Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   The last time the murder rate was this low in NYC was in the 1890's.   ( divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

3612 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Mar 2002 at 8:38 AM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

75 Comments     (+0 »)
2002-03-18 08:45:03 AM  
Another reason to never visit NYC.
2002-03-18 08:46:21 AM  
There's a gang called the "Jeri Curls"?
2002-03-18 08:47:17 AM  
You guys are missing the important news in this story!

"A modern New Yorker would have to take a time machine back to the late 1890s to find..."

New York has time machines!
2002-03-18 08:49:36 AM  
But crime is on the rise, right? I mean all that violence on TV and in video games is turning our children into killers! Things are worse now than when we were kids, we have to do something about it!
2002-03-18 08:54:20 AM  
Well done, at this rate you will reach UK levels of murders in 125 years.
2002-03-18 08:55:09 AM  
2002-03-18 08:55:43 AM  

Per capita or just cumlative?
2002-03-18 08:59:30 AM  
Fb-: I was thinking the same thing.
2002-03-18 09:01:28 AM  
2002-03-18 09:07:10 AM  
Can somebody find an updated chart of cities with highest murder rate, rape, fires, and such. I'm behind on my statistics. Last I heard Detroit was first in car fires, but behind in the rest.
(hoping for a comeback!)
2002-03-18 09:16:18 AM  
Frolixo -- check out a book called Statistical Abstracts of the United States. Has more stuff like that than you possibly ever wanted to know. Any library should have it.

Fb -- not funny.
2002-03-18 09:18:56 AM  
brought to you by Arthur Andersen sociological studies institutea
2002-03-18 09:19:52 AM  
Webalina: You'll often find on Fark that if you remove your head from actually inside your bottom, you can read and appreciate the humour a little more clearly.
2002-03-18 09:23:37 AM  
Anyone else think that the New York gangs sound more like out of work hair bands?

And besides wouldn't murdering someone in NY after the WTC (I refuse to use that god-awful 9-11 bullshiat)attack be like following Eddie Izzard on stage? That's just a lot to live up to.
2002-03-18 09:24:03 AM  
Either Fb.
2002-03-18 09:26:00 AM  

"Well done, at this rate you will reach UK levels of murders in 125 years."

And it will take about 900 years of gun-crazy, bloodthirsty Americans killing each other to even come close to the 6 years of killing and government-induced famine in WWII. When Europe goes 137 years without a war on their soil, then maybe you can climb up on your high horse.
2002-03-18 09:26:41 AM  

If you are coming to fark looking for niceities or tasteful jokes you will be very disappointed.

I stand by my Detroit line.

Damn mods.
2002-03-18 09:29:33 AM  
As a New Yorker,this is interesting.The funny thing is the squeegee guys are back,and are REALLYY aggressive now!!! It's seems the with Herr Rudy out,the crystal walls of the phantom zone broke,and they were freed again.Strange!!!!
2002-03-18 09:40:39 AM  
And the USA does not have wars because it has handguns Millay?

What a very strange comment.
2002-03-18 09:44:51 AM  
Hmmmm prison population levels at all time high. Crime levels at all time low. Could it be getting tough with people who break the law and throwing them in shiatty prison conditions for violent crimes actually reduces the crime rate???
2002-03-18 09:45:58 AM  

US does not have wars because we are smart and wealthy enough to pay other people to do our dirty work.
2002-03-18 09:48:03 AM  
millay: quite few less would have died had the US got off it's isolationist arse and instead of waiting for pearl harbour
2002-03-18 09:51:12 AM  

Typical. Damn the US for not getting involved sooner. Then damn them for getting involved in other's business at all.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Might as well just say fark all to the world and do whatever serves our interests.
2002-03-18 09:54:56 AM  
"US does not have wars because we are smart and wealthy enough to pay other people to do our dirty work."

yes I noticed that in operation oops they have all went to Pakistan while we were bombing empty mountains Anaconda

So we never again have to hear you boast about how you saved us all (except the Germans, Austrians and Swiss) from speaking German?
2002-03-18 09:57:47 AM  

You have proof that happened? Or just another liberal .org/.uk article?
2002-03-18 10:01:38 AM  
Fb- actually you're right. i think your point explains why the US and it's people are so attracted to isolationism. i retract my previous comment.

millay you're still full of shiat though. you can't compare war with the civilian murder rate.
2002-03-18 10:07:37 AM  

The only thing I gathered from that is a buncha anti-US arabs are trying to say the war isn't working.

