great we make national news-west ashley shooting at mall (Sumter: crime, credit)

[OleTomCat]

So does Michigan and Lousiana, Anchorage Alaska made the top Ten, it doesn't get much more north than that....

All this shows is that there are some areas of each and every city and state that have bad areas, and when you compare them on a per capita basis it gets blown way out of proportion.

If you have 100 residents and you have 10 violent crimes, then you are going to have a much higher per capita crime rate that a city that has 10K residents and 100 violent crimes.

[Geechie North]

[quote=OleTomCat;6074931]So does Michigan and Lousiana, Anchorage Alaska made the top Ten, it doesn't get much more north than that....

All this shows is that there are some areas of each and every city and state that have bad areas, and when you compare them on a per capita basis it gets blown way out of proportion.

If you have 100 residents and you have 10 violent crimes, then you are going to have a much higher per capita crime rate that a city that has 10K residents and 100 violent crimes.[/quote.R]



Crime statistics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From it:

Crime rate
This graph shows the rate of non-fatal firearm-related crime in the United States from 1993 to 2003.


Crime rate is a measure of the rate of occurrence of crimes committed in a given area and time. Most commonly, crime rate is given as the number of crimes committed among a given number of persons.Often, the type of crime is exactly specified. Thus, a crime rate might be given as the number of murders (or rapes, thefts, etc.) per 100,000 persons per year within a city.
Crime rate is a useful statistic for many purposes, such as evaluating the effectiveness of crime prevention measures or the relative safety of a particular city or neighborhood. Crime rate statistics are commonly used by politicians to advocate for or against a policy designed to deal with crime."

Also:

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offen...ime/index.html

From it:
The South

The South, the Nation’s most populated region, had an estimated 36.1 percent of the Nation’s inhabitants. An estimated 41.9 percent of the Nation’s violent crimes occurred in this region. Overall, violent crime decreased slightly (0.3 percent) in the region when compared with 2003 figures. The number of robberies and murders decreased, 4.1 percent and 3.7 percent, respectively. However, from 2003 to 2004, the estimated volume of forcible rapes and aggravated assaults in that region increased 2.6 percent and 1.2 percent, respectively.
The estimated rate of violent crime in the South was 540.6 offenses per 100,000 in population, a decline of 1.6 percent compared with the 2003 rate. By offense, this region experienced 354.3 aggravated assaults (a 0.2-percent decline), 145.6 robberies (a 5.4-percent decrease), and 6.6 murders (a 5.0-percent decline) per 100,000 in population. Forcible rape was the lone violent crime to increase (1.2 percent) in the rate, 34.1 per 100,000 inhabitants."

[OleTomCat]

Thank you for proving my point....

Even though you used Wikipedia again, which as I have said before is unreliable.

[Geechie North]

Okay, I'll bite.

So you're saying that because SC has fewer big cities than, say NY, it's bound to have a higher crime rate?

[OleTomCat]

Yes, when you base it on a per capita basis, if you have 1000 crimes per Million people you have a lower crime RATE than you have if you have 100 crimes per Thousand people.

[Geechie North]

I was afraid you'd say that.

For the record:

Methodology

From it:

"First, 2004 city and metro area crime rates per 100,000 population (the most recent comparable final numbers available, released by the FBI".

Per 100,000, Tom.

See their 100,000 equals our 100,000......

[OleTomCat]

Yes but if you have a million people and you have 100 instances per 100K then you have over a 100,000 instances of violent crime but if you only have 50,000 and you have 100 instances per 100K than you only have 50 instances of violent crime per year. So which is worse to have 50 instances or 100,000? They both have the same crime rate but which is worse?

[OleTomCat]

Ok, lets make this simple we will use the real numbers to illustrate how CRIME RATE can be disprportionate to actual crime.

CityCrime RatePopulationTotal Crimes1Memphis[SIZE=2]1,262.70[/SIZE][SIZE=2]674,028[/SIZE][SIZE=2]8511[/SIZE]2Sumter, S.C.[SIZE=2]1,244.00[/SIZE][SIZE=2]38782[/SIZE][SIZE=2]482[/SIZE]3Shreveport, La.[SIZE=2]1,187.90[/SIZE][SIZE=2]199569[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2371[/SIZE]4Florence, S.C.[SIZE=2]1,160.60[/SIZE][SIZE=2]31431[/SIZE][SIZE=2]365[/SIZE]5Saginaw, Mich.[SIZE=2]1,089.80[/SIZE][SIZE=2]56263[/SIZE][SIZE=2]613[/SIZE]6Alexandria, La.[SIZE=2]1,067.40[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45857[/SIZE][SIZE=2]489[/SIZE]7Gainesville, Fla.[SIZE=2]934.1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]102828[/SIZE][SIZE=2]961[/SIZE]8Anchorage, Alaska[SIZE=2]932.3[/SIZE][SIZE=2]279671[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2607[/SIZE]9Flint, Mich.[SIZE=2]929.6[/SIZE][SIZE=2]114662[/SIZE][SIZE=2]1066[/SIZE]10Salisbury, Md.[SIZE=2]907.6[/SIZE][SIZE=2]27833[/SIZE][SIZE=2]253[/SIZE]

