Illinois Road Videos

[hotdogPi]

I have the same problem with determining crime rates based on a standard of "per 100,000 residents" as I did with the covid incidence rate being based on that figure.

It really skews the rate higher for small communities.

One or two murders -- or one of two covid cases -- in a community like mine with a population of 7,000 really skews the rate up, while it's statistically meaningless in a larger community. I always thought a better indicator would be the actual percentage of residents who had tested positive for covid. My county was one of the last ones in Kentucky to record a case, but it spent considerable time in the red zone, which alarmed a lot of people. When you did the math and realized how few cases that high "incidence rate" really was, it wasn't quite so panicky.

The solution to that is to use larger units. I saw a map somewhere, probably on this forum, where it was your typical color by county except counties merged if they were too small so that every region had 100,000 or more people; I'm not sure where the groupings came from.

And your area was hit hard by COVID-19, with the counties in Kentucky within three counties of Virginia having some of the highest overall case rates in the entire country, while the entire state has high overall death rates except for inside the triangle bounded by Louisville, Cincinnati, and Lexington.

[kphoger]

I have the same problem with determining crime rates based on a standard of "per 100,000 residents" as I did with the covid incidence rate being based on that figure.

It really skews the rate higher for small communities.

One or two murders -- or one of two covid cases -- in a community like mine with a population of 7,000 really skews the rate up, while it's statistically meaningless in a larger community. I always thought a better indicator would be the actual percentage of residents who had tested positive for covid. My county was one of the last ones in Kentucky to record a case, but it spent considerable time in the red zone, which alarmed a lot of people. When you did the math and realized how few cases that high "incidence rate" really was, it wasn't quite so panicky.

But assaults and homicides don't just float around in the air, waiting for someone to walk into them.  They are an act committed against a certain person at a certain time.  Therefore, in order to weigh the risk to you–as a certain person being in that place at a certain time–it is very meaningful to ask the question, What are the chances that I might be the person it's done to?  In order to answer that question, you have to take population size into account.

Hypothetical Town A
Population = 50,000
Annual homicides = 5

Hypothetical Town B
Population = 5 million
Annual homicides = 500

In either hypothetical town, the chance of a homicide targeting any given person is 1 in 10,000.  And that's what you really want to know, isn't it?

[Max Rockatansky]

I have the same problem with determining crime rates based on a standard of "per 100,000 residents" as I did with the covid incidence rate being based on that figure.

It really skews the rate higher for small communities.

One or two murders -- or one of two covid cases -- in a community like mine with a population of 7,000 really skews the rate up, while it's statistically meaningless in a larger community. I always thought a better indicator would be the actual percentage of residents who had tested positive for covid. My county was one of the last ones in Kentucky to record a case, but it spent considerable time in the red zone, which alarmed a lot of people. When you did the math and realized how few cases that high "incidence rate" really was, it wasn't quite so panicky.

But assaults and homicides don't just float around in the air, waiting for someone to walk into them.  They are an act committed against a certain person at a certain time.  Therefore, in order to weigh the risk to you–as a certain person being in that place at a certain time–it is very meaningful to ask the question, What are the chances that I might be the person it's done to?  In order to answer that question, you have to take population size into account.

Hypothetical Town A
Population = 50,000
Annual homicides = 5

Hypothetical Town B
Population = 5 million
Annual homicides = 500

In either hypothetical town, the chance of a homicide targeting any given person is 1 in 10,000.  And that's what you really want to know, isn't it?

But as you stated, the statistics don't really tell the story about how victims are targeted.  That might be a 1 in 10,000 chance for some but might more or less chance for others depending on circumstances and actions they take.

Granted I don't really know of a good way to make risk calculations based upon an individual, the city they are in and the actions they take.  All the same, certain behaviors certainly do enhance the risk of being a victim of crime. 

[kphoger]

Absolutely.  I was just talking averages.

[formulanone]

– Pics or it didn't happen.

Challenge accepted.

[Crash_It]

For what it's worth, noted Michigander Ted Nugent was saying Detroit was "the murder capital of the world" back in the 1970s.

