A lot of hoopla on the right about the FBI revising 2022 crime numbers higher. Here’s my take:
▪️According to these revised stats, violent crime did rise from ‘21-‘22, but then fell in ‘23, which many are leaving out. Violent crime is down from the ‘20 spike and the crime rate is actually near historic lows. Murders and murder rates also fell from ‘22-‘23, but are still elevated from the mid 2010s lows.
▪️It’s possible that future revisions could raise ‘23 violent crime numbers above ‘22 levels, which would indicate crime is trending worse. But until that happens it’s pure speculation, these are the numbers. Also, it’s highly doubtful that murders would be revised above ‘22 levels as it would require a massive upward revision, and you can look at many major cities’ stats showing murder has dropped.
▪️Generally, violent crime and murders were on a steady decline for decades until about the mid 2010s. Then, this progress was reversed when it spiked in 2020. Violent crime is down since then, but still hasn’t gotten back to the lows.
▪️Statistics don’t capture everything, and many rightly feel like crime is up in their areas. I like to use the example of stores locking up products. If stores are locking up things they didn’t 10 years ago, crime is up in your area, regardless of how many thefts are reported by police stats. Walk into a CVS in downtown Sacramento and there’s barely anything that isn’t locked up. You don’t need stats to tell you crime is high there.
As with the leftist freak out over “banned books” this is not banning books, it’s still easy to get Harry Potter and bookstores should be able to limit whatever books they want for whatever reason. But not only does it show a double standard, the rationale is far less justifiable than removing certain content from school libraries. At least there the justification was the content of certain books are inappropriate for children, clearly not every book should be available in a school library. Here, there’s no argument about the content they just don’t like the author’s politics!
Because news came out about his letter to the FBI, revealing he was a nutcase. The letter was rambling and incoherent, claiming he was trained by the US military off the books, and that Walz had instructed him to kill Amy Klobuchar so he could run for Senate. None of it made any sense (Walz is not running for Senate) and none of the assassinations made any sense, even in a diabolical way.
Nearly all of his hit list was Democrats (including Walz) and abortion clinics, but he was supposedly working for Walz?! Plus, one of the guys he killed wasn’t even on his list, and others were no longer in office or deceased. None of it makes sense from any coherent angle.
Basically, it appears the guy was mentally ill and neither the left or right can use the incident to push their agendas anymore, so the story was dropped.
This is so dumb. First, this means LA began as Spanish land founded to support Spanish missions (i.e. colonialism). Which contradicts their entire premise. But the reality is that Los Angeles is a quintessential American city.
▪️When the US acquired California in the 1840s, LA was a small town of less than 2,000 people. It was basically nothing. It became large only after the gold rush and the railroads completed in the 1870-80s, which brought thousands of new settlers and a booming commercial center.
▪️But LA had a major issue limiting its growth, no water. It wasn’t until Mulholland found a water source and built an aqueduct down from Northern California that LA had the infrastructure to grow into a major city.
▪️Then, a combination of oil, real estate and the film industry caused it to boom in the early 1900s. Post WWII, industries like aerospace continued its spectacular growth. Calling this “Mexican land” is a brain dead take. Neither the Mexicans, Spanish nor ...
