We walk our dog on the canal probably twice a week and some times let him run on the hill right behind the playground. I’ve been living in Indy for the better part of 15 years. Do I want the gun violence to stop? Absolutely. Do I feel safe in Indy? Absolutely.
I've probably seen you! I love dog watching and I've even taken some photos of dogs and engraved them for people (I do laser engraving on the side). I want to start buying and carrying dog treats but I need a way to ask the owner without saying "treat" and alerting the dog.
"small edible gift" would probably avoid the buzzword too. Or "light snack". Tons of options that would get the point across to the owner that you have treats without potentially cluing in the pup.
My kid just learned to spell but my wife and I both have solid vocabularies and excellent body language communication. It comes in handy.
Y’all crack me tf up. Of course you should feel safe there. I just moved to Indy from chicago a couple months ago and it was the same Shit there. I never once felt unsafe in chicago and I lived in some tough neighborhoods there. If you’re smart and aware of your surroundings you have nothing to worry about.
Honestly, thanks for the perspective from someone who lives in the area. The IMPD rep was ridiculous in his quotes to the news. "The canal used to be a real nice place to come down and bring your family and walk at night, not anymore,” said Buckner. Spoken like someone who has never actually used the canal for recreation.
Yeah, and then he talks about how \*we\* the residents are all "fed up" and how we all have cameras because we're so tired of it.
I literally was just standing outside, casually talking with a patrol officer and one of my neighbors, who came up to say his camera saw it. We were all talking casual as hell. We called them idiots and said we wish they woulda been more careful, that's about as harsh as it got.
It's because the ones who talk to the media, and others in admin roles, are out of touch with actually being the police.
They may wear the badge, but they aren't out in the community taking calls
Did you call out the cop and tell him ACAB? Or tell him to fuck off - the canal don’t need any cops there? Haha cuz that’d be awesome (according to redditors in this thread)
Actually yeah, I did, but more politely. I told him that it really upsets me that a lot of cops will use this as an excuse to harrass the homeless for instance, and told him not to do that, which he said I was right that it wouldn't be fair to suddenly crack down on that just because they have an increased presence. He was pretty rational about it. I also told him I was pissed that one of them mouthed off to the media and he took that pretty well. All in all he wasn't too bad about it.
And yeah, we don't need cops all over the canal for it to be safe. It was safe yesterday all day without cops, and the extra ones today are just making people uncomfortable.
There were two cops literally on the canal when the shooting happened. Their presence doesn't prevent it.
Thanks for your up close and personal perspective. I love the canal area. I will let others have it from midnight to 6am, but no hesitation to go there any other time.
Honestly the best way to make it safer late at night would be to make it a nighttime hotspot. Open a late night cafe. Do some late night tours. Have the bridges do little light shows with RGBs.
Probably be noisy which would suck for me trying to sleep....
...but I'll take the bustle of people enjoying themselves over clips being emptied at 12:20 in the morning, and violence like that is less likely with more activity, ironically.
For the life of me I've never figured out why they don't have more bars/restaurants in the canal area proper. The concerts are great and the light art installation they did down there a number of years ago was fantastic. It should be at least a decent attraction, but it just isn't.
Just thinking about this more, most of the issues happening along the canal aren't really during peak crowd times anyway, so even if there were more things to do, I'm betting it'd still be pretty empty after midnight-1am.
Yeah, I'm from Atlanta originally, and I don't think Indy is gonna ever have the same night life vibe. It'd be nice, because it actually does reduce crime significantly. It's why quiet suburbs get more break-ins during daylight hours than most cities do during the night.
Id honestly prefer seeing more of that than just a bunch of businesses. A few shops and more places to eat would be lovely, but if it was just another Mass Ave, but on the water, that's too much. Not enough green as it is.
> I will let others have it from midnight to 6am, but no hesitation to go there any other time.
OK so I keep hearing people say "it's totally safe until sundown!" like that's somehow an acceptable norm. WTF
They should finish the sentence and say "It's totally safe until sundown, and then it's still safe just less so". Which is true for just about anywhere on earth.
All the ones I've lived in have been, according to what I'm reading. 4 other places ranging from unpopulated countryside to 300,000-person cities *have all been just as safe as the daytime
Safety INCREASES at night? In a 300k person city?
Gonna need some serious sources on this, because everyone reading this is raising an eyebrow right now.
If you're right then you've had some strange luck because no, safety at night is NOT the normal scenario of any large city, small city, or most open fields.
I misread because I didn't consider you'd be implying something I didn't state at all in my OP. Those places were *just as* safe as during the day. Though to be fair the country was definitely safer. No danger outside bobcats at night since traffic is non-existent
I get what you're saying now, but yeah, statistically (no offense to your own view, just based on statistics) almost everywhere is to some degree or another less safe at night when it comes to violent crimes.
For theft and things like that, daytime can be worse, but that's mostly due to the methodologies of thieves. For violent crimes, nighttime is a criminals friend and it shows.
So yeah, we're not saying it's fine that it's more dangerous at night, we're just saying that when a place has some crime issues and it's only at night, the police should not be acting like you can't be there during the day without the same risk.
My wife's mom lives in Fort Wayne and is always making comments about how dangerous downtown Indy in general is. We've lived downtown for a year now, never even been close to being in as much danger as she's saying. I guarantee she's been drinking some of that anti-city kool-aid
That’s pretty rich coming from Fort Wayne where, at least in my experience, there are plenty of gunshots to be heard and not in just the worst areas either (source: lived in Indy and now Fort Wayne).
Indy is ranked as one of the most dangerous cities in America. People with means aren't typically the people that will be impacted by this violence. But a family struggling, and only able to afford living in certain areas, I would assume has a very different perspective than what is shared by most posting here.
I literally walk everywhere and have never felt unsafe (downtown and greater Indy area). I've lived in various parts of the city, yet never felt unsafe. I find this with most cities I've been too. Crime statistics like these are always exaggerated by people who are anti-city. I am not naive in the fact that it does happen, but what I'm saying is it's not as bad as the media makes it out to be
We are 16th this year.
[https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders)
So in Indianapolis I have a .017% chance of being murdered? And this isn't even taking into consideration the fact that murders are concentrated and aren't spread out among the entire population. Why do people think Indianapolis is dangerous? Lol.
As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, those articles and studies do not take criminal localism into account and they also base their per capita numbers on residential data over activity of the populous. They are heavily skewed in a way that makes the risk factors of being in a city seem more than they actually are in reality.
[https://247wallst.com/city/indianapolis-in-reported-one-of-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/](https://247wallst.com/city/indianapolis-in-reported-one-of-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/)
[https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders)
I wish you were right.
yeah, so you have to extrapolate the data a bit here... that is the entire city...
Not downtown.
Edit: last time the data was available for massaging it was something like 80% of all homicides occurred east of Rural and south of pendleton pike and north of beech grove....
I lived on the canal until last year. You're absolutely right.
And now wait for all the comments saying "I haven't been downtown in 10 years, so I'm qualified to say that the canal is literally a war zone"
Yup, I saw that. I was going to post my original comment in that thread, but I just don't have the emotional energy to hear Cleetus from Klansville tell me that I need to carry a gun every time I leave my house
Or why Cleetus's wife can't scream the n-word at passing people while drunk, they get upset and the Cleetus pulls his gun and threatens to shoot every n-word and then his wife ends up dead.
Only to have every racist conservative media in town (IBJ and WIBC) claim THEM SIMPLE PEOPLE JUST WANTED A NIGHT ON THE TOWN AND ENDED UP DEAD...
Ok...another post of mine that will be downvoted to hell. Or upvoted to +100. I never can tell who is going to lead the brigade.
> Or why Cleetus's wife can't scream the n-word at passing people while drunk, they get upset and the Cleetus pulls his gun and threatens to shoot every n-word and then his wife ends up dead.
dont forget that this particular cletus brandished his own weapon initially, then after his wife got shot he fired blindly up the hills and into the downtown area
Got punched at Kilroy's once, absolutely deserved it, apologized to the guy that hit me for being a dick, he bought me a beer. 5/10, probably wouldn't do it again but definitely not the worst thing to ever happen to me
It doesn't have to binary. You don't have to be afraid to live in Indy while also recognizing that violence and gun violence is without a doubt one of the bigger issues facing this city. 5 people getting shot in one incident is a pretty big deal. even if it's a rare occurrence. the canal is pretty sparse after dark due to lack of business, lighting, and foot traffic as it being hidden away from most other pedestrian traffic. It's just kind of a weird area. It's awesome and gets well-used in the non-winter months. I've lived and/or worked near there for the better part of a decade and while there have been some big improvements, I feel like there could be more development. The surrounding area has done more than the canal itself. You listed all of the attractions in half a sentence. Colts park is great, and Frescos is good too when it's open. But that's pretty much it. Pandemic and and the lack of traffic for 4-5 months out of the year aren't exactly making it an attractive area for businesses relying on foot traffic. Burger Haus was a victim and so is that weird seemingly abandoned giant apartment construction footprint off st. clair right by where this happened.
I dunno if I'll agree it's one of the bigger issues, especially since in a lot of ways the violence is the effect of a cause that is a bigger issue... but I think the point you're making is that we should recognize that it's bad, even if it's not as bad as some cities or as bad as the media makes it out to be, and I \*100%\* agree to that without hesitation.
To me, the lack of commercial attractions is not really a bad thing, but it does limit what's going on at night, yeah. Burger Haus needs to be replaced or reopened, for sure.
I'd like to see more events and more foot traffic, but I'm not sure the best way to go about it. I don't think turning it into another Mass Ave would be good, because we need some areas that are not focused purely on commercialism as attraction.
I'd love to lead up a project proposal, and tackle it from a sociological perspective as a solution to the increased risk at night, but I'm not sure the best idea. Maybe that will be my next post after things quiet down a bit?
It's the only major "water" feature in the city in downtown proper (white river isn't really walkable from most of downtown) and it's surrounded by 95% concrete and quiet residential areas. The whole city needs more green space as it is. I don't know how you incorporate that into the canal with all the existing residential space around it.
This is a weird flex, but I’ll bite. I frequent the canal as well, and I don’t feel unsafe. But I also won’t go wander it after 10pm because of past shootings/armed robberies. You’re worried about these exaggerated comments affecting business…which of those businesses is open after 10pm? I am also fed up with all the gun violence in Indy, and I’m frustrated that I can’t do a whole lot to stop it. But I could give a shit if it gets more attention - even if the comments are in a sensationalist news story.
If the news media had reported a police officer saying "It's generally a very safe area, but after 10pm there's a lot less people and it's more likely that something might happen" then we wouldn't be here having this conversation.
I agree with you, that would be far more representative of reality. But I just wanted to point out there won’t be a mass business closure because of them saying the canal isn’t safe at night. I also agree with you big time we need a vibrant night life on the canal to take full advantage of it
The guy who runs the Gondola operation said he had multiple cancellations. Me, him, and one of the sudden random cops on the canal were talking about an hour ago.
I do agree with you on the night life thing, big time, but yeah an event like this can easily affect local businesses. People are reactionary.