It's not worth nothing, because noted Michigander Ted Nugent is a racist piece of garbage. He's the type who will base the favorability of a place on its whiteness, just like a large proportion of America's white population unfortunately would.

And this is the AARoads forum...nitpicking at technicalities is most of what we do here.

Went to Detroit a year ago, and I was amazed by the amount of decay.  It's not concentrated into neighborhoods like what I've seen of Chicago--it's widespread.  (I admit I haven't been to Chicago's South Side much--it might be more widespread there, too.) I like seeing the backdrops to where people live their lives, though, so it was really interesting to see, in a sad way.

Milwaukee might be a really nice place to visit, but its smaller size will simply make it less appealing to prospective tourists.  I don't see Milwaukee getting the "world-class city" treatment like Chicago does, just because it's not as big of a business giant with not as high a population.  Is that fair? Probably not.  But Milwaukee isn't going to start garnering more attention than Chicago does anytime soon.  I won't argue whether Milwaukee is more or less deserving of the attention, though; that's completely subjective.

Well I've been to the Southside of Chicago and most of it is in decay just like Detroit. I've often said that if you want to see Detroit just visit the Southside of Chicago and that is what Detroit is like. Detroit is comparable to Chicago they both have the same Urban headaches.

You obviously haven't been to the Southside if you're making that statement.

[Max Rockatansky]

For what it's worth, noted Michigander Ted Nugent was saying Detroit was "the murder capital of the world" back in the 1970s.

It's not worth nothing, because noted Michigander Ted Nugent is a racist piece of garbage. He's the type who will base the favorability of a place on its whiteness, just like a large proportion of America's white population unfortunately would.

And this is the AARoads forum...nitpicking at technicalities is most of what we do here.

Went to Detroit a year ago, and I was amazed by the amount of decay.  It's not concentrated into neighborhoods like what I've seen of Chicago--it's widespread.  (I admit I haven't been to Chicago's South Side much--it might be more widespread there, too.) I like seeing the backdrops to where people live their lives, though, so it was really interesting to see, in a sad way.

Milwaukee might be a really nice place to visit, but its smaller size will simply make it less appealing to prospective tourists.  I don't see Milwaukee getting the "world-class city" treatment like Chicago does, just because it's not as big of a business giant with not as high a population.  Is that fair? Probably not.  But Milwaukee isn't going to start garnering more attention than Chicago does anytime soon.  I won't argue whether Milwaukee is more or less deserving of the attention, though; that's completely subjective.

Well I've been to the Southside of Chicago and most of it is in decay just like Detroit. I've often said that if you want to see Detroit just visit the Southside of Chicago and that is what Detroit is like. Detroit is comparable to Chicago they both have the same Urban headaches.

You obviously haven't been to the Southside if you're making that statement.

Not directed at me but since I cited Pullman upthread and I've lived in Chicago I figured that would opine. Much of the Southside of Chicago is a blue collar industrial wreck and not too dissimilar to what one would expect in a stereotypical rust belt city. 

[Rothman]

For what it's worth, noted Michigander Ted Nugent was saying Detroit was "the murder capital of the world" back in the 1970s.

It's not worth nothing, because noted Michigander Ted Nugent is a racist piece of garbage. He's the type who will base the favorability of a place on its whiteness, just like a large proportion of America's white population unfortunately would.

And this is the AARoads forum...nitpicking at technicalities is most of what we do here.

Went to Detroit a year ago, and I was amazed by the amount of decay.  It's not concentrated into neighborhoods like what I've seen of Chicago--it's widespread.  (I admit I haven't been to Chicago's South Side much--it might be more widespread there, too.) I like seeing the backdrops to where people live their lives, though, so it was really interesting to see, in a sad way.

Milwaukee might be a really nice place to visit, but its smaller size will simply make it less appealing to prospective tourists.  I don't see Milwaukee getting the "world-class city" treatment like Chicago does, just because it's not as big of a business giant with not as high a population.  Is that fair? Probably not.  But Milwaukee isn't going to start garnering more attention than Chicago does anytime soon.  I won't argue whether Milwaukee is more or less deserving of the attention, though; that's completely subjective.

