D.C. On Pace For Fewer Than 100 Homicides In 2012 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/23/dc-homicides-2012-100-fewer_n_2177113.html)



WASHINGTON -- The crack epidemic that began in the 1980s ushered in a wave of bloodletting in the nation's capital and a death toll that ticked upward daily. Dead bodies, sometimes several a night, had homicide detectives hustling between crime scenes and earned Washington unwelcome monikers such as the nation's "murder capital." At the time, some feared the murder rate might ascend to more frightening heights.

But after approaching nearly 500 slayings a year in the early 1990s, the annual rate has gradually declined to the point that the city is now on the verge of a once-unthinkable milestone. The number of 2012 killings in the District of Columbia stands at 78 and is on pace to finish lower than 100 for the first time since 1963, police records show.

vs.

Oklahoma City's 2012 homicide rate on track to be one of the highest in 20 years | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/article/3731927)


Police have reported 85 homicides so far in 2012, mostly concentrated on the central, east and south sides. Excluding 1995, the year of the Oklahoma City bombing, that number is the highest in since 1993, when 92 homicides were reported.
What's going on?

The Oklahoman spoke to police, community leaders and people who work, volunteer and live in a small section of the northeast side, where 14 people have been killed this year within four miles of the state Capitol.

I can take a stab at an explanation, though it won't win me any friends at the Oklahoman. We have some of the harshest drug laws in the nation, including life in prison for possession of hash and the 3rd longest max prison sentence for possession of 1 ounce of marijuana [link] (http://www.drugscience.org/States/OK/OK.pdf).

The thing is, crime can't be policed away. The harder a state gets on opportunistic (drug dealing) crime, the harder the criminal gets who comes in to exploit the opportunity. In this case, cartels and gangs have stepped in to fill the void left by the small-time dope peddlers. Perhaps counterintuitively, the softer we get on drug crimes, the less violent a city will become.

Also, the more resources we use to enforce marijuana possession laws, the less resources that are available for homicide and gang units.

There simply aren't enough police officers for a city of OKC's population, let alone accounting for the largest geographical area to cover of any U.S. city. Look up the rates of officers per 1000 citizens in other major cities. More eyes are needed on the streets along with more of a visual police presence. Having cops WALK beats occasionally would greatly help to. (You don't think there would be an incentive for cops to occasionally get to stay in their own neighborhood while on duty? In bad areas where cops don't live, have rotating assigned walking patrols).

More on LandRunOkie's point, there is going to be even more social tension over the next decades as OKC's Hispanic population continues to climb (which has positives as well). The Mexican cartels will make it worse and cause your average racist Oklahoman to be even more close-minded to the diversification.

I'm going to go off on a tangent here...

Why do so many non-Hispanic whites (I am one) not recognize the fact that Hispanics can be as much or more European as a non-Hispanic white person? Hispanics are not another race, they are Spaniards/Portuguese who intermarried with Native Americans in the same way as other Europeans did. There are many fair-skinned Spaniards throughout Central and South America and of course in Espana as well. I recognize that many Hispanics identify more with being "native" than being European, but the point remains. Why not classify everyone who is >1/2 non-Hispanic white and <1/2 native American (like all the people you meet who are 1/64th Choctaw and have a CDIB lol) as a separate ethnic group, if we are going to do that in regards to people who have proportionate numbers of Spanish/Native American descent?

I'm not sure more police is the answer unless we plan on using them at a ratio that allows them to chaperone. We are a society that considers violence entertainment and which is more interested in protecting the right to own and carry a gun than the right to health care and a decent education. Until that changes, I think good and bad years for crime are more luck than anything.

LandRun, with respect, the shooting victim in that article is probably not a good candidate for poster child of harsh drug laws.


[he] disappeared from Oklahoma City Public Schools' records after the 2008-09 school year. He then served time in prison on multiple convictions for possession of drugs such as marijuana and crack cocaine with the intent to distribute, records show.

So, out of school at 09 and sadly, dead in about 3.5 years, before 2012 concludes. For some part of that 3.5 years, he did prison time on multiple convictions. But he was back to the streets, unknown how long, before his life was taken from him.

It takes a bit of time, even when entering a plea, to get from an arrest date to initial intake into DOC date, This deceased did time, but not harsh time. And he wasn't simply possessing. Part of his weight was for an intent to distribute.

We do have some harsh sentences at times in OK, but we also see a lot of leniency in sentencing. This young man appears to have benefited from the latter, then sadly lost his life anyway.

It was interesting that she didn't cover the reason he was killed. Many homicides involve drug deals gone bad, turf disputes from rival cartels and gangs, and theft of drugs because of their value, and then ensuing retaliation. The more legal drugs become, the less valuable they become, and the less violence their trade causes. Seriously destructive and addictive drugs like meth and cocaine should stay illegal probably though. I don't think you can argue that locking the guy up longer would have prevented his death..