Hmmm, Now tell me why the two from sc are actually way lower than the rest???

These are using actual numbers from you link http://www.commercialappeal.com/news...violent-crime/ and the population data fro City-data.

North Charleston wasn't even on that list so I couldn't use them to compare.

[Rockmysawks]

Originally Posted by OleTomCat

Yes but if you have a million people and you have 100 instances per 100K then you have over a 100,000 instances of violent crime but if you only have 50,000 and you have 100 instances per 100K than you only have 50 instances of violent crime per year. So which is worse to have 50 instances or 100,000? They both have the same crime rate but which is worse?

Kudos to you for trying to explain arithmetic to these poor souls.

[Geechie North]

Originally Posted by OleTomCat

Ok, lets make this simple we will use the real numbers to illustrate how CRIME RATE can be disprportionate to actual crime.

CityCrime RatePopulationTotal Crimes1Memphis[SIZE=2]1,262.70[/SIZE][SIZE=2]674,028[/SIZE][SIZE=2]8511[/SIZE]2Sumter, S.C.[SIZE=2]1,244.00[/SIZE][SIZE=2]38782[/SIZE][SIZE=2]482[/SIZE]3Shreveport, La.[SIZE=2]1,187.90[/SIZE][SIZE=2]199569[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2371[/SIZE]4Florence, S.C.[SIZE=2]1,160.60[/SIZE][SIZE=2]31431[/SIZE][SIZE=2]365[/SIZE]5Saginaw, Mich.[SIZE=2]1,089.80[/SIZE][SIZE=2]56263[/SIZE][SIZE=2]613[/SIZE]6Alexandria, La.[SIZE=2]1,067.40[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45857[/SIZE][SIZE=2]489[/SIZE]7Gainesville, Fla.[SIZE=2]934.1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]102828[/SIZE][SIZE=2]961[/SIZE]8Anchorage, Alaska[SIZE=2]932.3[/SIZE][SIZE=2]279671[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2607[/SIZE]9Flint, Mich.[SIZE=2]929.6[/SIZE][SIZE=2]114662[/SIZE][SIZE=2]1066[/SIZE]10Salisbury, Md.[SIZE=2]907.6[/SIZE][SIZE=2]27833[/SIZE][SIZE=2]253[/SIZE]

Hmmm, Now tell me why the two from sc are actually way lower than the rest???

These are using actual numbers from you link http://www.commercialappeal.com/news...violent-crime/ and the population data fro City-data.

North Charleston wasn't even on that list so I couldn't use them to compare.

Well Tom,

Seems you and I have come to our usual impasse.

If you are to be believed then the FBI, the social science of Criminology, plus the disciplines of Mathematics and Statistics are all hooey. And it's all a conspiracy to make the South look bad.

But alas, it's far simpler than that: you're just plain old in error.

We define ourselves by what we post on these boards; I'm satisfied with what I've reported, as I'm sure you're with what you believe.

Here's some N. Chas Data (and Chas data) referenced by city/metro size:

City Crime Rankings by Population Group

From it:

CITIES OF 75,000 TO 99,999 POPULATION: (120 cities)
Safest 10:
Most Dangerous 10:

1

Brick Twnshp, NJ

1

Camden, NJ

2

Mission Viejo, CA

2

Compton, CA

3

Cary, NC

3

North Charleston, SC

4

Colonie, NY

4

Trenton, NJ

5

Clarkstown, NY

5

Youngstown, OH

6

Orem, UT

6

Reading, PA

7

Farmington Hills, MI

7

West Palm Beach, FL

8

Troy, MI

8

Wilmington, NC

9

Lake Forest, CA

9

Miami Beach, FL

10

Canton Twnshp, MI

10

Longview, TX

Not much different.

See, we learned to equalize for size differences in population comarisons. Back about 1700, or so.