Residents of North Peoria are “startled” by recent crimes in their neighborhoods. What an interesting word the Times Observer chose to describe residents’ reaction to crime: startled. It means “to frighten suddenly; to alarm; to surprise.” In other words, they didn’t expect there to be any crime up where they lived, and are shocked — startled — to discover that crime knows no boundaries.
Mike Wisdom, president of the Chadwick Estates Neighborhood Association, is quoted as saying, “We always felt isolated from crime.” Peoria Police captain Mike Scally said, “When you live in an area of low crime, a little bit of crime is alarming.” Peoria City Councilman George Jacob agreed that “crime in Peoria’s far-flung neighborhoods is ‘surprising.'”
The converse, of course, is that this crime wouldn’t have been surprising elsewhere in Peoria, such as the south side or on the bluffs. But because it’s all the way out here, it’s notable. Conventional wisdom is that these “far-flung neighborhoods” popped up as an effort to flee crime and deterioration (real or perceived) in the older parts of Peoria.
Incidentally, there are those who would prefer a Balkanized Peoria. I’ve heard the sentiment expressed that we should keep crime generally contained on the south side with the bluffs acting as buffers so that everyone living north of the bluffs can live in safety. Whether or not residents feel that’s the way it should be, it is generally accepted as the way things are.
Crime statistics support this view. A quick look at the CrimeView Community website shows the following total numbers of crimes by council district in the last 90 days:
- District 1: 1,217
- District 2: 507
- District 3: 491
- District 4: 370
- District 5: 199
By now, you’re no doubt saying, “So what? Tell us something we don’t know. This is all so obvious.” And I guess that’s the point of my post. We’ve accepted this state of affairs in our city. It’s the way it is. It’s the way it’s been for so long, we’ve become complacent. I can hear the objections: “Every city has problems with inner city crime.” “We’re doing everything we can.”
Here’s a thought experiment. Ask yourself, if the property damage and home invasion crimes that happen on the south side suddenly started happening in the fifth district with the same frequency, what would be the City’s reaction? Would any additional pressure be put on the police department? Would they be given any additional resources? How about Code Enforcement? Planning & Growth? Public Works?
Should we be satisfied with the status quo? Are we really doing the best we can to reduce crime?
Nothing is satisfactory until all crime from all neighborhoods is extinguished. There should be no complacency about crime. Its wrong, its hideous, its unnecessary, its something that can and should be erradicated from our society.
If you want to eliminate crime, eliminate laws. If you don’t want to eliminate laws, just eliminate the right to own property and you will cut crime by about 90%. Most crime is property crime and/or economic.
On the other hand, if you want to increase crime, pass more laws.
Crap, was gonna be the first to post to this before kcdad gave us a lecture on how bad and jaded our society really is and Vespa blames the school district. Oh, well, a small victory.
This is a perfect example of why it is important to confront and deal with societal issues as opposed to just flee from them. If no one is willing to stand up and fight for their neighborhoods and schools we will literally be “fleeing” our entire lives.
Hmm wonder how many of the 5th district resident council members voted to cut police spending?
what would happen? They would call in the National Guard, much as if the shootings which are happening in my area were occuring around Bradley.
Only fools think you can tolerate crime in some neighborhoods, and it won’t affect others.
You hit it on the head, Paul.
The residents would probably demand that a roadblock be set up and everyone be issued I.D. cards
Diane, you are correct in theory, and before I had children I was a fan of staying in the City and being part of the difference and would be happy to “preach” it to all that would allow me to bend their ear. But now my youngest is in MS, and after sticking around and seeing the City decay further, I am on the fence. I am not sure I can risk sticking around much longer. As much as a good education is important, as your children become more independent, the “crowd” that they have to chose from to hang with is equally important. The pickings are getting pretty slim at District 150.
This isn’t big-city Chicago, so crime cannot be contained in one area of the city. It doesn’t take much more than 20 minutes to get from the southend to the far north end of the city. People fleeing from the inner city areas, then the west bluff and east bluff, etc., are finding crime following them. Those that thought they didn’t have to concern themselves with the left-behind areas are wrong. The same goes with District 150 schools. That’s the main reason that I am concerned by the concept of the charter school as an effort to find an escape for the better students. That’s all 150 does–keeps providing ways of escape (Edison Schools, charter school, etc.) Until they fix all the schools, District 150 will not be “fixed” and these escape schools will suffer the same fate. Last night at the 100th anniversary of Manual High School, I listened to all the hype about how wonderful the “new” Manual is–new faculty, new courses, etc. When the NCLB scores come in for the next four years, I will be willing to bet that there will be no change for the better. None of the new administrators and programs at Manual are solving any of the real problems. It’s smoke and mirrors. All the changes 150 made this year: Wacky Wednesdays for common planning time for teachers, uniforms for next year, no 8th grade graduations, change in bell schedules for next year, creating more Title I schools for next year, school closings–none of these “solutions” will solve the educational problems and probably not even the financial problems. And, yes, what happens in District 150 or doesn’t happen does have a direct effect on the crime rate in the city.
New definition for explaining KCDAD view on society:
Previously he was modern utopian, as of today he can add anarchist. No laws, no ownership of property. A solution for the ages.
Precinct Committeeman: What’s the matter? Don’t trust yourself? Don’t trust your neighbor? Have you done something to fear retribution for? Afraid?
The question wasn’t how do we stop people from hurting each other… the question was about stopping crime. You get rid of crime by getting rid of laws. You get rid of people hurting each other over property by eliminating possessions. Simple. Logical.
If you want to change the nature of mankind, laws won’t do it… at least they haven’t in over 15,000 years. Maybe you should start with yourself.
KCDAD: no laws – no criminal behavior.. property held in common to those in the community.. Then it become the operation of the jungle.. the biggest and badest will dominate the weak. No bench mark to compare bully type behavior
To pass a magic wand across our system of laws and declare them void will exact total anarchy.
Well there you go again… creating doomsday scenarios that are in your imagination. I didn’t suggest we should eliminate laws. I offered it as a solution for those who think there is a way to end crime. There it is. Stop making behavior criminal. That is the only way unless you intend to take that magic wand and change human nature.
If you use a law to steal my property then I am going to use whatever means necessary to resist that law… what you call crime. If you use the law to steal my my ability to provide for myself and my family, then I will do whatever I have to do to regain it. call me a criminal if you wish… its only because you have written the laws to make me one.
Crime out North… Doesn’t suprise me, its a sign of the times… We will always have crime .. The inner city has dealth with this for years..Neighborhood leaders have been fighting this issue. i hope we can get the concealed gun law passed .. Kick a door in out north..it doesn’t matter where you live , crime is there .. Ido rember back in the old days when you could leave your doors open..
Kcdad you are entirely correct. A look at the “industrialized” nations with supposedly the most “freedom” (and the most laws), have the highest incidents of crime. These include: United States, Canada, Great Britain, France, Australia, Germany, and Japan. These countries have made human nature, “survival of the fittest” for yourself, your family, and your property, virtually illegal in every respect.
A Peoria police officer told me years ago that if an intruder is coming through the window to your home but has not made it into the house yet, to shoot the intruder and make sure to drag him inside. Of course, that same police officer would be the first one on the scene to arrest me.
Someone please tell me what liberties we Americans have left. I mean come on, to tell a business that they cannot smoke cigarettes inside their own building, no smoking in bars or restaurants, and stand fifteen feet away from a door or window while you smoke outside. Can’t text message while driving anymore; next will be no cell phone use at all while driving. And more and more taxes and “fees”. And elected officials who do not listen to their constituents while making more laws to inhibit our freedoms afforded us by the Constitution.
I am 37 years old and the rhetoric about “freedom” means nothing to me. Show me the proof.
It is my understanding that Japan has a low incident of crime. It is a society that values honor and to steal brings shame to the individual and the family.
Even if an intruder breaks into your home, I believe the law is that the property owner must be under imminent threat of danger in order to use deadly force. So if a property owner found a robber crawling out of his window with his big screen T.V., he would not be justified in shooting the robber in the back in order to prevent the theft. This seems be right. Property should not take precedence over life.
It is also a society that abhors diversity and difference… it is the most homogeneous society on the planet. Japanese citizens that leave Japan and come back are treated as traitors. The Japanese word for someone who has Japanese parents and speaks Japanese but lives someplace else translates as “strange stranger”.
Frustrated: Oh, well, I forgot to read Kcdad’s post–he has just said what I had planned to say about Japan.
Kcdad – you are off point. I just I believed crime was low in Japan. I did say the country was perfect. I agree that the Japanese prefer conformity, but they tolerate (politely) differences. There is not that much diversity in Japan to tolerate.
Frustrated: I think Kcdad is right in that much of crime is fueled by distrust, feelings of inferiority, etc. Japan may have some social problems, but I believe most Japanese tend to share a very similar value system, etc.. which probably has something to do with the crime rate. Also, they all “look alike” so to speak–well, I guess that is reality–so trust is easier. American diversity tends to lend itself to distrust–and it creates social problems. That said, I prefer to live in a diverse society striving to build trust.
Elections have consequences.
Sharon – I agree with you, Japan has a very clearly defined value system and social code of conduct that I believe is sorely lacking in the U.S. Diversity in America is not an excuse for lack of self-restraint and respect for self and others.
Frustrated: I probably didn’t state my thoughts too clearly. I just believe that Japan doesn’t have the same problems that we have in America because of their lack of diversity–neither to their credit or discredit. They haven’t had the same kind of racial strife–no, they haven’t had any racial strife. No group in Japan was enslaved by another group. Like it or not, our history of slavery and the years following the end of slavery have created discord that Japan simply has not had. Diversity is not the cause of crime in America–but the distrust of other groups probably contributes to it. That distrust isn’t limited to just the black-white tensions. World War II created a distrust of the Japanese in this country. I know my uncle who served in that war still carries that distrust with him. Now because of 911 (and before) there is a distrust of Arab Americans. Jewish people have not always been comfortable in America. I was raised in an era when members of my family and friends distrusted Roman Catholics. I remember how those feelings came to the fore when John F. Kennedy ran for president. Respect for one another (for those others who look different or have different religious beliefs, etc.) is difficult to accomplish in our very diverse society. And, of course, these “dislikes” and “distrust” work in reverse, also. I hope you understand that I’m not trying to make excuses for any one group–only stating that disrespect and discord in society are inevitable results of these kinds of diversity. The term “diversity” is a relatively new term–a modern-day attempt to turn these differences in to a positive. We aren’t there yet–it is my hope that we will get there someday–before eternity.
PC–What is the world does that mean–or do I want to know?
Well written Sharon. I understand where you are coming from, and I agree for the most part. But I guess I am more referring to a general tenor in the U.S. that is not totally related to race relations or socio-economic status.
It seems that many in the U.S., do not act with dignity and integrity. For example, the current financial crisis, many individuals and institutions find themselves in dire financial straits because they did not act with integrity. Individuals that took out interest only mortgages or no down payment mortgages had to know in their hearts that this was not a proper course of action and that they were placing themselves in peril. There are no shortcuts in life. And it seems, in the U.S. it is all about the quick fix.
Frustrated: Yes, I get it–you switched more to “white collar” crime and irresponsibility. It’s roots may be a bit harder to discern. Everything in our technological world seems to promise instant gratification. Ever since this country’s economic problems came to light, I’ve tried to decide who is the most at fault–the bands for lending the money or the individuals who bought houses with no down payment. I haven’t come to any conclusions yet. I can understand how families buying modest houses with no down payment may have thought they could make it. I guess I’m thinking they could have fooled themselves into thinking they could make ends meet. (But not planning on losing jobs, etc.) I would think that the banks might have had a better idea that they were taking risks. I recall having conversations with my students–conversations that made me realize how easily they could be duped into believing in quick fixes. Certainly, charge companies have preyed on young people by giving them easy credit. I was always amazed at how easily young people could get car loans, etc.–that companies took the risk, knowing they could repossess the cars, etc.
In order to address the crime problem in the city of Peoria, WE must observe the pattern and address the issue head on. The level of CRIME is Directly Proportionate to the number of poorly maintained, monitored, and managed rental properties in an area. The “Community” is nonexistant when the number of slum rental properties outnumber the homeowners.(Perfect example district1) Without a community, schools suffer(high student mobility rate has an adverse effect upon behaviors, grades, and overall health of the child, school, community and eventually the city. Homeowners suffer(high crime rate, lower quality schools, low voter turnout which leads to scum politicans representing their own morally bankrupt agendas instead of the people)
(Fight or Flight) There is a rising trend of people fleeing the Peoria Area instead of standing up and fighting for their communities. And Crime just like a disease will continue to spread from neighborhood to neighborhood unless it comes against a communinty that is willing to stand and fight instead of running yellow.
And without a school, a community suffers–and District 150 has just robbed a rather large community of a high school. Many areas have been robbed of primary and middle schools. Students commuting to school is not a good idea. The paltry 1.3 million savings just isn’t worth the cost of depriving a community of a high school. Glen Barton, Rob Parks, and company didn’t have the welfare of Peoria in mind when they encouraged the closing of Woodruff.
We live in a resource based economy where success is measured by money. One can “steal” resources from the general trust (or the Common Green) and sell those resources to the general population. That is the example of Oil, Coal, logging and other such industries. It also describes the “stealing” of labor and human resource… businesses have the gall to come right out and call us that.
Why should stealing from businesses be any different? Why should they be protected from their own practices?