It was interesting that she didn't cover the reason he was killed. Many homicides involve drug deals gone bad, turf disputes from rival cartels and gangs, and theft of drugs because of their value, and then ensuing retaliation. The more legal drugs become, the less valuable they become, and the less violence their trade causes. Seriously destructive and addictive drugs like meth and cocaine should stay illegal probably though. I don't think you can argue that locking the guy up longer would have prevented his death..

This is what I learned in sociology. The fact that drugs are illegal increases the incentives (profits) from those who sell them. This is big business, all untaxed and unregulated. Gangs & Cartels control most distribution. So even though something is illegal, doesn't mean that thing will cease to exist. Since drugs are a product, they are subject to the laws of supply & demand. Cops make a big bust, supply goes down. Demand will force the price up. Every bust the cops make simply create a market that is now willing to pay more for something than they used to. This creates more incentives for the next person to step up and help supply the market demand. This cycle has repeated for decades, and we haven't made any progress. Drugs are still available in all metropolitan areas in the US.

The fact remains that this person was involved with the illegal drug trade. This is big business, with few barriers to entry. You don't need training, education, or credentials to sell drugs. You just need a source, and clients. All the money is tax free, so I can see why it is easy for those who have grown up poor & uneducated to participate in this trade. The risks are apparent, but one can make profits with little investment, little startup costs, and little know-how. This happens to many of America's youth.

For somebody his age, he could have got employment at McDonalds, worked 40 hours a week, and earned about $250 after taxes. Instead, this young man decided to sell drugs, an occupation in which he could make that $250 in a few hours.

I don't see any gang members selling tobacco, or alcohol, because those demands are already satisfied by the legal, taxed, and regulated markets. Point is - the illegality of these drugs are what often causes the most societal damage.

For the harder drugs like Meth & Cocaine, I feel an approach similar to Methadone distribution clinics should be used. If you really need these substances, they should be available in a clean, monitored setting, with all of the resources one needs to get off them long term, while still satisfying their short-term needs for the substance. There are many methadone clinics in the OKC area, and last I checked, it isn't exactly the wild west. People go in, take their drugs, then go on about their day. They also have counseling resources available and addiction support groups.

The only people that want drugs illegal long term are those who profit from the situation in some way: 1. High level drug dealers. 2. Police/DEA

Please stop playing Cowboys & Indians with my tax money. Let's treat addicts in a non-militaristic way.

The only people that want drugs illegal long term are those who profit from the situation in some way: 1. High level drug dealers. 2. Police/DEA
Pharmaceutical companies also, they like not having more "legal" competition.

... I don't think you can argue that locking the guy up longer would have prevented his death..

Nope, nor did I try to do so. I simply pointed out discussing against harsh drug laws in this context, where someone had benefited from an apparently very lenient sentencing, was to be charitable a wee bit counter-productive.

OK here is the part of the story that Ms. Keeping decided not to cover: newsok news brief (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-news-briefs-for-july-31/article/3696788) It says Jackson was killed by a gang member protecting his turf. Meaning probably it was a dispute about drug dealing territory. If all drugs were legal, people like him wouldn't have turf to defend, so they wouldn't be getting killed. Thats not what I'm advocating for in regards to medical marijuana, but thats what I believe.

OK here is the part of the story that Ms. Keeping decided not to cover: newsok news brief (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-news-briefs-for-july-31/article/3696788) It says Jackson was killed by a gang member protecting his turf. Meaning probably it was a dispute about drug dealing territory. If all drugs were legal, people like him wouldn't have turf to defend, so they wouldn't be getting killed. Thats not what I'm advocating for in regards to medical marijuana, but thats what I believe.

Exactly - when was the last time Byron's got involved in a "turf war"?

Exactly - when was the last time Byron's got involved in a "turf war"?

Oh, I think we've got one. If not, you'd be buying beer and wine in a grocery store if you wanted. But the Byron's of the world fight their wars with money and influence. No one gets killed so a blind eye is turned.

This is what I learned in sociology. The fact that drugs are illegal increases the incentives (profits) from those who sell them. This is big business, all untaxed and unregulated. Gangs & Cartels control most distribution. So even though something is illegal, doesn't mean that thing will cease to exist. Since drugs are a product, they are subject to the laws of supply & demand. Cops make a big bust, supply goes down. Demand will force the price up. Every bust the cops make simply create a market that is now willing to pay more for something than they used to. This creates more incentives for the next person to step up and help supply the market demand. This cycle has repeated for decades, and we haven't made any progress. Drugs are still available in all metropolitan areas in the US.

