Crime Thread

dweebe · PostMar 18, 2016#60262016-03-18T15:33+00:00

gary kreie wrote:
dbInSouthCity wrote:KC metro is much more dangerous then STL...heck even Nashville is in Violent Crime

http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/libra ... -Crime.pdf
The local media know that EVERY METRO area ranking shows St. Louis is safer than KC, Nashville, San Antonio, OKC, etc., but they love to promote rankings that parse out high crime portions of the metro and rank those against suburbs of other metros. If our metro area is safer, isn't it likely that core areas, inner suburbs, and outer suburbs are also safer than similar areas of these higher metro areas? If our core is way more violent than the cores of these cities, then our suburbs would have to be way way safer to bring our average down for our lower ranking. Or else -- the rankers failed to normalize out a major factor contaminating the one they purport to be ranking -- crime danger. And that factor of course is wildly varying political boundaries.

Here's another metro ranking that also show St. Louis Metro is safer than most:
http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/2013/20 ... oHigh).pdf

The "No Reports" are interesting:
-Albuquerque
-Chicago
-Minneapolis
-Philadelphia
-New York City
-Phoenix
-Seattle
-San Francisco

If they can hide their crime stats, why can't St. Louis pull the same bullsh*t move?

PostMar 18, 2016#60272016-03-18T16:01+00:00

Kids assisting in the theft of "I Scream Cakes" car was the lead story on KMOV news last night.

http://www.kmov.com/story/31500698/pers ... ract-owner

roger wyoming II · PostMar 18, 2016#60282016-03-18T16:48+00:00

It's been a horrible week for gun violence impacting our kids.... I don't think any homicides of children, but since Saturday we've had several depressing incidents including:

-- a teen shot to steal his pants
-- teens shot at a school but stop
-- 7 yr. old shot in cheek while walking with family to the store
-- children on school bus witness to rolling gun battle.

Northside Neighbor · PostMar 20, 2016#60292016-03-20T14:32+00:00

My Facebook feed this morning is showing photos of Better Family Life's rally to end violence. An alderman is thanking them.

All the people in the picture look like nice, decent people. But I guess I don't get it. A rally to end violence? What's the point?

Sure it raises awareness, but rallies and marches against violence have been held for years and where are we? Still with violence, and lots of it. So what good are they?

Then there's the conservative media types asking the question, "where are the protests and rallies against black on black crime?" Well, there's this one from BFL, but what good does it do?

Ending the cycle of violence will take a lot more than marches and rallies. Maybe it makes people feel like they're doing something. But is it any more than that?

MarkHaversham · PostMar 20, 2016#60302016-03-20T14:40+00:00

Crime is the result of a crappy political system, and it doesn't impact non-poor most of the time so those people don't care about fixing that system. Rallies raise awareness of the issue outside of poor communities.

addxb2 · PostMar 20, 2016#60312016-03-20T16:26+00:00

I think the entire region is well aware of the city's crime issue. I want less awareness and media on the issue.

Northside Neighbor · PostMar 20, 2016#60322016-03-20T17:30+00:00

Crime is the result of a crappy political system, and it doesn't impact non-poor most of the time so those people don't care about fixing that system. Rallies raise awareness of the issue outside of poor communities.

?? I don't understand that response at all. What good does it do to raise crime awareness outside of high crime areas? If anything, the impression most of the region has about St. Louis, especially its high crime areas is just that: St. Louis has a lot of crime.

So the rally is intended to raise awareness of that? Makes no sense.

quincunx · PostMar 23, 2016#60332016-03-23T14:20+00:00

Gotta tie in Metrolink whether it played a factor or not. The Galleria is enough of a geographical reference methinks.

KMOC - 2 wounded, 5 in custody after shooting near MetroLink station by Galleria

http://www.kmov.com/story/31542052/poli ... r-galleria

robertn42 · PostMar 23, 2016#60342016-03-23T14:56+00:00

^You are exactly right. Our news stations are shaping narratives to get clicks off of fear. It is a despicable practice and it is incredibly detrimental to the region.

If this was New York wouldn't every crime happen in proximity to the Subway? Do you think it is reported that way?

This crap infuriates me and I don't blame the suburbanites that are skeptical of going into St. Louis or riding Metro when they are bombarded with this trash.

roger wyoming II · PostMar 23, 2016#60352016-03-23T15:50+00:00

I don't know if the "comprehensive plan" is an actual thing or not, but it is interesting to see how violent crime stats are tracking in the 15 neighborhoods that are supposed to be targeted versus the non-plan neighborhoods.

It appears to be off to a rocky start.... violent crime, including homicide, appears to be down citywide compared to the same period last year but is up in the comprehensive plan areas. It's early, of course, but otoh we are almost 12.5% through the two-year plan. We'll see how things progress as Saint Louis's shooting season warms up.

