What do y'all think about demolishing projects?

[Jello Biafra]

its hard to prove its a directly related but IMO the part of the drop in crime for the past decade has to do with getting rid of projects, its much better to disperse the crime in the big picture, crime might spread but there is less of it overall

I can't buy into that one. You don't decrease crime by removing the projects...the projects were not the reason for the crime, the criminals living in the projects were responsible and spreading that element out to infect the entitrety of a city instead of keeping it housed in one area is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

its hard to prove its a directly related but IMO the part of the drop in crime for the past decade has to do with getting rid of projects, its much better to disperse the crime in the big picture, crime might spread but there is less of it overall

Crime was on the decline before they started tearing down the projects due to the decline of the crack game. In studies in places like Chicago and Memphis, it's shown that crime has followed the dispersal pattern of the former project residents to a tee. In my hometown of Portsmouth VA they got a ton of federal money to tear down the seas of bricks in the inner core of the city, and those areas now are not as much of danger zones and have more private businesses than check cashing and corner stores. But now there's homegrown gangs and drive-by shootings in once safe neighborhoods. And if course that also brings down property values.

I'm still on the fence though because I think it takes a full generation or two to see the long term overall effect.

 

[theworldismine13]

I can't buy into that one. You don't decrease crime by removing the projects...the projects were not the reason for the crime, the criminals living in the projects were responsible and spreading that element out to infect the entitrety of a city instead of keeping it housed in one area is a recipe for disaster.

I didn't say it doesn't spread crime, I said it does spread crime but the overall crime rate goes down

 

[theworldismine13]

Crime was on the decline before they started tearing down the projects due to the decline of the crack game. In studies in places like Chicago and Memphis, it's shown that crime has followed the dispersal pattern of the former project residents to a tee. In my hometown of Portsmouth VA they got a ton of federal money to tear down the seas of bricks in the inner core of the city, and those areas now are not as much of danger zones and have more private businesses than check cashing and corner stores. But now there's homegrown gangs and drive-by shootings in once safe neighborhoods. And if course that also brings down property values.

I'm still on the fence though because I think it takes a full generation or two to see the long term overall effect.

The decline of crack explains the decline of crime in the 90s but it doesn't explain the decline in crime of the 2000s

In fact there is no clear theory for the decline of crime of the 2000, but crack and the economy are certainly not explanations, but the decline of crime in the 2000s is coincidental with eliminating projects which started in the late 90s

and I agree it does spread crime, but overall crime rates decline

 

[theworldismine13]

But bottom line is that when you put somebody in a project you are inherently cutting them off from the American economic system which is based on ownership and economic freedom , projects eliminate and discourage both of those of those things, so projects are unamerican and anti black

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

The decline of crack explains the decline of crime in the 90s but it doesn't explain the decline in crime of the 2000s

In fact there is no clear theory for the decline of crime of the 2000, but crack and the economy are certainly not explanations, but the decline of crime in the 2000s is coincidental with eliminating projects which started in the late 90s

and I agree it does spread crime, but overall crime rates decline

I don't think there's evidence to bear that out though. Mixed income housing started with a few test cases in the late 90's I didn't get into full swing until the mid and latter portion of the 00's. They would usually tear down one or two developments and leave most of them up in most cities, so it's a stretch to say that's the reason for crime going down.

I think a better explanation is the advancements in law enforcement strategy and technologies. After years of fighting street crime, law enforcement settled on strategies that worked and implemented them city by city. They started aggressively targeting and pinpointing the crews responsible for most of the violence and using every legal method and technological method at their disposal to charge them as an entity as opposed to haphazrdly chasing drugs and doing military-like action. Most high crime neighborhoods have crews of 10 to 15 people who are running the neighborhood and terrorizing everyone. They're more frequently using thr RICO or whatever, surveillance, and intel to take these crews off the street and the data shows crime goes down substantially in neighborhoods when they do that. Until the next generation crew pops up then you get rid of them too.

 

[theworldismine13]

I don't think there's evidence to bear that out though. Mixed income housing started with a few test cases in the late 90's I didn't get into full swing until the mid and latter portion of the 00's. They would usually tear down one or two developments and leave most of them up in most cities, so it's a stretch to say that's the reason for crime going down.