Well I've been to the Southside of Chicago and most of it is in decay just like Detroit. I've often said that if you want to see Detroit just visit the Southside of Chicago and that is what Detroit is like. Detroit is comparable to Chicago they both have the same Urban headaches.

You obviously haven't been to the Southside if you're making that statement.

Not directed at me but since I cited Pullman upthread and I've lived in Chicago I figured that would opine. Much of the Southside of Chicago is a blue collar industrial wreck and not too dissimilar to what one would expect in a stereotypical rust belt city.

When I visited Pullman, I thought Southside was a rather strange mix of working class people scraping by and better and then burnt-out-dear-heavens-is-that-a-crackhouse horror shows.  It was really socioeconomically complex.

[thspfc]

I'd like to point out that the two people defending Detroit in this thread are both from Michigan. Granted, it's not Carhorn-level homerism. But clearly there's some American State Pride Syndrome in everyone.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'd like to point out that the two people defending Detroit in this thread are both from Michigan. Granted, it's not Carhorn-level homerism. But clearly there's some American State Pride Syndrome in everyone.

Interesting assertion that you think I was defending Detroit.  Being fearful of an American city, having an American-only centric perspective and fearing being a victim crime in unfamiliar places are very stereotypical American traits as well. 

[hotdogPi]

I've walked pretty much every non-residential street plus some residential ones in Lawrence, MA north of the river and east of MA 28, which is about 3-4 square miles. There is no place within this region where I haven't been within 750 feet except along the I-495 corridor. I would show a map, except it could reveal where I live.

While much of the city has abandoned buildings, I don't feel unsafe regarding crime (there have been a few close calls with being hit by cars, not unique to Lawrence; I'm not counting those as feeling unsafe). That said, I only walk during the daytime. Lawrence is also getting better over time, becoming its own Hispanic (mostly Dominican north of the river) community over the last few decades. The riots in 1994 don't seem anywhere near likely to happen again soon.

[Max Rockatansky]

Even if you did walk around in the dark it isn't as though you would be engaging in the activities which would make someone generally a victim of crime.  You are less and less likely to even encounter another person the longer the night time approaches sunrise.

[Flint1979]

For what it's worth, noted Michigander Ted Nugent was saying Detroit was "the murder capital of the world" back in the 1970s.

It's not worth nothing, because noted Michigander Ted Nugent is a racist piece of garbage. He's the type who will base the favorability of a place on its whiteness, just like a large proportion of America's white population unfortunately would.

And this is the AARoads forum...nitpicking at technicalities is most of what we do here.

Went to Detroit a year ago, and I was amazed by the amount of decay.  It's not concentrated into neighborhoods like what I've seen of Chicago--it's widespread.  (I admit I haven't been to Chicago's South Side much--it might be more widespread there, too.) I like seeing the backdrops to where people live their lives, though, so it was really interesting to see, in a sad way.

Milwaukee might be a really nice place to visit, but its smaller size will simply make it less appealing to prospective tourists.  I don't see Milwaukee getting the "world-class city" treatment like Chicago does, just because it's not as big of a business giant with not as high a population.  Is that fair? Probably not.  But Milwaukee isn't going to start garnering more attention than Chicago does anytime soon.  I won't argue whether Milwaukee is more or less deserving of the attention, though; that's completely subjective.

Well I've been to the Southside of Chicago and most of it is in decay just like Detroit. I've often said that if you want to see Detroit just visit the Southside of Chicago and that is what Detroit is like. Detroit is comparable to Chicago they both have the same Urban headaches.

You obviously haven't been to the Southside if you're making that statement.

You have never been to Detroit so you have no business making such a claim. You have no idea what Detroit is like compared to the Southside of Chicago so don't try telling me I haven't been somewhere.

[Flint1979]

For what it's worth, noted Michigander Ted Nugent was saying Detroit was "the murder capital of the world" back in the 1970s.

It's not worth nothing, because noted Michigander Ted Nugent is a racist piece of garbage. He's the type who will base the favorability of a place on its whiteness, just like a large proportion of America's white population unfortunately would.

And this is the AARoads forum...nitpicking at technicalities is most of what we do here.

