Painesville's (and Fairport's) BB gun terrorism spree is now over. Hopefully. Dozens of cars, homes and businesses were hit (including the Steele Mansion). I hope they use enhanced interrogation on the suspects!

 

http://www.cleveland19.com/story/33369396/painesville-police-break-case-of-vandals-targeting-businesses-cars-with-bb-guns

Rocky River carjacking victim says she was followed from the Cleveland Clinic, neighbors being vigilant

ROCKY RIVER, OH (WOIO) - A carjacking victim's grandmother confirms that her granddaughter thought she had been followed all the way from the Cleveland Clinic, where she works, to Rocky River, where she was robbed of her car at gunpoint.

 

http://m.cleveland19.com/19actionnews/db_348172/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=pl4q8zD5

 

Eh.  This one doesn't really pass the smell test IMO.  Two 'suspects' marked a CCF employee getting into a 12 year old Honda Civic and followed her all the way to Rocky River (at least 30 minutes, right?) to carjack her?  No mention of them taking her cell phone, which was probably worth about as much as the car? 

The poor Sunny Patel execution (and his dad's reaction that's gone viral) has got to be the most heartbreaking thing I've seen...since Jim Brennan. The murderer should be euthanized.

Looks like they caught a suspect. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/10/arrest_made_in_fatal_shooting.html#incart_river_mobileshort_home

The poor Sunny Patel execution (and his dad's reaction that's gone viral) has got to be the most heartbreaking thing I've seen...since Jim Brennan. The murderer should be euthanized.

 

Heartbreaking for sure, but not any more so than the many innocent victims of shootings we've seen in the Cleveland MSA between Brennan and this.

http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/oh-lake/shots-fired-near-lowes-in-willoughby

http://www.cleveland19.com/story/33426205/police-to-announce-charges-for-suspect-in-murder-of-15-year-old-at-mr-hero?sf39303466=1

 

$1M bond for man charged in Mr. Hero murder

 

CLEVELAND HEIGHTS, OH (WOIO) - Police have charged a 20-year-old man in the murder of 15-year-old Sunny Ravi Patel at Mr. Hero on Friday night.

 

Bond for Daveion Perry, 20, was set at $1 million. He was arraigned in Cleveland Heights Municipal Court Wednesday after being arrested Monday. Perry pleaded not guilty to aggravated murder, aggravated robbery and kidnapping.

http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/county-prosecutor-calls-h20-ultralounge-a-crime-magnet-judge-orders-it-shut-down

Three accused of kidnapping woman in Rocky River

 

ROCKY RIVER, Ohio -- Three people are accused of kidnapping a 26-year-old woman during an argument Sunday morning in Rocky River, police said.

 

Rocky River officers stopped a car and arrested the trio minutes after a witness reported that a man forced a woman into a car at gunpoint on Detroit Road near Linda Street, police said.

 

Officers stopped the car just after 11 a.m. and arrested a 30-year-old Parma man, a 64-year-old Parma Heights man and a 48-year-old Parma Heights man. Officers also found a gun and drugs in the car, police said.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/rocky-river/index.ssf/2016/10/three_accused_of_kidnapping_wo.html

North Ridgeville man calls 911 after allegedly shooting wife

 

NORTH RIDGEVILLE, Ohio -- “Send the cops now, please.”

 

That was the demand from 50-year-old Randy Hamilton who called 911 to notify authorities he had shot his wife.

 

“Please send an ambulance," he continued. "Send everything please. Send everything right now.”

 

 

http://www.wkyc.com/news/crime/north-ridgeville-man-calls-911-after-allegedly-shooting-wife/342223633

http://m.cleveland19.com/19actionnews/db/330498/content/HaG0iNuc

So my best friend's cousin (actually, his cousin's son) was violently stabbed to death in Mentor (or at least that area) last week right before Thanksgiving.  No coverage of this tragedy that I've seen on any of the local websites.  I wonder how often this type of suburban crime is not reported and why.

Apparently one of many of these types of disturbances last night...

Police called to Beachwood Place mall for report of disturbance

 

http://www.cleveland.com/beachwood/index.ssf/2016/12/police_called_to_beachwood_pol.html

Apparently one of many of these types of disturbances last night...