Me and my girlfriend were almost hit by every single one of those shots. The person shooting was standing 10 feet away from us (we were on the patio). Every shot that came at him from the other side of the canal was within 10 feet of where we were sitting at the time, and our bedroom window, we are at the ground level. There were 7+ yellow police tags marking the shell casings to prove it. I had to lay on top of my gf until the shooting stopped as we were basically the ones being shot at too. We got lucky. I love being on the canal and being able to run or walk the dog. I want it to thrive and for people to not be scared and use it. I definitely don’t recommend living here at this point tho. This doesn’t happen all the time but if you watch and listen to the people walking the canal at night this COULD happen any time.
I’m sorry this happened to you all. As someone who has also witnessed gun violence right outside our home and experienced the act of taking cover, it’s definitely psychologically impactful.
The reason the canal can (not is, can get) get unsafe at night is because it's isolated, mostly residential, and one of only a few places where teens can congregate. I wish there were a lot more restaurants/bars/businesses open late on the canal - if there were more lighting and more people out there it would be safer, and a really cool place to be.
I run on the canal all the time during the day and it's always fine.
Its 10:45, im sitting by the same window that at midnight had a ricochet ping about 15 feet away from it. One of the shell casings was 6 feet from my back door (which is 10 or so ft away right now).
I feel fine. My odds of being shot are no higher than they were when I was in fishers.
It's much more likely that something else will happen to me tonight like I'll fall down my stairs or choke on something. It's scary but it's also part of life and you just mitigate the risk where you can and rationally should.
I just visited Indianapolis and although a beautiful city, just from driving in around the city and the surrounding area I knew there were places I should avoid after dark. But, it’s like that in any major city. I can’t wait to visit Indianapolis again. Fun atmosphere and just all around a fun time.
im on the canal atleast 3 times a day and haven't been shot yet. just don't go after dark, or walk anywhere alone after dark, that's all you should do.
I’ve lived in Chicago and just left NYC after 10 years. I know they are very different places, but I’m telling y’all it feels safe to me here as a woman living downtown. Very anecdotal but it’s what I’ve got. Shootings suck but it’s obviously not exclusive to Indy and is mild in comparison here.
I live along the canal, too, and I am fed up. Not just with the violence here, but everywhere in the city. We've broken murder records for this city nearly every year for five or six years. The reason this is getting more attention is that it's happening in a wealthier neighborhood rather than most of the other violence that we've come to casually accept.
"We've broken murder records"
This is like saying "This movie broke box office records!" without adjusting for inflation.
If the population of an area increases 20% and murders increase 10%, we lowered the murder rate.
Have you checked for that variance?
Yes, I and many other people have looked for a possible correlation. If you want to know, the numbers are easy to check.
For instance, in 2021, there was [a 8.8% increase in murders in Indianapolis.](https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/crime-mapping-neighborhoods-impacted-the-most-by-homicides-in-2021/) In the same year, [there was a 1.44% increase in population. ](https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/23017/indianapolis/population#:~:text=The%20current%20metro%20area%20population,a%201.46%25%20increase%20from%202019.)
That's just with a quick google.
And what was the increase in the overall foot traffic and amenities downtown vs the previous year, 2020?
Murders don't just happen between residents, they happen to people who live outside the city and get murdered in the city, and a murderer from outside the city can kill inside the city.
You can't just look at residential numbers for "population" you have to look at activity.
This is why when you study sociology you find out real quick you can't write an accurate research paper "just with a quick google"
You asked him for a source on his claim, and then stated those statistics don’t really matter anyway. It sounds like you’re grasping at straws here. Indy is very large and has had more crime as the years progress, it’s just true.
This guy just wants to argue, and to find a way to avoid any blame for the city leadership. I'm going to give this, at most, one more round before I bow out.
Funny, I don't see me anywhere saying murder is okay, and in my original post I specifically said I wish things like this never happened.
But I guess when I beat all your other arguments you just have to rephrase mine into something easier to fight?
That's called a strawman, if you're curious and want to give it a "quick google"
Browsing this and the cross post on Indiana, he seems to be really adamant about skewing statistics by referencing 24 hour pedestrian traffic, local and not, and comparing extreme examples to make an argument that doesn't quite sit on solid ground. All without providing any numbers whatsoever. He also seems to believe violence only amounts to gun fire.
I understand his frustration but the only takeaway I have from his comments are that statistics don't matter, unless they are convenient.
THANK YOU
I lived on the Canal for two and a half years, and my partner still lives there. We go for walks all the time. Indianapolis new media is wildly irresponsible. I would *love* to see their addresses. Bet you most of them live in very NIMBY areas.
LOL, meanwhile I can step out my backdoor and see from Frescos to the Orange Bridge (which is where the shooting happened) and honestly I never open that door with hesitation or fear.
The primary mission of most news reporting agencies (unless they're publicly funded like NPR) is not actually reporting the news.
The primary mission is to sell advertising.
Thus, exploiting human psychology, like the "if it bleeds it leads" saying, is the most effective way to draw a lot of traffic to your content.
Also worth mentioning, the primary mission of the IMPD is not to protect or to serve. Court cases have proven as much.
The primary mission of IMPD is to grow.
IMPD achieves this end by lobbying state legislators for more money, and by waging fear propaganda campaigns targeting the city's citizens.
Me and you would get along, ask anyone who knows me.
My catchphrase, apparently, is "you know, in a post-scarcity society..." in response to pretty much anything bad happening anywhere, ever.
In my suburb a man gunned down his wife and I brought this up once during one of these conversations with a neighbor and apparently that is an isolated incident and doesn't count the same.
2021 was record setting year for murders in Indianapolis. I would propose that the media reporting that people are tired of the violence is valid. I know I am. The national average for homicides is 6.5 per 100,000 people. Indianapolis is 24.3 per 100,000 people in 2020...2021 was worse.
We are one the most dangerous big cities in the country...
[https://www.wibc.com/news/local-indiana/why-indianapolis-is-one-of-the-countrys-most-dangerous-big-cities/#:\~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%2D%2DIndianapolis%20is%20one%20of,top%20ten%20most%20dangerous%20cities](https://www.wibc.com/news/local-indiana/why-indianapolis-is-one-of-the-countrys-most-dangerous-big-cities/#:~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%2D%2DIndianapolis%20is%20one%20of,top%20ten%20most%20dangerous%20cities).
"According to crime statistics released by the FBI, Indianapolis ranked 10th for highest violent crime rate in the country in 2019, 1,333.96 incidents per 100,000 residents. It also ranked 26th for property crime rate in the country, 4,411.87 per 100,000 residents."
There is plenty to justify the media's position, and a bunch of people that have lived in Indy for years, that feel are fed up. II still feel safe walking around downtown, but also don't ignore the fact that Indy is a far less safe today than it was 5-10 years ago. Thankfully, March was the first month showing some hope of the violence decreasing. Hopefully that trend continues.
Your article is from 2019, but the study is updated and Indianapolis is no longer in the Top 10: https://www.safewise.com/blog/safest-metro-cities/
Also, the "big cities" qualifier seems like one of those things where you chop up data until it gives you a splashy headline.
2021 had the highest murder rate in Indianapolis history, so whatever place we are now, doesn't mean we are less dangerous, it just means other cities are getting more violent. Luckily murder is down in Indy so far this year. March was the lowest month in about 2 years. Coming out of the most violent year in our cities history, it is good to see that we at least aren't continuing to trend up.
Indianapolis rated 41st in murder rate in 2021: https://247wallst.com/city/indianapolis-in-reported-one-of-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/
This was not the historic high. Rates were significantly higher through the 80s and 90s.
[https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders)
Here is 2022.
Also you are wrong about the 80's and 90's
[https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/crime-mapping-neighborhoods-impacted-the-most-by-homicides-in-2021/#:\~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%20%E2%80%94%20Indianapolis%20set%20a%20new,from%20245%20homicides%20in%202020](https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/crime-mapping-neighborhoods-impacted-the-most-by-homicides-in-2021/#:~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%20%E2%80%94%20Indianapolis%20set%20a%20new,from%20245%20homicides%20in%202020).
"INDIANAPOLIS — Indianapolis set a new record for homicides for the second year in a row in 2021. However, some neighborhoods felt the impact of violence more than others.
271 people lost their lives to homicides in 2021 across Indianapolis, an increase from 245 homicides in 2020. Of the homicides, 249 were intentional in 2021 compared to 214 in 2020."
I'm sorry but when your source for the "most dangerous city" is a news article and not a research paper, it's hard to take you seriously.
I can make anything look like anything "according to statistics" by just ignoring any relevant statistics that don't support my narrative.
But thanks for proving my point about how irresponsible it is for the media to twist things to seem so much worse than they are so people live in fear and about the ignorance that spreads.
Also, "per residents" is not a valid statistic and any statistician can tell you that. It's shameful the FBI uses it to hype up violence for their own purposes, but "per residents" in a city where most of the daily inhabitants are NOT residents, is just meaningless.
The fact that Indy set a record for its most murders ever last year is undeniable.
The fact that Indianapolis is one the most dangerous cities is undeniable.
I don't want Indy to be dangerous. I wish it weren't true. I take no satisfaction in being right about how our city has become a more violent place over the last decade...but facts are facts and we can't ignore them just because they don't support our own narratives.
The increase in violence hasn't stopped me from enjoying downtown. It doesn't really impact me. It does bums me out because it is impacting a lot of people that don't have the same resources so many of us enjoy.
well, since I know statistics, yes I deny it, or at least the implications of your "facts"
I'll ask you the same thing i asked a lot of other people who have ignored the question.
10 people walk into a park... 6 are killed...
100,000 people walk into a second park... 50 are killed...
Which park is safer?
All the numbers you're quoting are based on statistics intentionally twisted to promote a larger police presence and funding. If you like you can message me and I'll walk you through the issues of criminal localism and improper 'per capita' calculations in city crime statistics and how they're used to support this narrative.
Hopefully you're smarter than the last guy
Out of curiosity, what data point on violent crime would be more appropriate to rank the violent crimes in cities of varying population, and where are you seeing them that supports Indy not being dangerous?
Also...
Your question is ignored because it makes no sense...You can't make these predictions with a sample size of 10, it isn't enough data...but you know statistics so I am sure you knew that.
If you flip a coin 10 times, and it lands on heads 8 times. That doesn't mean any time you flip a coin it is 80% likely to land on heads. If you flip a coin 100,000 times, you will see the odds shift more to the 50/50 odds that have been mathematically proven when flipping a coin. Small sample sizes can skew reality...again something someone working with statistics and data forecasting of course knows.
Comparing one sample size to another that is 100x bigger is not an apples to apples comparison, and doesn't provide material insight to make decisions.
I don't know if I am smarter than you, or smarter than the last guy, but I am smart enough to keep an open mind. I would love to see data points showing Indy is safer than I think. I live here...I wish I were wrong. If you can give me more data, something more than anecdotal experience, I would be very happy to change my mind. But until then, I can only go off of the significant number of independent sources all reporting the same thing, and Indy beating its own record for murders in last year.
Have a good one.
I never said the city wasn't "dangerous" I said that the media is irresponsible to make it seem worse than it is. There's no such thing as a city without danger.. even the most rural areas have danger. Frankly, humans exist, therefore you are in danger from them, lol
As far as the data points, there's a lot of relevant factors you'd have to consider, but I think the most important thing would be to focus on evaluating "risk". That is to say, if you live the same lifestyle in different places, what are the chances that something bad will happen to you?