Went to Detroit a year ago, and I was amazed by the amount of decay.  It's not concentrated into neighborhoods like what I've seen of Chicago--it's widespread.  (I admit I haven't been to Chicago's South Side much--it might be more widespread there, too.) I like seeing the backdrops to where people live their lives, though, so it was really interesting to see, in a sad way.

Milwaukee might be a really nice place to visit, but its smaller size will simply make it less appealing to prospective tourists.  I don't see Milwaukee getting the "world-class city" treatment like Chicago does, just because it's not as big of a business giant with not as high a population.  Is that fair? Probably not.  But Milwaukee isn't going to start garnering more attention than Chicago does anytime soon.  I won't argue whether Milwaukee is more or less deserving of the attention, though; that's completely subjective.

Well I've been to the Southside of Chicago and most of it is in decay just like Detroit. I've often said that if you want to see Detroit just visit the Southside of Chicago and that is what Detroit is like. Detroit is comparable to Chicago they both have the same Urban headaches.

You obviously haven't been to the Southside if you're making that statement.

Not directed at me but since I cited Pullman upthread and I've lived in Chicago I figured that would opine. Much of the Southside of Chicago is a blue collar industrial wreck and not too dissimilar to what one would expect in a stereotypical rust belt city.

I have also lived in Chicago he seems to assume things before he even knows what he's talking about. And where I lived in Chicago was indeed on the Southside, I'm also a White Sox fan and have gone to plenty of games at Sox Park. I think he thinks just because I'm from Michigan and live in Michigan again that I don't know what I'm talking about but I most certainly do know what I'm talking about I lived in Chicago for 5 years I'd say that was long enough to know what the city around me was like.

[Flint1979]

I suppose he'll try to deny this somehow too but about 20 years ago I was on a trip to the Twin Cities and stopped in Milwaukee to watch a game, Miller Park was in it's first season so it was 2001 but anyway they were playing the Braves I remember and after the game I started to trek toward Chicago and traffic on I-94 was backed up for what seemed miles and this was before GPS systems so I tried my best to navigate down the shore of Lake Michigan for awhile on streets running near I-94. I ended up taking Green Bay, Sheridan, Lakeshore Drive and by the time I got to Chicago my destination was actually Detroit as I was headed back home I lived in Royal Oak at the time.

I got through downtown Chicago and that's where I should have got back on the Dan Ryan and just dealt with the traffic. It was a Sunday so traffic was slow go in the summer time with everyone heading back home. I stayed on Lakeshore for quite awhile going well into the Southside and I decided to move over and take Stony Island back to the Bishop Ford because I was tired of riding the city streets at that point and hadn't been on the Interstate at all in about 90 miles. I got on Stony Island and started to go south and as I approached 87th Street I noticed a person laying in the street, the light was red so I was stopped and right before the light turned green he shot up and then collapsed again. I thought to myself I'm getting the fuck outta here, the light turned green and I punched it. There was one more light at 95th and it was green I was doing about 55 mph and saw the sign that said I-94 East - Indiana and was never so happy to see that sign in my life.

There is more crime in Detroit on a per capita scale but since Chicago is so much bigger than Detroit they win the total number of crimes. I don't know which one I'd rather be in. Let's also keep in mind that Detroit is one of the only cities that didn't see riots during the summer of 2020, Chicago can't say the same thing.

[kphoger]

I'm quite a bit more familiar with Chicago's west side than I am with the south side.  But, from what I've seen and especially from talking to people who have been familiar with the south side for decades, my general impression is that a lot of the neighborhoods that weren't very bad 50 or 60 years ago have really slid downhill over the years.  For example, I have a good friend at church who grew up near Garfield and Western, and she says that area has taken a turn for the worse since then.  Closer in to the city, the neighborhood my great-grandparents immigrated to and where my grandparents lived until 1953 would be practically unrecognizable today.

Back when I was attending church in South Austin (in a fairly rough neighborhood on the west side near Central and Washington), the locals who lived there wouldn't even dare move to the south side.  (Maybe the reverse is true, I don't know.)

[Flint1979]

I'm quite a bit more familiar with Chicago's west side than I am with the south side.  But, from what I've seen and especially from talking to people who have been familiar with the south side for decades, my general impression is that a lot of the neighborhoods that weren't very bad 50 or 60 years ago have really slid downhill over the years.  For example, I have a good friend at church who grew up near Garfield and Western, and she says that area has taken a turn for the worse since then.  Closer in to the city, the neighborhood my great-grandparents immigrated to and where my grandparents lived until 1953 would be practically unrecognizable today.

Back when I was attending church in South Austin (in a fairly rough neighborhood on the west side near Central and Washington), the locals who lived there wouldn't even dare move to the south side.  (Maybe the reverse is true, I don't know.)

Garfield and Western, that'd be like border line between West Englewood and Gage Park I had always thought that Gage Park was an ok neighborhood, nothing great but not the worst of the Southside. It seemed like going south from there toward Marquette Park it started to get bad, then West Englewood and Englewood itself are two of the worst neighborhoods in the city. The ultimate worst neighborhood I have always thought was Fuller Park, it's a narrow strip of land with the Dan Ryan running almost through the center of it but very abandoned and just run down as all hell. It's not too far south of Comiskey Park either which I would consider almost border line between good and bad. The Bridgeport neighborhood always seemed pretty nice, Armour Square which is the neighborhood the ballpark is in has a large Asian population and is an ok neighborhood too. I've parked on 39th Street and walked past Wentworth Gardens which of course is a housing project within the shadows of the ballpark and just heard a lot of shouting as I was walking by I remember no violence or anything as I was just walking to the ballpark.

I'm not too sure about Austin as I haven't spent any considerable amount of time there but I always had heard that it was one of Chicago's worst neighborhoods as far as crime goes.

[kphoger]

I'm not too sure about Austin as I haven't spent any considerable amount of time there but I always had heard that it was one of Chicago's worst neighborhoods as far as crime goes.

South Austin is the neighborhood where I had teenagers throwing rocks at me from across the street on a Sunday morning as I walked down the sidewalk from church to the L station.  It's also the neighborhood where I was solicited by a prostitute with methed-out teeth while ordering a hamburger through a bulletproof window.  And yeah, the church members from that neighborhood considered the south side "rough".

[Crash_It]

For what it's worth, noted Michigander Ted Nugent was saying Detroit was "the murder capital of the world" back in the 1970s.

It's not worth nothing, because noted Michigander Ted Nugent is a racist piece of garbage. He's the type who will base the favorability of a place on its whiteness, just like a large proportion of America's white population unfortunately would.

And this is the AARoads forum...nitpicking at technicalities is most of what we do here.

Went to Detroit a year ago, and I was amazed by the amount of decay.  It's not concentrated into neighborhoods like what I've seen of Chicago--it's widespread.  (I admit I haven't been to Chicago's South Side much--it might be more widespread there, too.) I like seeing the backdrops to where people live their lives, though, so it was really interesting to see, in a sad way.

Milwaukee might be a really nice place to visit, but its smaller size will simply make it less appealing to prospective tourists.  I don't see Milwaukee getting the "world-class city" treatment like Chicago does, just because it's not as big of a business giant with not as high a population.  Is that fair? Probably not.  But Milwaukee isn't going to start garnering more attention than Chicago does anytime soon.  I won't argue whether Milwaukee is more or less deserving of the attention, though; that's completely subjective.

Well I've been to the Southside of Chicago and most of it is in decay just like Detroit. I've often said that if you want to see Detroit just visit the Southside of Chicago and that is what Detroit is like. Detroit is comparable to Chicago they both have the same Urban headaches.

You obviously haven't been to the Southside if you're making that statement.

You have never been to Detroit so you have no business making such a claim. You have no idea what Detroit is like compared to the Southside of Chicago so don't try telling me I haven't been somewhere.

Then you should know that they are plenty of community areas on the Southside that aren't in decay (Bridgeport,Douglas, Grand Boulevard, Hyde Park, Kenwood, Oakland are just a few examples). Now the west side is a different story...it only has 3 community areas that aren't in decay (Near West Side, Pilsen, and West Town). However there are some parts of Austin that are more upscale.. I went over it in this video


https://youtu.be/hmgtPNtjNlE

[thspfc]

I'd like to point out that the two people defending Detroit in this thread are both from Michigan. Granted, it's not Carhorn-level homerism. But clearly there's some American State Pride Syndrome in everyone.

