• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Murders vs Electoral Map

shmogie

Well-Known Member
By my party, do you mean the Libertarians? Well hell yes Democrats commit murder at higher rates than Libertarians!

It's not a spin. It is raw data based off the FBI crime stats and election results per city. Not that hard to understand.
They commit murder at a much higher rate than Republicans too.
 

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
democrats live in fantasy world, the little snowflakes. They ALWAYS question and prevaricate re facts, they just don't like them very much when they crash in on the fantasy. Witness them in the streets rioting, ah, poor baby's, whaaaa, we are so sad. Conservatives put up with osama bin obama, in two elections, not one riot.

While I can see where you are coming from, that's actually not the topic of my discussion. I'd like to hear plausible theories as to why Democrat favored cities are the top 25 for murder in the US.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Source: FBI stats and election results per city.

That is not a source citation. Do you know how to cite a source? Guess not. Swing and a miss

Are you saying that the FBI and the pollsters are all part of a big conspiracy and they lied about crime stats and the election results? :rolleyes:

I question if you source is from the FBI rather than a claim that is from the FBI. Do you know the difference between a claim and a source?

Addendum: since some of you aren't getting it...

No I get it, you have no source to speak of. You have an argument from assertion.

FBI crime stats: Google it. Public info. Look at murder rates per year, and the cities that had the highest per 100,00 people.

Provide your source. I am not playing Google tag because you are too lazy to do your own work

Election results: Google it. City by city.

Provide your source. I am not playing Google tag because you are too lazy to do your own work.

Google is your research. Hilarious.... Your research consists of Google stuff...... Amusing and a unreliable source even k-12 school teach children to avoid.

Combine the two data fields. Presto! Not that freaking hard.

Apparently citing your own source is too hard for you. Maybe go down to the local k-12 school so they can teach you how to make proper citation.

Now that we have that out of the way, WHY is this happening in those cities? Why is it that heavy Democrat leaning cities have the top 25 spots? That is the topic of discussion.

Population density... Have you heard of it?
 

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
That is not a source citation. Do you know how to cite a source? Guess not. Swing and a miss



I question if you source is from the FBI rather than a claim that is from the FBI. Do you know the difference between a claim and a source?



No I get it, you have no source to speak of. You have an argument from assertion.



Provide your source. I am not playing Google tag because you are too lazy to do your own work



Provide your source. I am not playing Google tag because you are too lazy to do your own work.

Google is your research. Hilarious.... Your research consists of Google...... Amusing



Apparently citing your own source is too hard for you. Maybe go down to the local k-12 school so they can teach you how to make proper citation.



Population density... Have you heard of it?

I quoted my sources. FBI crime stats (murder per 100,000) for 2015 (they have a nice website) and the election results per city.

If you are too lazy to do 10 minutes worth of work like I did, then bow out of the conversation since you have nothing to offer to it.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
I quoted my sources. FBI crime stats (murder per 100,000) for 2015 (they have a nice website) and the election results per city.

No that is a claim not the source. See when you cite a source you reference the author and the paper at the very least. In this day and age you can also link the source. For example you do not understand the burden of proof as evident by your comment and what the burden of proof is.

Source citation"

http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialscien...ER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

Now cite your FBI stats from an FBI report.... I will wait.


Do you understand son?

If you are too lazy to do 10 minutes worth of work like I did, then bow out of the conversation since you have nothing to offer to it.

You are too lazy to support your own claim, demand others support your argument then call them lazy because your reason is fallacious. Try again son.

You run away from your burden of proof like a child caught making up stories. All I see is whining because someone dares to question your OP.

I already pointed out one reason why, population density. You didn't bother responding most likely as you do not get to rant about democrats with this line of thought.
 
Last edited:

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
I quoted my sources. FBI crime stats (murder per 100,000) for 2015 (they have a nice website) and the election results per city.

If you are too lazy to do 10 minutes worth of work like I did, then bow out of the conversation since you have nothing to offer to it.

Meh...I might be missing something. I had a quick run through with the UCR table builder on the FBI website and the stats only appear to run through to 2012 for large agencies.

It would be easier if you linked.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
democrats live in fantasy world, the little snowflakes. They ALWAYS question and prevaricate re facts, they just don't like them very much when they crash in on the fantasy. Witness them in the streets rioting, ah, poor baby's, whaaaa, we are so sad. Conservatives put up with osama bin obama, in two elections, not one riot.

Way to add to the intelligent discourse.
 

