Hey, there! Log in / Register
Shootings in Boston up 46% this year; murder rate down, except in Roxbury
By adamg on Tue, 08/04/2015 - 11:45am
The latest stats from Boston Police are out: Through Aug. 2, 130 people have been shot in Boston, compared to 89 in the same period last year.
Gun-related murders, however, are down, from 26 to 15, which might reflect better medical care or worse shots or both.
Recent weeks have seen a series of shootings in which two or more people were shot at once.
The BPD stats do not break out shootings by police district. However, the department's "aggravated assault" figures, which would include non-fatal shootings, show increases in Charlestown, Mattapan, Dorchester, Hyde Park. and Roxbury. Roxbury's District B-2 shows a 34% increase in aggravated assaults, to 438 reported incidents. B-2 has also seen a doubling of murders, from 5 to 10 (in contrast, B-3, which covers Mattapan and part of Dorchester, has seen a decrease, from 6 to 2).
The Back Bay and the South End saw a slight increase in aggravated assaults, up to 160 from 155 last year.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
"
In New Orleans "local EMS and hospital officials say. They have saved the lives of more gunshot victims this year by deploying techniques pioneered by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan."
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2014/01/2013_new_orleans_murder_rate...
Similar big win in the 80s
IIRC Emergency medical care got a big boost 35 years ago from what we learned about trauma care in Vietnam -- new techniques and skills made their way from the battlefield to civilian EMS and the casualty statistics from gunshot wounds and car accidents improved.
sad.
Does anyone who's not a troll have any idea of why violent crime is up?
Unrelated, but interesting:
David Simon wrote a piece last May about Baltimore juking the stats: violent crime seemed to go down, but homicide surged. Basically, the orders came from on high that violent crime calls should be marked as "unfounded reports" so that O'Malley seemed to be making progress in his crusade against homicide.
"Does anyone who's not a troll have any idea of why viol..."
I'm also interested in seeing some solid reasoning for this.
Cycles
I don't know much - but I know that sometimes a spike in violence is not necessarily related to the economy, or changes in policing, or other social/policy factors, but could just be the result of semi-random events in the cycle of prison sentences and prison releases. Having even a handful of key people coming out of prison at once may set off increased shootings, as these people may be either targets or perpetrators of retaliation. Or part of a battle for shifting territories.
There are really two questions -- Why does this happen at all? And why has this been an especially bad year.
indeed
Like the weather, there can be cycles of crime, human behavior, etc.; that makes sense. Have there been any big changes in policing or policy over the last year, though? If not, then maybe we're just in a rough patch.
I grew up in the 80s into the 90s
in the city. Crime, random violent crime, was bad. Older people have told me the 70s were a disaster, epic violent crime rates and urban decay. From the mid 90s onwards, I noticed a big change. I believe a big part of this change involved so called gentrification and changing demographics. Many of those who commit violent street crime were finding it harder and harder to live in a lot of neighborhoods except for a few places, usually surrounding housing projects and clusters of subsidized housing. Today, many people who would be living in now gentrified neighborhoods with white hipsters, now live in outlying low income cities and towns in the metro area, going as far north as N.H. and south to New Bedford, Fall River, R.I., Worcester, etc. In Boston's case, the city (including Cambridge, Somerville) has become expensive to live in.
Another thing is generational changes. Each generation adapts, evolves, many (not all) lead a more mainstream life. But, Boston may be somewhat of an outlier. It has some major characteristics that help it thrive more than many other cities, so it may not be the best example. There are many American urban areas, large and small, that are warzones and have been for generations, going back to the beginning of our modern day urban crime wave in the late 60s-70s.
I strongly believe that the
I strongly believe that the increase of heroin on the streets and the protection of and stronghold of the same by different neighborhood territory drug peddlers may certainly be contributing to the increase of gun violence. Some of you may roll your eyes at this, but it's got to be one of the related factors.
Drugs make everything worse
This much is true.
However, a big part of the crime wave of the 70s-90s was the baby boom coming of "prime age" for criminal behavior.
We have a large cohort of youth coming of age now, and they have somewhat dim economic prospects. Throw in the shift to heroin resulting from restricting the oxy supply without expanding treatment options, and stir.
These gangs aren't into heroin.
For the most part, heroin has stayed out of inner city gang feuds over the past few years. Most shootings are over turf disputes and disrespect.
But what's the point of
But what's the point of controlling that turf? What are they selling? How do they stand to profit from controlling a piece of turf or taking it from a rival gang?
Could it have anything to do with Long Island?
This is the first full summer with a severe decrease in services that would have kept many off the streets and/or from committing crimes. Of course, more month by month data and history of specific offenders (which in medical cases should be pretty protected) would support or debunk this idea.
Also, could it be possible the weather has anything to do with it? This winter was very draining on everyone, and the heat as of late has been pretty rough as well. Between just being agitated and having resources stretched thin, I could easily see that playing a factor.
