mattyt36

It ain't just the cities. Rural America Reels From Violent Crime. ‘People Lost Their Ever-Lovin’ Minds.’ - WSJ

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, that is among the nicest Embassy Suites in the system! (We Houstonians know not to judge a book by its cover!) Or at least it was the last time I stayed there 10 years ago. How time has flied. Or flew, as the case may be.

Well, they passed a law and then upheld it. I guess big to some, no news to others. For me, it's nice to show that they are committed. It is something one hears from most visitors, the inner core of the City is quite nice now, but getting here from the airports is quite the eyesore.

What is the dotted line on the Eastex Freeway?

Looks like my kind of place!

Potentially dumb question but could the transaction not have been structured either as (1) as a contract for a purchase at a later date; or (2) TxDOT owning the property and hiring a property manager? I guess of the two, (2) would be more problematic for the reasons you state and other, more practical ones, but either would allow the property to continue producing income, which would have the effect of reducing the effective purchase price.

If of interest to anyone other than I, according to Central Houston, this will be the 10th largest residential building in downtown Houston by number of units are: 1. Market Square Tower 463 2. 500 Crawford 400 3. Houston House Apartments 394 4. Brava 373 5. Catalyst 361 6. One Park Place 346 7. SkyHouse Houston 336 8. SkyHouse Main 336 9. The Rice 312 10. Trammell Crow Co. | High Street Residential (Parkside Residences) 309 The Star is the next largest at 286. Of the above, only 500 Crawford is not a high-rise. Of other high rises, ARIS has 274 and Camden has 271. Interestingly enough there are 2 single-family residences listed, 110 Milam (the distinctive building on the south side of the Bayou) and the National Cash Register Building (515 Caroline). The WL Foley Building (214 Travis) has 2 units. https://www.centralhouston.org/filer/0/1614996509/468/

Have they? Enlighten me. Likewise, it doesn’t make it true, so let’s stop with the hollow and circular logic and just speak directly and to the point. So, at the end of the day this isn’t about the statistics (reminder … there were other statistics quoted in the release that had numbers well above 3%) whether they’re factual as stated or not, it’s about a press release, which almost by definition is pure puffery. Bellyaching and blaming Democrats, indeed. I do think it’s worth pointing out that no one on this thread, myself included, think that putting out a press release for a 3% reduction in the murder rate is warranted. But I also don’t think it’s sinister or disingenuous or “fake news” as others on here seem to. Puffery, sure, but you guys are supposed to love puffery. You voted its spirit animal into office for President of the United States in 2016. Maybe we should change the title of the thread to “Mayoral Press Release: Silly or Not Silly?” because at the end of the day that seems to be the thrust of our discussion.

Not saying you are--what I said was if there were fluctuations in crime rates from time to time (assuming you or no one you knew was not directly affected) would you change your behavior? I think you've pretty much confirmed here the answer is no, which is what I and probably 99% of people do (if you exclude from doing something about it bellyaching and blaming Democrats, of course . . . this is the boilerplate response for a good chunk of the population, for which there is plenty of evidence in this thread). One is either murdered by one someone knows or it's entirely random. There's not much people can do to counteract the random except avoid places in which random shootings are, well, not that random in occurrence. Oh, and Augie will insist, arm one's self. I've stated my opinion earlier that going to biweekly meetings about crime for 15+ years to somehow feel better about it just doesn't make much sense to me, but I understand there are different perspectives. Yes, another thing everyone can agree on. Innocent people being victims of crime is bad. On this note, however, we've heard a lot about repeat offenders. I have yet to see any statistics, however, linking any of the increase in crime to repeat offenders. In my sense it's an empty observation. "Oh, have you seen crime has gone up? Can you believe that a lot of these crimes are done by repeat offenders? Why aren't we do something about repeat offenders?" Seems like a conversation that could've taken place in 1954, 1982, or 2022. Why? Because it's pretty much a truism. Repeat offenders, er, repeat offend. Quelle surprise. Now I know the Harris County Republican Party is trying to link that to changes in bail requirements under the Hidalgo administration . . . I mean something like that should not be subject to debate. It either is a major, major increase in crimes being caused by repeat offenders or there are other contributors. Remember, repeat offenders have been repeat offending since the beginning of history . . . also, remember, there is a balance to be struck in designing an entire criminal justice system around the maybe 0.5% of repeat offenders who end up killing someone upon release and the others who do not (although these days I think there are plenty of Americans who think criminals should just be locked up for life, regardless . . . well, criminals of a certain demographic if we're honest). I'm a bit "skeptical" (as @trymahjong would say) because (1) it is so overtly political; and (2) there has been a nationwide increase in crime since the pandemic. It seems as if this question were actually answered--not in awful anecdotes or tragic news stories or political fingerpointing--maybe we could get somewhere. Instead (sadly), the typical response is one like @august948's . . . "Well, a Democrat is in charge, so you should just expect looting, rape, murders, and pillaging cuz the Democrats love the criminals." (I mean, this is just such a TIRED, TIRED trope, but I guess not for some. Moreover, he somehow makes these comments unironically while complaining about Turner being too political, BUT I DIGRESS.) If I've missed anything in the local media, please share so I can be educated about it.

You see, now, Augie, this, I would say, is way more in the spirit of "fake news." More like, "The Republican propaganda networks have aligned the Democrats nationally with higher crime rates, looting, burning, riots, and defunding the police." Of course, but the question is, are you going to make material changes to your life or start attending meetings or obsessing about statistics to feel safer because the murder rate goes up or down a few ticks? Now I will say, the only (well visible) crime that I encounter on a regular basis and that seems to have increased greatly is vehicle theft, just tons of broken glass in and around the streets and lots surrounding Buffalo Bayou Park. You'd think if it were that localized HPD could set something up, but I guess not. Maybe you can ask them at your next meeting?

“Everybody’s gotta have a job”

And I find myself again not feeling any more or less safe, and I question why anyone would feel any differently.

@Blue Dogs, I have never seen "Master Chef," but shall give it a try based on your recommendation. Do they film the season in a single city like Top Chef? I do wonder how Houston was selected for Top Chef . . . I know our culinary scene gets a lot of press, but I wonder how much any incentive packages, etc. played into the location decision. I remember reading somewhere (wish I could remember where so I could share) that HoustonFirst was investing money into increasing the City's profile through productions such as these. The last show I remember that gave Houston a try was "Married to Medicine: Houston," which got canceled after 1 season because there was such little drama, which I thought was a fine testament to the City and how we generally get along relatively well. The biggest shade thrown in that show was one of the women telling another, "You're so Beaumont." I thought Buddha was arrogance personified, a real jerk! At the Judge's Table when the others were being reviewed and they split to him, he had a look in his face like he was ready to jump the judges, screaming, "Just give it to me already!" Evelyn did Houston proud. And Sarah's story was fun to watch. All in all, I don't think the show did the best job showcasing Houston (must've seemed pretty bland to those watching who have no knowledge of the City), but the worst was the fact they ended in Tucson . . . blech! I know they typically do that, but I just wish there was a better finale to the Houston episodes than the Galveston fish fry.

I'd say it's pretty much a standard press release. Hell, they didn't even say it was directly responsible, which is arguably an improvement over most press releases from even the private sector. (You should read the "hot off the presses" United press release this week on its new amenity kits, and then see how many "news" outlets regurgitated the content with the same aplomb. Boy did it make a free tube of Chap Stick seem like way more than it actually is!) The nearly 3% decline in the city's homicide rate is an indication of the efficacy of the One Safe Houston initiative, a comprehensive public safety plan aimed at holistically addressing and in some cases rebuilding the public safety ecosystem in Houston. I don't think they're playing any games with the time period, either. It's not February-May, or second week of March-third week of May. It's from the beginning of the year to the most recently available month. (I've already said my piece on the 5 being insignificant, although it does seem the drop in other types of crimes may be way more material.) That said, I'd still say calling it "fake news" is a bit dramatic. Perfectly understandable. (Although I must point out that 187 murders over 151 days equals an average of 1.24 murders/day by my calculation, and since you can't commit a quarter of a murder, that means on some days it's 1 and some days it's 2, some bad days it may be 5, and I'm sure there are several days with none, so I wouldn't say that 2 murders in one day in and of itself disproves the statistic being quoted.) To each their own! I certainly am in no place to lecture someone who has invested so much time over the past 15+ years. I'd say your feelings on the matter are definitely worth more than mine.

The numbers they are advertising are a 3% drop in the HOMICIDE rate, which of course is a subset of the CRIME rate. So one can go down while the other is going up. (Although they do mention drops in 3 other categories—robberies, rapes, and aggravated assaults.) I’m sure you know that, and I’m not trying to split hairs, I just think that if people in this country could agree on basic facts again, it’d move the ball down the field at least a couple yards. Feeling “safe” is definitely based in large part on perception. And if one spends a lot of time at HPD meetings going over crime statistics (which I’m not criticizing in any way … perhaps you’re a business owner in a particularly affected area or, especially, have been directly affected yourself), it wouldn’t surprise me if they would leave you feeling less safe. That goes for me, too. I think I’m happier not knowing, to be honest. People told me for years to stop watching the news, and I finally did, and I think my life is at the very least marginally better for it. Regardless, from a statistical perspective I’d say a 3% drop is probably insignificant. (The other statistics seem MUCH more material.). I certainly wouldn’t put a press release out about it, or expect to get feted in Washington. And any link between that insignificant number and a program is, if course, subjective. All of the above said, is what you describe a feeling or do you believe the statistics are being falsified? Or perhaps in your neighborhood they’re still going up while going down elsewhere? There’s of course a big difference between these 3 statements. Anyhoo, here’s to hoping by the end of the year the 3% reduction somehow becomes a 10% reduction and the crime rate in total comes down as well.

Well, in fairness, the 3% decrease in the homicide rate is either real or not, and shouldn't be subject to debate, wouldn't you agree? The OP stated that his personal experience does not jibe with the claim. Even though his personal experiences may not jibe with the claim, that doesn't automatically mean it's "fake news," correct? The Mayor's press release states: May 31, 2022 -- Mayor Sylvester Turner and the Houston Police Department announced today that for the first time in more than a year, Houston’s homicide rate is showing a decline. As of today, there is an unofficial number of 187 homicides in Houston thus far in 2022 compared to 192 homicides at this time last year. The nearly 3% decline in the city's homicide rate is an indication of the efficacy of the One Safe Houston initiative, a comprehensive public safety plan aimed at holistically addressing and in some cases rebuilding the public safety ecosystem in Houston. https://www.houstontx.gov/mayor/press/2022/decrease-homicide-rates.html#:~:text=The nearly 3% decline in,public safety ecosystem in Houston. If the 187 is accurate and the 192 is accurate, then the "nearly 3%" is accurate. One could argue, wow, only 5 fewer murders, are you kidding me? Perfectly valid. One could argue, wow, only a 3% reduction, why don't you call me when you hit 10%? Also valid. Or one could just say, "192 murders in 5 months?! That seems like it's still a pretty big problem, so why are you tooting your own horn?" That seems to jibe with @trymahjong's observation. But for it to be "fake news," either the 187 would have to be inaccurate or the 192 would have to be inaccurate. Or both. Or the "nearly 3%" calculation. What is your claim, Augie? For me, as a resident of the City of Houston, I have obviously not been murdered, don't know anyone else who has been murdered, don't know anyone who knows anyone who has been murdered or attempted murdered, can't say I've seen anything close to one transpiring, and, for that reason, I don't feel any less safe than I did 5 years ago. If that experience changes next week, well I'm sure my opinion will change. There may be stories from time to time on the local news with really, really bad and really, really sad circumstances for murder, but it's been that way my whole life. Not trying to discount the murders here, all murders are of course bad, but I would argue sensationalizing it without context is as well, especially for political reasons. If @trymahjong has personal and pervasive experiences as a victim of crime, well it totally makes sense to me that he would think 3% is nothing to write home about and is a waste of time and that it would be overtly political to advertise such “small potatoes.”

OMG … PROGRESS!!!! 😢

Well thanks for telling me you were tapping out (turning around?) brother! That’s what we call GROWTH!

Reefy, I do appreciate the time you have taken for a bit of self-reflection. I’ve also taken some time to think. After all, it’s the only way we can learn and grow. As I think I mentioned before, I work in the aviation industry, and have always been interested in the stories behind air disasters. What a great system we have! We've got a whole investigatory arm, separate from the regulating agencies, that gets to investigate why there are major transportation accidents and make recommendations to the government on how to improve safety. One of the first things you learn is that this work is not about assigning blame--in fact, every report speaks to "contributing factors" that led to the accident. So our exchange has reminded me of one such event in particular, viz BN352, a HOU-DAL L-188 "Electra" flight in the 1960s. Now I'm going off memory here, but essentially what happened is that the pilots were a bit late leaving Houston and a massive thunderstorm was on the direct route to Dallas. They saw that thunderstorm but decided to go through. I mean, it's not like they wanted to crash. They probably thought they had been through something similar before and that they could do it again, but maybe there was a bit of adrenaline, too . . . who knows? But they decided they just weren't going to be any later getting into Dallas. They told people they were going to land at a certain time, and by God, they were going to do it. And they got into that thunderstorm and it was really bad. I mean, obviously I wasn't there, but I imagine the rain must have been pounding on the plane, the plane was being bounced around, it was at night so it was pitch black. And they probably saw it relatively fast, I mean, they could've turned around, but somehow they thought either, "I'm sure the worst is over" or, more likely based on the CVR transcript (I did have to Google this one as I wanted to be specific--I'm shamelessly copying from Wikipedia here), they just were too proud to turn around. The NTSB correlated the cockpit conversations with the ATC communications transcript and noted that it was the first officer, at the captain's request, who asked ATC if they had received reports of hail in the area and received the response from ATC that they hadn't because other aircraft had "all deviated around to the east." At that point, according to the CVR transcript, the captain advised the first officer: "No, don't talk to him too much. I'm hearing his conversation on this. He's trying to get us to admit (we're makin)[6] big mistake coming through here."[ And so they kept on flying directly through it, and I mean, it must've gotten really bad and even caught them by more surprise than they had already been surprised, and they decided to cut their losses and request permission to turn around. Alas, it was too late. In short, in the execution of the turn in the thunderstorm conditions, the aircraft was overstressed, the wings tore off, and the plane plummeted to the ground in Dawson, Texas, near Buffalo. All 85 onboard died. And, why did they die? Foolish pride. Well, I suppose the captain died of foolish pride . . . sadly, everyone else was just along for the ride. So, you know, your comments here are very enlightening in helping me "put more pieces of the puzzle together" and add to the list of "contributing factors." You had a bad experience, just wanted to blow off some steam, someone responded to you with an accurate description of the cause, it so happened to be me (lucky me, BTW 🤢) and you decided to "pick a fight" because you read some other posts of mine and thought, "Man, that guy is an arrogant SOB and he needs to be brought down a peg." In other words, you saw the storm and thought you could get through it. (That whole plane crash thing was a metaphor, just to be clear.) Turbulence got rough, so to speak, much rougher than you thought it ever could get, you said some silly things, but kept on digging in your heels because "He's trying to get us to admit we're makin a big mistake coming through here," so to speak (can you just admit that you aren't getting flight changes willy nilly days in advance, at least not more than once?), and now is the time you decide to turn around. So well done. No need for the wings to fall off. I'm happy to extend a hand and help you get back on course (metaphor alert!). But, before I do that, I must just take issue with your characterizations of my posts, my rhetorical style, my skirmishes and kerfluffles so to speak. I will say that foolish pride is at the root of most. (Did I mention there’s a song about that?) I remember Luminaire making some comment once suggesting it would be "hilarious" to erect a statue to policemen killed in the line of action across the Bayou from the statue of Jose Campos Torres (who, in case you weren't aware was murdered by HPD in the 1970s). I believe I responded something to the effect of "Well, that wouldn't be the word I'd use." And man, he barreled through that thunderstorm. His response wasn't, "Sorry, poor choice of words," but rather something to the effect of "Sorry, not sorry, all they're trying to do is buy votes with some stupid statue." 😳 Man, I mean the wings came off very fast with that one. But, I will say, I have since learned through other posts of his that he lost his job relatively recently and that's probably why he moved to Utah, so I see how that could not have been anything short of a major life trauma (especially for someone so qualified because it’s clear to me from his other posts he knows what he’s doing and is good and very thoughtful at it) which does lead to lashing out and, at the end of the day, essentially blaming entire groups of people. It's a story as old as time, so to speak. I can't say I agree with his position, but I feel some empathy for him now that I did not before. Then there was editor, some really strange comment about something being unequivocally proven (I don't even remember what it was, quite honestly, but it was definitely objectively subjective), and I said, "Oh yeah?" and his response was to, again, barrel through that thunderstorm and say, "Books have been written about it" and sent me a link to the library. I mean, really juvenile at the end of the day, don't you think? (Definitely common themes here in terms of "contributing factors,” I submit foolish pride is the biggest one) I did read a few other editor posts, and noticed some other common themes . . . I mean, they're mostly negative and critical. And then I remembered, "Hey this guy just moved back to Houston not too long ago, so he's probably going through the whole, 'Why in the hell did I move back HERE?!'") second-guessing phase that occurs to all of us who do. Probably needs another good year, but he'll be a changed and happier man, no doubt! The long and the short is, I feel empathy now for him, too. (And, in fairness, maybe he just wanted me to check out the damned library! I dunno.) As for the NHHIP stuff, hey, maybe in the early days I argued with more, but I think if you do the forensics on that one, I spent a couple of months trying to earnestly share information. At the end of the day, it really was a "tiff" between samagon and me. Most of the original people who argued against whatever points I made, I think, realized that what I was saying was true, there was no choice between a freeway and a train, there weren't tens of thousands of people being "ripped from their homes," etc., etc. so they kind of dropped it. Samagon, well he took the BN352 approach. He is proud to say he blocked me, much like you're like Dwight Schrute screaming "Michael! Michael!!!" at the moderators trying to get my posts deleted or posting privileges revoked. I've got other buddies I argue with, august948 is my fave, but even Blue Dogs, I mean, I'll be the first to congratulate him when he gets to ride his red wave. Do I agree with him? Absolutely not. Do I think he’s crazy? Yes. Does he think I’m crazy? I’d be disappointed if he didn’t. But, at the end of the day, you know, he's just Blue Dogs doing Blue Dogs. Here's a fun fact--I have not reported a single post for a violation of forum rules. I have not ever mentioned forum rules. I have never asked for anyone to be banned (and I know at least several people have asked for me to be banned). OK, maybe now's a good time to mention "forum rules" for the first time . . . do you really think it's in the spirit of the "forum rules" to get the air traffic controller banned for suggesting you turn around when you’re the guy who made the decision to fly into a thunderstorm in the first place? You got us here. Doesn't seem like it should be that way to me. In fact, it kind of seems totally wrong, you know, wrong, like on a moral level. Like, this is on you, buddy. Take some ownership. In re your comments about all my societal flaws, I mean, man, really, you got it all wrong again. I mean like the total opposite. I am gay, have been (officially at least) for 25 years now, which probably coincides with the time you were at the Bubble Gum elite level of the Continental Young Travelers program. ANOTHER fun fact--I don't even call the Guv Hot Wheels--except on here--I use another word, which I think is a little too on the nose for this forum. So credit for the whole Hot Wheels thing actually goes to my very good friend (also a gay), who--again--interesting fact--his mother is a paraplegic! It shouldn't be that difficult to see if the ADA were being debated today, Greg Abbott would be the poster child for the opposition . . . he would have zero problem standing up (oooops, metaphor!) and saying, "I don't need any help, why do these other losers?" So you also shouldn't be surprised that, sure, there will be plenty of people to line up and accuse me of being insensitive to the disabled, but I will guarantee you that the common denominator will not be their disability, but rather their political affiliation. Likewise, there are plenty of disabled people out there who would love to push the Guv down a cliff and stick a steel rod in his spokes on the way down (figuratively speaking, of course) . . . surely you must see that! (Sanctimony is never pretty, and it's always about one's self, not the people you are appealing to. I've noticed Samagon has the same problem. They don't need you speaking on their behalf, especially if you're doing it only to further your position (there's that pesky pride again!) . . . you might be surprised that lesbians love lesbian humor, BTW. I mean I'm almost certain Kim would at least chuckle at that post . . . I can say that cuz I've met her. I don't project experiences I haven't had, in other words.) As for Man Hands, I mean, it's the same. I'll let you think through it as a thought exercise. Maybe look up the concept of "reclaiming" identity through humor. Take a little moment to dig a little deeper and notice other patterns--towards what group of people do I use such language? You are right on something--it is indeed modeled on Trump. Fight fire with fire, brother. Humor works on many different levels, and I make the decision to operate on the level I do acknowledging the cost that some people may not "get it." Buddy, thanks. I don't need an apology, but, again, I appreciate the reflection. Let's start over! See you on the battlefield, brother! ❤️ Oh, and while we're on it, from today . . . once again, just trying to keep you informed! This summer is going to be rough! (It's going to be even more awful for the employees who are living it every day, and I know you're all about empathy for others, so please keep that in mind … for sure don’t be misogynistic or ableist, don’t body shame them, and, whatever you do, don’t be homophobic! There’s a lot of us homos in the aviation industry, after all.) Flying with Delta this summer? Here's what to know and how to prep | Delta News Hub ""From July 1-Aug. 7, we’ll reduce service by approximately 100 daily departures, primarily in markets in the U.S. and Latin America that Delta frequently serves. This will build additional resilience in our system and improve operational reliability for our customers and employees; we’ll continue to proactively adjust select flights in the coming weeks." (July is in a matter of weeks, just FYI) And from Europe, totally not the same but speaks to the general labor issues: KLM Halts Ticket Sales at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport – Airways Magazine