I think a better explanation is the advancements in law enforcement strategy and technologies. After years of fighting street crime, law enforcement settled on strategies that worked and implemented them city by city. They started aggressively targeting and pinpointing the crews responsible for most of the violence and using every legal method and technological method at their disposal to charge them as an entity as opposed to haphazrdly chasing drugs and doing military-like action. Most high crime neighborhoods have crews of 10 to 15 people who are running the neighborhood and terrorizing everyone. They're more frequently using thr RICO or whatever to take these crews off the street and the data shows crime goes down substantially in neighborhoods when they do that. Until the next generation crew pops up then you get rid of them too.

there is no excepted explanation for the drop in crime of the 2000s, no theory fully explains the drop, thats just a fact, i posted an article about it either here or on sohh

but the drop in crime and elimination of projects coincide with each other, it may or may not be coincidence , i would suggest its not coincidence but there isnt any clear data showing that, so thats simply my opinion

i dont really know much about mixed use housing, i think thats a separate issue, we are talking about projects and the elimination of projects started in the late 90s and was in full swing when clinton left office

but the bottom line is that projects are unamerican and anti black

 

[Jello Biafra]

I didn't say it doesn't spread crime, I said it does spread crime but the overall crime rate goes down

I got you. I misread your first statement.

Here is a good article that points to how the crime rate dropped overall after the projects were demolished but in areas where project residents were relocated crime went up. That is the downside that tends to get lost when people look at the benefits of tearing down the project housing.

Public Housing Demolition Lowered Overall Crime, New Study Says

 

[Habit]

I can't buy into that one. You don't decrease crime by removing the projects...the projects were not the reason for the crime, the criminals living in the projects were responsible and spreading that element out to infect the entitrety of a city instead of keeping it housed in one area is a recipe for disaster.

You have to take a couple things in factor. It didn't work in Chicago after they tore down Cabrini–Green projects, because of all the gangs. But, it worked down here in Pompono Beach, FL because we don't have a gang problem like Miami.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

I got you. I misread your first statement.

Here is a good article that points to how the crime rate dropped overall after the projects were demolished but in areas where project residents were relocated crime went up. That is the downside that tends to get lost when people look at the benefits of tearing down the project housing.

Public Housing Demolition Lowered Overall Crime, New Study Says

There was also the Memphis study which was cited in the article and I was already familiar with that shows that in Memphis crime not only spread but also increased after tearing down the projects. American Murder Mystery - Atlantic Mobile

 

[theworldismine13]

There was also the Memphis study which was cited in the article and I was already familiar with that shows that in Memphis crime not only spread but also increased after tearing down the projects. American Murder Mystery - Atlantic Mobile

That doesn't prove your case, projects were eliminated all over the country so if eliminating projects increased crime then we would also see the same in other cities

there has been an across the board demolishing of projects all over the country and there has been an across the board reduction in crime, it could be coincidental or not

But it seems Memphis and Chicago are exceptions to the current trends so there are other factors involved which means they are not useful models to answer the question

 

[theworldismine13]

Crime in cities: America

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

That doesn't prove your case, projects were eliminated all over the country so if eliminating projects increased crime then we would also see the same in other cities

there has been an across the board demolishing of projects all over the country and there has been an across the board reduction in crime, it could be coincidental or not

But it seems Memphis and Chicago are exceptions to the current trends so there are other factors involved which means they are not useful models to answer the question

I'm not making a case either way. I'm just providing data.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Crime in cities: America

Sounds like from reading that article my hypothesis that smarter, improved, targeted law enforcement strategies like Compstat are the primary cause of crime reduction, though obviously not the only reason.

When you focus on specifically targeting terrorist cells like this http://m.fbi.gov/#http://www.fbi.gov/norfolk/press-releases/2010/nf061810.htm build cases, and take them off the street instead of just jumping out of cars and tackling random dudes on the corner, neighborhoods get safer overnight.

 

[Habit]

There was also the Memphis study which was cited in the article and I was already familiar with that shows that in Memphis crime not only spread but also increased after tearing down the projects. American Murder Mystery - Atlantic Mobile

That article is 4 years old. Its hard to put the numbers in context, if we are not looking at trends and the character of the neighborhoods. Miami has more crime than Broward County, because of the higher population density, drug trafficking, and gang activity.