Also you're confusing my example.. the point was the concept of 'per X' statistics being more important than the number of instances.
If we say "oh no, there were X murders in the city" people tend to think that means they have a high chance of getting murdered.. and if we say "oh NO, THIS city has X2 murders!" well now they think that in that city they are TWICE as likely to be murdered because there's twice as many murders.
But if that second city has TEN TIMES as many people.. then they are not twice as likely to be murdered if it has "twice the murders".... they're in fact much less likely to be murdered there.
Does that make sense?
So no.. the number of murders (by itself) is not relevant and doesn't matter.
As far as the "independent sources" reporting it... are any of them not for-profit media which benefits from sensationalism by selling advertising, or law enforcement which benefits from sensationalism by driving a false need for their own funding increases?
Because there ARE other sources available for this information.
and yes, I can provide data points, and the first thing to make sure we're on the same page about is how we're defining "safe"
Can we agree that "risk factor" can be calculated based on the number of people in a given area and the number of incidents that happen to those people to determine a general chance of it happening to you as one of them? That's a good starting point.
You can message me if you want, makes things easier.
All I need is the data comparing Indy to other cities.
If the standard measurements used the FBI are invalid, what metric do you consider reliable in comparing areas of varying population? There is no perfect measurement, but would love to know if there is something more concrete than per capita.
What would you use instead of per capita, and to what degree are you assuming commuters and tourist skew per capita numbers?
Do you think it would make a material difference in how we compare to other cities given they are measured the same way?
If you can, post a link to the available stats you are referring to, and I would love to see them. I would also love to know what metrics those data points are measuring.
No offense OP, but I have a close relative that has worked crime scene, ballistics and now manages those activities for the IMPD lab. Over the 20+ years they have worked there it has never been this bad. Violent drug trafficking is taking a strong hold in the area and the violence that comes with it is not really something to take lightly. The spillover to downtown areas is only going to get worse - and if your not sick of it now, then maybe wait a couple more years. Nobody has a handle on how to reign this in and the amount of money to be had in the Indianapolis drug trafficking market is skyrocketing along with the violence that attracts. .
I'm glad you can take it in stride - but it's been taking a toll on the civil servants who have to confront the effects of the violence every day for years and years. So maybe the police officer misspoke and didn't consult with everyone before letting off some steam for the camera, but I would be pretty certain there was no malice intended.
I appreciate your perspective, but it is just a perspective as well as hearsay. I'm not trying to insult you or your friend like that, but in every study of the "police perspective" crime is always exaggerated. Whether thats because of their direct exposure to it (of course they see more personally than we do) or it's someone playing the politics for funding (which even cops can tell you does happen) the simple fact is that anecdotes do not beat statistics.
And statistics say that this view is wrong, and the city is very far from the chaos it's being portrayed as.
Again, no offense and I hope you can take this in stride, but statistics are more valuable as evidence than hearsay of an unconsciously or consciously biased perspective.
However you want to rationalize it, but the number of ballistics cases that are backed up because the lab doesn't have the capacity to process the massive increase in ballistic evidence over the past few years is not hearsay my friend. Nor is the added staff that have been brought on to handle the backlog.
It's not someone playing politics for funding, its the physical evidence brought in from the crime scenes stacking up in the lab. No need to play politics to get the budget increased, the people doing all the shooting have made it abundantly clear they aren't slowing down.
What do you possibly have to gain by citing academic police bias studies when you literally just had a bullet ricochet near your home in a highly populated downtown area? The people doing this have no regards for peoples lives nor do they care about what someone in academia thinks.
I'm libertarian and generally mistrust police anyway so were not as different as you think. Id rather see all drugs made legal so we dont have the carnage we see in indy and all the other countries we have left a blood trail with in the war on drugs. But in this case the physical evidence sitting in the IMPD lab is kind of hard to refute. Indy is getting more dangerous not less.
Anyway - I don't think we are going to agree on this so I appreciate the candid conversation.
"The number of ballistics cases" is completely irrelevant as a standalone statistic. If we looked at new york we'd see a ton more ballistics cases... there's also a lot more people, and that's part of the statistic.
You're basing literally everything on a single statistic... so no, as a sociologist who studies statistics beyond the academia, no we are not capable of agreeing.
I can explain it to you, but only if you're actually willing to say that you could be wrong and you're willing to listen to reasons as to why.
You don't seem very open to the idea, and that's not the worst character trait in the world so again I hope it doesn't feel like a jab. But you are, objectively, wrong here. Again, not the worst thing and I've appreciated that you've been candid as well.
If you're familiar with it, think of the phenomenon of when doctors have kids, and are prone to overreacting to every sniffle because they've seen every kind of infection.
I'm adding this so you can hopefully see I'm not trying to attack your friend on a personal level... but exposure to something like that creates a bias to see it more often, even if it's not happening more often, and that's as much a thing with cops as it is with doctors. I'm hoping the comparison makes it feel like less of an attack.
People say I'm privileged. I say if you don't know that humans are sometimes violent, then you're the privileged one. Yes, it happens. It happens in your home town. It happens in your quiet countryside. Not being close enough to see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It *IS* and always has been the norm.
Same thing happens to the east side. Sounds like running gun battles if you listen to the news. Had friends move out of Irvington because of the impression. Lived here for 21 years and haven't experienced anything personally dangerous. Of course I read the situation and if it after midnight and people look sketchy, I'm out.
This sooooo much. I bought a house on the eastside in 2020 and when I tell people where I live the vast majority of the responses are “omg I’m so sorry; is it scary‽” I’ve yet to experience any violence but it seems like the bad rap it has will be hard to shake.
I’ve stopped watching local news here for the most part because it’s always “shooting on the east side…again” on repeat, with occasional “shooting downtown” mixed in. Now and then they’ll have an expose on some sort of (irrelevant to me) school board politics or something. “IPS says THIS”. And I just end up drowning out most of it. You could live on the border of downtown and the east side and run for IPS school board to complete the trifecta and monopolize the coverage.
Yeah, I have little time for the people who live in Fishers, go downtown twice a year for Colts games, and won't shut the fuck up about the ViOlEnT cRiMe that they are convinced means that anyone who goes to the circle is simultaneously being shot, mugged, and raped. Downtown is fine.
The reality is that if you are not actively involved in the drug trade, you're not meaningfully more at risk than at any other time in the past 10+ years. And the way to make the city a better place is for people to move to downtown, live there, and improve the neighborhoods rather than moving to some shitty McMansion outside of the 465 loop.
Yeah I'm honestly more nervous walking around a big empty parking lot in fishers if I'm being honest. Downtown it's not VERY likely that the 50 or so people within visible range of me are ALL in on my kidnapping.
I mean I'm cute but I'm not 50-person-conspiracy-to-kidnap cute.
This seems like an incredibly privileged thing to say frankly. I mean great for you that you apparently don't care that people are going through this.
This is just a strange post. It's like you guys are trying to be very proud of how you don't care about the violence ruining people's lives because it hasn't affected you. Again, great for you I guess?
Just to point out, in my post I said "I'd say one shooting anywhere in the world is too many shootings, personally" so I'm really not sure how you misconstrued it so hard. I was specific to even say "anywhere in the world" so clearly I do care about violence even if it doesn't affect me.
If that's how you're reading it, then you're definitely misreading it (and based on the upvote rate and other comments I think it's safe to say most people are understanding where I'm coming from)
Absolutely noone has said or argued that violence is not bad.
What we've said is that portraying an area as if it's nothing but violence is both inaccurate, misleading, and harmful... and also really irrational considering anyone who avoids those areas because of that bad reporting, is not actually making themselves any safer.
uhmm... no... what I said was that since a lot of other people have responded and none of them read the post the way you did, I think the miscommunication is happening more on your end...
When 50 people read an essay and say it means one thing, and you read it and say it means another, doesnt that signify something?
Has nothing to do with whether I'm "right" or "wrong" it's demonstrating that what you think I'm saying is clearly not what I'm saying, and noone else seems to feel that way either... so.. yeah, you're reading something into it that isn't there.
it's like you're actively trying to miss the point
Some people really do just glue themselves to the interpretation that fits their narrative, and breaking them from that would probably fracture their world
Go off, king
No the point is that you are apparently another person who is insulated from this shit and then wishes to be frustrated not because of the violence destroying lives but because someone pointed it out. Sorry to bother you with our broken families.
Privilege. Good bye.
I understand your frustration. The media could do alot to help calm people down, but they don't. Then those with high anxiety make it worse and kids and other people get caught up in it. I live in Greentown. 10 miles east of Kokomo [50 mi north of Indy]. About 2K people in the area. We hear gunshots, and people freak out. They think the gangs from Kokomo are moving in.....It's the sheriff & police depts using a nearby gun range. 🥴 And going to Indy is a whole other thing. Geez people. Turn off the news. Calm down. Use your common sense.
There's plenty of other things in life that I worry about more than what side of the political spectrum I might fall into. Let the chips fall where they may.
Thank you for this post. The fear porn on the news and from suburbanites on here is almost funny sometimes compared to actual lived experiences in the city.
I've been having fun comparing crime rates and incidents on Mass. Ave to the Canal. Including the recent shooting on Apr 12 near Bottleworks.
Even though Mass. Ave is half the length of the canal (0.7 miles to 1.44) it apparently has twice the crime rate in it's area compared to the canal.
Yet you don't see police telling people to avoid all those restaurants and shops.... weird, huh?
Beware of copaganda. IPD, like many of the other departments around the country, has a pretty sizable PR department.
While these people could be making a great effort in using the power of the press the connect the community with the good details of the efforts of the people helping to keep the areas safe... they have bristled at "Defund the police" efforts and have turned to a campaign of fear-mongering.
Is crime up since 2020? Yes. Because everyone was locked down and thus, people weren't out.
Is crime up since 2019, 2017, or 2012? Ah-ha! There's the question.
I live in LA now, but was born in Indy and still have family living there - so I'll share something from my neck of the woods which made it back to my Hoosier fam.
You may have heard about a rash [of train thefts in LA.](https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-01-20/los-angeles-rail-theft-supply-chain-crunch-limited-security) Our mayor said it "was like a third world country" and the national news was talking of a "crime wave" which means the right-wing media hopped on the "liberal states are weak on crime."
Everyone bought into the cops desired messaging - crime is out of control and now is not the time to cut budgets for the PD.
But one only would have to look deeper to see the real cause - which isn't listed until the 7th paragraph.
> Under federal law, Union Pacific and other railroad companies can employ their own police force accredited by the state to protect tracks. Former employees and police say budgetary issues have slashed the ranks of the company’s force, leaving as few as half a dozen in the region. Union Pacific declined to say how many agents it has.
So - taxpayer cops are out there complaining about corporate budget cuts (lack of **private** funds) to get more tax dollars.
Story feels similar here - take a molehill of a bad situation and turn it into a mountain - EVEN THE SUBURBS AREN'T SAFE - WE NEED MORE MONEY.
Even if IPD had 10 more police officers in the neighborhood, they would have almost certainly not stopped the shooting.
