From The Washington Post: A shaken Washington copes with surging violence: ‘This is not normal’

Jaybird

Jaybird is Birdmojo on Xbox Live and Jaybirdmojo on Playstation's network. He's been playing consoles since the Atari 2600 and it was Zork that taught him how to touch-type. If you've got a song for Wednesday, a commercial for Saturday, a recommendation for Tuesday, an essay for Monday, or, heck, just a handful a questions, fire off an email to AskJaybird-at-gmail.com

Related Post Roulette

35 Responses

  1. Philip H says:

    The volume of carnage these days is not nearly as high, and most D.C. residents are unlikely to ever be a victim of violence.

    That’s the money shot from your quote.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

      “Crime is not nearly as high as the 90s” is one of those things that feels like it’s supposed to be important context, but it doesn’t end up being important context when you sit and think about it.

      I did a search on “highest homicide rate in the US”.

      It gave the result: “The District of Columbia has the highest murder rate in America, at 49.2 murders per 100,000 people.”

      We could easily rephrase that as “99,950.8 per 100,000 people are *NOT* murdered in DC” and make it seem a lot brighter.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

        Um, no, when you think about it, crime trending lower actually is important. Especially when you put it in context.

        No matter how many anecdotes you try to cobble together, America is more peaceful and law abiding than in previous eras.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

          I suppose you have to look at “trending lower” in context.

          “The trend takes place over 35 years” is a different trend than what you see if you look at this story from last month: D.C. on pace for most homicides in two decades.

          Now. Do you feel that it is dishonest and manipulative to look at the last two decades instead of the last three decades?Report

          • Damon in reply to Jaybird says:

            This is where “facts and statistics” collide with perception. My neighborhood could be safer now than 20 years ago, but if I get mugged twice in a month, or someone gets shot on my corner and nothing like that has happened in the 10 years I’ve lived there, I now perceive it as being “less safe”. Both can be true.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to Damon says:

              These stories seem to be showing up in various newspapers for some reason.

              Instead of the stories about how it’s not as bad as 1993.Report

              • Damon in reply to Jaybird says:

                Because “it’s not as bad as 1993” gets superseded by “if it bleeds, it leads”. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not disagreeing with you. I suspect the historical view of the residents is a lot less than several decades. Additionally, in some neighborhoods, it’s likely that a lot of crime isn’t reported as there is no response.Report

              • InMD in reply to Damon says:

                I think this is right. Crime is worse and it’s a problem, but it’s also worse mostly in the zip codes and mostly among the demographics where it’s always a problem. We have friends transplanted from the NE who are constantly in a panic about this stuff, and while there’s no way to say upticks in homicides is a positive thing, their personal risk profile probably hasn’t changed at all over the time period in question.Report

          • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

            Not at all. Periodic spikes in crime are perfectly consistent with a general downward trend.

            See your problem is you aren’t able to use statistics (even FBI statistics!) to supporty our overal contention of a society moving to lower trust, so you can only use individual anecdotes and temporary spikes.

            I guess the better question is why you have such a deep committment to the narrative.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

              What if the numbers for 2018 were higher than 2017 and the numbers for 2019 were higher than 2018 and the numbers for 2020 were higher than the numbers for 2019 and the numbers for 2021 were higher than the numbers for 2020?

              Is that a trend or should we, instead, compare to 1993?Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

                Sure.
                You just need to construct an overall thesis and support it with nuymbers.

                Like, is this a trend across the entire nation, or particular regions, or individual cities?
                Does it hold true for all crime, or just violent crime, or just homicide?
                Are the statistics corroborated by other empirical facts?
                Do recognized experts in the field generally agree with the thesis?

                A big theory, which yours is, needs a big document set in order to be persuasive. And your credibility isn’t helped when it becomes obvious you are starting with a conclusion then hunting for data to support it.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

                Now I have to come up with a *THESIS*?

                Dang.

                Am I allowed to use FBI stats in support of the thesis?Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

                Using statistics in support of a thesis you can’t even articulate?

                Does that make sense to you or anyone here?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

                Oh, I can come up with something, I’m sure.

                “There’s been a surge in violence in Washington DC over the last five or six years and we’re on track to have the worst homicide year in a couple of decades”.

                Is that a workable thesis?Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

                Sure, the motte holds.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

                Oh, good. It’s best to start out with the motte.

                It’s the worst when someone runs out into the bailey and starts spouting stuff and then, when cornered, retreats to the motte.

                Don’t you think so?Report

      • Brandon Berg in reply to Jaybird says:

        That’s definitely not right. DC’s population was about 670k in 2022. To have a homicide rate of 50 per 100k would require about 335 homicides, but it topped out around 225 last year, so that’s more like 33.

        This is still higher by far than any state. Granted, it’s just a city, but I’m told that the real violence problem is in small towns, so I don’t think that should be considered a handicap.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

        Except DC doesn’t have the highest per capita murder rate:

        St. Louis consistently ranks among the cities with the highest crime rates per capita, with a staggering 87.8 homicides per 100,000 residents in recent years. Poverty, lack of economic opportunities, and racial tensions contribute to the city’s crime dilemma. Initiatives aimed at reducing crime and improving the quality of life for residents include community policing, investments in education and job training programs, and partnerships with local organizations.

        https://www.southwestjournal.com/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-us-2023-a-comprehensive-analysis/Report

        • Pinky in reply to Philip H says:

          DC has the highest per capita murder rate by state. DC is often counted as a state for statistical purposes, and it’s usually at the top of any list because it’s 100% urban, with all the wealth, education, crime, et cetera, that you’d get if you counted any city as a state.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

          Perhaps they could have included that as well.

          The volume of carnage these days is not nearly as high, and most D.C. residents are unlikely to ever be a victim of violence. It’s also not as bad as St. Louis.Report

  2. Chris says:

    I happen to be typing this from a hotel in downtown DC. Feels much safer than the first time I came here, and I’ve spent my evenings here walking around on crowded streets full of people who don’t seem particularly afraid, though there is a much larger police presence here than the last time I was here a decade or so ago. The people I’ve talked to who live here seem to really like it.

    Murders are up a disturbing amount here, for sure, and the Kias and Hyundais are getting stollen here like they are everywhere, but at least most of the city seems reasonably safe.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Chris says:

      Yeah. I don’t know why people were complaining about police violence a few years back.

      I’ve never found police to be anything but helpful.Report

      • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

        To Chris’ point, downtown and the tourist areas are fine. Anecdotally to the extent I’ve noticed anything since covid It’s certain areas feeling a lot more empty than they used to during the day, and maybe an increase in homeless camping in some parks I don’t recall seeing it in the past. The murders are mostly a matter of the areas that have always had problems seeing increases in those problems.Report