Interesting that little CT scores 3 times!
How many are run by RATs?
I am ready to be proven wrong in my PREJUDICE, but ...
I presume:
Correlation between both party affiliation and pigmentation of the MAYORS in those cities would likely approach 90%.
Ready to be admonished.
They are on their way to not really being cities any more.
In the meantime, other cities with lower crime rates have sextupled (like Austin) or doubled (like Portland).
And the returning champion, Flint Michigan, takes the crown again!
LOL Chicago doesn’t even make the list.
Yay! Not a single Florida city. So despite our being the state with the most dysfunctional citizens, we’re pretty tame as far as crime. Awesome.
Take a wild guess about #8 ping
Good ol’ Texas didn’t even make the top 25. I could have sworn that Dallas or San Antonio, Democrat bastions, would have made the list.
See http://www.city-data.com for crime and demographics stats for nearly every city in the US.
So, be honest: How many would have lost money betting on Chicago topping that list, much less not even making the top 25?
Lol! “Murderopolis!” Gonna be hard for the left-wingers to defend against that name. But I’m sure this problem is nothing that higher taxes can’t solve.
I despise how they present these lists in page after page format
Time consuming for folks like me and tedious
they do it to generate hits and more ad presentation...per page
Assclowns
Flint’s stay atop the list will be short-lived.
Still losing 20,000 people every ten years, it won’t be considered a city for very much longer.
Nothing in Arizona on that list
Where's the Equal Rights Dept. people?
What do the cities have in common?
DISPARATE IMPACT....they all have HUGE inner-city tribal parasiste black populations, and, compared to the percentage of blacks nationwide, there is crime that is DISPROPORTIONATE to the population numbers (black percentage), and there should be an investigation into why whites are not participating in the crimes to the extent blacks are.
That's the logic: racism because whites are excluded from crime in the major cities, disproportionately.
/sarc (although very true; it's not PC to mention it)
Seems that CCL cities fare really well. Criminals are selfish survivallist and won’t mess with armed citizens.
#1 Flint, Mich.
#2 Detroit, Mich.
#3 Oakland, Calif.
#4 Bridgeport, Conn.
#5 New Orleans, La.
#6 Cleveland, Ohio
#7 St. Louis, Mo.
#8 Jackson, Miss.
#9 Baltimore, Md.
#10 Newark, N.J.
#11 Birmingham, Ala.
#12 Philadelphia, Pa.
#13 Memphis, Tenn.
#14 Little Rock, Ark.
#15 Baton Rouge, La.
#16 Cincinnati, Ohio
#17 Stockton, Ca.
#18 Buffalo, N.Y.
#19 Dayton, Ohio
#20 New Haven, Conn.
#21 Kansas City, Mo.
#22 Minneapolis, Minn.
#23 Atlanta, Ga.
#24 Hartford, Conn.
#25 Milwaukee, Wis.
The most significant and relevant factor common to all of these cities is a high concentration of a certain ethnic population (or two, in some cases). They are the ones committing the vast majority of the violent crimes. But that cannot be mentioned in the article, of course.
It should also be noted that there are some very safe neighborhoods in many of these cities and, in the greater metro areas, some very safe suburbs.
Notice also that America’s four largest cities—New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston—do not make the list. While there are many violent crimes in those cities, because of their huge overall populations, the percentages are relatively less.
It appears the DNC may have been contracted to writer the explanations for each city.
This must represent an average over the entire city.
While Bridgeport, New Haven and Hartford are nearly 100% awful, there are parts of Philadelphia that are far worse than the worst part of Bridgeport. But Philly also has some real nice parts that average it out to better.