Hardly a source.
2002-03-18 10:11:17 AM  
jesus, I see there is a never ending end to Harmonia's copy-n-paste-n-fuk-the-Americas-n-the-arse point of view.
2002-03-18 10:12:19 AM  
Those guys are your noble allies Fb

I have beenthrough this before, I post a link you attack the source, one week later it turns up on CNN and you then say it doesnt matter anyway.

The red cross buildings, the attack on the village, you always go through exactly the same steps.

Its from a liberal source its rubbish

ok then its true but who cares.
2002-03-18 10:14:12 AM  
Here is evidence the war isn't working: their masterminds are still alive, and Bush is saying they aren't that important to capture or kill anymore. Why? Well, there are a couple of reasons. One could be due to his close ties to the bin Laden family (and Cheny's), and the other could be due to the fact that he over estimated himself and is just like his daddy (let the bad guy get away).

When you fail to accomplish your chief objective, you LOSE.
2002-03-18 10:15:08 AM  
I see there is no beginning to Vegasj's relevant points.
2002-03-18 10:16:45 AM  
And so we captured some soldiers: that is hardly a dent in their militia. Typical Republican thinking: eliminate the red herrin, not the real problem (bin Laden, his fellow leaders)
2002-03-18 10:18:02 AM  
Nobel allies?

They are just a buncha rag head fighters that can tell which way the wind is blowing and are smart enough not to piss into it.

They are muslim. They are bound by their religion to hate America. Don't think for a minute they are really on our side, or our friends. They are just tools. We are using them to accomplish a goal. American lives are expensive. We can save $ by using Afghans.

The paper is good, the article and it's sources are trash. Just fodder to increase banner impressions.
2002-03-18 10:18:45 AM  
Bin Laden, sans fighers and finances, it irrevelant. I know that's hard for some to fathom, but I assure you it's the case.
2002-03-18 10:19:59 AM  
Vega: something simular could be said about 90% of the fark community (except it isn't "fuk-america-in-the-arse" it is "fuk-everyone-else-in-the-arse-because-america-is-god-and-saintly-inca​pable-of -doing-anything-wrong-and-never-lying-to-civilians-except-when-a-dirty​-liberal -does-it.)

The whole conservative "movement" after sep. 11th reminds me of the neo nazi movement.
2002-03-18 10:21:43 AM  
They are muslim. They are bound by their religion to hate America.

Everything you've said is rendered irrevelant by that statement of pure ignorance.
2002-03-18 10:23:20 AM  
2002-03-18 10:23:39 AM  
The whole conservative "movement" after sep. 11th reminds me of the neo nazi movement.

Everything you've said is rendered irrevelant by that statement of pure ignorance.
2002-03-18 10:28:58 AM  
So Fb, all muslims are your enemy?

And there was me thinking this was not a religous war.
2002-03-18 10:30:47 AM  

I'm atheist. I suppose the only think that remotely makes this a religious war is the whole "Muslim vs Everybody else on the plant that must be destroyed because they are infadels! JIHAD LALLALALALA!" thing.
2002-03-18 10:38:59 AM  
This made me laugh. With gang names like these I doubt they will be killing a lot of people.

"But the single most important assault by his office was on drug gangs, knocking out, for example: 35 Wild Cowboys; a dozen Purple Top Gang members; 17 from the Good Job Crew and the Black Stallion Gang; 15 from the Jeri Curls; and 64 members of La Compania."
2002-03-18 10:39:12 AM  
Congratulations New York! (i'm here in school), still, good job at not murdering someone noble people of New York.