The fact remains that this person was involved with the illegal drug trade. This is big business, with few barriers to entry. You don't need training, education, or credentials to sell drugs. You just need a source, and clients. All the money is tax free, so I can see why it is easy for those who have grown up poor & uneducated to participate in this trade. The risks are apparent, but one can make profits with little investment, little startup costs, and little know-how. This happens to many of America's youth.

For somebody his age, he could have got employment at McDonalds, worked 40 hours a week, and earned about $250 after taxes. Instead, this young man decided to sell drugs, an occupation in which he could make that $250 in a few hours.

I don't see any gang members selling tobacco, or alcohol, because those demands are already satisfied by the legal, taxed, and regulated markets. Point is - the illegality of these drugs are what often causes the most societal damage.

For the harder drugs like Meth & Cocaine, I feel an approach similar to Methadone distribution clinics should be used. If you really need these substances, they should be available in a clean, monitored setting, with all of the resources one needs to get off them long term, while still satisfying their short-term needs for the substance. There are many methadone clinics in the OKC area, and last I checked, it isn't exactly the wild west. People go in, take their drugs, then go on about their day. They also have counseling resources available and addiction support groups.

The only people that want drugs illegal long term are those who profit from the situation in some way: 1. High level drug dealers. 2. Police/DEA

Please stop playing Cowboys & Indians with my tax money. Let's treat addicts in a non-militaristic way.

This is a fantastic post, brilliantly written and argued, and encapsulates my viewpoint 100%

On the flip side, if drugs were decriminalized / legalized / regulated, wouldn't that cut into the income of many of our poorer citizens? If Marlboro were selling pot at Wal-Green's it would take away the profits of many small-time dealers in addition to the scary cartels.

On the flip side, if drugs were decriminalized / legalized / regulated, wouldn't that cut into the income of many of our poorer citizens? If Marlboro were selling pot at Wal-Green's it would take away the profits of many small-time dealers in addition to the scary cartels.

The generational harm that drug-related incarceration brings on minority families far outweighs any economic benefits. When someone goes to jail for a drug offense, several negatives happen.
-If they are convicted of a felony, they face the glass ceiling that comes with that
-There is a 80% recidivism rate. Meaning 80% of people that go to jail wind up back in jail. May have something to do with not being able to get a job with a felony on their record.
-Families get torn up and kids have to live in poverty often times (because their family then depends on one income instead of two), and with permanent damage done to their relationship with the incarcerated parent. So there becomes a scarcity of male role models, whether positive or negative.
-Instead of paying taxes, they are either making untaxable illegal revenue or in the penitentiary, absorbing tax dollars.

Also the illegal drug trade is one of the major contributors to the trade deficit of the US. As long as the companies that produce the mass market weed are US-owned, the money will help to reduce the trade deficit and help domestic economic conditions.

BTW, I don't want to take credit for this argument. Milton Friedman's book Free to Choose (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0156334607/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0156334607&linkCode=as2&tag=67867800-20) changed my mind about drug legalization.

Murder Rate Soars In OKC - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/20410837/murder-rate-soars-in-okc)

So . . . Is this going to move OKC Up--or Down--in any of ["The Top"] "Surveys"?

So . . . Is this going to move OKC Up--or Down--in any of ["The Top"] "Surveys"?Well with train comin round the bend to survey us.. I'd say up on the highest murder rate.. but down on safest list... but up and most dangerous list.. however with that being said it is safe to say we will down in most dangerous city to be gangbanger in.. with us moving up in most likely to die being a tree wizard owing $4.38 to someone you owe in favor for... you know (the merch)

"When the student is ready the teacher will appear."
(except for pop quizzes)

This teacher's goal is to help in the recognition of b-u-l-l-s-c-h-i-t-e in media.
(including this forum =)

Good answer/rejoinder*, btw.

*Starting a Thread Topic with a Cyber-Link or even posting other referencial Cyber-Links isn't exactly non-plagiaristic "journalism" (outside of non-predigested conversation) . . . is it? =)

A-minus.....=)

"soonerLIBERAL???" (OP) . . . what a joke . . . (not personally, only paradigmally)
("liberal" indeed . . . heh heh heh)

"When the student is ready the teacher will appear."
(except for pop quizzes)

This teacher's goal is to help in the recognition of b-u-l-l-s-c-h-i-t-e in media.
(including this forum =)

Good answer/rejoinder*, btw.

*Starting a Thread Topic with a Cyber-Link or even posting other referencial Cyber-Links isn't exactly non-plagiaristic "journalism" (outside of non-predigested conversation) . . . is it? =)

A-minus.....=)

"soonerLIBERAL???" (OP) . . . what a joke . . . (not personally, only paradigmally)
("liberal" indeed . . . heh heh heh)

Huh? There are far too many quotes and parenthesis for me to grasp your point.

Huh? There are far too many quotes and parenthesis for me to grasp your point.