Police called to Beachwood Place mall for report of disturbance

 

http://www.cleveland.com/beachwood/index.ssf/2016/12/police_called_to_beachwood_pol.html

 

Yes.  This is happening all of the country. I don't like this trend.  This is why I rarely go to a "mall" these days.

This is what happens when you don't have curfew. This is what happens when you have security that can't even fire pepper spray/mace/rubber bullets. This is what happens when police fear of doing anything out of concern for how they are treated in the media and snowflakes.

 

And this is a parenting issue that isn't resolving itself, especially in the inner-cities. Generation after generation is being brought up to disrespect authority, conduct mob actions (easier with social media), freewheel, remain uneducated, deal drugs, shoot up toddlers for their parents not paying up $20 in drug money. It's why there were numerous shootings in Cleveland over the holiday and, what, 13 murders in Chicago in two days?

^The fight happened around 6:30pm.  What curfew do you have in mind to prevent it?  Police did use pepper spray.  I'm not sure I want to go to a mall, or anywhere, where the private security uses rubber bullets.

There are some shopping centers, upscale ones, that have curfews starting at 4 pm - where anyone under the age of 18 must be escorted by an adult at all times. I recall coming across one where that was enforced all day long.

 

These are becoming more common - remember the Mall St. Matthews incident in Louisville? It's led to discussions of installing a police substation to patrol the mall.

There are some shopping centers, upscale ones, that have curfews starting at 4 pm - where anyone under the age of 18 must be escorted by an adult at all times. I recall coming across one where that was enforced all day long.

 

These are becoming more common - remember the Mall St. Matthews incident in Louisville? It's led to discussions of installing a police substation to patrol the mall.

 

Yeah If the mall wants to remain relevant, they will need to do something.  These little thugs have ruined enough, including former east side malls, Shaker and other communities fireworks as well as countless festivals. 

 

   

When the initial posts came out at cleveland.com via Facebook for Beechwood Mall (not knowing that it was an epidemic nationwide on the same night), people were blaming a specific subset of individuals and chiming in that this was how Randall Park, Shaker Square and other malls died. They were sadly right. Randall Park had issues with crime in its later years that started the slow exodus of tenants. Shaker Square was (and to an extent, still is) plagued with crime, especially on its southern borders. Now we are seeing it infect once protected areas, like Beechwood, as new centers pop up on the horizon (Pinecrest, for one).

 

This isn't advocating profiling. But the demographics were all too similar with Beechwood and other incidents at the Mall St. Matthew and the other riots during the same night. How does one go about solving this issue without being overly selective or discriminatory?

^That's about as complex a question as you can ask.  There is no magic bullet, except maybe eliminating concentrated poverty (good luck with that).  Roving thugs from less fortunate communities are a time tested tradition in modern society, in almost every country that has concentrated poverty. 

 

There are some shopping centers, upscale ones, that have curfews starting at 4 pm - where anyone under the age of 18 must be escorted by an adult at all times. I recall coming across one where that was enforced all day long.

 

These are becoming more common - remember the Mall St. Matthews incident in Louisville? It's led to discussions of installing a police substation to patrol the mall.

 

Ah.  I thought you were talking about a general curfew.  Cleveland Heights implemented rules for Coventry and Lee Rd districts under which minors had to be accompanied by an adult if it was past a certain hour.  It seems to have worked well.

Except this doesn't necessarily have to poverty as many of these kids were from areas such as South Euclid.  These are cultural issues in the black community.     

^There are plenty of Section 8 houses in South Euclid, especially closer to the Cleveland and Euclid borders.  This isn't the 1980's anymore.  Nearly half of all poverty in the Cuyahoga County is in the suburbs.  But if you want to say it is "cultural issues in the black community", I would say okay, sure.  I don't like the term "black community".  Don't like it when it is used by whites to lay blame for all the ills of society and don't like it when it is used by blacks to segregate themselves.  But, if you must, we can't really talk about the "black community" without discussing concentrated poverty.  It is a plague within that "community" 

I think we are all perfectly aware how the spread of section 8 has affected these communities.  You can likely blame many of the dozens of shoplifting incidents at B.P. on poverty but not so much the social media inspired frenzies brought on by all of these punks having access to an I-Phone.  This certainly has more to do with cultural issues in the black community.  As I'm certain that the people I work with that had kids, relatives and neighbors that took part would agree (as they would likely be offended by your characterization that they are in poverty)     

 

Don't be a d!ck and don't make this personal.  I don't know any of the people you work with.  I never characterized them as anything unless you read my post like an idiot would.