As for this flamewar. Bugger off Fb-
2002-03-18 10:49:51 AM  
'Bin Laden, sans fighers and finances, it irrevelant. I know that's hard for some to fathom, but I assure you it's the case.'

Uh, didn't Bush promise on the site of the Trade Center to bring Bin Laden in Dead or Alive? heck, he said the people who brought down the Towers. I am not aware of that many conspirators being brought to justice anyways.

But that is irrelvant, since we gotta bomb Iraq now.
2002-03-18 10:51:15 AM  

We are fighting terrorism. This isn't a war on Osama bin Laden.

Besides, for all you know, he's dead.
2002-03-18 10:54:50 AM  
although, it's gonna be tough for people to believe that until we have a body.

And Bush did say that the people that brought down those towers would hear all of them, which means Al Qaida.

A war on terrorism being conducted without capturing Osama and his advisors is like conducting World War II by taking over Nazi Germany but not capturing Hitler and his main henchmen.
2002-03-18 11:00:03 AM  
WWII was a war of occupation, not terrorism. I fail to see how you can draw any rational parallels at all.

The goal is to distrupt/destroy the world's largest terrorist network.

Cutting off the head of Osama is not important. Look at it this way you could either,

A. Capture/kill Osama but have no impact on the troops or finances of al Qaeda.

B. Devistate the al Qaeda network, both financially and physically, yet Osama remains at large.

Osama can be replaced. I'll take choice B.
2002-03-18 11:01:43 AM  
A) Not done
B) not done either

Although the USA's actions have probably brought the thousands of recruits.
2002-03-18 11:04:10 AM  
I'd take choice C, a combination of A and B (kill Osama, devastate Al Qaeda)

for two reasons-

1: Bush pretty much made a promise to get Osama dead or alive.

2: Osama's organization is not a snake, it is a chameleon, it blends in to the host country, if you cut off some arms and legs, the arms and legs will return, but if you cut out the heart, it dies. Osama is the heart of Al Qaida, keep him alive and you keep Al Qaida alive.
2002-03-18 11:05:53 AM  

You make me laugh. You hate the US so much, and want to see them so badly, that you can't even see that truth that you so used to preach about.
2002-03-18 11:07:57 AM  

BS. Osama's head is just a trophy for Bush. I could care less about him. Killing him will have no impact. Osama isn't what brings in the people to al Qaeda, the mosques do.
2002-03-18 11:11:06 AM  
Osama is the leader of Al Qaida, you kill the leader, you hurt the movement. Osama is not just the leader, but the banker, he's a billionaire. You kill him, you snuff out the fiancing he does.

As for mosques bringing in anything, your own bigotry and paranoia is appearing to be the reason for you going with Bush and wanting to keep Osama alive.
2002-03-18 11:12:44 AM  
I have about 20 minutes left, you have any more statements, don't wait. I'm not gonna be on for another 4 hours.
2002-03-18 11:13:08 AM  
Are the hookers back in Time Square yet?
2002-03-18 11:15:14 AM  
"You make me laugh. You hate the US so much, and want to see them so badly, that you can't even see that truth that you so used to preach about."

Any chance of that in English?

"You want to see them so badly (?) that truth that you so used to preach about (?)

Excuse my ignorance but I dont speak idiot.
2002-03-18 11:17:49 AM  

"And the USA does not have wars because it has handguns Millay?

What a very strange comment."

and Batfink--

"millay you're still full of shiat though. you can't compare war with the civilian murder rate."