Ya... Radical Moderate, what are you trying to say? The post reads like Jeff Goldblum just huffed spraypaint.

At any rate - what is our official murder count now? Are we going to hit 100 in 2012?

Ya... Radical Moderate, what are you trying to say? The post reads like Jeff Goldblum just huffed spraypaint.

At any rate - what is our official murder count now? Are we going to hit 100 in 2012?I think we already did.

I think we already did.

We're still officially at 98, but an incident last night may end up being number 99... depends on how they classify it. Police release name of man who died after hit-and-run in northeast Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/police-release-name-of-man-who-died-after-hit-and-run-in-northeast-oklahoma-city/article/3740990)

I can't believe how bad things have been. We've been a major city for drug manufacturing, sales, and use for years. Why the uptick in violence now? I think there's more at play.

I can't believe how bad things have been. We've been a major city for drug manufacturing, sales, and use for years. Why the uptick in violence now? I think there's more at play.

I disagree. I don't think there's enough of a common thread in the murders to think that. If the trend continues next year I will be surprised. We haven't suddenly become an uncivilized city.

I disagree. I don't think there's enough of a common thread in the murders to think that. If the trend continues next year I will be surprised. We haven't suddenly become an uncivilized city.

There's all kinds of studies linking increased homicide rates to many things that don't make a city suddenly uncivilized, but simply vulnerable at certain periods. I think it's a little too easy to say murder=drug crimes. I would guess it plays a role, but there's other things at play. Do you really think it's all drug related? The value of human life has plummeted, we're a culture of violence from the military drones to violent movies and video games. Put it all together and we reap what we sow.

Of course it's not all drug related and the value of human life has not suddenly lessened here in OKC compared to the rest of the US. One murder is absolutely too many but I'm just not convinced that this year isn't just an aberration.

#99 happened last night.
UPDATE: Name of man shot and killed in Oklahoma City released Friday | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/name-of-man-shot-and-killed-in-okc-released-friday/article/3741245)

It's really sad when we refer to a person who's been murdered as #99.

Pretty interesting for a city in such a pro gun state that we are having such a high homicide count. Also interesting how NYC, which has very strict city gun laws is having one of its lowest homicide rates ever.

Chicago just logged their 500th.

OKC's population is 579k while Chicago's is 2.7 million. Their population is roughly five times ours. Our murder rate is nearly 100 and theirs is five times that at 500. In other words murder-wise we are basically on par with Chicago now. They're the same. It's shocking really.

Is our murder count strictly for Oklahoma City proper or is that a metro number?

Strictly OKC proper, as is Chicago's.

The OKCMSA is 1.2 million, while Chicagoland MSA is is around 10 million I think... it'd be interesting to tally all of that up and compare the two.

Is our murder count strictly for Oklahoma City proper or is that a metro number?

OKC only. No suburbs.

Sounds like you have been hanging around with the wrong crowd of people. I personally do not have anyone know that thinks with the "Racist Oklahoman Mentality".

Pretty interesting for a city in such a pro gun state that we are having such a high homicide count. Also interesting how NYC, which has very strict city gun laws is having one of its lowest homicide rates ever.
Those same type of restrictive gun laws don't seem to work for Chicago...

How much of OKC's murder rate is gang/drug related? How much of it is domestic related? Finally how much is "random violence" related, I would imagine that the random violence numbers are fairly static per capita between even large cities and and small towns. Most murders happen between known persons or associates, rival gangs or cartels could be classified as "known associates". Domestic crime can happen anywhere, there was a person found murdered here in Friday in the suburb of Greenwood Village, in the Tech Center area which is not exactly known for that type of crime. The primary suspect is a former co-worker who had been fired two weeks prior because of sexual harassment.

Those same type of restrictive gun laws don't seem to work for Chicago...

How much of OKC's murder rate is gang/drug related? How much of it is domestic related? Finally how much is "random violence" related, I would imagine that the random violence numbers are fairly static per capita between even large cities and and small towns. Most murders happen between known persons or associates, rival gangs or cartels could be classified as "known associates". Domestic crime can happen anywhere, there was a person found murdered here in Friday in the suburb of Greenwood Village, in the Tech Center area which is not exactly known for that type of crime. The primary suspect is a former co-worker who had been fired two weeks prior because of sexual harassment.

Most of Chicago's murders are by gun and I think they have a much bigger gang problem than we do. I don't know the numbers but I wonder how many of the murders for both cities are gang related.

What is interesting is that while OKC recorded its highest number of homicides (99) in decades (second highest ever), Tulsa finished the year with the fewest homicides since 2002 (46). What happened this past year that would cause such a sea change?

Chicago's 5th homicide of 2013 Beloved Chicago muffler store owner city (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/03/beloved-chicago-muffler-store-owner-citys-fifth-homicide-new-year/?test=latestnews)