• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pritzker: "It breaks my heart to report that we have been told ICE will try to disrupt community picnics and peaceful parades. Let's be clear...

Tangmo said:
You can say that again which is why I repost your urgent insistence that is well taken.

MAGAs have always been relentless for their Triumph of The Will 2.0 in Amerika.

They went into high gear for the election last year which now has brought 'em so close they can see it.

Trump and MAGAs have another year to twist the '26 voting so the Democrats / democrats never have power and authority again. Which is why they don't care about public opinion any more. Institutions, regular order and normal processes can't stop their unrelenting tunnel vision. This unprecedented evil underway needs to be quashed by an unprecedented response.
Click to expand...
Correct

And being nice and using old rules and norms will not work. Period.
 
NolanVoyd said:
Im not confusing anything.
Click to expand...

Yes you are.

What exactly do you think a per capita homicide rate is measuring/representing in the overall population, and why would it be important to equalize it across cities with different populations?

The answer is that a per capita homicide rate is measuring an estimation of the individual risk of being murdered in each city, and providing equalized scale to that data point so that different cities can be compared in a statistically sound way. That's where face validity exists for a per capita-adjusted homicide rate.

There's nothing wrong with doing that, but that's not what I'm discussing.

What I'm discussing is the question of which cities have the biggest "murderer" or "rapist" problem. Standardizing such a statistic is unsound because by doing so you're intentionally equalizing the quantitative measure you're assessing for differences.

Are one's chances of becoming a homicide victim typically going to become smaller as a N becomes larger? Of course. But that's not the same thing as saying that one large city has a much bigger problem with murderers than a small city who has far fewer murderers and dead bodies.

Watered-down averages have a tendency to do this, especially on a state or national scale. It's why things like overall IQ score are relatively meaningless. It's why average income, gas prices, home prices, etc. are relatively useless, because on an individual basis, you're going to get a much better read on the impact of individuals if you're NOT using overgeneralized averages.

Hiding the absolute value of a raw number such as "total murder victims" by using overgeneralized averages and conflating "the risk of becoming a murder victim" with measures that show an absolute value of murderers in totality is a definitive form of misleading statistics.

We're not trying to become average at the number of murder and assault victims we have--we're trying to eliminate them altogether. This is another reason why it makes no sense to standardize populations in order to gauge risk of victimhood in the context of assessing the problematic elements of violence in a city. "Deviating to the mean" is not an appropriate concept in the context of assessing total murder victims in any given city.
 
redbeer said:
8 dead and 58 people shot and the Governor and Mayor don't want any help....wtf? Their citizens are being killed and shot by the dozens......so I have to ask, what are they doing to curb this crime spree?? Looks like they don't want to give up support of the criminals.....be damned the citizens......too damn crazy.
Click to expand...
Kudos on parroting the sudden interest in what's going on with crime in major cities. In the case of Chicago, I can't help but wonder why Trump didn't complain about murders in Chicago back in 2019 and 2020 when there were 510 and 779 of them respectively. What I'm puzzled about is why the city that's led the homicide rate for a while now isn't the first one targeted, which would be St. Louis. They had a 50 year high in murders back in 2020 too, and no National Guard. Weird, no?
 
ElChupacabra said:
Kudos on parroting the sudden interest in what's going on with crime in major cities. In the case of Chicago, I can't help but wonder why Trump didn't complain about murders in Chicago back in 2019 and 2020 when there were 510 and 779 of them respectively. What I'm puzzled about is why the city that's led the homicide rate for a while now isn't the first one targeted, which would be St. Louis. They had a 50 year high in murders back in 2020 too, and no National Guard. Weird, no?
Click to expand...

Conspiracy theories are 👉👉👉
 
NolanVoyd said:
No, im not confusing anything. You are. You are trying to compare apples to oranges
Click to expand...

No, you clearly don't understand that you're not supposed to misuse overgeneralized averages as a way to hide the absolute value of certain kinds of raw data. And you clearly don't understand what a violent crime rate per capita represents versus what raw data of murder victims means.

