Chicago Violence Vs. The War in Afghanistan, Which Killed More Americans?

Which locale was responsible for the deaths of more Uinted States citizens from 2002 to 2012? If you guessed Afghanistan you guessed wrong by a large margin.

Afghanistan
2001--7
2002--30
2003--33
2004--49
2005--93
2006--88
2007--111
2008--153
2009--310
2010--496
2011--412
2012--301
2013--80
-------2163
Source

Chicago
2002 -- 656
2003 -- 601
2004 -- 453
2005 -- 451
2006 -- 471
2007 -- 448
2008 -- 513
2009 -- 459
2010 -- 436
2011 -- 435
2012 -- 506
------- 5429
Source

The figure is more than twice as high as has not fallen below 400 for more than two decades. It would appear that you may be safer in Kandahar than the South Side. I found it shocking that an entire country harboring an untold number of persons hostile to our armed forces resulted in less deaths than a city of 234 square miles over a little more than a decade. But this made me dig into the numbers a bit more. How does Chicago's string of homicides stack up against other United States cities?

While these numbers are obscenely high (actually the highest in the country) it should be pointed out that the per capita murder rate in Chicago (15.9 per 100,000) is lower than some other major cities but still well above the United States average; New Orleans (57.6), Detroit (48.2) and St. Louis (35.3). You are three times as likely to be killed in the Big Easy than the Windy City, not that I am about to test that theory anytime soon.

Critics of Chicago's strict gun laws cite the high number of murders as evidence for loosening of these laws. It should be noted that the per capita murder rate has fallen since their implementation in 1982 but the big caveat is they were already falling every year since 1974. The best that could be said is that the gun laws did not enhance the problem but it would be difficult to prove that they were a noticeable factor in the per capita drop.

Superficially it would appear, from watching/reading the news, that Chicago has a rampant, out of control, murder fest. While they do lead the nation in number of murders, and this is a very sad and tragic thing, they are not nearly as deadly as some other major American cities. Additionally, the oft-cited gun laws did not appear to do anything to assist in the steady decrease in the per capita murder rate as this was already in motion almost a decade before their implementation.

The moral of the story? There is none really, other than the age old adage, nothing is as it appears.

Thanks for the information but the two variables you used in your statistical comparison are pretty irrelevant to each other.

Now for a real study. Which killed more americans?
.
.
chokin the chicken
or beating the eggs?

Why haven't we declared war on Chicago?

They're killing Americans there, for god's sake!

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


It's frightening when put in that perspective.

A question.

How much money has been spent in Afghanistan vs Chicago to "combat" this issue.

SnF

Originally posted by jvm222
Thanks for the information but the two variables you used in your statistical comparison are pretty irrelevant to each other.

I know, it was intentional. The comparison was more of a sensationalistic approach, much as the media uses to prove useless points and influence your opinion on irrelevant topics.

Nvm.. Self edit

1. At least give credit to the originator that decided to make these comparisons.

2.CHICAGO MURDERS TOP AFGHANISTAN DEATH TOLL
www.wnd.com...

3. Your argument would be more relevant if you were to include the numbers of murders committed in Afghanistan, by Afghans killing Afghans to provide measure of the situation and the environment.

4.

The moral of the story? There is none really, other than the age old adage, nothing is as it appears.

Well I must say, I'm confused as to why you took the time to rehash a story from wnd.com with no real intention other than to close by saying "nothing is as it appears." You've been here long enough to realize the audience or choir that you're preaching to is well aware that 'murder rates are high in Chicago' and that the U.S. have lost men and women of their military in Afghanistan. If individuals reading this are not aware... well, they must have been living under a rock for the past 12 years.

5. The objectives set forth while in Afghanistan and the loss of lives were set forth as a result of terrorist acts on US soil that claimed roughly 3000 American lives.

6. The failure to resolve the murder rates in Chicago that is in part a result of inaction is one thing. Yet, there is no connection to be drawn with regards to Afghanistan for those stationed in Afghanistan are not the ones that will actively be resolving these issues.

7. Granted, Chicago murder rates gain more attention in the media than other parts of the country... but there is nothing wrong with this. The fact is, black on black crime consisting of murder in Chicago has been consistent for obviously over a decade, and Chicago is a perfect example to attach the issue of gun and gang violence in the U.S. It's not to distract from other relevant statistics around the country.

....

Originally posted by retirednature
1. At least give credit to the originator that decided to make these comparisons.

I did not see it. It could have also been titled with New York instead, or Detroit or New Orleans beacuase they all have higher death tolls.

3. Your argument would be more relevant if you were to include the numbers of murders committed in Afghanistan, by Afghans killing Afghans to provide measure of the situation and the environment.

It would appear that the Afghan police do not compile accurate statistics in regards homicides committed.

If individuals reading this are not aware... well, they must have been living under a rock for the past 12 years.

Not everyone is as well versed in current events as you feel you are, nor is everyone a long time member of this site and understand it tenets and principles. I opted to do this as I feel I am very up on current events and had not bothered to check whether or not Chicago was a wild west shootout until recently.

5. The objectives set forth while in Afghanistan and the loss of lives were set forth as a result of terrorist acts on US soil that claimed roughly 3000 American lives.

6. The failure to resolve the murder rates in Chicago that is in part a result of inaction is one thing. Yet, there is no connection to be drawn with regards to Afghanistan for those stationed in Afghanistan are not the ones that will actively be resolving these issues.

You must have missed the post were I stated as much. There are only six, scroll up.

7. Granted, Chicago murder rates gain more attention in the media than other parts of the country... but there is nothing wrong with this. The fact is, black on black crime consisting of murder in Chicago has been consistent for obviously over a decade, and Chicago is a perfect example to attach the issue of gun and gang violence in the U.S. It's not to distract from other relevant statistics around the country.

While it is bad it is also somewhat conflated in regards to other cities, similar to Chicago's politicians claiming that their rstrictive gun laws are also somehow part of a major solution.

Interesting stats.

I spent some time on the North Shore between 2007-2012, and there was no problem at all that I could see.

Today I was listening to an NPR (local outlet) interview with the Dr Reverend of one of the two largest black churches in the metro area where I live, but not in my state or "city". The differences in suburban or geographical locations is of importance. There are neighborhoods in every large city that are riddled with crime, much of it violent.

The Reverend Doctor described how they (his community) have not been "hard hit" by the recession, because his "flock" ponies up just fine. Yet, he said he's led more funerals than he cares to mention, and he blames the ongoing, intolerable violence on:

Poor/absent parenting
Failing school system which does not give youth the skills required for "competing" in the work world
No community centers, recreation centers, libraries, etc.
Liquor stores and pawn shops are the main businesses there
Despair and hopelessness.
(He also stressed "faith-based" upbringing, but I disagree with that premise on principle. My kids are successful, and were never regular participants in any faith community. My eldest tried out the Youth Group for a while, but found it pretentious and silly, and dropped out, to focus more on her future and engineering/science.)

He was asked what keeps him from being discouraged, and it was pointed out that this is NOT a new issue. The Rev Dr said that through efforts of his community, two licenses to open MORE liquor stores were shot down by the community. I guess that's a symbolic start - but it doesn't address all the other issues.

In my opinion the U.S. needs to clean house HERE, and stop focusing on world events until they've achieved a "model nation". We're not there. Maybe we almost were during the Baby Boom, but now? No.

Youth are our future. Theirs will be the responsibility of "running things" in a few short years....and we, the adult population, are NOT sufficiently focused on giving them the guidance and teaching them social skills, financial management (budgeting), cooperative, "Agile" flexibility, or parenting skills in sufficient quantity to lead to GOOD future parenting and leadership. The millenials can't find work - just unpaid internships. A lovely young woman at my grocery store has a degree in music education - and has to ring up beans and dog food instead, because she CAN'T FIND WORK. STUPID.

The new "education" ideas that Jeb Bush is pushing are asinine. Ending tenures for teachers based on experience? PLEASE. So, just get rid of the great teachers and bring in the still-wet-behind-the-ears graduates...
pay them less, and to hell with "experience" and "skill."