My point is that the US takes a lot of grief from Europeans for being a "violent culture." However, it would take over a hundred years of the US' current murder rate to come up to speed with the killing that happened in Europe during WWII alone. You can compare the civilian murder rate to war. In Europe, killing is state business, and its carried out with great aplomb and efficiency. Americans may like to shoot people at bar fights, but no one here has ever constructed ovens to kill millions. I know its easy to blame all this on the Germans, but that brings up another point. From this side of the pond, Germany invading France every 20 years and killing millions makes as much sense as New York invading Pennsylvania every 20 years and doing the same--that is to say, no sense at all. Somehow that doesn't happen here, now does it? Which is a greater threat? Handguns in the hands of a few or armies of millions on the march? (Harmonia--the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto would have appreciated "assault weapons," by the way.) When the US has a dispute (2000 election), even if its decided stupidly no one goes around drafting soldiers, burning books, and crankin' up the ovens. And if the Nazis do start to march, we do a lot more than the Europeans to *stop* the violence. I'll take a lack of gun control if it also means that I'm safe from a generation-destroying war every generation.

PS: Europe is irrelevant anyway. See "Europe's Military Gap," New York Times, 3/16/02, p. A1.
2002-03-18 11:20:36 AM  
However, as a law student, I would like to thank the UK for giving us ours laws. They work very well once the monarch is removed.
2002-03-18 11:21:13 AM  
Millay, the last general European war was 1945.

How that is relevent to New orks murder rate I leave to your befuddled mind.

Since then, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Korea, Vietnam, Beruit and now Afghanstan have been American wars.

Got anything to say about them?
2002-03-18 11:23:30 AM  
When New Yorkers kill other New Yorkers, the terrorists have already won.
2002-03-18 11:33:29 AM  
I believe Hiroshima & Nagasaki was during a time when the Britsih were our allies, so there's plenty of blame to go around. Or perhaps the British Army, Navy & RAF could have taken the Japanese mainland by themselves. Korea, Vietnam--sure they were a mess, but again, Europe was as comfortable with Soviet imperialism in Western Europe as they were with it in Asia--that is to say, very aware of the evil and very unlikely to do anything about it. Beirut--what war? The Marines that got killed?

The relevancy to NY's murder rate is one I was trying to make on a more abstract level in the face of your criticism from a European standpoint. If taking things to a different level of abstraction is "befuddlement," well, I guess then my liberal arts education has failed me. I was just rebutting a backhanded jab at our "violent culture" I keep hearing about.

PS: Bosnia was pretty recent, if I remember correctly. I guess saying "never again" to ethnic cleansing means "never again shall Europe stop ethnic cleansing--we will always wait for the Amercians to handle it." Please send your thank you card to Bill Clinton and John McCain.

PPS: I have to go. I'm not ducking anybody's comments, I'm just at class.
2002-03-18 11:43:54 AM  
After living in the US for almost two years (including before and after 9/11), I tend to agree with Harmonia on this one. George Bush really overstepped his boundaries when speaking about "Axis of Evil" and "Dead or Alive" .. since then, the fact is that the US led campaigns have been a disaster from a tectical standpoint. They've spend billions of dollars on something they're not sure if it even was a success. They can't find any Al Qaida leaders, and the international press has been raising questions about the entire process from the get go. It's really a shame that the US media machine has become so concerned with being PC and in agreeance with the president's every move, that they've failed to look at the big picture.

I'm done.. my brain hurts.
2002-03-18 11:47:00 AM  
To acheive this low figure, however, those that live outside the ridulous and oppresive laws have become victims of the cruel and heartless past and present Republican Mayoral administrations. When these Republicans are booted from office, and they will be soon, piece will again reign in New York.
2002-03-18 11:56:43 AM  
Frolixo--I used to live in the Detroit metro area, and it was not uncommon to see a car on the side of the road on fire on Interstate 696. That and some pretty wacky car chases....
2002-03-18 11:57:00 AM  
Fb Wrote


US does not have wars because we are smart and wealthy enough to pay other people to do our dirty work."

Looks like you have a point:

Up to 1,700 British troops are to be deployed to Afghanistan, Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon has revealed.

It comes after the US asked the UK to provide forces to join future operations against al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Mr Hoon told MPs he had authorised deployment to Afghanistan of a full UK infantry battle group, built around 45 Commando, Royal Marines.