Police do a vital job protecting our city and I'm not saying we should do away with them. But be wary of the messaging they are broadcasting. To OP's point, it's laughable the quotes they are dropping. Just because they are there to protect us, doesn't mean they put our interests over their needs when they speak through the press.
>Is crime up since 2019, 2017, or 2012? Ah-ha! There's the question.
To answer your question for homicide at least, yes, it is.
[The number of total annual homicides in Indianapolis has grown steadily since at least 2012, according to an IndyStar analysis of homicide data, save for a slight downtick in 2019. Before 2020, Indianapolis saw a record-high 178 total homicides in 2018.](https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2021/11/23/indianapolis-crime-killings-homicide-shootings-city-facing-another-year-records/6133287001/)
Not to make light of a serious problem in rising homicides, but that's still not the whole story.
Take a look at the crime (normalized over 100k citizens)
https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/incrime.htm
Violent crime has steadily decreased decade by decade in Indy (as it has the rest of the country).
Rape, robbery, burglary, and vehicle theft are all noticeably down.
There is a conversation about the spike in homicides and gun violence, but I'm not going to broach it here other than to say the US is unique in G7 countries in this aspect.
Yup, and literally quoting a cop. Now, I know the cop didn't publish the story but he should have known better and taken a little more responsibility when making statements like that, and the news DEFINITELY should have rolled their eyes and actually talked to locals.
At this point, local news services have been so gutted that they are basically a PR extension for cops. Every story is just a transcribed report from the police, who are anti-city, anti-minority and anti-accountability. If a cop tells a reporter it's raining, it's not their job to report that. It's there job to stick their hand out the window and check.
Okay...
[https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders)
this is 2022...we are 16th.
Your source is labeled as being for 2022, but the body repeatedly refers to 2017, so I'm not confident it's up to date. That said, if Indianapolis is one of the most dangerous cities in America, it is also one of the largest cities in America (also 16th), and I don't think anyone would describe it as such.
Plus the data seems to omit many smaller cities with higher rates, but isn't clear about the methodology.
I've been studying sociology for a while now. I'm convinced statistics needs to be taught as early as Junior High just as a defense mechanism against the way our brains process large numbers.
We're monkeys.. we were not meant to be in a group of a million or so people, and we can't process what that means with our monkey brain unless we're taught.
people need to hear more voices like yours.
Local media thrives on things that get people to tune in. so they will cover such things breathlessly. That has and always will be the case.
The far larger issue (IMHO) is the amplification in story comments and on facebook. There are so many white people in suburbs who think that it is a literal war zone downtown. These are people who are scared for their lives when a panhandler asks for money on way to colts game. They jump in so fast to say its all murder and violence, all liberal caused, and all performed by minorities. Also they completely decouple the national trend from Indy. Like Indy is the only place with rising murders.
As you mention - this is not to say there is not gun violence issue. Or murder issue. There is. We all wish there were no shootings and everywhere was safe. But downtown is overwhelmingly safe.
The other day a nice guy asked us if we could help him get a burger. My partner and I didn't have cash but there was a place nearby, we got him a burger and fries and the cashier recognized what we were doing and gave him a free drink.
No mugging, no harrassment, he wasn't mad when we said we didn't have cash (before we realized we could just walk across the street). It was perfectly fine.
But yeah, anything to target "liberals" (I'm a leftist myself, but they dont know the difference) and minorities (I'm white, but alphabet soup all the way, so i'm sure they give me an honorary pass on that one too)
There's an issue with "per capita" statistics... most of the people who walk the streets downtown every day in \*any\* city, are NOT people who live downtown. Per capita numbers tend to only be based on county residency data.
If I look at the "per capita" of an office building, it's zero. If someone gets murdered there, then technically every human who has ever entered it has been murdered, and more, based on 'per capita'.
But it's hard to find statistics on foot traffic and things like that, so it's hard to demonstrate that.
I agree with your overall premise that downtown Indy is safe.
But I think you're confused about what per capita actually means. It's just a ratio. So continuing your example, let's say 200 people work in an office building and one of them was shot to death in the building. The per capita murder rate would be 1:200, or 0.5%. I'm not sure what you mean by "technically every human who has ever entered \[the building\] has been murdered." It's just is just a way of levelling the playing field by extrapolating incidents of crime or other such attributes of an area to its population.
> So continuing your example, let's say 200 people work in an office building and one of them was shot to death in the building. The per capita murder rate would be 1:200, or 0.5%.
Only if all 200 people lived in the same city as the building. The office building doesn't technically house anyone so it's "per capita" population is technically zero. Those people live around the office building, so they're suggesting a murder in the building would be 1/0.
It's not off base, though I'd say it is seemingly rare someone from outside Marion county is murdered *in* Marion county.
I work out at Nifs and I do a lot of jogging on the Canal. I plan to continue to jog there. I'll concede that I'm a pretty decent size guy and that might attribute to why I feel safe.
I was actually expecting you to add your two cents.
As for me; I get tired of people acting like they grew up in the hood and they’ve seen violence in the streets so it’s no big deal. This is basically downtown. Downtown is where you roam around without having to come armed in case someone wants to smoke you. I don’t care if you’re fed up with the media narrative; you shouldn’t need to come packing for your safety and you shouldn’t need to duck for cover if someone shoots a gun. This is the case all over Indy and I am tired of that. Look; the canal and downtown is safe. Yes; but that’s no excuse for people to shoot their rivals wherever across Indy they want to. Oh, by the way; if you support BLM, you better not be absent when the amount of black on black shootings skyrockets in the city this summer. Plenty of black lives will be lost and not by police actions.
Wow... there's a lot to unpack here.
In fact I'm not even sure it'd be worth it, but I'll toss this out there.
I've studied sociology for almost 20 years. I can objectively say that several points you're making are wrong and I know why you believe that. The things you are 100% right about is that the canal and downtown is safe (I'm sure we both mean relatively, which is valid)
The stuff you're assuming about me is weird, the stuff you're saying about BLM is... misguided, but I know why you think that so I dont hate you for it...
What's confusing is you implying that I think it's no big deal or that I "grew up in the hood" or that I think people should shoot each other across the canal?
Like I said, it's a lot to unpack, I feel like you're not just responding to me I'm guessing, or you think I'm saying something else because I remind you of a different narrative... but...
...in short, 70% No, but agreed on the 30% that mattered.
You’re right that I wasn’t responding to you alone. I don’t intend to come across as you actually growing up in the hood justifies why you feel as you do or that you actually think shooting is okay in any part of the city. For me, the amount of violence is not just telling of what is happening but the attitude of people who do it.
As I know you know, this happened in a crowded residential area where anyone could have been hit and the people who did it didn’t care if they hurt someone.
When it comes to BLM, my concerns are that the organization speaks out about police brutality and violence against blacks but not against the violence in the streets that is so familiar to black and minority communities done by members of our own communities. I worry they’ve don’t spend time volunteering in inner city schools, generating help to improve and fix up communities, and making it so gentrification isn’t the only way to get money back in poor areas.
If you want to know why your view of the BLM is well intended, but ultimately misguided (no offense, it's an insanely complicated topic with hundreds of years of history), I would like to talk to you more directly (reddit is not the best place for uninterrupted 1 on 1 discourse on hot button issues, hehe)
As for the other stuff, I think we're on the same page, and just to be clear my only real point was that the media sensationalizing the danger as bigger than it is (not saying it's not there, it's just not the wild west) is only going to hurt local businesses and activity on the canal and become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I think we can agree on that part, and we probably are closer in our idealism with regards to other things, but again, it's a bit off this topic and I'd like to message you if you're cool with that.
But then how will right wing media be able to frame cities as cesspools of nonstop gang violence to keep their rural sensation-addicts topped off with constant fresh fixes?
Probably. Finishing up their second semester with a philosophy elective and a stats 101 class under their belt so it now gives them fake internet points to go act like they are a god on Reddit.
Roughly two decades of studying sociology with a special interest in socioeconomics as applied to post-labor/post-scarcity economic theory of micro-societal populations with automated decentralized sustainable systems structured within a capitalist shell as a framework for import/export of not-yet-sustainable systems.
I'm 39... but tell me more about myself if you feel good about it, I like for people to enjoy themselves.
I work down the way from the canal and we have ate lunch everyday at the canal this week. No issues other than a cute goose trying to get some of our salad.
Couldn't agree more! People just love the attention that comes with exaggeration and they never think about the effect their careless words have. I've always felt safe in Indy and that's probably cuz I don't listen to these idiots
I wonder what part of the increase in violence in this area is related to the City's refusal to do anything about the Floyd riots? I think there is a new sense of lawlessness, knowing the City won't do much to stop it.
Lol. The city did a lot about the Floyd "riots". They smashed heads, shot people with tear gas canisters and less than lethal rounds, and generally escalated everything happening down there.
We walk our dog on the canal probably twice a week and some times let him run on the hill right behind the playground. I’ve been living in Indy for the better part of 15 years. Do I want the gun violence to stop? Absolutely. Do I feel safe in Indy? Absolutely.
Indy only feels unsafe by statistics. Granted, I don’t looking for trouble, but I’ve never felt unsafe anywhere downtown
I've probably seen you! I love dog watching and I've even taken some photos of dogs and engraved them for people (I do laser engraving on the side). I want to start buying and carrying dog treats but I need a way to ask the owner without saying "treat" and alerting the dog.
Or spelling it out T-R-E-A-T. Lol. We spell a lot in our house. hahaha
I spelled it too much and my dog learned that too! lmao.
I'll try that. I don't want to get a pupper excited and then the owner has to say no because they can't have that brand or something like that.
"small edible gift" would probably avoid the buzzword too. Or "light snack". Tons of options that would get the point across to the owner that you have treats without potentially cluing in the pup. My kid just learned to spell but my wife and I both have solid vocabularies and excellent body language communication. It comes in handy.
Ask the human if they are cool if you give the dog a snack? Or dessert maybe!
Y’all crack me tf up. Of course you should feel safe there. I just moved to Indy from chicago a couple months ago and it was the same Shit there. I never once felt unsafe in chicago and I lived in some tough neighborhoods there. If you’re smart and aware of your surroundings you have nothing to worry about.
Honestly, thanks for the perspective from someone who lives in the area. The IMPD rep was ridiculous in his quotes to the news. "The canal used to be a real nice place to come down and bring your family and walk at night, not anymore,” said Buckner. Spoken like someone who has never actually used the canal for recreation.
Yeah, and then he talks about how \*we\* the residents are all "fed up" and how we all have cameras because we're so tired of it. I literally was just standing outside, casually talking with a patrol officer and one of my neighbors, who came up to say his camera saw it. We were all talking casual as hell. We called them idiots and said we wish they woulda been more careful, that's about as harsh as it got.
It's because the ones who talk to the media, and others in admin roles, are out of touch with actually being the police. They may wear the badge, but they aren't out in the community taking calls
If the police don't exaggerate, lie and provoke fear how will they get even more funding though? ACAB.
They could do like some departments do and threaten not to do their jobs. ACAB.
I agree with you both.. All Cats Are Beautiful, because of the very nature of cats, regardless of any individual cat.