Oh man, I can’t believe that sterile corridor will be permanent. 🤢

Well it‘s now or never on that one, as we’ve discussed before, unless they get an extension from the City.

Reef, brother, just do a little more forensics and this time take the emotion out of it. The situation you described in the OP, i.e., flights getting changed weeks and months in advance, was literally answered in the original reply. I mean, again, so much has been written about this, it’s not just me, buddy! The pride and the snark and the attitude were all introduced by you. Presumably because, it is WAY important to you that your original post (which you are probably now embarrassed you posted to begin with) is perceived as accurate and totally legitimate. (You know the concept … you used it incorrectly … it’s “saving face” … I fear it is the exact opposite of what you think it means, and, man, to go through life not knowing how that works, truly rough. Feel for you, bro.) Forgive me for trying to shed some light on what was going on, I was obviously a fool to even attempt to do so. I see now that the purpose of your original post was to just “let off a little steam,” and you didn’t really want anyone to engage with you other than to say, maybe, “Yeah, man, that happened to me, too, and it s*cked! Damn those airlines!” and “Man, elite status on two airlines, how’d you do it, you lucky guy?” (Been there, done that, doing it now. You talk like a total Silver, BTW. 90 minutes on the phone? Yikes! Worse than I thought. I’m so used to not having to wait. I really shouldn’t kick a man while he’s obviously so (far!) down.) But, sure, go ahead and call the Sheriff and lecture me on rhetorical techniques and what people who have “lost the argument” do. Again, it’s like the total opposite of what you think it is. I believe the psychological term for this is PROJECTION. I must admit, it is fascinating to me that you can’t seem to see this for yourself, but, again, I’ve read that’s how projection works so it totally checks out. Regardless, enjoy your trip to HEL. I hear it’s nice.

“You just don’t like Mealer do you ? Just admit it. You’re scared because 2022 is a GOP year across the country.” Correct. (Has that ever been in question?) (BTW, serious question here, do you think na-na-ny-boo-boo is a legitimate way to run a country?)

Fearmongering based on fever dreams for votes when you should know better is lying as far as I'm concerned. But I mean, you're right, she could believe her own stuff, I suppose, and therefore it wouldn't constitute "lying" per se, just tremendous irresponsibility and lack of self-accountability.