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
No that is a claim not the source. See when you cite a source you reference the author and the paper at the very least. In this day and age you can also link the source. For example you do not understand the burden of proof as evident by your comment and what the burden of proof is.

Source citation"

http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialscien...ER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof


Do you understand son?



You are too lazy to support your own claim, demand others support your argument then call them lazy because your reason is fallacious. Try again son.

You run away from your burden of proof like a child caught making up stories.

In other words, you have nothing to offer to the conversation. You just want to argue about where my numbers came from, even though I have stated it multiple times. Since you are too lazy to do the work yourself, I will break it down for you.

The FBI crime stats can be found here: https://ucr.fbi.gov/

From there, you have to navigate to the appropriate columns and refine your results for murder per 100,000 people (not all violent crimes, just murder).

For the election results, you have to Google each city from the list generated by the FBI's stats. For example: https://www.google.com/#q=ny+voting+results+2016&eob=enn/p/ny/0/0///////////

(Google states that the source is the AP)

As a matter of fact, most of the cities on the list will be highlighted in blue or red on that Google election result. Just change the drop down menu state to state.

Do YOU understand? Oh, and I am not your son (thank God).

Now then, let's get back to the OP questions at hand. Why is this happening in heavy Democrat cities? Why do they occupy the top 25 for murder per 100,000 people?
 
Last edited:

McBell

Unbound
This is NOT taken from some of those fake maps that have been circulating around. Instead, this is taken from the FBI's crime stats and the listing is for the top 25 cities for murders in the US (per 100,000 people), for the year of 2015. That data is then compared to how a majority of the people in those cities voted in the 2016 election. Feel free too Google city murder rates and then compare that to city elections. Here we go...

In no particular order:

Birmingham, AL - Democrat
Philadelphia, PA - Democrat
Newark, NJ - Democrat
Dayton, OH - Democrat (but only by a small margin)
Atlanta, GA - Democrat
Cleveland, OH - Democrat
Little Rock, AR - Democrat
Jackson, MS - Democrat
Baton Rouge, LA - Democrat (but only by a small margin)
Milwaukee, WI - Democrat
Memphis, TN - Democrat
Stockton, CA - Democrat
Cleveland, OH - Democrat
Oakland, CA - Democrat
Bridgeport, CT - Democrat
Buffalo, NY - Democrat
Baltimore, MD - Democrat
St. Louis, MO - Democrat
New Orleans, LA - Democrat
Minneapolis, MN - Democrat
Cincinnati, OH - Democrat (but only by a small margin)
Detroit, MI - Democrat
New Haven, CT - Democrat
Kansas City, MO - Democrat
Flint, MI - Democrat
Hartford, CT - Democrat

(dis)Honorable mentions:

Miami, FL - Democrat
Los Angeles, CA - Democrat
Chicago, IL - Democrat
Houston, TX - Democrat (but only by a small margin)
New York, NY - Democrat

The data shows that the highest murder rates are in cities that are predominantly Democrat in political affiliation. The question is, why? Let the theories begin...
My first thought is "and?"

A couple of things...
You claim you researched but offer no links at all.
you have not not shown any correlation.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
In other words, you have nothing to offer to the conversation. You just want to argue about where my numbers came from, even though I have stated it multiple times. Since you are too lazy to do the work yourself, I will break it down for you.

I provided a hypothesis (caught your layman's use of theory late) Guess you missed it in your hurry to ignore your burden. It's not my problem you do not understand logic nor even basic law.

You were too lazy to cite your source and still are incapable of finding it. You blame me for you inability and incompetence but this is your problem not mine. Try again.

The FBI crime stats can be found here: https://ucr.fbi.gov/

Which is the front page and not a source of report you claim to be using. Swing and a miss.

From there, you have to navigate to the appropriate columns and refine your results for murder per 100,000 people (not all violent crimes, just murder).

There are no columns as you posted the front page... You didn't even look at your own link.... Hilarious Keep trying, you are getting closer.

For the election results, you have to Google each city from the list generated by the FBI's stats. For example: https://www.google.com/#q=ny+voting+results+2016&eob=enn/p/ny/0/0///////////

Which is from 2016 elections not all elections. See elections are not always the same. At times the party that wins changes, as per your articles citation of the Reagan election. You need to correlate crime rates with numerous elections not just one. Now I am speculating here in a hypothetical manner but merely for a point. Lets say the crime rate in NY was higher when it voted for Reagan than it was during Bill Clinton's election. I could easily infer a number of points regarding a political party. Maybe Republicans were weak on crime letting it spiral to new heights. Maybe Republicans were tough on crime thus more reports and investigation produced an increase in reports.There are other alternatives. Maybe Republicans cut social service spending which cause many to turn to crime to make ends meet.