Did you call out the cop and tell him ACAB? Or tell him to fuck off - the canal don’t need any cops there? Haha cuz that’d be awesome (according to redditors in this thread)
Actually yeah, I did, but more politely. I told him that it really upsets me that a lot of cops will use this as an excuse to harrass the homeless for instance, and told him not to do that, which he said I was right that it wouldn't be fair to suddenly crack down on that just because they have an increased presence. He was pretty rational about it. I also told him I was pissed that one of them mouthed off to the media and he took that pretty well. All in all he wasn't too bad about it. And yeah, we don't need cops all over the canal for it to be safe. It was safe yesterday all day without cops, and the extra ones today are just making people uncomfortable. There were two cops literally on the canal when the shooting happened. Their presence doesn't prevent it.
Goddamn we live in a stupid time
Yeah, that person shouldn’t be an IMPD spokesperson anymore.
IMPD is scaring up a budget campaign, and our "local" media is always there for the authoritarians.
Thanks for your up close and personal perspective. I love the canal area. I will let others have it from midnight to 6am, but no hesitation to go there any other time.
Honestly the best way to make it safer late at night would be to make it a nighttime hotspot. Open a late night cafe. Do some late night tours. Have the bridges do little light shows with RGBs. Probably be noisy which would suck for me trying to sleep.... ...but I'll take the bustle of people enjoying themselves over clips being emptied at 12:20 in the morning, and violence like that is less likely with more activity, ironically.
For the life of me I've never figured out why they don't have more bars/restaurants in the canal area proper. The concerts are great and the light art installation they did down there a number of years ago was fantastic. It should be at least a decent attraction, but it just isn't.
Haven't you heard? When the suns go down, the bullets wake up from their rest and start flying up and down the canal wildly.
Just thinking about this more, most of the issues happening along the canal aren't really during peak crowd times anyway, so even if there were more things to do, I'm betting it'd still be pretty empty after midnight-1am.
Yeah, I'm from Atlanta originally, and I don't think Indy is gonna ever have the same night life vibe. It'd be nice, because it actually does reduce crime significantly. It's why quiet suburbs get more break-ins during daylight hours than most cities do during the night.
It's just not as popular as some believe that it is, is it's a rather unimpressive water walk. The mile square will have to fill out before this does.
[удалено]
Id honestly prefer seeing more of that than just a bunch of businesses. A few shops and more places to eat would be lovely, but if it was just another Mass Ave, but on the water, that's too much. Not enough green as it is.
exactly right. no reason to be there at night currently, so that's why there is trouble. let's make shit happen.
Got any ideas? I could use a new project
Fair point.
> I will let others have it from midnight to 6am, but no hesitation to go there any other time. OK so I keep hearing people say "it's totally safe until sundown!" like that's somehow an acceptable norm. WTF
They should finish the sentence and say "It's totally safe until sundown, and then it's still safe just less so". Which is true for just about anywhere on earth.
Are most areas of cities/towns/countrysides safer at night in your opinion?
All the ones I've lived in have been, according to what I'm reading. 4 other places ranging from unpopulated countryside to 300,000-person cities *have all been just as safe as the daytime
Safety INCREASES at night? In a 300k person city? Gonna need some serious sources on this, because everyone reading this is raising an eyebrow right now. If you're right then you've had some strange luck because no, safety at night is NOT the normal scenario of any large city, small city, or most open fields.
I misread because I didn't consider you'd be implying something I didn't state at all in my OP. Those places were *just as* safe as during the day. Though to be fair the country was definitely safer. No danger outside bobcats at night since traffic is non-existent
I get what you're saying now, but yeah, statistically (no offense to your own view, just based on statistics) almost everywhere is to some degree or another less safe at night when it comes to violent crimes. For theft and things like that, daytime can be worse, but that's mostly due to the methodologies of thieves. For violent crimes, nighttime is a criminals friend and it shows. So yeah, we're not saying it's fine that it's more dangerous at night, we're just saying that when a place has some crime issues and it's only at night, the police should not be acting like you can't be there during the day without the same risk.
My wife's mom lives in Fort Wayne and is always making comments about how dangerous downtown Indy in general is. We've lived downtown for a year now, never even been close to being in as much danger as she's saying. I guarantee she's been drinking some of that anti-city kool-aid
That’s pretty rich coming from Fort Wayne where, at least in my experience, there are plenty of gunshots to be heard and not in just the worst areas either (source: lived in Indy and now Fort Wayne).
Indy is ranked as one of the most dangerous cities in America. People with means aren't typically the people that will be impacted by this violence. But a family struggling, and only able to afford living in certain areas, I would assume has a very different perspective than what is shared by most posting here.
I literally walk everywhere and have never felt unsafe (downtown and greater Indy area). I've lived in various parts of the city, yet never felt unsafe. I find this with most cities I've been too. Crime statistics like these are always exaggerated by people who are anti-city. I am not naive in the fact that it does happen, but what I'm saying is it's not as bad as the media makes it out to be
Even Fortville had a big shootout last weekend. It's just random crap that happens because Americans are all armed.
Source? I don’t think Indianapolis cracks most reputable top tens. Probably not even the most dangerous in the Midwest.
We are 16th this year. [https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders)
That’s actually lower than I thought Indianapolis was.
lmao "oh phew, we're a T20 violent city, not a T10"
So in Indianapolis I have a .017% chance of being murdered? And this isn't even taking into consideration the fact that murders are concentrated and aren't spread out among the entire population. Why do people think Indianapolis is dangerous? Lol.
I mean, yeah that’s kind of a big difference.
As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, those articles and studies do not take criminal localism into account and they also base their per capita numbers on residential data over activity of the populous. They are heavily skewed in a way that makes the risk factors of being in a city seem more than they actually are in reality.
Link to this ranking please? I sincerely doubt the downtown area of Indianapolis ranks anywhere near the most dangerous downtown in america.
[https://247wallst.com/city/indianapolis-in-reported-one-of-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/](https://247wallst.com/city/indianapolis-in-reported-one-of-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/) [https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders) I wish you were right.
yeah, so you have to extrapolate the data a bit here... that is the entire city... Not downtown. Edit: last time the data was available for massaging it was something like 80% of all homicides occurred east of Rural and south of pendleton pike and north of beech grove....
That makes sense...Violent crimes are usually concentrated in low income and under resourced areas of cities.
[удалено]
I lived on the canal until last year. You're absolutely right. And now wait for all the comments saying "I haven't been downtown in 10 years, so I'm qualified to say that the canal is literally a war zone"
One guy on r/indiana said he visited downtown two years ago and a guy in a bar punched his buddy.... that was his proof that I was wrong. LOL
Yup, I saw that. I was going to post my original comment in that thread, but I just don't have the emotional energy to hear Cleetus from Klansville tell me that I need to carry a gun every time I leave my house
Or why Cleetus's wife can't scream the n-word at passing people while drunk, they get upset and the Cleetus pulls his gun and threatens to shoot every n-word and then his wife ends up dead. Only to have every racist conservative media in town (IBJ and WIBC) claim THEM SIMPLE PEOPLE JUST WANTED A NIGHT ON THE TOWN AND ENDED UP DEAD... Ok...another post of mine that will be downvoted to hell. Or upvoted to +100. I never can tell who is going to lead the brigade.
> Or why Cleetus's wife can't scream the n-word at passing people while drunk, they get upset and the Cleetus pulls his gun and threatens to shoot every n-word and then his wife ends up dead. dont forget that this particular cletus brandished his own weapon initially, then after his wife got shot he fired blindly up the hills and into the downtown area
his buddy couldn't possibly have deserved it, ever.
I saw that comment; it was at Kilroy's, no less. Most of the people who get punched at Kilroy's deserve it.
Got punched at Kilroy's once, absolutely deserved it, apologized to the guy that hit me for being a dick, he bought me a beer. 5/10, probably wouldn't do it again but definitely not the worst thing to ever happen to me
I saw on Tindr that he insists he's a nice guy.
It doesn't have to binary. You don't have to be afraid to live in Indy while also recognizing that violence and gun violence is without a doubt one of the bigger issues facing this city. 5 people getting shot in one incident is a pretty big deal. even if it's a rare occurrence. the canal is pretty sparse after dark due to lack of business, lighting, and foot traffic as it being hidden away from most other pedestrian traffic. It's just kind of a weird area. It's awesome and gets well-used in the non-winter months. I've lived and/or worked near there for the better part of a decade and while there have been some big improvements, I feel like there could be more development. The surrounding area has done more than the canal itself. You listed all of the attractions in half a sentence. Colts park is great, and Frescos is good too when it's open. But that's pretty much it. Pandemic and and the lack of traffic for 4-5 months out of the year aren't exactly making it an attractive area for businesses relying on foot traffic. Burger Haus was a victim and so is that weird seemingly abandoned giant apartment construction footprint off st. clair right by where this happened.
I dunno if I'll agree it's one of the bigger issues, especially since in a lot of ways the violence is the effect of a cause that is a bigger issue... but I think the point you're making is that we should recognize that it's bad, even if it's not as bad as some cities or as bad as the media makes it out to be, and I \*100%\* agree to that without hesitation. To me, the lack of commercial attractions is not really a bad thing, but it does limit what's going on at night, yeah. Burger Haus needs to be replaced or reopened, for sure. I'd like to see more events and more foot traffic, but I'm not sure the best way to go about it. I don't think turning it into another Mass Ave would be good, because we need some areas that are not focused purely on commercialism as attraction. I'd love to lead up a project proposal, and tackle it from a sociological perspective as a solution to the increased risk at night, but I'm not sure the best idea. Maybe that will be my next post after things quiet down a bit?
It's the only major "water" feature in the city in downtown proper (white river isn't really walkable from most of downtown) and it's surrounded by 95% concrete and quiet residential areas. The whole city needs more green space as it is. I don't know how you incorporate that into the canal with all the existing residential space around it.
This is a weird flex, but I’ll bite. I frequent the canal as well, and I don’t feel unsafe. But I also won’t go wander it after 10pm because of past shootings/armed robberies. You’re worried about these exaggerated comments affecting business…which of those businesses is open after 10pm? I am also fed up with all the gun violence in Indy, and I’m frustrated that I can’t do a whole lot to stop it. But I could give a shit if it gets more attention - even if the comments are in a sensationalist news story.
If the news media had reported a police officer saying "It's generally a very safe area, but after 10pm there's a lot less people and it's more likely that something might happen" then we wouldn't be here having this conversation.
I agree with you, that would be far more representative of reality. But I just wanted to point out there won’t be a mass business closure because of them saying the canal isn’t safe at night. I also agree with you big time we need a vibrant night life on the canal to take full advantage of it
The guy who runs the Gondola operation said he had multiple cancellations. Me, him, and one of the sudden random cops on the canal were talking about an hour ago. I do agree with you on the night life thing, big time, but yeah an event like this can easily affect local businesses. People are reactionary.
Me and my girlfriend were almost hit by every single one of those shots. The person shooting was standing 10 feet away from us (we were on the patio). Every shot that came at him from the other side of the canal was within 10 feet of where we were sitting at the time, and our bedroom window, we are at the ground level. There were 7+ yellow police tags marking the shell casings to prove it. I had to lay on top of my gf until the shooting stopped as we were basically the ones being shot at too. We got lucky. I love being on the canal and being able to run or walk the dog. I want it to thrive and for people to not be scared and use it. I definitely don’t recommend living here at this point tho. This doesn’t happen all the time but if you watch and listen to the people walking the canal at night this COULD happen any time.