Everyone is right because the problems are linked.  Concentrated poverty spawns undesirable cultural issues and keeps them in place.  When the system rejects people, those people in turn reject the system.  We should expect more of this as jobs continue to shrivel and poor neighborhoods continue to crumble.  My local solution would be less spending on visitor amenities and apartments for the rich, more spending on resident amenities and businesses in bad neighborhoods.

^That's about as complex a question as you can ask.  There is no magic bullet, except maybe eliminating concentrated poverty (good luck with that).  Roving thugs from less fortunate communities are a time tested tradition in modern society, in almost every country that has concentrated poverty. 

 

There are some shopping centers, upscale ones, that have curfews starting at 4 pm - where anyone under the age of 18 must be escorted by an adult at all times. I recall coming across one where that was enforced all day long.

 

These are becoming more common - remember the Mall St. Matthews incident in Louisville? It's led to discussions of installing a police substation to patrol the mall.

 

Ah.  I thought you were talking about a general curfew.  Cleveland Heights implemented rules for Coventry and Lee Rd districts under which minors had to be accompanied by an adult if it was past a certain hour.  It seems to have worked well.

 

I'm not surprised the curfew works. But I've got to say, I don't have kids, but if I did, I would seriously think twice about moving to a community that had one. It's a real red flag imho. But mostly because being a kid is still pretty fresh in my mind. If I grew up having to be inside at night I'd have gone absolutely crazy.

Everyone is right because the problems are linked.  Concentrated poverty spawns undesirable cultural issues and keeps them in place.  When the system rejects people, those people in turn reject the system.  We should expect more of this as jobs continue to shrivel and poor neighborhoods continue to crumble.  My local solution would be less spending on visitor amenities and apartments for the rich, more spending on resident amenities and businesses in bad neighborhoods.

 

I'm curious as to how this would be implemented. It's a broad paintbrush. Do we just force corporations to spend in Cleveland's poorest neighborhoods? Throw money at problems that have no real solutions? Do we just give money to folks and expect them to just drop off of welfare? SSI? Stop using drugs?

 

Businesses flee these areas because of several reasons. One of them is a lack of disposable income. As has been posted about Kroger in other threads (and pretty much every national grocer), you need income to stay afloat in a low-margin industry. You either start selling higher margin items, like organics, and/or furnishings and appliances. With Cleveland and many of its inner-ring suburbs having such a low median household income and falling population numbers, you either have food deserts or bottom-of-the-chain grocers - or none at all. I posted (here, elsewhere) about how Louisville, Kentucky is bleeding grocers as its demographics fare for the worse in its inner cities, and how the city can't throw any money to the situation, or how Houston has tried to give millions to national chains to come into its poorest neighborhoods in a program that has had zero takers. And as has been posted elsewhere, Kroger just dropped its Walnut Hills, Cincinnati store after a decade of losses. You can't force a business to come in and be unprofitable. And when you try to force unpopular ideas on businesses, they can and will leave - like the silly $15 minimum wage argument that led Dave's grocery to threaten to stop any new grocery store development in the city and consider closing stores instead.

 

Another reason is crime. Just drive down Buckeye and see all of the gated windows. Or the bare windows that have cracks and boards after being vandalized. I stopped counting how many businesses have been torn apart after I ran out of fingers in a matter of a summer. The Huntington Bank by E116 had its poor window shot at, then busted at with a bat, and then finally smashed to pieces - and now it's in the process of being rebuilt. I saw the aftermath of another active business - owned by a black family, that was robbed, it's storefront windows smashed out into Buckeye. And I have sadly come across two convenience stores that have had their fronts destroyed after vans backed into the facade, taking alcohol and ATM machines.

 

Demographics pays a part, even if its unintended. Poorer areas will always receive fewer amenities given income is low and crime is high. In the United States, these are either areas that have high concentrations of poverty. Future demographic trends also plays key, especially when planning for areas to be revitalized.

