I am convinced there are benefits to letting your children roam and learn about the world on their own (within reasonable limits, of course). I grew up in Chicago in the 90s and once I was old enough to understand the seriousness of being careful around traffic and crossing the street safely I was allowed to walk to the home of friends who lived a few blocks away on my own. I learned how to navigate the city: oh my usual route is blocked by construction, I have to find a different way.
By the time I was 12 I was taking the El home from school, a consequence of my decision to participate in after-school Jazz band. But that's the thing, it was my choice. If I wanted to be in the band, then I'd have to take the train as my parents couldn't pick me up at that time.
By the time I got to college, it was painfully clear which of my fellow students in the dorms had never had to do anything for themselves before. They were very nearly incapable of caring for themselves, be it their living spaces or navigating life in a new city.
I grew up in Chicago in the 90s and once I was old enough to understand the seriousness of being careful around traffic and crossing the street safely I was allowed to walk to the home of friends who lived a few blocks away on my own. I learned how to navigate the city: oh my usual route is blocked by construction, I have to find a different way.
I see so many children nowadays who are oblivious to their environment! I have to step out of their way, as they run straight toward me on collision courses! They don't make eye contact, and they don't interact as if I'm a person. I remember this happening in malls, in parks, and on the street.
I've been in classes, where we're playing a multiplayer game, and you can't tell a kid to "figure it out." Many kids just freeze until you lead them through what to do, then they just robotically do exactly what you showed them -- no generalization and no independent thought, and if you never show them what to do, they just sit there and do nothing.
Are you talking about the table under "Yearly Murder Trend"? Of course the 1989 entry is the highest; it's the longest period. The only other period on that table of comparable length is 1955 - 1976, with about 3700 less homicides but also a much smaller city.
The line chart above the table clearly backs up the statement you were replying to. From 1968 through 2001 Chicago never had a year with less than 600 homicides. Yes, this year has seen a sharp uptick for some reason. It is still the first time in 15 years Chicago has broken that 600 threshold. This year notwithstanding Chicago has been significantly safer this millennium than it was when most of the people on this site were kids.
I think the the world is becoming much safer, while at the same time, seems a lot scarier because social media has given massive exposure to any sort of danger / problems in society. Things that shock us now were the norm 30 years ago, and the really awful stuff (racial homicides, police corruption) is becoming more rare.
You don't have to think the world is becoming safer, it absolutely is. And not just safer, but more prosperous and wealth is more distributed then ever. Here is just a single article going over many of these things: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/12/goo...
Personally, I don't find such topline metrics that helpful. If India improves by some margin (noting that it is a country with relatively more space to grow than a developed nation) then the averages for the whole World would improve, given that India represents 1/6th the global population. This would mask any relative declines in pockets/cities in a country like the US.
NB I only very quickly skimmed the article, and base this opinion on the usage of broad terminology like "the World is...". It may be objectively true but is not really pertinent to the discussion of whether Chicago is or is not getting safer...
Yes. I did when I was middle school aged. I loved the science museum, but I also wandered around other places downtown. Other than some security guards harassing me when I tried to use the bathroom in their lobby and some homeless people asking me for stuff I don't recall any incidents. And from what I understand seems are safer now then they were in the mid-80s when I was wandering Chicago.
I roamed free in Chicago (city) once I was 10. Still in Chicago. Never been shot. Neither have any of my friends. One is dead of a heroin overdose though...
Having lived there and assuming they had an upbringing similar to the OP, then yes, I would. Like any city, there are parts that are safer than others. As long as I felt my children could understand the difference and were informed enough not to do anything too stupid, I'd be comfortable with them roaming around the city on their own for some things.
Yes, without a doubt. The violence in Chicago is confined to a couple of small areas and are a result of racist policies that will unfortunately take years to fix. Most of the city is as safe as the average town in America.
Yes, probably. Most of Chicago is very safe. My neighborhood ranks as one of the safest in the city. Kids are very likely in my very near future so I'll find out soon enough.
Ironically, the more urban, working class, and "rough" an area is, the more kids you see outside playing by themselves or being home alone without their parents.
By the time I was 12 I was taking the El home from school, a consequence of my decision to participate in after-school Jazz band. But that's the thing, it was my choice. If I wanted to be in the band, then I'd have to take the train as my parents couldn't pick me up at that time.
By the time I got to college, it was painfully clear which of my fellow students in the dorms had never had to do anything for themselves before. They were very nearly incapable of caring for themselves, be it their living spaces or navigating life in a new city.