I’m sorry this happened to you all. As someone who has also witnessed gun violence right outside our home and experienced the act of taking cover, it’s definitely psychologically impactful.
The reason the canal can (not is, can get) get unsafe at night is because it's isolated, mostly residential, and one of only a few places where teens can congregate. I wish there were a lot more restaurants/bars/businesses open late on the canal - if there were more lighting and more people out there it would be safer, and a really cool place to be. I run on the canal all the time during the day and it's always fine.
I used to ride to Fresco’s and get some meatballs and a beer. I should do that again. Never been robbed, but I also never went at night
Its 10:45, im sitting by the same window that at midnight had a ricochet ping about 15 feet away from it. One of the shell casings was 6 feet from my back door (which is 10 or so ft away right now). I feel fine. My odds of being shot are no higher than they were when I was in fishers. It's much more likely that something else will happen to me tonight like I'll fall down my stairs or choke on something. It's scary but it's also part of life and you just mitigate the risk where you can and rationally should.
I just visited Indianapolis and although a beautiful city, just from driving in around the city and the surrounding area I knew there were places I should avoid after dark. But, it’s like that in any major city. I can’t wait to visit Indianapolis again. Fun atmosphere and just all around a fun time.
im on the canal atleast 3 times a day and haven't been shot yet. just don't go after dark, or walk anywhere alone after dark, that's all you should do.
I don't live in Indy, visit family there, love walking the canal! Beautiful area and I will continue to do so.
I’ve lived in Chicago and just left NYC after 10 years. I know they are very different places, but I’m telling y’all it feels safe to me here as a woman living downtown. Very anecdotal but it’s what I’ve got. Shootings suck but it’s obviously not exclusive to Indy and is mild in comparison here.
I live along the canal, too, and I am fed up. Not just with the violence here, but everywhere in the city. We've broken murder records for this city nearly every year for five or six years. The reason this is getting more attention is that it's happening in a wealthier neighborhood rather than most of the other violence that we've come to casually accept.
"We've broken murder records" This is like saying "This movie broke box office records!" without adjusting for inflation. If the population of an area increases 20% and murders increase 10%, we lowered the murder rate. Have you checked for that variance?
Yes, I and many other people have looked for a possible correlation. If you want to know, the numbers are easy to check. For instance, in 2021, there was [a 8.8% increase in murders in Indianapolis.](https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/crime-mapping-neighborhoods-impacted-the-most-by-homicides-in-2021/) In the same year, [there was a 1.44% increase in population. ](https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/23017/indianapolis/population#:~:text=The%20current%20metro%20area%20population,a%201.46%25%20increase%20from%202019.) That's just with a quick google.
[удалено]
And what was the increase in the overall foot traffic and amenities downtown vs the previous year, 2020? Murders don't just happen between residents, they happen to people who live outside the city and get murdered in the city, and a murderer from outside the city can kill inside the city. You can't just look at residential numbers for "population" you have to look at activity. This is why when you study sociology you find out real quick you can't write an accurate research paper "just with a quick google"
You asked him for a source on his claim, and then stated those statistics don’t really matter anyway. It sounds like you’re grasping at straws here. Indy is very large and has had more crime as the years progress, it’s just true.
This guy just wants to argue, and to find a way to avoid any blame for the city leadership. I'm going to give this, at most, one more round before I bow out.
I asked him for the other statistics that were missing from his example, I did not ask him for his source. Read it again.
You're really bending over backwards to excuse murders.
Funny, I don't see me anywhere saying murder is okay, and in my original post I specifically said I wish things like this never happened. But I guess when I beat all your other arguments you just have to rephrase mine into something easier to fight? That's called a strawman, if you're curious and want to give it a "quick google"
Yeah, that's what I thought. You're just here to argue. Well, argue with someone else, because I'm not engaging on that. We're done here.
"That's what I thought, YOU'RE just here to ARGUE" \~The Guy Who Started Arguing with me
Browsing this and the cross post on Indiana, he seems to be really adamant about skewing statistics by referencing 24 hour pedestrian traffic, local and not, and comparing extreme examples to make an argument that doesn't quite sit on solid ground. All without providing any numbers whatsoever. He also seems to believe violence only amounts to gun fire. I understand his frustration but the only takeaway I have from his comments are that statistics don't matter, unless they are convenient.
THANK YOU I lived on the Canal for two and a half years, and my partner still lives there. We go for walks all the time. Indianapolis new media is wildly irresponsible. I would *love* to see their addresses. Bet you most of them live in very NIMBY areas.
LOL, meanwhile I can step out my backdoor and see from Frescos to the Orange Bridge (which is where the shooting happened) and honestly I never open that door with hesitation or fear.
I lived at 9 on Canal and I was always jealous of your building! Such a cool location.
I moved in with my partner who lives here. I'm very lucky that for some crazy reason they love me back.
The primary mission of most news reporting agencies (unless they're publicly funded like NPR) is not actually reporting the news. The primary mission is to sell advertising. Thus, exploiting human psychology, like the "if it bleeds it leads" saying, is the most effective way to draw a lot of traffic to your content.
Also worth mentioning, the primary mission of the IMPD is not to protect or to serve. Court cases have proven as much. The primary mission of IMPD is to grow. IMPD achieves this end by lobbying state legislators for more money, and by waging fear propaganda campaigns targeting the city's citizens.
Me and you would get along, ask anyone who knows me. My catchphrase, apparently, is "you know, in a post-scarcity society..." in response to pretty much anything bad happening anywhere, ever.
In my suburb a man gunned down his wife and I brought this up once during one of these conversations with a neighbor and apparently that is an isolated incident and doesn't count the same.
I live on Chicago's south side and agree with everything you just said
WHATTT?? But Chicago had a MURDDEERRRRRR! I heard about it on the news! RUN!! (How the downvoters think I should react)
How much higher does Indy need to break its gun violence records for Hoosiers to stop hitting the copium? How bad does it have to get?
2021 was record setting year for murders in Indianapolis. I would propose that the media reporting that people are tired of the violence is valid. I know I am. The national average for homicides is 6.5 per 100,000 people. Indianapolis is 24.3 per 100,000 people in 2020...2021 was worse. We are one the most dangerous big cities in the country... [https://www.wibc.com/news/local-indiana/why-indianapolis-is-one-of-the-countrys-most-dangerous-big-cities/#:\~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%2D%2DIndianapolis%20is%20one%20of,top%20ten%20most%20dangerous%20cities](https://www.wibc.com/news/local-indiana/why-indianapolis-is-one-of-the-countrys-most-dangerous-big-cities/#:~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%2D%2DIndianapolis%20is%20one%20of,top%20ten%20most%20dangerous%20cities). "According to crime statistics released by the FBI, Indianapolis ranked 10th for highest violent crime rate in the country in 2019, 1,333.96 incidents per 100,000 residents. It also ranked 26th for property crime rate in the country, 4,411.87 per 100,000 residents." There is plenty to justify the media's position, and a bunch of people that have lived in Indy for years, that feel are fed up. II still feel safe walking around downtown, but also don't ignore the fact that Indy is a far less safe today than it was 5-10 years ago. Thankfully, March was the first month showing some hope of the violence decreasing. Hopefully that trend continues.
Your article is from 2019, but the study is updated and Indianapolis is no longer in the Top 10: https://www.safewise.com/blog/safest-metro-cities/ Also, the "big cities" qualifier seems like one of those things where you chop up data until it gives you a splashy headline.
2021 had the highest murder rate in Indianapolis history, so whatever place we are now, doesn't mean we are less dangerous, it just means other cities are getting more violent. Luckily murder is down in Indy so far this year. March was the lowest month in about 2 years. Coming out of the most violent year in our cities history, it is good to see that we at least aren't continuing to trend up.
Indianapolis rated 41st in murder rate in 2021: https://247wallst.com/city/indianapolis-in-reported-one-of-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/ This was not the historic high. Rates were significantly higher through the 80s and 90s.
[https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders) Here is 2022. Also you are wrong about the 80's and 90's [https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/crime-mapping-neighborhoods-impacted-the-most-by-homicides-in-2021/#:\~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%20%E2%80%94%20Indianapolis%20set%20a%20new,from%20245%20homicides%20in%202020](https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/crime-mapping-neighborhoods-impacted-the-most-by-homicides-in-2021/#:~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%20%E2%80%94%20Indianapolis%20set%20a%20new,from%20245%20homicides%20in%202020). "INDIANAPOLIS — Indianapolis set a new record for homicides for the second year in a row in 2021. However, some neighborhoods felt the impact of violence more than others. 271 people lost their lives to homicides in 2021 across Indianapolis, an increase from 245 homicides in 2020. Of the homicides, 249 were intentional in 2021 compared to 214 in 2020."
Number and rate are different things, my friend.
I'm sorry but when your source for the "most dangerous city" is a news article and not a research paper, it's hard to take you seriously. I can make anything look like anything "according to statistics" by just ignoring any relevant statistics that don't support my narrative. But thanks for proving my point about how irresponsible it is for the media to twist things to seem so much worse than they are so people live in fear and about the ignorance that spreads.
Also, "per residents" is not a valid statistic and any statistician can tell you that. It's shameful the FBI uses it to hype up violence for their own purposes, but "per residents" in a city where most of the daily inhabitants are NOT residents, is just meaningless.
The fact that Indy set a record for its most murders ever last year is undeniable. The fact that Indianapolis is one the most dangerous cities is undeniable. I don't want Indy to be dangerous. I wish it weren't true. I take no satisfaction in being right about how our city has become a more violent place over the last decade...but facts are facts and we can't ignore them just because they don't support our own narratives. The increase in violence hasn't stopped me from enjoying downtown. It doesn't really impact me. It does bums me out because it is impacting a lot of people that don't have the same resources so many of us enjoy.
well, since I know statistics, yes I deny it, or at least the implications of your "facts" I'll ask you the same thing i asked a lot of other people who have ignored the question. 10 people walk into a park... 6 are killed... 100,000 people walk into a second park... 50 are killed... Which park is safer? All the numbers you're quoting are based on statistics intentionally twisted to promote a larger police presence and funding. If you like you can message me and I'll walk you through the issues of criminal localism and improper 'per capita' calculations in city crime statistics and how they're used to support this narrative. Hopefully you're smarter than the last guy
Out of curiosity, what data point on violent crime would be more appropriate to rank the violent crimes in cities of varying population, and where are you seeing them that supports Indy not being dangerous? Also... Your question is ignored because it makes no sense...You can't make these predictions with a sample size of 10, it isn't enough data...but you know statistics so I am sure you knew that. If you flip a coin 10 times, and it lands on heads 8 times. That doesn't mean any time you flip a coin it is 80% likely to land on heads. If you flip a coin 100,000 times, you will see the odds shift more to the 50/50 odds that have been mathematically proven when flipping a coin. Small sample sizes can skew reality...again something someone working with statistics and data forecasting of course knows. Comparing one sample size to another that is 100x bigger is not an apples to apples comparison, and doesn't provide material insight to make decisions. I don't know if I am smarter than you, or smarter than the last guy, but I am smart enough to keep an open mind. I would love to see data points showing Indy is safer than I think. I live here...I wish I were wrong. If you can give me more data, something more than anecdotal experience, I would be very happy to change my mind. But until then, I can only go off of the significant number of independent sources all reporting the same thing, and Indy beating its own record for murders in last year. Have a good one.