MarkHaversham · PostMar 23, 2016#60362016-03-23T16:57+00:00

NYC media definitely play up the fear angle on subway violence. The difference is that a broad group of people actually need the subway, regardless.

framer · PostMar 23, 2016#60372016-03-23T17:00+00:00

Things are bad in Chicago; nearly double the murders compared to a year ago:

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016022 ... t-20-years

roger wyoming II · PostMar 23, 2016#60382016-03-23T17:53+00:00

^ I still can't wrap my head around the fact that even if Chicago reached 700 homicides at the end of the year, it would still have to double that number the following year to have the same homicide rate that we've had the past couple years. (50+)

andrewarkills · PostMar 23, 2016#60392016-03-23T18:20+00:00

roger wyoming II wrote:I don't know if the "comprehensive plan" is an actual thing or not, but it is interesting to see how violent crime stats are tracking in the 15 neighborhoods that are supposed to be targeted versus the non-plan neighborhoods.

According to a Twitter exchange I had with Alderman French, "the Public Safety Committee discusses this every month", and that I "should come some time."

If anyone can come cover for me at work from 10-12 on the last Thursday of each month, I'll get right on that.

If like me, you can't make that time frame, here are the first 2 meetings for this year:

roger wyoming II · PostMar 23, 2016#60402016-03-23T18:34+00:00

^ I know Carl Filler, Slay's policy guy, was on the agenda last month to give a "brief update" on the plan.

andrewarkills · PostMar 23, 2016#60412016-03-23T18:35+00:00

^He gave the overview in January as well.

PostMar 23, 2016#60422016-03-23T18:43+00:00

Having skimmed through the videos, the Comprehensive Plan and Mayor Slay's PIER Plan are one and the same. The PIER Plan involves a two year blue ribbon panel to study the issue.
I applaud the efforts planned in that document, but it is being rolled out incredibly slowly, considering that the violence issue in STL is a public health crisis.
PIER Plan: https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 151215.pdf

roger wyoming II · PostMar 24, 2016#60432016-03-24T01:37+00:00

4 homicides so far today in north city.

audac1ty · PostMar 24, 2016#60442016-03-24T16:10+00:00

App That Slashed Crime in NOLA Coming to STL:
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/03/23/ ... ng-to-stl/

Here's some longform coverage in the NYTimes that I'd previously seen:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/magaz ... .html?_r=0

It seems like a great idea to me, though I imagine some may be weirded out by the semi-private nature of it.

MarkHaversham · PostMar 24, 2016#60452016-03-24T20:19+00:00

audac1ty wrote:App That Slashed Crime in NOLA Coming to STL:
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/03/23/ ... ng-to-stl/

Here's some longform coverage in the NYTimes that I'd previously seen:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/magaz ... .html?_r=0

It seems like a great idea to me, though I imagine some may be weirded out by the semi-private nature of it.

It sounds like he just paid out of his own pocket for a bunch of police officers. That would be a troubling precedent, if police protection becomes something even more explicitly reserved for the wealthy interests.

His accountability tools and results-driven approach sound interesting, and maybe that's something that should be brought into the police force. But the notion of cutting funding for the city police while the wealthy fund forces in their neighborhoods is disheartening.

audac1ty · PostMar 24, 2016#60462016-03-24T20:44+00:00

It sounds like he just paid out of his own pocket for a bunch of police officers. That would be a troubling precedent, if police protection becomes something even more explicitly reserved for the wealthy interests.

His accountability tools and results-driven approach sound interesting, and maybe that's something that should be brought into the police force. But the notion of cutting funding for the city police while the wealthy fund forces in their neighborhoods is disheartening.

Yeah, I assumed that would be the controversial part of it. Personally, I have no problem with people paying for a level of police service that they desire. Make it all fee-for-service as far as I'm concerned. I realize however that that's not a typical or mainstream position.

quincunx · PostMar 24, 2016#60472016-03-24T21:01+00:00

Another aspect of the app is it facilitates quicker response.

dweebe · PostMar 24, 2016#60482016-03-24T21:14+00:00

audac1ty wrote:
It sounds like he just paid out of his own pocket for a bunch of police officers. That would be a troubling precedent, if police protection becomes something even more explicitly reserved for the wealthy interests.

His accountability tools and results-driven approach sound interesting, and maybe that's something that should be brought into the police force. But the notion of cutting funding for the city police while the wealthy fund forces in their neighborhoods is disheartening.
Yeah, I assumed that would be the controversial part of it. Personally, I have no problem with people paying for a level of police service that they desire. Make it all fee-for-service as far as I'm concerned. I realize however that that's not a typical or mainstream position.

We're already there since the CWE has an extra tax to pay for the private security they have.

roger wyoming II · PostMar 24, 2016#60492016-03-24T21:31+00:00

Yeah, several neighborhoods pay for extra private security with arresting powers -- moonlighting police -- but what I don't get here is how this guy plans to monetize the app. It can't be cheap to pay for.

dweebe · PostMar 24, 2016#60502016-03-24T21:34+00:00

roger wyoming II wrote:Yeah, several neighborhoods pay for extra private security with arresting powers -- moonlighting police -- but what I don't get here is how this guy plans to monetize the app. It can't be cheap to pay for.

I could envision this menu:

How fast do you want a response?
>5 minutes: $1
3-5 minutes: $3
1-3 minutes: $5

Crime Thread

Choose Display Mode