Furthermore, it is my experience that MOST people who have children don't really know what they're doing - and while it is not necessary (nor should it be expected) to be a "Perfect" parent -
many young people becoming parents haven't the SLIGHTEST idea what to do, and their own parents are often ABYSMAL parents themselves.

My belief is that EDUCATION is the paramount need - both for kids, AND PARENTS, if this nation is going to survive.

Wonderful idea. (What the hell is WRONG with that clan?) Texas has destroyed the quality of their public ed curriculum based on Christian Fundamentalism, and the govt push for "core standards" are leaving OUT humanities, fine arts, and social studies. All this does is create "factory workers" or "skilled tradesmen" -- and particularly when kids go straight to college without having a job until they graduate --- which means dumping the MENTORS those brand new teachers NEED to guide them as they start out.

Many young adults are NOT prepared to live in the real world. Whether rich spoiled brats whose Daddy gives them everything from brand new cars to luxury cruises, or ghetto-dwellers who are too busy trying to keep up with ongoing trauma - PARENTING is lacking.

PARENTING is the role of teaching a kid the life skills and coping mechanisms they need to be productive and successful in the outside world - BEFORE they leave home. Uneducated, unprepared PARENTS raise unprepared CHILDREN, and the cycle goes on and on.

That said, people who are in perpetual "stress" or "fight or flight" or "survival" mode will NOT learn the finer skills of community participation - they will just live from crisis to crisis until they die. Those who have everything handed to them with no knowledge of budgeting, self-sufficiency, etc are EQUALLY ill-equipped. This is NOT a "model society."

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus



The moral of the story?

Humans will often kill, when the opportunity arises.

We will never evolve into an enlightened species, because we cant get past killing our fellow man. MHO

How about the number of Americans killed by gun violence in the the last 67 years vs All of the wars that America has fought combined in the 20th century?

Totaling together the number for which national statistics are available, at least 1,417,902 Americans were killed from gun homicides, suicides, unintentional shootings and unknown causes in the last 67 years. The actual total for the century, however, given the large number of years for which no or limited information was reported, may be more than triple the number of Americans killed in battle.

Source

reply to post by muse7


Page not found

and.......

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

No agenda here.........



I often wonder how many people have died from the sword or spear, through hunger, or beatings. I bet you gun violence as at the low end of those killing mechanisms.

reply to post by muse7


Quoting a propagandanistic source such as the Brady Campaign? Really?

Government sources actually state that gun violence is going down across the country.

But it still stays high in areas that have restrictive gun control laws.

reply to post by muse7

How about the number of Americans killed by gun violence in the the last 67 years vs All of the wars that America has fought combined in the 20th century?

It is not gun violence I do so love it when certain people love to make it sound like those guns get up all by their lonesome and go around killing people.

Come on now.

People commit violence not objects.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by muse7

 

How about the number of Americans killed by gun violence in the the last 67 years vs All of the wars that America has fought combined in the 20th century?

It is not gun violence I do so love it when certain people love to make it sound like those guns get up all by their lonesome and go around killing people.

Come on now.

People commit violence not objects.

Of course!

That's why we need more regulation to prevent PEOPLE that shouldn't own them from owning them

These stats are from the US Government not a private group with an agenda like Brady. More Homicides are committed without firearms than WITH firearms.

Hard to argue with that but I'm sure they will try.

reply to post by muse7

That's why we need more regulation to prevent PEOPLE that shouldn't own them from owning them

So let me get this straight:

Give up my guns to the people(government) has killed more people, and waged those wars, then turns around and gives weapons denied to us to any 2 bit dictator or drug cartel you know any 'friend' of the day ?

I don't think so, think I will keep my guns, and my rights, and I really don't care what someone else thinks about that.

reply to post by muse7


How about we just keep the maniacs in prison where they belong instead of paroling them.

You show me 1 law that has stopped a criminal from getting a firearm illegally.

Originally posted by muse7


That's why we need more regulation to prevent PEOPLE that shouldn't own them from owning them

You sound like the Government.....

“Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.” Janet Reno

There are times when the emotional side of me thinks that martial law would be a good thing for the South side of Chicago.

But the rational side always tells me that would lead to more martial law elsewhere.

Sometimes I hate my mind. It's a double edged sword.