He said it would join a US-led brigade "forming a potent force ready to undertake such operations".

He said the force would go intially to Bagram, with the first members of 45 Commando Group on the ground within days and ready to commence offensive operations by mid April.

Mr Hoon told the Commons: "These troops are being deployed to Afghanistan to take part in war fighting operations. We will be asking them to risk their lives ... They may suffer casualties."

Mr Hoon told MPs it would be the UK's largest military deployment for combat operations since the Gulf conflict.
2002-03-18 12:54:26 PM  
For those of you who haven't been paying attention: NYC's crime rates have been declining steadily for the past 8 years (they started going down after Giuliani took office). It has *nothing* to do with 9/11, but rather with an strengthened police force.

I've lived here since 1992 and have never been in any sort of danger. I feel way safer here than I do in D.C. or Boston!
2002-03-18 02:05:29 PM  
it would be the UK's largest military deployment for combat operations since the Gulf conflict.

Let's just hope they shoot at the right people this time.
2002-03-18 02:17:23 PM  
well, we all know the tail end of 2001 wasn't all that low now was it?
2002-03-18 02:33:26 PM  
Just for reference Vietnam was actually a French mess that we got caught up in and couldn't easily extricate ourselves from. France saves the US: 2. US saves France: 3.
2002-03-18 02:38:53 PM  
For those of you who are counting Europe's bloody messes, don't forget the Russians who killed between 10 and 50 million of their own people (plus the 10 million killed fighting the Nazis). I liked Margaret Thatcher's comments the other day that Britain should extricate itself from the EU. They were spot on.
2002-03-18 03:06:06 PM  

"Up to 1,700 British troops are to be deployed to Afghanistan, Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon has revealed."

1,700? Gee. Thanks for that huge help. There's probably more reporters than British troops.

Again, see "Europe's Military Gap," New York Times, 3/16/02, p. A1.
2002-03-18 06:17:54 PM  

Harmonia, do you have any idea how many Americans are in Afghanistan? At least 50,000, and growing every day. My history teacher was called up in October to go to Afghanistan.

As for gun control:
Q. When is the last time the United Staes mainland has been invaded?
A. Never. The American Revolution was before the US was a country. The fact that there is almost one gun for every American was part of the reason the Soviet Union collapsed; they had to increase spending to overcome this in event of an invasion.

The Napoleonic War, WWI, WWII, the mess in Africa, the mess in South-east Asia, and the mess in South America are ALL Europe's fault. America's former colonies are currently doing fine, with no major wars and no Commie dictatorships.
2002-03-18 06:21:14 PM  
Also, America created your low crime rates. The fact that all of Europe spent almost nothing on its military throughout the Cold War allowed Europeans to focus on social matters. The US was to busy defending your asses from Soviet invasion to create a socialist welfare state.
2002-03-18 06:47:05 PM  
Well they're just gona have to do something about that then arn't they, can't have all those non-murdered people walking around.

...Note the sarcasm for anyone who can't...
2002-03-18 07:34:47 PM  
Wow, it's good to see that some people never get tired of repeatedly arguing over the same thing. I guess everyone needs a hobby.
2002-03-19 12:46:45 AM  
2002-03-19 03:30:02 AM  
Donkeyman you are a blithering fool. are you selling something on Ebay with all those caps and "!!!!!!"? Did you even read the article? Do you even know how to read? "Bin Ladan?". My gardener knows about ten English words, and even he knows how to properly spell that cocksuckers name. I pray that was satire, or a JeffK-esque rambling.

As for the flamerwar...Harmonia never ceases to amaze me. I think when he spent his time in the United States living here he got burnt by a lot of American women, so when he kilted his ass back to Bagpipe land, he decided he no likey US no more.

Millay Thank God for somebody well educated on Fark.

Read "Jihad vs. McWorld" at this URL. Excellent article I read while studying at Brown.

I'm too lazy and overtired to link to it.

Fooshnik This is Fark, remember? ;)
Displayed 75 of 75 comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.