SFist: 100

Rah

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:59:45 -0800

The same thing it's been since the ealry 80's...crack? Gangs too of course. then you have to take into account the medical care of the time. Nowadays it seems we routinely have gunshot victims who even in 1993 would have been as good as dead. For instance the guy who was shot in the head a couple days ago in the Fillmore...10 years ago he might have been a goner. Many people who survived violent attacks in 2007 might have been more numbers on the homicide list in 93...

pancakebreakfast

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:45:44 -0800

What I want to know is what the hell was going on in 1993 that made it such a murder-fest.

Rah

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:33:45 -0800

hehe, yeah...Of course the 100 we have now is a big increase over then, and the numbers have been steadily rising since then...but with the big picture taken into account, it's pretty much the same old stuff for all the thugs I guess.

Brock Keeling

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:29:34 -0800

thanks, Rah. (ah, the good ol' days of 1998!)

Rah

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:26:35 -0800

Here's where you can see the trend: 1985 - 85 1986 - 114 1987 - 103 1988 - 92 1989 - 73 1990 - 101 1991 - 95 1992 - 117 1993 - 133 1994 - 91 1995 - 104 1996 - 82 1997 - 59 1998 - 58 1999 - 64 2000 - 59 2001 - 63 2002 - 68 2003 - 74 2004 - 88 2005 - 96 2006 - 86 2007 - 100 (to date) For the past 23 years, SF's murder rate really hasn't changed. In the late 90's and early 2000's it dropped, but more or less, SF has always had a relatively stable murder rate. the low is 59, the high is 133, and most of the time it's been somewhere in the middle (keep in mind SF's population has been pretty much the same throughout as well) The average for the whole stretch is 87. Data is from the Dept. of justice, and the SFPD.

Brock Keeling

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:17:07 -0800

You're right, civic-minded dcranston. My mistake. But looking at the forest through the trees, it's an increase nevertheless.

dcranston

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:12:08 -0800

Can someone explain to me how: In 2006 SF saw a total of 85 homicides, 96 in 2005, and 88 in 2004 -- a fairly steady and frightening increase is a steady increase? 88, 96, 85, 100 ... seems kind of up and down, no? Even if it were a steady increase, 4 years is hardly an adequate sample to show trends...

lazthedog

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:00 -0800

the Chronicle (imagine that) just had a great series of articles about what it called the "culture of murder." sadly, the stories didn't offer a lot of fresh insight or anything close to a simple solution, but still are worth a read: http://tinyurl.com/2bxbzb

deadbrother

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:26:33 -0800

SF: second most walkable city, first most killable. maybe the guys who got murdered were trying to steal a baby and the shooters were trying to do a good deed. maybe.