Just reasonable speculation, take it for what it's worth. Or don't.
also sad
The Long Island factor is an interesting one. I don't know how much it would have contributed to violent crimes going up, but I personally have noticed far more homeless people - and not just in the busy, touristy parts of the city. I've seen one particular panhandler near Audubon Circle a couple of times, and I even saw one at Comm Ave/University Rd once. The other night, I was walking from the Waterfront to Downtown Crossing, and I saw a homeless person sleeping in just about every doorway along Summer Street. Obviously, homeless people are nothing new, but it seems to me that there are more now than there used to be - and I bet the Long Island closure had something to do with it.
As for the weather: who knows.
I was speaking more about
Drug treatment and re-rentry programs than the homeless population in general. This city opened a "replacement" center late, and even then didn't have treatment centers for everyone.
Pure speculation
and without supporting facts, but I haven't heard about police sweeps happening this year like they did under Menino. A few times each summer the cops would go out and round up everyone they could who had outstanding warrants and keep them over the weekend. Maybe they have occurred just as frequently, but I haven't heard about them. I wonder if that's a contributing factor.
One Police Sweep last month
http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/herald_bulldog/2...
Oh right, I forgot about that
Oh right, I forgot about that one, that was a big one. Wish they'd do these more often. Or, you know, arrest people when the warrants are issued instead of waiting.
More gang beefs.
Morse / Norfolk v. Lucerne / Mascot B3
MIC / Thetford v. FH / Greenwood / Norfolk B2, B3
Hit-Fam / Woodledge v. Franklin Field B3 H-Block / WG v. CP2 / St. Joes B2
Ruggles v. Lenox / Villa Victoria D4, B2
Cedar / Ashmont v. Dorchester Ave C11
Johnston Rd / Ashmont v. Wilcock / Corbet B3, C11
OP / Heath / Lenox v. MHP / H-Block / 1850 B2, D4
Maverick v. East Side “ESMG” A7
Wendover v. Cameron / Homes Ave B2, C11
There are several hundred gang members who usually retaliate for each shooting, regardless if an arrest is made. So it's kind of like a tumbleweed of shootings that keeps going up and up until some sort of cool down happens. The coolown usually happens if key gang members are killed, but with different beefs, the gang that does the shooting isn't always known to the other gang.
Also the weather. More hot weather, more people outside. More people outside, more outside shootings. Outside gang related nighttime shootings are always the hardest to solve, with few reliable witnesses, and a quick getaway.
Are you posting law
Are you posting law enforcement sensitive data on a public site? I'm pretty certain you did not come up with those beefs off the top of your head!!
they are mixed up......
so not all correct but this wasn't law enforcement sensitive.
Not really sensitive data
The gangs beefing know those with whom they are beefing. People on the street know who is beefing with whom.
Who shot at whom? That's a different story.
Correct me if I'm wrong
but "which gangs hate each other" isn't exactly top-secret knowledge.
From what we know, I would
From what we know, I would guess some of the recent stuff was breaking up CPD - other crews are certainly gunning for power in the vacuum that left. Could also be we are in a release schedule from prisons, and as people get out they return to their old ways. Not up on my black market pricing, but perhaps there is even an influx of illegal weapons, and decrease in price making guns easier to obtain. Does anyone know how well the city youth job programs are doing, or if they even exist anymore? Those can help quite a bit for youth violence/crime. I am going to say everything but the CPD thing is pretty speculative, but combo things like that in and I think it would explain a lot.
Accuracy
more shots fired, less deaths, sounds like accuracy is down.
pew pew pew
To put the shootings in perspective using onomatopoeia:
PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW PEW
That's quite a bit of shooting.
Closure rate?
What's the closure rate like? I know that kid who got murdered in Roslindale last winter on Rowes St is still unsolved. I'm sure there are many others given the challenges of having enough info to actually pin a charge on someone.
Pete (or other cops) - how long does a case stay active after a shooting/murder? Or is it specific to the particulars? I can imagine that in some cases the police pretty much know who is guilty but can't get enough together to charge them and I'd think those would be kept somewhat active whereas others probably dead end pretty quickly unless someone comes forward with hard info.
There's your reason ...BPD
There's your reason ...BPD does a shitty job of finding the culpirts who then go one and further 'beef' with rivals, letting off more shots, injuring and killing more people
Step it up BPD!
I really don't think it's that simple
In some cases, maybe the BPD could do better. In other cases, I'm sure the 'stop snitching' tenet comes into play. Without real data though, this kind of discussion just devolves into people ranting about their particular topic (thugs, bad/racist police, liberal judges, etc...)
Closure rate year to year would be an interesting statistic to know outside of agenda based posting.
I think you're right!
This Feb '14 piece by David Bernstein is informative.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2014/02/10/mayor-marty-walsh-gun...
