Earlier by Paul Kersey: Indianapolis: Shooting By Black Teen Starts “Conversation” About NRA Convention, But Not Black Expo
When the regime media dares to note the percentage of blacks committing violent crime, such as homicide, in an individual city, you know the problem is quite bad. Indianapolis, long a favorite topic at SBPDL, is one of the cities, boasting a majority white population and a black underclass, with the latter responsible for the vast majority of the violent crime.
Courtesy of the Indy Star, we now know the exact amount: despite being 29% of the population of Indianapolis, blacks commit 77% of the homicides in the city.
‘Street groups’ involved in 39% homicides in Indianapolis, new analysis finds, by Elizabeth DePompei, Indy Star, August 5, 2021
A new analysis released by Indianapolis leaders Thursday gives new insight into the victims and suspects involved in the gun violence plaguing the city.
The “Gun Violence Problem Analysis” comes more than a year after the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform released a critical report of Indianapolis’ gun violence prevention work. That report, which was commissioned by the city, found that the city’s prevention work was underfunded, understaffed and poorly coordinated. It recommended, among other things, the city conduct a gun violence analysis so leaders could better understand what is driving the violence.
“The lack of clarity on what is driving most of the gun violence in Indianapolis is clear,” the report authors said in May 2020. “Without a shared understanding on what is driving gun violence in the City, there cannot be a shared strategy, clearly defined roles for partners, or measurable objectives.”
A new analysis released by Indianapolis leaders Thursday gives new insight into the victims and suspects involved in the gun violence plaguing the city.
The “Gun Violence Problem Analysis” comes more than a year after the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform released a critical report of Indianapolis’ gun violence prevention work. That report, which was commissioned by the city, found that the city’s prevention work was underfunded, understaffed and poorly coordinated. It recommended, among other things, the city conduct a gun violence analysis so leaders could better understand what is driving the violence.
“The lack of clarity on what is driving most of the gun violence in Indianapolis is clear,” the report authors said in May 2020. “Without a shared understanding on what is driving gun violence in the City, there cannot be a shared strategy, clearly defined roles for partners, or measurable objectives.”
“Despite the great work that partners in Indianapolis are doing, those efforts are not effectively having a significant impact on gun violence in the near term as indicated from the rate of homicides and shootings over the last five years,” the 2020 report read.
Between Jan. 1 and Aug. 1, the city reported 160 criminal and non-criminal homicides, most of those involving a gun. That’s up from 131 total homicides for the same time in 2020, a record-shattering year of violence in Indianapolis. The city has also reported more than 450 non-fatal shooting victims to date.
A profile of victims and suspects
The newly released gun violence analysis examined 296 homicides occurring in Indianapolis from March 1, 2018 to Feb. 29, 2020, and 456 non-fatal injury shootings that occurred from March 1, 2019 to Feb. 29, 2020. It’s unclear why shootings were reviewed for a shorter time frame than homicides.
Here’s some of what the analysis found:
- Around 77% of victims and suspects in homicides and shootings were Black, despite Black residents accounting for only 29% of the city’s population. Nearly 85% of victims and suspects were male.
- About 62% of homicide victims and suspects and 60% of shooting victims and suspects were between the ages of 18-34, with a mean age of 30.9 and 29.5 respectively.
- Around 74% of homicide victims and suspects were already known to the criminal justice system, with 64% having been previously incarcerated and 58% previously convicted of a felony.
- About 12% of victims and 15% of suspects were on active community supervision at the time of the incident, with around 7% on electronic GPS monitoring.
- Based on case summaries and detective interviews, the analysis found that homicides and shootings most often occurred as a result of “personal disputes between known individuals.”
Understanding ‘group’ violence
The analysis also revealed more about “group” violence in Indianapolis. The term refers to a “wide range of dynamics and structures present in criminally active street groups.”
“Individuals at high risk for violence are likely to associate within particular groups and social networks, ranging from more highly organized, formal gangs to more loosely associated, informal neighborhood crews,” the report reads.
“Attention to groups is important because criminally active groups, gangs, crews, and social networks tend to drive a substantial amount of violence.”
Groups tied to criminal activity in Indianapolis are not “the traditional, hierarchical, and structured ‘gangs,'” according to the analysis. “Instead, groups and their turfs were noted to be unstable and dynamic, with associated members frequently crossing city districts and sometimes holding very fluid associations with multiple groups.”
Around 39% of homicides reviewed were confirmed to have involved group members as victims, suspects or both, according to the analysis.
More than 60 groups were identified among victims and suspects of homicides and shootings. Seventeen of those groups were involved in two or more incidents. Five “core groups” emerged as being responsible for most violent incidents reviewed.
This type of information should be made available by every city government in America, but to publish such data is to provide fodder for the so-called “racists” to notice patterns and then pass legislation and govern based upon the reality of crime in their municipality.
Such a sound system of government once flourished in America, but the only type of data surrounding racial differences allowed to influence public life is whatever can be blamed on whiteness as a means for allocating more tax dollars to improving the lives of individual people of color.