Also, the murder capital of the world distinction has always been given to the city with the highest raw number of murders.

And you still haven't answered all the other examples I gave you about the flaws of "per capita" comparisons. You're clearly avoiding it because you cannot explain or rationalize why you would want to equalize populations in assessing the seriousness of a problem, especially when I showed you incontrovertible evidence that the crime data you're citing is completely unreliable (another fact you repeatedly avoided/ignored).

Here's another question for you--since you believe Chicago has far less of a problem than Birmingham, should Chicago decrease their number of police further even though half of more of their critical 911 calls go unresponded to? Should Birmingham increase their number of police?
 
Hello My Son said:
No, you clearly don't understand that you're not supposed to misuse overgeneralized averages as a way to hide the absolute value of certain kinds of raw data.
Click to expand...

Not what i am doing.

lying wont help you.

Comparing raw numbers from cities with vastly different population sizes is apples to oranges. Not a valid comparison


use per capita, which makes it an apples to apples comparison.

this isnt rocket science, its standard.

maybe take a class or something.
 
NolanVoyd said:
Holy cow.

You could tripple the population of Birmingham Alabama and still not come close to the number in chicago.

That is why, if you want to compare apples to apples, you use the per capita number (thecrate per 100,000) not the raw number.

Didnt you guys go to school?
Click to expand...
That's not comparing apples to apples, though.

You need only increase the arbitrary city limits of Birmingham to "bring crime down." Could make it practically whatever you want.
 
Taylor said:
That's not comparing apples to apples, though.

You need only increase the arbitrary city limits of Birmingham to "bring crime down." Could make it practically whatever you want.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. You don't understand math.
 
Taylor said:
That's not comparing apples to apples, though.

You need only increase the arbitrary city limits of Birmingham to "bring crime down." Could make it practically whatever you want.
Click to expand...
Complete and utter nonsense.

Not how its done.

You have no idea how this stuff works do you?

You should take a class or something
 
NolanVoyd said:
Complete and utter nonsense.

Not how its done.

You have no idea how this stuff works do you?

You should take a class or something
Click to expand...
More silly personal attacks.

Are you not even going to attempt a rational argument?
 
Taylor said:
More silly personal attacks.

Are you not even going to attempt a rational argument?
Click to expand...
Dude.

You dont just change the boundaries of cities.

You clearly have no idea how this stuff works.

Your posts demonstrate that.
 
Hello My Son said:
I think it's hilarious that people who don't live and/or own property in Chicago think that Pritzker and Johnson are somehow doing a great job and that Chicago hasn't turned into an absolute shithole under their (and Lightfoot's) watch.

Of course those of us who are here and know what's going on completely welcome it. Duh.
Click to expand...
What about the source of the guns that did all that shooting? Why can't the Fed help with that?

Less than half the guns used in Illinois crime come from Illinois, data analysis shows​

https://abc7chicago.com/post/chicago-crime-shooting-guns-illinois-gun-laws/11937013/
 
NolanVoyd said:
Complete and utter nonsense.

Not how its done.

You have no idea how this stuff works do you?

You should take a class or something
Click to expand...
Look at their economics. 50 years of believing trickle down works.
 
Hello My Son said:
I think it's hilarious that people who don't live and/or own property in Chicago think that Pritzker and Johnson are somehow doing a great job and that Chicago hasn't turned into an absolute shithole under their (and Lightfoot's) watch.

Of course those of us who are here and know what's going on completely welcome it. Duh.
Click to expand...
Do you live or own property in Chicago?
 
NolanVoyd said:
Dude.

You dont just change the boundaries of cities.

You clearly have no idea how this stuff works.

Your posts demonstrate that.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you're having trouble with hypotheticals.

A hypothetical argument, or hypothetical syllogism, is a deductive argument containing conditional (if-then) statements, which explores possibilities and their consequences without necessarily claiming any of the conditions are true. It is a chain of logical reasoning, most commonly a "pure" type where premises and conclusion are all conditionals, or a "mixed" type that includes a statement affirming or denying the truth of the antecedent or consequent.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom