Murder up 35.7% YTD relative to 2019 (2020)
twitter.com
twitter.com
Certainly these departments won’t announce the official policy, the same way they didn’t for all their other polices.
But it seems like there are a number of police departments that have less money to operate.
But I will comment on the murder rate in Philadelphia. Good lord that's a lot of murders per capita (NYC has 5x the population of Philadelphia)
But what about the rest of the world?
"No one has been murdered in Norway so far this year"
You'll have trouble finding statistically significant trends there year-to-year, yet alone in a few months.
Further, given how culturally different those countries are, trying to compare the two would be ludicrous.
If the original post was making a comment about american culture (its "hyperviolence"), why wouldn't you compare it to a different culture? That is how comparisons work.
Sure, yes. That's how comparisons work if you'd wanted to make that kind of comparison. Or you might want to compare to similar countries where you don't have to control for so many variables.
That's why you compare the crimes commited per capita. The demographics of Norway and that of the USA is nothing alike.
So yes I was comparing per-capita. However Norway is so tiny that fluctuations of even +/- 50% year-to-year are likely to be just noise.
A tiny country may have one homicide one year, then three the next. Or as a journalist would put it: "Murders in Norway skyrocket. Up 200%."
I don't think it's a fair comparison just because absolute population is similar.
If Norway had the same homicide rate as the whole of the US in 2019 (as it doesn't seem they've release the 2020 ones yet), according to the FBI[1] the homicide rate in the US was 5.0 murders per 100,000 people. Norway has a population of 5.4 million.
So for Norway, that would have been 270.
Does that seem like a fluctuation?
You're severely misrepresenting the facts as your figures are out by two orders of magnitude.
[1]https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-....
That's an order of magnitude off from the homicide rate of the US, which you just quoted.
Why are you even using the US' homicide rate and applying it to Norway?
because they are considered simarly developed countries, but as far as violence stats go (especially gun violence) USA is more comparable to developing countries.
But also a population 12 times larger than Norway (60 million people).
Los Angeles and Norway have a comparable population, in Los Angeles in 2020 there have been 300 homicides, a 20% increase over 2019, despite covid. It's more than the whole Italy that stopped at 271, 14% less than 2019 that ended with 315 homicides.
Los Angeles has the same size of Rome, in Rome there have been "only" 15 homicides in 2020, 20 times less than LA.
US is the outlier in the West, all the other developed countries have comparable homicide rates.
Japan has the lowest rates globally, in 2017 they had 56 times less homicides per capita than in USA.
How developed is the US really? Here's a non exhaustive list of things I and people in my surroundings think moves the US closer to a developing country like India than a developed country.
Democracy wise: Broken voting system
Technology wise: Still using insecure CC and cash only
Healthcare wise: Insurance companies ripping you off
Infrastructure wise: Fiber optics still uncommon, train system is crap
Social security: Friends and family (hopefully) only
Legal system: Carreers are on the line with big cases, so rather than getting to the truth corruption takes over big cases
Freedom: You're free to carry weapons in town that could wipe out the entire mall. (But the government has nukes and tanks, thank god you can shoot them with an assault rifle now)
Education: Only if your parents planned ahead and can afford it, never ending cycle to keep poor people poor (I know there are grants and exceptions)
Religion: Still a significant percent following the person in the clouds.
I've never been to the US, but these are things "Swedes" (My social circle) commonly joke about when talking about the US, seeing videos, news, articles from your media online.
I do realise i might come off as quite arrogant, but this is the picture the US presents, the list from above could probably quite easily be broken down by exceptions and differences between states, It's only there to reflect back what I/we see.
That's a steep drop of context. The US doesn't have abnormally high violence overall, as your blanket statement would imply. The US has a lower rate of violent crime than Europe does and that has been consistently true for 50 years.
The US has an unexpectedly high murder rate due to the mass proliferation of easy to get handguns in its inner cities. If you remove that single factor, the US murder rate drops to something comparable to Canada. It's obvious that the murder problem in the US is a handgun problem and the stats always bear that out year after year.
The OPs claims were not flippant and are easy to verify. Erhk was being lazy and trying to pin that laziness on the OP. It's the very behavior LMGTFY was invented to expose.
Demanding citations for easily checked facts is one of the primary signs of bad-faith arguing.