 

Shaker Square's revitalization didn't happen overnight. It was all but deserted a decade ago and it's resurgence was carefully planned and orchestrated in a bid to save that Cleveland neighborhood from ultimate decay and destruction. It wasn't aimed at the poorest demographics but ones with low to high incomes. Hence why Dave's chose to be a grocer in a risky proposition. Or why there are some fine dining restaurants instead of your typical inner-city fast-food variant. Or how a CVS provides basic necessities instead of a subpar convenience store. These were businesses that were not forced in and chose to be in, given proper incentives, planning and promises that were ultimately kept by the city and neighborhood groups.

 

The same can be said about other neighborhoods - like Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati. It's one of America's best examples of what proper planning and financial resources can do. It reduced the concentration of poverty, which hampered any real redevelopment from occurring, allowing for a healthy mix of incomes to infiltrate. That brought in all-but local businesses onto its linear corridors - Main, Vine and then Race and Elm streets. I won't elaborate further on OTR because it's been written about so much (but can point you to a fantastic read if I can find the article again). It's essentially a model of a planned renaissance that wasn't forced. No bad money thrown chasing hopeless dreams.

Everyone is right because the problems are linked.  Concentrated poverty spawns undesirable cultural issues and keeps them in place.  When the system rejects people, those people in turn reject the system.  We should expect more of this as jobs continue to shrivel and poor neighborhoods continue to crumble.  My local solution would be less spending on visitor amenities and apartments for the rich, more spending on resident amenities and businesses in bad neighborhoods.

 

The outbreak in what could be called "audacious" crime began during the 1960s and the "Great Society".  There's a balance, too much subsidy of unproductive lifestyles can become a sense of entitlement, leading to lashing out because it's not "enough".  Plus, the impact of drugs cannot be discounted.

Everyone is right because the problems are linked.  Concentrated poverty spawns undesirable cultural issues and keeps them in place.  When the system rejects people, those people in turn reject the system.  We should expect more of this as jobs continue to shrivel and poor neighborhoods continue to crumble.  My local solution would be less spending on visitor amenities and apartments for the rich, more spending on resident amenities and businesses in bad neighborhoods.

 

The outbreak in what could be called "audacious" crime began during the 1960s and the "Great Society".  There's a balance, too much subsidy of unproductive lifestyles can become a sense of entitlement, leading to lashing out because it's not "enough".  Plus, the impact of drugs cannot be discounted.

 

Another perspective on the same thing is "audacious" crimes began when segregation became too much to bear, which was right around the same time de-industrialization began.  The Great Society programs were an olive branch which kept things from falling apart but were not, in fact, enough.

^^ Obviously if a city can't provide basic services like police protection, nothing works and nothing will.  But if you want more income levels to move into these neighborhoods, they can't be business-free zones.  And unlike downtown apartments, public investments in neighborhood businesses can benefit existing residents as well as attracting new ones.  They still have street crime in Portland, so nobody is saying this will fix everything.  No one plan fixes everything.  And some of the problems we're facing are national in scale, like these mall fights.  But some aren't and those we have to address locally. 

Everyone is right because the problems are linked.  Concentrated poverty spawns undesirable cultural issues and keeps them in place.  When the system rejects people, those people in turn reject the system.  We should expect more of this as jobs continue to shrivel and poor neighborhoods continue to crumble.  My local solution would be less spending on visitor amenities and apartments for the rich, more spending on resident amenities and businesses in bad neighborhoods.

 

Most certainly.  And we have seen how those cultural conditions born out of poverty have translated to populations that are not necessarily associated with poverty (good example being rap and hip hop (the glamorization of thug life)).  We have seen these behaviors in areas such as PG County Maryland and communities there such as Bowie which have fairly recently transitioned to predominantly black communities.  These areas are interesting to look as they have the highest per capita incomes of any black community in the country, yet they haven't escaped these very cultural issues that are mentioned here. 

 

Unfortunately, I don't see too much being done to alter these conditions as there is always going to be too much diversion from the discussion (I have seen nearly 2o yrs worth from Hts121 alone, simply because he doesn't like the message) and you cant have a discussion of the topic without cries of racism.  All the more reason why the mall incident especially bothers me as it helps to reinforce those very steriotypes and stigmatisms.     