Do you understand? Oh, and I am not your son (thank God).

Me too. I would be disappointed that my son failed to grasp basic principles taught in highschool such as how to make citations and knowing the difference between a source and a claim.
 
Last edited:

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
My first thought is "and?"

A couple of things...
You claim you researched but offer no links at all.
you have not not shown any correlation.

From the OP: The data shows that the highest murder rates are in cities that are predominantly Democrat in political affiliation. The question is, why? Let the theories begin...

The correlation is the topic of discussion. Why do you think it is happening?
 

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
In other words, you have nothing to offer to the conversation. You just want to argue about where my numbers came from, even though I have stated it multiple times. Since you are too lazy to do the work yourself, I will break it down for you.

The FBI crime stats can be found here: https://ucr.fbi.gov/

From there, you have to navigate to the appropriate columns and refine your results for murder per 100,000 people (not all violent crimes, just murder).

For the election results, you have to Google each city from the list generated by the FBI's stats. For example: https://www.google.com/#q=ny+voting+results+2016&eob=enn/p/ny/0/0///////////

(Google states that the source is the AP)

As a matter of fact, most of the cities on the list will be highlighted in blue or red on that Google election result. Just change the drop down menu state to state.

Do YOU understand? Oh, and I am not your son (thank God).

Now then, let's get back to the OP questions at hand. Why is this happening in heavy Democrat cities? Why do they occupy the top 25 for murder per 100,000 people?

Perhaps some people were not understanding what I was getting at. There is not a link I can give that shows both the crime stats and the election results together on one table. You will have to do some research and/or digging to see the numbers for yourself. The FBI UCR database can be tough to negotiate if you are not familiar with it. Furthermore, I am a LEO so I have greater access than civilians, so unfortunately I can't provide you with links for what I am seeing. No that is not a cop out. It's just the way it is. But in the interest of transparency, I found a site that did much of the work already. It is from a news agency in Chicago, IL.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/691526-2/

You will have to look at the information provided. On the bottom of that table are two options:
Cities with populations between 100,000 - 250,000 and 250,000+.

Compile the two tables and the compare the murder rates.

After that, use the Google link I provided (comes from the Associated Press) that shows each state (drop down menu) and the major cities within. Most of the cities on the list are shown on the link (per state). They have the typical red/blue county designations based on how the majority of people voted.

Here is the Google link again: https://www.google.com/#q=ny+voting+results+2016&eob=enn/p/al/0/0///////////
Change it from state to state to see the breakdown.

Finally, compare the cities from the murder rate table to the "blue" cities from Google.

Once you see the results, this is the topic of discussion from the OP: why are heavy Democrat cities the top 25 for murder per 100,000 people, in 2015?
 

McBell

Unbound
From the OP: The data shows that the highest murder rates are in cities that are predominantly Democrat in political affiliation. The question is, why? Let the theories begin...

The correlation is the topic of discussion. Why do you think it is happening?
Coincidence
 

Shad

Veteran Member
That is one theory but not likely the reason. There has to be something linking those cities together. I thought about strict gun laws = higher crime rates, but there are southern cities on there as well.

There is no one thing. You are attempting to create a simplification based on one influence while omitting other influences so you could focus on more or less a partisan slant.
 

McBell

Unbound
That is one theory but not likely the reason. There has to be something linking those cities together. I thought about strict gun laws = higher crime rates, but there are southern cities on there as well.
I agree.
There is a common denominator for the murders.
I just have serious doubts that it has anything to do with political favourism.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
That is one theory but not likely the reason. There has to be something linking those cities together. I thought about strict gun laws = higher crime rates, but there are southern cities on there as well.
I don't know about all those places.
But I know a bit about Chicago. I live in Indiana, which a big chunk of is inside the metropolitan area.
Chicago tried to fight violent crime by getting guns off the streets. They passed some of the most restrictive regulations in the country. Indiana has some of the most lax. Here, you can practically get guns out of vending machines. So the violent criminals in Chicago just run down 80-94 to get cheap weapons in East Chicago, IN .
And the police in Windy City have to deal with gun laws they have no influence over. The politicians in Indianapolis can get reelected by pandering to the NRA types and pointing to Chicago as proof that gun control doesn't work.
Tom
 
Top