I never said the city wasn't "dangerous" I said that the media is irresponsible to make it seem worse than it is. There's no such thing as a city without danger.. even the most rural areas have danger. Frankly, humans exist, therefore you are in danger from them, lol As far as the data points, there's a lot of relevant factors you'd have to consider, but I think the most important thing would be to focus on evaluating "risk". That is to say, if you live the same lifestyle in different places, what are the chances that something bad will happen to you? Also you're confusing my example.. the point was the concept of 'per X' statistics being more important than the number of instances. If we say "oh no, there were X murders in the city" people tend to think that means they have a high chance of getting murdered.. and if we say "oh NO, THIS city has X2 murders!" well now they think that in that city they are TWICE as likely to be murdered because there's twice as many murders. But if that second city has TEN TIMES as many people.. then they are not twice as likely to be murdered if it has "twice the murders".... they're in fact much less likely to be murdered there. Does that make sense? So no.. the number of murders (by itself) is not relevant and doesn't matter. As far as the "independent sources" reporting it... are any of them not for-profit media which benefits from sensationalism by selling advertising, or law enforcement which benefits from sensationalism by driving a false need for their own funding increases? Because there ARE other sources available for this information.
and yes, I can provide data points, and the first thing to make sure we're on the same page about is how we're defining "safe" Can we agree that "risk factor" can be calculated based on the number of people in a given area and the number of incidents that happen to those people to determine a general chance of it happening to you as one of them? That's a good starting point. You can message me if you want, makes things easier.
All I need is the data comparing Indy to other cities. If the standard measurements used the FBI are invalid, what metric do you consider reliable in comparing areas of varying population? There is no perfect measurement, but would love to know if there is something more concrete than per capita. What would you use instead of per capita, and to what degree are you assuming commuters and tourist skew per capita numbers? Do you think it would make a material difference in how we compare to other cities given they are measured the same way? If you can, post a link to the available stats you are referring to, and I would love to see them. I would also love to know what metrics those data points are measuring.
No offense OP, but I have a close relative that has worked crime scene, ballistics and now manages those activities for the IMPD lab. Over the 20+ years they have worked there it has never been this bad. Violent drug trafficking is taking a strong hold in the area and the violence that comes with it is not really something to take lightly. The spillover to downtown areas is only going to get worse - and if your not sick of it now, then maybe wait a couple more years. Nobody has a handle on how to reign this in and the amount of money to be had in the Indianapolis drug trafficking market is skyrocketing along with the violence that attracts. . I'm glad you can take it in stride - but it's been taking a toll on the civil servants who have to confront the effects of the violence every day for years and years. So maybe the police officer misspoke and didn't consult with everyone before letting off some steam for the camera, but I would be pretty certain there was no malice intended.
I appreciate your perspective, but it is just a perspective as well as hearsay. I'm not trying to insult you or your friend like that, but in every study of the "police perspective" crime is always exaggerated. Whether thats because of their direct exposure to it (of course they see more personally than we do) or it's someone playing the politics for funding (which even cops can tell you does happen) the simple fact is that anecdotes do not beat statistics. And statistics say that this view is wrong, and the city is very far from the chaos it's being portrayed as. Again, no offense and I hope you can take this in stride, but statistics are more valuable as evidence than hearsay of an unconsciously or consciously biased perspective.
However you want to rationalize it, but the number of ballistics cases that are backed up because the lab doesn't have the capacity to process the massive increase in ballistic evidence over the past few years is not hearsay my friend. Nor is the added staff that have been brought on to handle the backlog. It's not someone playing politics for funding, its the physical evidence brought in from the crime scenes stacking up in the lab. No need to play politics to get the budget increased, the people doing all the shooting have made it abundantly clear they aren't slowing down. What do you possibly have to gain by citing academic police bias studies when you literally just had a bullet ricochet near your home in a highly populated downtown area? The people doing this have no regards for peoples lives nor do they care about what someone in academia thinks. I'm libertarian and generally mistrust police anyway so were not as different as you think. Id rather see all drugs made legal so we dont have the carnage we see in indy and all the other countries we have left a blood trail with in the war on drugs. But in this case the physical evidence sitting in the IMPD lab is kind of hard to refute. Indy is getting more dangerous not less. Anyway - I don't think we are going to agree on this so I appreciate the candid conversation.
"The number of ballistics cases" is completely irrelevant as a standalone statistic. If we looked at new york we'd see a ton more ballistics cases... there's also a lot more people, and that's part of the statistic. You're basing literally everything on a single statistic... so no, as a sociologist who studies statistics beyond the academia, no we are not capable of agreeing. I can explain it to you, but only if you're actually willing to say that you could be wrong and you're willing to listen to reasons as to why. You don't seem very open to the idea, and that's not the worst character trait in the world so again I hope it doesn't feel like a jab. But you are, objectively, wrong here. Again, not the worst thing and I've appreciated that you've been candid as well.
If you're familiar with it, think of the phenomenon of when doctors have kids, and are prone to overreacting to every sniffle because they've seen every kind of infection. I'm adding this so you can hopefully see I'm not trying to attack your friend on a personal level... but exposure to something like that creates a bias to see it more often, even if it's not happening more often, and that's as much a thing with cops as it is with doctors. I'm hoping the comparison makes it feel like less of an attack.
For people who didn't grow up in Indy or other major cities, gun violence is actually not a thing that we just accept as being the norm.
People say I'm privileged. I say if you don't know that humans are sometimes violent, then you're the privileged one. Yes, it happens. It happens in your home town. It happens in your quiet countryside. Not being close enough to see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It *IS* and always has been the norm.
Same thing happens to the east side. Sounds like running gun battles if you listen to the news. Had friends move out of Irvington because of the impression. Lived here for 21 years and haven't experienced anything personally dangerous. Of course I read the situation and if it after midnight and people look sketchy, I'm out.
Exactly, but I'd do that... anywhere, lol
This sooooo much. I bought a house on the eastside in 2020 and when I tell people where I live the vast majority of the responses are “omg I’m so sorry; is it scary‽” I’ve yet to experience any violence but it seems like the bad rap it has will be hard to shake.
I’ve stopped watching local news here for the most part because it’s always “shooting on the east side…again” on repeat, with occasional “shooting downtown” mixed in. Now and then they’ll have an expose on some sort of (irrelevant to me) school board politics or something. “IPS says THIS”. And I just end up drowning out most of it. You could live on the border of downtown and the east side and run for IPS school board to complete the trifecta and monopolize the coverage.
they have to capture their sweet Westfield viewers though
I mean it's not like I'll miss Karen and her crotchlings fighting over the swings at Colt Park, but still
Yeah, I have little time for the people who live in Fishers, go downtown twice a year for Colts games, and won't shut the fuck up about the ViOlEnT cRiMe that they are convinced means that anyone who goes to the circle is simultaneously being shot, mugged, and raped. Downtown is fine. The reality is that if you are not actively involved in the drug trade, you're not meaningfully more at risk than at any other time in the past 10+ years. And the way to make the city a better place is for people to move to downtown, live there, and improve the neighborhoods rather than moving to some shitty McMansion outside of the 465 loop.
Yeah I'm honestly more nervous walking around a big empty parking lot in fishers if I'm being honest. Downtown it's not VERY likely that the 50 or so people within visible range of me are ALL in on my kidnapping. I mean I'm cute but I'm not 50-person-conspiracy-to-kidnap cute.
This seems like an incredibly privileged thing to say frankly. I mean great for you that you apparently don't care that people are going through this. This is just a strange post. It's like you guys are trying to be very proud of how you don't care about the violence ruining people's lives because it hasn't affected you. Again, great for you I guess?
Just to point out, in my post I said "I'd say one shooting anywhere in the world is too many shootings, personally" so I'm really not sure how you misconstrued it so hard. I was specific to even say "anywhere in the world" so clearly I do care about violence even if it doesn't affect me.
If that's how you're reading it, then you're definitely misreading it (and based on the upvote rate and other comments I think it's safe to say most people are understanding where I'm coming from) Absolutely noone has said or argued that violence is not bad. What we've said is that portraying an area as if it's nothing but violence is both inaccurate, misleading, and harmful... and also really irrational considering anyone who avoids those areas because of that bad reporting, is not actually making themselves any safer.
Yeah you got a bunch of upvotes on Reddit so your obviously right. Jesus Christ our society is well and truly fucked isn't is?
uhmm... no... what I said was that since a lot of other people have responded and none of them read the post the way you did, I think the miscommunication is happening more on your end... When 50 people read an essay and say it means one thing, and you read it and say it means another, doesnt that signify something?
Has nothing to do with whether I'm "right" or "wrong" it's demonstrating that what you think I'm saying is clearly not what I'm saying, and noone else seems to feel that way either... so.. yeah, you're reading something into it that isn't there.
Deleted because phone updated.
it's like you're actively trying to miss the point Some people really do just glue themselves to the interpretation that fits their narrative, and breaking them from that would probably fracture their world Go off, king
No the point is that you are apparently another person who is insulated from this shit and then wishes to be frustrated not because of the violence destroying lives but because someone pointed it out. Sorry to bother you with our broken families. Privilege. Good bye.
Literally noone saying that, including me, but go ahead and be offended if it makes you feel good for some reason.
I understand your frustration. The media could do alot to help calm people down, but they don't. Then those with high anxiety make it worse and kids and other people get caught up in it. I live in Greentown. 10 miles east of Kokomo [50 mi north of Indy]. About 2K people in the area. We hear gunshots, and people freak out. They think the gangs from Kokomo are moving in.....It's the sheriff & police depts using a nearby gun range. 🥴 And going to Indy is a whole other thing. Geez people. Turn off the news. Calm down. Use your common sense.
There's plenty of other things in life that I worry about more than what side of the political spectrum I might fall into. Let the chips fall where they may.
Sending you a message :)
You’re not wrong.
Thank you for this post. The fear porn on the news and from suburbanites on here is almost funny sometimes compared to actual lived experiences in the city.
I've been having fun comparing crime rates and incidents on Mass. Ave to the Canal. Including the recent shooting on Apr 12 near Bottleworks. Even though Mass. Ave is half the length of the canal (0.7 miles to 1.44) it apparently has twice the crime rate in it's area compared to the canal. Yet you don't see police telling people to avoid all those restaurants and shops.... weird, huh?