       

 

Another perspective on the same thing is "audacious" crimes began when segregation became too much to bear, which was right around the same time de-industrialization began.  The Great Society programs were an olive branch which kept things from falling apart but were not, in fact, enough.

 

There is a nice piece in today's Financial Times about dealing with the social cost of globalization. The historical example cited is London water taxi drivers, who were once the largest number of workers in the city and who were almost totally displaced by bridges and tunnels over a few centuries' time. The author feels that simply laying off all those men risked revolution and that it is right and proper for the succeeding technologies to bear the social cost of displaced workers.

 

In the US we had functionally useless firemen riding diesel locomotives for a couple of decades; maybe that is a price we (the government, the unions, the companies) should have paid to auto and steel workers. That might have kept families and neighborhoods together, or at least slowed their destruction.

Everyone is right because the problems are linked.  Concentrated poverty spawns undesirable cultural issues and keeps them in place.  When the system rejects people, those people in turn reject the system.  We should expect more of this as jobs continue to shrivel and poor neighborhoods continue to crumble.  My local solution would be less spending on visitor amenities and apartments for the rich, more spending on resident amenities and businesses in bad neighborhoods.

 

One of your best posts ever. Thanks.

327[/member] : Can you define spending on resident amenities and businesses? I'm curious as to what you mean by that and your previous post - and not in a bad way. Does this include subsidies or incentives for private developers to build affordable housing units? Or incentives for companies like Dave's to build new markets in distressed neighborhoods?

"Living in poverty" and "law-abiding" don't have to be mutually exclusive... You don't have to be living above the poverty line to have a conscience or know right from wrong . Sure, poor neighborhoods deserve some serious attention - everywhere - but the residents have to play along more than a bit, too... Can't just blame all the problem of that culture and lifestyle on others with more resources or cities that choose to spend on more visible and equally important things.

"Living in poverty" and "law-abiding" don't have to be mutually exclusive

 

They're not mutually exclusive, but they're statistically correlated.  There's a HUGE difference between those two.

 

Shaker Square's revitalization didn't happen overnight. It was all but deserted a decade ago and it's resurgence was carefully planned and orchestrated in a bid to save that Cleveland neighborhood from ultimate decay and destruction. It wasn't aimed at the poorest demographics but ones with low to high incomes. Hence why Dave's chose to be a grocer in a risky proposition. Or why there are some fine dining restaurants instead of your typical inner-city fast-food variant. Or how a CVS provides basic necessities instead of a subpar convenience store. These were businesses that were not forced in and chose to be in, given proper incentives, planning and promises that were ultimately kept by the city and neighborhood groups.

 

Shaker Square isn't so black 'n white (no pun intended) ... over the years it has had a hit-and-miss approach to revitalization ever since Coral bought the Square around 2000.  First they tried to go high-end, with a Wild Oats market (where Dave's now is), Fire food and drink, Joseph-Beth's Booksellers (where CVS now is), and Sergio's (where Zanzibar now is).  Grotto was a later-coming wine bar that lasted barely a year...the very-inspiring Edwin's (that generally successfully gives second chances to ex-offenders -- starting with the owner) grabbed the space. Only Fire remains. 

 

Clearly Coral shot too high--they were trying to Crocker-ize a city-urban area (albeit one bordering Shaker Heights) an extremely diverse area demographically.  Nowadays it seems to have found its niche but it obviously still has some retail problems, like that significant almost totally vacant, eyesore stretch of buildings along Van Aken bending south from the Van Aken-Shaker junction to Drexmore.

 

The Square is a very bustling place today, but with a less glitzier, more workable neighborhood focus.  But as we've seen with the creeping decay -- and increased crime -- immediately to the south where whole druggie apt buildings have been leveled along Drexmore (again!) and several handsome, well-crafted old Tudors along S. Moreland stand vacant and dilapidated, there's a major challenge to the Square area to infuse vitality and security in order to keep it relevant.  Edwin's is a major boost -- not only the restaurant on the square, but its small but effective residential 'campus' at Buckeye and S. Moreland that's slowly revitalizing an eyesore neighborhood that needs and deserves to comeback.

 

Edwin's is taking the approach I wish more of the private, and public, sectors would take: it's investing in people and not just pretty buildings. It is giving hope to the hopeless in ways, if done on a larger scale, would help both the locals and the local neighborhood in and around Shaker Square and, to me, would be much more fulfilling than the usual gentrification of moving professional whites in while shipping working-poor minorities out.

