years. Hands down, it would do more to clean up the streets than 100 more police officers.

Of course, the Donohue-Levitt theory opens up a giant mess of morality, up to and including whether it serves as a means to passive voluntary genocide. Personally, I recognize how successful this would be but am not apt to champion the cause.

Meanwhile, this theory (in various names) has been going around political circles for years because no one knows what to do with it. The Left appreciates how this will lead to better lives for predominantly poor voters in urban areas, people who tend to vote Democrat. However, in doing so, they actually will be killing off the next generation of Democrat voters! But don't worry, the Right doesn't want this because it would involve supporting abortions, which is counter to their base's morals & philosophies. Yes, making the world a more right-leaning place is exactly what the GOP is voting against by opposing abortion, and by supporting abortion the Democratic Party could herald their own irrelevancy.

You don't get much more bizarre than political blowback like this.

+1 kind of. We have to be highly focused on flushing out the root causes (poverty, poverty, and poverty) but continue the emphasis on policing in the interim. It's more both/and at the moment than either/or. At some point the policing would be less necessary.

On a related note I'm interested in understanding the median income in the city a little better. Many cities and regions have a significantly higher median income than STL. But STL, and I presume the region, have a much higher proportion of low-income households. That said, do the middle and upper income households have similar levels of income to middle and upper income households in other regions? For instance, census tract 1181 (Vandegrove) had a 34% increase in median income to about $30k over 2005-2009. Within that neighborhood, what seems to be the gap between the poor and the affluent? What are the high incomes in that area that have caused the median income(and surrounding census tracts) to show hh incomes increase anywhere from 15% to 45% since '05? And what have crime stats looked like over the same period? I commented that the majority of murders occur north of Page in another post, and north of Page, with the exception of the strip along Grand and around the Bellefontaine cemetary, have all had a reduction in hh income over the same perdiod. The area around Gravois Park has had an 11% to 26% drop, and a number of murders occur there. Any comments or insights to the above? Seems relevant to me.

FPSE (1181) is seeing an influx of people earning $80-$100K. With the average being ~$30K, you can guess that the split between top and bottom is significant.

KSDK: $600K in Federal dollars coming in to support City policing initiatives
Source: http://www.ksdk.com/rss/article/335173/ ... me-efforts

$200K is going to increasing Drug Courts, and $400K is to help pay SLPD overtime wages as new strategies increase nighttime patrols and enforcement. And I know we could use every last cent.

Meanwhile, a friend of mine (who's a professor at Wash U) posted this story on his Facebook last night:
STLtoday: St. Louis officials announce police measures; UMSL prof studies
Source: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 0f31a.html

In doing so, he made sure to mention how actions like this are what happens when STL has a police chief in Daniel Isom who has his Ph.D. in Criminology and Criminal Justice, which he earned at UMSL. When I first read about their bringing in a professor to track crimes and the effects of different enforcement strategies, I was scared it would turn into something like "COMSTAT" from the third season of The Wire; instead, noting his education, it looks like the Chief's bringing in all his resources from his alma mater to help study crime in STL City and seek out best strategies for enforcement. This could very well be the infusion of fresh genius that STL's Finest can use to best effect their missions.

STL has a police chief who's a full-on Doctor in Criminology and Criminal Justice. Cincinnati's chief, meanwhile, is doing ads for the University of Phoenix. If only for the sake of UMSL's academic integrity, I sure hope we see strong effects.

Yes, but the notion that one should expect to be carjacked or otherwise assaulted if watching the river at 12:30 AM on Tuesday is even more interesting/screwed up.

roger wyoming II wrote:From all appearances, God bless that girlfriend who told police her boyfriend admitted what happened. Probably would have got them anyway w/o her cooperation, but she did the right thing.

I disagree. Calling the police before they contacted her would have been the right thing. Hell, she could have earned $30,000 (tax-free?). My guess is she thought she could be arrested and it would be in her best interest to turn over her boyfriend. I guess technically she could have lied for him, but I doubt she would have voluntarily given over her boyfriend's admission to the crime.

And it sounds like when something like this happens in Brentwood, that the STL City, and perhaps Richmond Heights, Clayton, etc. police departments may not know about it? I am presuming too much? Missing something?