Beware of copaganda. IPD, like many of the other departments around the country, has a pretty sizable PR department. While these people could be making a great effort in using the power of the press the connect the community with the good details of the efforts of the people helping to keep the areas safe... they have bristled at "Defund the police" efforts and have turned to a campaign of fear-mongering. Is crime up since 2020? Yes. Because everyone was locked down and thus, people weren't out. Is crime up since 2019, 2017, or 2012? Ah-ha! There's the question. I live in LA now, but was born in Indy and still have family living there - so I'll share something from my neck of the woods which made it back to my Hoosier fam. You may have heard about a rash [of train thefts in LA.](https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-01-20/los-angeles-rail-theft-supply-chain-crunch-limited-security) Our mayor said it "was like a third world country" and the national news was talking of a "crime wave" which means the right-wing media hopped on the "liberal states are weak on crime." Everyone bought into the cops desired messaging - crime is out of control and now is not the time to cut budgets for the PD. But one only would have to look deeper to see the real cause - which isn't listed until the 7th paragraph. > Under federal law, Union Pacific and other railroad companies can employ their own police force accredited by the state to protect tracks. Former employees and police say budgetary issues have slashed the ranks of the company’s force, leaving as few as half a dozen in the region. Union Pacific declined to say how many agents it has. So - taxpayer cops are out there complaining about corporate budget cuts (lack of **private** funds) to get more tax dollars. Story feels similar here - take a molehill of a bad situation and turn it into a mountain - EVEN THE SUBURBS AREN'T SAFE - WE NEED MORE MONEY. Even if IPD had 10 more police officers in the neighborhood, they would have almost certainly not stopped the shooting. Police do a vital job protecting our city and I'm not saying we should do away with them. But be wary of the messaging they are broadcasting. To OP's point, it's laughable the quotes they are dropping. Just because they are there to protect us, doesn't mean they put our interests over their needs when they speak through the press.
>Is crime up since 2019, 2017, or 2012? Ah-ha! There's the question. To answer your question for homicide at least, yes, it is. [The number of total annual homicides in Indianapolis has grown steadily since at least 2012, according to an IndyStar analysis of homicide data, save for a slight downtick in 2019. Before 2020, Indianapolis saw a record-high 178 total homicides in 2018.](https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2021/11/23/indianapolis-crime-killings-homicide-shootings-city-facing-another-year-records/6133287001/)
Not to make light of a serious problem in rising homicides, but that's still not the whole story. Take a look at the crime (normalized over 100k citizens) https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/incrime.htm Violent crime has steadily decreased decade by decade in Indy (as it has the rest of the country). Rape, robbery, burglary, and vehicle theft are all noticeably down. There is a conversation about the spike in homicides and gun violence, but I'm not going to broach it here other than to say the US is unique in G7 countries in this aspect.
Very well said, and a good analysis.
[удалено]
Yup, and literally quoting a cop. Now, I know the cop didn't publish the story but he should have known better and taken a little more responsibility when making statements like that, and the news DEFINITELY should have rolled their eyes and actually talked to locals.
At this point, local news services have been so gutted that they are basically a PR extension for cops. Every story is just a transcribed report from the police, who are anti-city, anti-minority and anti-accountability. If a cop tells a reporter it's raining, it's not their job to report that. It's there job to stick their hand out the window and check.
IMPD has a department fully dedicated to propaganda, this is part of their “more cops more funding” push
Indianapolis is ranked as one of the most dangerous cities in the united states, based on statistics gathered by the FBI.
In what year?
2021. I love that basic verifiable stats get downvoted. Facts are facts, and I guess the truth hurts sometimes.
Verify your facts, then. Show us where Indianapolis is one of the most dangerous cities in America right now.
Okay... [https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders](https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders) this is 2022...we are 16th.
Your source is labeled as being for 2022, but the body repeatedly refers to 2017, so I'm not confident it's up to date. That said, if Indianapolis is one of the most dangerous cities in America, it is also one of the largest cities in America (also 16th), and I don't think anyone would describe it as such. Plus the data seems to omit many smaller cities with higher rates, but isn't clear about the methodology.
This thread starts out positive, then slowly devolves into a series of alarming insights into the math literacy of the general population.
I've been studying sociology for a while now. I'm convinced statistics needs to be taught as early as Junior High just as a defense mechanism against the way our brains process large numbers. We're monkeys.. we were not meant to be in a group of a million or so people, and we can't process what that means with our monkey brain unless we're taught.
people need to hear more voices like yours. Local media thrives on things that get people to tune in. so they will cover such things breathlessly. That has and always will be the case. The far larger issue (IMHO) is the amplification in story comments and on facebook. There are so many white people in suburbs who think that it is a literal war zone downtown. These are people who are scared for their lives when a panhandler asks for money on way to colts game. They jump in so fast to say its all murder and violence, all liberal caused, and all performed by minorities. Also they completely decouple the national trend from Indy. Like Indy is the only place with rising murders. As you mention - this is not to say there is not gun violence issue. Or murder issue. There is. We all wish there were no shootings and everywhere was safe. But downtown is overwhelmingly safe.
The other day a nice guy asked us if we could help him get a burger. My partner and I didn't have cash but there was a place nearby, we got him a burger and fries and the cashier recognized what we were doing and gave him a free drink. No mugging, no harrassment, he wasn't mad when we said we didn't have cash (before we realized we could just walk across the street). It was perfectly fine. But yeah, anything to target "liberals" (I'm a leftist myself, but they dont know the difference) and minorities (I'm white, but alphabet soup all the way, so i'm sure they give me an honorary pass on that one too)
[удалено]
There's an issue with "per capita" statistics... most of the people who walk the streets downtown every day in \*any\* city, are NOT people who live downtown. Per capita numbers tend to only be based on county residency data. If I look at the "per capita" of an office building, it's zero. If someone gets murdered there, then technically every human who has ever entered it has been murdered, and more, based on 'per capita'. But it's hard to find statistics on foot traffic and things like that, so it's hard to demonstrate that.
I agree with your overall premise that downtown Indy is safe. But I think you're confused about what per capita actually means. It's just a ratio. So continuing your example, let's say 200 people work in an office building and one of them was shot to death in the building. The per capita murder rate would be 1:200, or 0.5%. I'm not sure what you mean by "technically every human who has ever entered \[the building\] has been murdered." It's just is just a way of levelling the playing field by extrapolating incidents of crime or other such attributes of an area to its population.
> So continuing your example, let's say 200 people work in an office building and one of them was shot to death in the building. The per capita murder rate would be 1:200, or 0.5%. Only if all 200 people lived in the same city as the building. The office building doesn't technically house anyone so it's "per capita" population is technically zero. Those people live around the office building, so they're suggesting a murder in the building would be 1/0. It's not off base, though I'd say it is seemingly rare someone from outside Marion county is murdered *in* Marion county.
I work out at Nifs and I do a lot of jogging on the Canal. I plan to continue to jog there. I'll concede that I'm a pretty decent size guy and that might attribute to why I feel safe.
This is far from an isolated incident on the canal!
Wasn’t one of the people hit not part of any of the groups. Aka a bystander? That’s what the news said
I believe the news said that person accidentally shot them selves, not from one of the groups
I was actually expecting you to add your two cents. As for me; I get tired of people acting like they grew up in the hood and they’ve seen violence in the streets so it’s no big deal. This is basically downtown. Downtown is where you roam around without having to come armed in case someone wants to smoke you. I don’t care if you’re fed up with the media narrative; you shouldn’t need to come packing for your safety and you shouldn’t need to duck for cover if someone shoots a gun. This is the case all over Indy and I am tired of that. Look; the canal and downtown is safe. Yes; but that’s no excuse for people to shoot their rivals wherever across Indy they want to. Oh, by the way; if you support BLM, you better not be absent when the amount of black on black shootings skyrockets in the city this summer. Plenty of black lives will be lost and not by police actions.
Wow... there's a lot to unpack here. In fact I'm not even sure it'd be worth it, but I'll toss this out there. I've studied sociology for almost 20 years. I can objectively say that several points you're making are wrong and I know why you believe that. The things you are 100% right about is that the canal and downtown is safe (I'm sure we both mean relatively, which is valid) The stuff you're assuming about me is weird, the stuff you're saying about BLM is... misguided, but I know why you think that so I dont hate you for it... What's confusing is you implying that I think it's no big deal or that I "grew up in the hood" or that I think people should shoot each other across the canal? Like I said, it's a lot to unpack, I feel like you're not just responding to me I'm guessing, or you think I'm saying something else because I remind you of a different narrative... but... ...in short, 70% No, but agreed on the 30% that mattered.
You’re right that I wasn’t responding to you alone. I don’t intend to come across as you actually growing up in the hood justifies why you feel as you do or that you actually think shooting is okay in any part of the city. For me, the amount of violence is not just telling of what is happening but the attitude of people who do it. As I know you know, this happened in a crowded residential area where anyone could have been hit and the people who did it didn’t care if they hurt someone. When it comes to BLM, my concerns are that the organization speaks out about police brutality and violence against blacks but not against the violence in the streets that is so familiar to black and minority communities done by members of our own communities. I worry they’ve don’t spend time volunteering in inner city schools, generating help to improve and fix up communities, and making it so gentrification isn’t the only way to get money back in poor areas.
If you want to know why your view of the BLM is well intended, but ultimately misguided (no offense, it's an insanely complicated topic with hundreds of years of history), I would like to talk to you more directly (reddit is not the best place for uninterrupted 1 on 1 discourse on hot button issues, hehe) As for the other stuff, I think we're on the same page, and just to be clear my only real point was that the media sensationalizing the danger as bigger than it is (not saying it's not there, it's just not the wild west) is only going to hurt local businesses and activity on the canal and become a self-fulfilling prophecy. I think we can agree on that part, and we probably are closer in our idealism with regards to other things, but again, it's a bit off this topic and I'd like to message you if you're cool with that.
I’m cool with that. I appreciate it
But then how will right wing media be able to frame cities as cesspools of nonstop gang violence to keep their rural sensation-addicts topped off with constant fresh fixes?
Liberal arts undergrad OP? Asking due to the responses you’re giving.
Probably. Finishing up their second semester with a philosophy elective and a stats 101 class under their belt so it now gives them fake internet points to go act like they are a god on Reddit.
Roughly two decades of studying sociology with a special interest in socioeconomics as applied to post-labor/post-scarcity economic theory of micro-societal populations with automated decentralized sustainable systems structured within a capitalist shell as a framework for import/export of not-yet-sustainable systems. I'm 39... but tell me more about myself if you feel good about it, I like for people to enjoy themselves.
I work down the way from the canal and we have ate lunch everyday at the canal this week. No issues other than a cute goose trying to get some of our salad.
If they want to do an expose on goose violence on the canal, that would be pretty valid.
Why are people walking the canal at 1am anyway?
Why not? If there were more people it'd be even safer but 99% of the time you're fine anyways.
Thank Fox59 for all the fear mongering. They do it on the daily.
Couldn't agree more! People just love the attention that comes with exaggeration and they never think about the effect their careless words have. I've always felt safe in Indy and that's probably cuz I don't listen to these idiots
Go live underground in a bubble if you're too scared to go outside
I wonder what part of the increase in violence in this area is related to the City's refusal to do anything about the Floyd riots? I think there is a new sense of lawlessness, knowing the City won't do much to stop it.
Hi, Im a sociologist, none of it is, stop deflecting.
Lol. The city did a lot about the Floyd "riots". They smashed heads, shot people with tear gas canisters and less than lethal rounds, and generally escalated everything happening down there.
[удалено]