Thanks for the kind words KJP.

 

327[/member] : Can you define spending on resident amenities and businesses? I'm curious as to what you mean by that and your previous post - and not in a bad way. Does this include subsidies or incentives for private developers to build affordable housing units? Or incentives for companies like Dave's to build new markets in distressed neighborhoods?

 

Mostly I mean local small businesses that can operate in traditional storefronts.  Most of the units need rehabs and then they need tenants, so there would be two levels of subsidy involved.  Programs like this have already paid dividends in areas like E 55th and St. Clair.

 

Neighborhoods designed around walking and mass transit require walkable businesses to function.  Those businesses serve two purposes by employing people nearby and providing access to goods and services without a car.  Take them away and the neighborhood cannot function, it becomes a round peg in a square hole, and blight is the only possible outcome.  Demand for the neighborhood plummets because people who want a car-centric lifestyle will always have better options, options designed for that purpose, while people who prefer an urban lifestyle can't find it there.

 

It's really just supply and demand.  Neighborhoods for which there's no demand become blighted and produce trouble beyond their borders, so something must be done to stimulate demand.  That's the only way to bring in higher income levels, which in turn generates more demand for goods and services.  But something has to start that cycle, hence the need for public investment.  There's been a big upswing in demand for traditional urban living, among people who have money, but Cleveland's supply isn't marketable because it's lacking a key component of traditional urban living.

It's really just supply and demand.  Neighborhoods for which there's no demand become blighted and produce trouble beyond their borders, so something must be done to stimulate demand.  That's the only way to bring in higher income levels, which in turn generates more demand for goods and services.  But something has to start that cycle, hence the need for public investment.  There's been a big upswing in demand for traditional urban living, among people who have money, but Cleveland's supply isn't marketable because it's lacking a key component of traditional urban living.

 

When you say "demand," I really read that as "price." And in economics, price is based on the interplay of both demand and supply. So I would also add that in some of these neighborhoods, selectively reducing housing supply can help improve prices in numerous ways. Think of it as the old cliche of "addition by subtraction."

 

Here's an example: Just north of the Coventry shopping center is what some refer to as the Superior Triangle. Most of that area is a mess. I have long felt that it be torn down entirely, which I think would result in significant benefits. I would also advocate that other parts of the Heights area and other inner-ring suburbs also eliminate chunks of their housing in troubled areas, including the previously-referenced South Euclid neighborhoods that are heavy with Section 8. Some of this has already started to happen, but local officials need a more widespread and planned program. Obviously I would hope that historic housing would be spared if at all possible.

 

I know that this may not be a popular view, but my thinking is that many of these suburbs have taken on far too much of the burden for low-income housing and it's causing them to reach a tipping point. If there is a correlation between poverty and crime, then it should come as no surprise that as poverty has become concentrated in certain parts of the suburbs that crime has also crept in as well. If state and Federal programs are not going to help spread the burden around, then local governments need to figure out what they can do to combat the problem themselves.

If state and Federal programs are not going to help spread the burden around, then local governments need to figure out what they can do to combat the problem themselves.

 

If by "spread the burden around" you mean put low income housing in more affluent areas, that's a non starter as long as we hold elections.  People in those areas are about as likely to accept that as the Great Lakes states would large scale water diversion to the southwest.

 

A big part of the problem is behavior.  Not all poor people behave the way some do.  It's not even close.  But they all pay for it.

Everyone is right because the problems are linked.  Concentrated poverty spawns undesirable cultural issues and keeps them in place.  When the system rejects people, those people in turn reject the system.  We should expect more of this as jobs continue to shrivel and poor neighborhoods continue to crumble.  My local solution would be less spending on visitor amenities and apartments for the rich, more spending on resident amenities and businesses in bad neighborhoods.

 

The outbreak in what could be called "audacious" crime began during the 1960s and the "Great Society".  There's a balance, too much subsidy of unproductive lifestyles can become a sense of entitlement, leading to lashing out because it's not "enough".  Plus, the impact of drugs cannot be discounted.

