It's ok to admit that you were never interested in discussing the actual analysis in the report because you refuse to accept it's validity. Instead of going around-and-around, we can just agree on that.
< (as the article groups entire cities together, then maybe the article was not granular enough?)
The article wasn't making a point about a specific city or a specific part of a city, like the commenter (incorrectly) was, so they wouldn't have that burden. I'm not sure why it is so hard to accept what the report is rather than argue about what it isn't.
> Even the article mentions Chicago as having a real and persistent homicide problem and describes the murder rate as alarming.
As I said in my comment. Nobody has ever disputed that, to say otherwise is yet another strawman. I live in Chicago, which is why I tune into opinions on the city built entirely on assumptions (like the one the article mentions and that commenter displayed).