No
BPD actually does a pretty good job of rounding up gun-toting thugs, but they usually end up back on the streets the very next day - illegal search, raaaacism, kkkops, #hashtagoftheday, etc.
Cycle
The issue that is raised here is why are non-fatal shootings up, while homicides are down. It really does come down to chance and cycles. A few years ago we had the same thing happen and in between we had the reverse. Last year we were wondering why homicides were up yet non-fatals were down. It does go in cycles and there really aren't any answers. When the stats are down police take credit, when they are up they complain about funding and lenient judges( yes judges are a part of this). When you look at the mortality rate of shootings, is also to ebbs and flows. Yes EMS / Hospitals save people that would die in other cities, but that doesn't change year to year. One thing that does have an effect is that when you have more personal or drug / robbery shootings, the mortality rate increases. When the shootings are gang-related the mortality rate goes down, as they often ride into a neighborhood and let rounds go at anyone they see from a good distance. This year we are seeing a lot of the shootings in gang neighborhoods and involving gang members. There has also been more multiple-victim shootings than last year, the BPD reports number of victims not number of shooting incidents.
One way to look at it is over a longer time frame. BPD is posting this year vs last year. You need to take a 5 - 10 - 20 year look at the shootings. Doing this you would find that this years shooting numbers are not out of whack with the average. On average there are 100 people shot in the City between 6/1 - 8/31. I'd be curious to see where that number is now.
No Long Island doesn't have an affect on those shooting each other, as those people are mostly involved in property crime. Sweeps are not effective other than in the media. When a gang member or known player has a warrant there is a full court press to get them off the streets. The sweeps generally clear warrants for auto infractions and default warrants and have little to no value.
count
Maybe it's better to use a qualifier: non-fatal shootings are up by 46%. The total number of shootings (fatal or not) is up by 26%--and I noticed this figure was up even during all those snowfalls in February, when homicides started going down. To just say shootings are up 46% is a bit of a stretch. Commissioner Evans recently said shootings are up "a little bit," I would maintain that an increase of 26% from one year to the next is more than just a little.
So.......how's that gun buy
So.......how's that gun buy back program working for ya?????
Almost 2 troll-free hours
That's pretty good, actually.
That is not
a troll. It is a legitimate observation and conclusion to reach that gun buy backs are a joke.
A troll is when someone says something that is over the top, often using 'bad' language (mean spirited words and phrases), and designed to provoke a negative response. A troll is not something that someone says that you disagree with.
Troll-ish, then?
I didn't cry "troll" because the post said something I disagreed with, but because I felt that it deviated widely from a civil, reasoned, thoughtful conversation in order to score easy political points. But I admit that this is a broader definition than many would use for "troll," and one that would, perhaps, cause valued UHub members to be so labeled.
Really, it was the Palin-esque phraseology that set me off. So maybe I'm over-politicizing, too. Fair enough.
Really?
Care to provide some information to legitimize that observation, then? Beyond repeating what you just believe? Consider the counterfactual scenarios, too - don't be shy!
Let me Google that for you:
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2014/02/10/mayor-marty-walsh-gun...
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/sl001153.pdf
The time frame is about 200
The time frame is about 200 days. Boston has a population of 645 thousand people. Compared to those numbers, 89 and 130 are small numbers, coming from relatively rare events. And numbers of rare events will vary far more than the numbers of common events. So as any statistician would tell you, we should expect the numbers of shootings and murders to vary quite a bit from year to year.
Why is this happening? The most likely answer is simply the Law of Large Numbers - or in this case, the result of small numbers. No need to look for a cause when natural variation is at work.
Attention news outlets
Please hire "Anon (not verified)" to teach your staff about statistics so we can stop reading so much into things.
I think her/his point can be summarized with an example. If we had 1 "thing' happen last year, and we have 2 this year, the headline "Almost no change in things" is just as appropriate, or maybe more-so, than, "Things double this year!".
What is the relevant population?
But the approx. 645,000 people in the city of Boston isn't the relevant population from which these events come. Most street crime comes from a very small subset of the city population, as well as a very small subset of the population of even the neighborhoods with the highest crime rates.
(I agree that the spike in shootings is probably partly a random variation..... but not a rare event within those small groups of people involved in street crime.)
I totally agree
Most of the street crime of marking spots well after the 48 hour period definitely is due to a small subset of the city population, with certain neighborhoods (east of Old Colony Ave) having the highest crime rate.
Shootings up 46%
I think the answer is fairly simple. South Bay HOC is at about half it's capacity. Liberal judges are handing out lower bails and lighter sentences to violent offenders.
Crime rate is a function of generation size
That huge burst of crime between the 1970s and the 1990s? The baby boom was of "prime crime" age, and they were a very large generation.
Same thing is happening now, but to a lesser extent. Most crime is committed by younger people - up to about age 25. We have a demographic bulge forming in that age group.