 

Another perspective on the same thing is "audacious" crimes began when segregation became too much to bear, which was right around the same time de-industrialization began.  The Great Society programs were an olive branch which kept things from falling apart but were not, in fact, enough.

But the outbreak happened after the CRA was passed.

^correlation =/= causality

A big part of the problem is behavior.  Not all poor people behave the way some do.  It's not even close.  But they all pay for it.[/color]

 

Bingo. You have large swaths of Appalachia that is rather poor, and in many instances, worse off than many of the inner cities. These types of mob-rule crimes are unheard of.

A big part of the problem is behavior.  Not all poor people behave the way some do.  It's not even close.  But they all pay for it.[/color]

 

Bingo. You have large swaths of Appalachia that is rather poor, and in many instances, worse off than many of the inner cities. These types of mob-rule crimes are unheard of.

 

Lots of that in the Deep South too, both black and white, and likewise.  It's cultural, not racial.

^Actually, the South has he highest murder rate per capita, followed by the Midwest, then the West, and then the Northeast. 

 

What you don't have in Appalachia is concentrated poverty.  There really is no such thing as a rural ghetto, although I would venture to guess if you looked at per capita crime stats they are not as far off as you might assume.  There are also a lot of places in Appalachia and the Ozarks that are also largely self-policed, where crimes are not reported or at least not taken through the criminal justice system.

 

Concentrated poverty has led to this type of mob violence in the black ghettos and the Latino ghettos of the Americas, as it did in the Irish and Italian ghettos of NYC and other large cities back when there were large pockets of concentrated white poverty..... as it does in the ghettos of India (gang rapes and other horrific mob violence rarely seen here in America) and other places today.  American gangs and "turf" hardly originated with the modern version.  Russian hooligans engage in this type of mob violence and much worse.  Just look at what they did at the Euro Cup or do a search on youtube for some of the largest and most brutal riots imaginable in which every single participant in white. 

 

By saying this, I'm not trying to offend or insult the more sensitive members on here.  But I do find it disappointing that I get personally attacked if I say anything contra to the group think mentality this topic sadly spawns on UO.   

If by "spread the burden around" you mean put low income housing in more affluent areas, that's a non starter as long as we hold elections.  People in those areas are about as likely to accept that as the Great Lakes states would large scale water diversion to the southwest.

 

A big part of the problem is behavior.  Not all poor people behave the way some do.  It's not even close.  But they all pay for it.

 

That's fine, but then urban communities need to start "playing the game," then, including doing what I suggested above as well as coming up with more creative measures to strike back at residents in sprawl communities who are shirking the burden.

Something to remember in this discussion: in many jurisdictions prior to the 1960's or 70's crime in areas of great poverty was simply overlooked - not reported by the news media and not recorded by the police, if they even heard about it. My personal opinion is the levels of violence have not increased as much as the data indicate.

^Not sure I follow. The data indicate that crime is much, much lower today in urban areas than it was in the 1960s, 70s, or 80s. In most places, it's been much lower in recent years than in the 90s and 2000s. There is an article in the NYT today pointing out that Chicago has had more murders this year than NYC and LA combined, which is astonishing, but also speaks to how much crime has dropped in LA and NYC over the decades. NYC's crime rate has been astonishingly low in recent years (despite the end of stop and frisk).

 

Unfortunately for Cleveland and the Rust Belt, a lot of our crime problems are not really inherent to "urban areas." They aren't inherent to concentrated poverty either, at least not to the degree we see them in our community.  Cleveland really is unusually dysfunctional, even for an urban area.

^Not sure I follow. The data indicate that crime is much, much lower today in urban areas than it was in the 1960s, 70s, or 80s. In most places, it's been much lower in recent years than in the 90s and 2000s. There is an article in the NYT today pointing out that Chicago has had more murders this year than NYC and LA combined, which is astonishing, but also speaks to how much crime has dropped in LA and NYC over the decades. NYC's crime rate has been astonishingly low in recent years (despite the end of stop and frisk).

 

Unfortunately for Cleveland and the Rust Belt, a lot of our crime problems are not really inherent to "urban areas." They aren't inherent to concentrated poverty either, at least not to the degree we see them in our community.  Cleveland really is unusually dysfunctional, even for an urban area.

 

Violent assaults and murders in Cleveland and the inner ring have increased largely due to the gang battles and the drug trade.