Interesting assertion that you think I was defending Detroit.  Being fearful of an American city, having an American-only centric perspective and fearing being a victim crime in unfamiliar places are very stereotypical American traits as well.

I'm not fearful of any American city. I'm fearful of some American neighborhoods.

[Rothman]

For what it's worth, noted Michigander Ted Nugent was saying Detroit was "the murder capital of the world" back in the 1970s.

It's not worth nothing, because noted Michigander Ted Nugent is a racist piece of garbage. He's the type who will base the favorability of a place on its whiteness, just like a large proportion of America's white population unfortunately would.

And this is the AARoads forum...nitpicking at technicalities is most of what we do here.

Went to Detroit a year ago, and I was amazed by the amount of decay.  It's not concentrated into neighborhoods like what I've seen of Chicago--it's widespread.  (I admit I haven't been to Chicago's South Side much--it might be more widespread there, too.) I like seeing the backdrops to where people live their lives, though, so it was really interesting to see, in a sad way.

Milwaukee might be a really nice place to visit, but its smaller size will simply make it less appealing to prospective tourists.  I don't see Milwaukee getting the "world-class city" treatment like Chicago does, just because it's not as big of a business giant with not as high a population.  Is that fair? Probably not.  But Milwaukee isn't going to start garnering more attention than Chicago does anytime soon.  I won't argue whether Milwaukee is more or less deserving of the attention, though; that's completely subjective.

Well I've been to the Southside of Chicago and most of it is in decay just like Detroit. I've often said that if you want to see Detroit just visit the Southside of Chicago and that is what Detroit is like. Detroit is comparable to Chicago they both have the same Urban headaches.

You obviously haven't been to the Southside if you're making that statement.

You have never been to Detroit so you have no business making such a claim. You have no idea what Detroit is like compared to the Southside of Chicago so don't try telling me I haven't been somewhere.

Then you should know that they are plenty of community areas on the Southside that aren't in decay (Bridgeport,Douglas, Grand Boulevard, Hyde Park, Kenwood, Oakland are just a few examples). Now the west side is a different story...it only has 3 community areas that aren't in decay (Near West Side, Pilsen, and West Town). However there are some parts of Austin that are more upscale.. I went over it in this

A non sequitur just to plug his own video.  The man has no shame.

[kphoger]

I'm not fearful of any American city. I'm fearful of some American neighborhoods.

What about East Saint Louis?  Does that count as a city or a neighborhood?

In 2019 there were 36 murders in East Saint Louis, a town with a population of just over 26,000.  That's a murder rate of 137 per 100,000 population–more than twice that of nearby Saint Louis, and more than three times that of Detroit.

I used to make occasional deliveries there.  I didn't usually feel unsafe there, but it's the only town I delivered to where I'd make sure to shut the truck off and put the keys in my pocket at every stop.

[Crash_It]

A non sequitur just to plug his own video.  The man has no shame.

To be fair this thread is called Illinois road videos

[Max Rockatansky]

A non sequitur just to plug his own video.  The man has no shame.

To be fair this thread is called Illinois road videos

Which this thread largely lacks, from all sources.  I tend to be of the opinion "bad driver videos"  even if they are in Illinois don't really count towards the pool "Illinois road videos."    More so when the original post in this thread is taken into consideration. 

[Flint1979]

I'm not too sure about Austin as I haven't spent any considerable amount of time there but I always had heard that it was one of Chicago's worst neighborhoods as far as crime goes.

South Austin is the neighborhood where I had teenagers throwing rocks at me from across the street on a Sunday morning as I walked down the sidewalk from church to the L station.  It's also the neighborhood where I was solicited by a prostitute with methed-out teeth while ordering a hamburger through a bulletproof window.  And yeah, the church members from that neighborhood considered the south side "rough".

That doesn't surprise me since I know Austin is a bad neighborhood but even on a Sunday morning? It'd be like trying to touchdown on North Sentinel Island. That sounds rougher than anything I've experienced on the Southside.