> Demanding citations for easily checked facts is one of the primary signs of bad-faith arguing.
Not providing facts and then expecting people to do it for you is arguing in bad faith. Particularly when it’s trivial to find sources telling that the fact-free opinion is in fact wrong.
(The US seems to be ahead of most european countries.)
For a very specific definition of violent crime, I suppose. In the real world, homicide rates are not even close, regardless of any hand waving about guns. Same for rapes.
Crime rates are comparable if you put together robberies, assaults, murders, rapes and jaywalking, it does not mean that the rates of violent crimes are similar.
Heck, Romania is 10 times poorer than the US and it's still safer. And it's not even the safest country in Europe.
The definition of "violent crime" in the UK covers much more than it does in the US.
Here's an old piece about it: https://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checki...
> If you remove that single factor
"If you remove the murders, the US has a low murder rate" isn't helpful.
> It's obvious that the murder problem in the US is a handgun problem and the stats always bear that out year after year
Well, yes, but this runs into the "this is constitutionally guaranteed and we refuse to even contemplate doing anything about it" problem.
But the difference is huge. In the 1980s, Detroit was more lethal than Belfast, with regular bombs going off and troops shooting civilians in the streets.
The US system of policing seems to be both repressive and ineffective.
The original post contained no data about shootings, and even if US shootings were also higher my statement could still be true.
Also, these numbers have nothing to do with hospital occupancy.
For the UK it was a high year, but that's partly because the ONS are counting homicide, which in this case includes the death of 39 people in the back of a lorry in Essex. (https://news.sky.com/story/essex-lorry-deaths-two-men-found-...)
So its either up 8% including these people in the back of the lorry, or 1% if you exclude it.
nowhere near the 39% quoted in OP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention...
Czech Republic: -10% murders between 2019 and 2020.
Based on the comments it looks like we’re at the denial phase. Maybe another year or two until we wise up and restore the budgets.
It is more likely that it is caused by pandemic situation where many people have lost jobs and homes. Also social conditions changed. All of that could attribute to agressive and reckless behaviour.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferguson_effect#:~:text=The%....
Don’t physically fight with police, and you’ll be fine. Simple as that.
Link me some examples. There are so many that it cannot be counted, and so surely it should be easy for you to send me a dozen examples.
How in any way is this relevant? To anything? It's seeing this sort of spiked dialogue that just reinforces my belief that the US is on a downward spiral of naval-gazing self-destruction. One would hope the US had grown up by now. Gotten past the terrible teens. Sadly it hasn't.
Can't say or do anything without someone wondering whether you have "an agenda".
It feels like the US has less moderates every year. I don't have any data to back that up, just how it feels.
[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/interactives/political-...
Three-quarters of one side believe that the last election was stolen, despite the huge amount of evidence to the contrary. Very many of them believe that the climate emergency is a Chinese hoax, that Obama is a Muslim from Kenya, that his wife is trans.
Why would there be any middle ground now, when one side has taken leave of their senses?
Plus the real issue is not percentage that the rate went up but how many people does that actually mean? Going up in Chicago is going to greatly dwarf most other cities and I am not sure they are very large Republican governed cities.
In effect, they are using statistics to attempt to make the issue seem less dire than it really is. The number of deaths is ridiculous so they don't want that number out there.
The right question to ask is why and the next what to do about it if this trend is not desirable.
It's not.
Furthermore, city boundaries are often gerrymandered to either turn their suburbs blue or be turned red by their suburbs so. Some cities absorb their suburbs, some don't. Then on top of that you've got moderate D's who can pass as an R if they shut their mouths on certain topics running on the R ticket because that's the only way to challenge the incumbent. So not only is the distinction needlessly divisive but it's such a high noise metric it's not useful for anything ever anyway.
Without the location's demographics you can't conclude nothing. Or maybe that's the point.
How else can you tackle the causes of crime if all you have is a number and don't know who exactly is committing them?
But nobody's going to edit Wikipedia to characterize him as an "East Asian/Ashkenazi Jewish/Brahmin Hindu Supremacist", which would still be wrong, but at least be far more accurate.
A lot of people think that criminals are fundamentally different from them. More aggressive, less empathetic, etc... I'm pretty sure that essentially anyone can become a criminal. It's just a matter of how much trauma each person can take.
Stress and trauma are very bad for the brain.