Jump to content

Shooting At Rogers Park


Hagar

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, thetragichippy said:

That quote makes me so mad......

Yes.

Looking at the most latest data available of the 5 year period from 2015-2019…

The 3 Mid County cities have a combined population of almost exactly 50k. Port Arthur, literally across the street from all 3, has a population of 54k so pretty close to the same size.

 In that 5 year period MC had a combined 3 murders.  PA had 38.

Beaumont with a population of 115k (2.3 times as large as MC) had 78.

So compared by size and murder rate, if PA was as violent as MC they should have had 6 murders instead of 38. Beaumont should have had 7 instead of 78.

Yep, they all have crime. It’s just when you cross a street the most violent crime increases by up to 1,000% or more.

If you want to go in another direction and compare Lumberton to Beaumont as an example…

Lumberton had 3 murders in 14 years or 1 every 5 years. Beaumont has 9 times more population so using Lumberton as the standard, Beaumont should have had 9 murders in 5 years, not 78. 

But hey, there’s crime everywhere.

It just isn’t perpetrated at the same level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,900
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    henrysmith
    Newest Member
    henrysmith
    Joined


  • Posts

    • How do you know that Harrison is not a big opportunity? I don't really know him, but maybe just maybe he is what Liberty needs. I was just wondering what you know about Harrison that doesn't make him a big opportunity. 
    • This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • The last 2 or so minutes are so true
    • Looking back at the exact wording, it seems like you are correct and it was the concrete barriers that were the ultimate problem. I mentioned it in my last comment, even if it was just the barriers, did Texas take his property? I think a case like US v. Causby might go a long way to proving his case. Causby had an egg farm and during World War II, the US government started flying four engine heavy bombers for the war effort, low over his farm at full power. The extremely loud noise killed a bunch of his chickens and caused many of the rest of them to quit laying eggs. Even though he legally still on the property, he sued, saying that the federal government had effectively “taken” the use of his property from him. The US Supreme Court sided with him, saying that for the purposes of the Fifth Amendment, the federal government had indeed taken away the use of his property. It wasn’t intentional but that didn’t matter. It seems like this case would fall somewhere along those lines.
    • That might have added to it but it said that they intentionally raised the roadway to help it act as a dam. Even if it was the dividers and no intent, did the state “take” his property without compensation? I think that it is interesting that a local landowner fought his case all the way to the US Supreme Court and won in a unanimous decision. So while he has not won his case yet, he won the right to have his day in court and possibly heard by a jury.     
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...