Interactive NYC Murder Map 2003-2009

[patrick1]

I stumbled across this and don't remember seeing it on this site.  Pretty interesting map. You can zoom to block and sort by weapon, race, gender or age. It is pretty grim but it would have been much more colorful were it 1985-1990.

http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map

[bgwah]

Knives appear to be the weapon of choice in Chinatown...

Stabby stabby!

[Sam Spade]

Knives appear to be the weapon of choice in Chinatown...

Stabby stabby!

Chinese mob can be a bit old-school at times...

[Sam Spade]

Btw, it's not like this map would be any different than 1985-1990 - you just add more dots where the dots presently are... 

[LBJ Revivalist]

I knew one of the people on that map, kid in my class.

[patrick1]

Btw, it's not like this map would be any different than 1985-1990 - you just add more dots where the dots presently are... 

Yeah, like 5 times the amount of people. Unreal that over 2200 people were killed in 1990 alone. 4 times the current rate. Can't say that I miss Koch-Dinkins era New York.

It is amazing to look at the clusters around the projects. What bad social planning.

[minionofmidas]

Omar Trent appears to have died twice.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It is amazing to look at the clusters around the projects. What bad social planning.

I think the key point is the lacking of much to do with the last word...

[Lunar]

Wow, apparently like twelve African-Americans have died within a couple blocks of my sublet

[patrick1]

Wow, apparently like twelve African-Americans have died within a couple blocks of my sublet

Welcome to New York;P  New York is still the safest big city in the US.   Did you find a place in Manhattan?

[minionofmidas]

It is amazing to look at the clusters around the projects. What bad social planning.

I think the key point is the lacking of much to do with the last word...

Hmm? They planned to further concentrate the Negro Underclass in more isolated spots where they wouldn't offend the eye so much. They succeeded admirably.
Of course, the interests of the persons moved never entered into consideration. [/hyperbole, but not as much hyperbole as I would like]

[patrick1]

Pretty spot on actually, Lewis. If not in inception then certainly in outcome.

The projects and public housing at large have always been of interest. Whether it be tenement rows in the UK,  or the Tower Blocks in Ballymun or Queensbridge.

My mom lived into the Edgemere (Rockaway, Queens) projects in 1960 and moved out in 1970- So I’m pretty acquainted with tales of the decline.  When they first moved into the projects they were beautiful.  I guess it helps that they were brand new.  These were really for the working poor and lower middle class.  At the inception it was actually predominantly white ethnic and Jewish.  The decline occurred throughout the sixties because of a variety of reasons.  The most important of which I think was that the projects in the Rockaway became a dumping ground for those on the welfare rolls.  Basically send the poorest to the furthest flung part of the city- Out of sight out of mind type attitude.  The problem with this is that the people who were having their rent paid for them did not have any stake in the buildings upkeep.  I remember going into the projects as a kid in the 80’s and it was just nasty.  People would piss in the elevators and in the hallways.  It also wasn’t profitable for building management to give a crap about the upkeep so they did nothing.  The welfare policy also forced working people out. If you made over a certain amount then you were forced to move.  My grandma had my two young aunts who were trainee nurses and was ordered to leave since they made too much money. After years of not having a pot to piss in this made my grandma laugh.  She took the city to court but lost the case.

Another factor in the projects decay was that Moses basically ripped up huge swaths of the Bronx with his highway fetish and people were just dumped in housing.  This and race riots and ensuing slum clearances in the later 1960’s led to a shifting neighborhoods and the end of communities.   Lastly, I just don’t think man wasn’t meant to be stacked up on top of each other in warehouse like conditions.  Well, I’m rambling so I’ll stop here for now.

[Linus Van Pelt]

It is amazing to look at the clusters around the projects. What bad social planning.

I think the key point is the lacking of much to do with the last word...

Hmm? They planned to further concentrate the Negro Underclass in more isolated spots where they wouldn't offend the eye so much. They succeeded admirably.
Of course, the interests of the persons moved never entered into consideration. [/hyperbole, but not as much hyperbole as I would like]

In terms of actual outcomes yes (q.v. also Patrick1's last post), but in terms of intentions I don't think this is right at all. The projects were created by New Deal/Great Society liberals who really thought they were improving over the crumbling old crowded housing in which the poor had lived. (Federal public housing construction was then essentially brought to a halt by Nixon). It's hard for us now to get into the mindset of the period, but it was an age in which shiny new things and driving seemed futuristic and progressive and Jane Jacobs-like considerations of the intangible benefits of sidewalks, community spirit etc. were pretty much off the radar.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Wow, apparently like twelve African-Americans have died within a couple blocks of my sublet

Bring Guiliani back......crime will go away.

[Smash255]

Saw one from Jan 04 which looks like it was pretty much exactly where my Grandparents use to live.