U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-22-2010, 03:44 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
24,787 posts, read 30,939,012 times
Reputation: 10444
Default CQ Press: Most Dangerous Cities in America, 2010

First, let me say as I've said in the past, that this is an incredibly reckless and irresponsible way to characterize municipalities. This ranking throws a huge blanket over entire cities and that is in very poor taste. I believe the company that does this seeks to be as sensationalistic as possible and deliberately ignores to the damage they know this horrible ranking does to the image of these cities.

Another thing that irks me about this ranking is that it presents data from the previous year as the ranking for the current year-and that is wrong. If this is data from 2009, then it should be presented as a ranking of 2009.

Example: Richmond, California has had a 50% drop in homicides in 2010 and crime is down across the board this year, but if you take this 2010 ranking at face value, you'd assume the city was in the midst of a crime epidemic having jumped 7 spots from the previous year-but the reality is crime is signifantly lower in Richmond this year(year-to-date).

So let's take this with a grain of salt folks, because these cities should not be defined by CQ Press, but by the opinions and experiences of the people who live there.

25 Most Dangerous Cities, 2010(Data is actually 2009)
Rank/ City, State/ Change in ranking from previous year
1 St Louis, MO +1
2 Camden, NJ -1
3 Detroit, MI +1
4 Flint, MI +1
5 Oakland, CA -2
6 Richmond, CA +7
7 Cleveland, OH +1
8 Compton, CA +4
9 Gary, IN +2
10 Birmingham, AL -3
11 Baltimore, MD +2
12 Memphis, TN -2
13 New Orleans, LA -7
14 Jackson, MS -5
15 Little Rock, AR +8
16 Baton Rouge, LA +9
17 Buffalo, NY(Not in Top 25 last year)
18 New Haven, CT( Not in Top 25 last year)
19 Hartford, CT +4
20 Dayton, OH Unchanged
21 Kansas City, MO -6
22 Washington, DC -6
23 Newark, NJ (Not in Top 25 last year)
24 Cincinnati, OH -5
25 Atlanta, GA -7

Most Dangerous Cities 2010 - WalletPop

Cities that Fell out of Top 25
Philadelphia, PA
North Charleston, SC
Orlando, FL

2009 Rankings(Based on data from 2008)
1 Camden, NJ
2 St Louis, MO
3 Oakland, CA
4 Detroit, MI
5 Flint, MI
6 New Orleans, LA
7 Birmingham, AL
8 Cleveland, OH
9 Jackson, MS
10 Memphis, TN
11 Gary, IN
12 Compton, CA
13 Baltimore, MD
14 Richmond, CA
15 Kansas City, MO
16 Washington, DC
17 Orlando, FL
18 Atlanta, GA
19 Cincinnati, OH
20 Dayton, OH
21 Philadelphia, PA
22 North Charleston, SC
23 Little Rock, AR
24 Hartford, CT
25 Baton Rouge, LA

Last edited by 18Montclair; 11-22-2010 at 04:04 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-22-2010, 03:59 AM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 13,015,206 times
Reputation: 6444
Isn't Baton Rouge at 16? So in what sense did it fall out of the 25?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 04:05 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
24,787 posts, read 30,939,012 times
Reputation: 10444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R. View Post
Isn't Baton Rouge at 16? So in what sense did it fall out of the 25?
gracias...I had to do a double take.

Corrected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 06:10 AM
 
Location: Clayton, MO
1,517 posts, read 1,928,067 times
Reputation: 409
What a joke. St. Louis is not the most dangerous city. Not even close.

Quote:
Greg Scarbro, unit chief of the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program, said the FBI also discourages using the data for these types of rankings.
Kara Bowlin, spokeswoman for St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, said the city actually has been getting safer over the last few years. She said crime in St. Louis has gone down each year since 2007, and so far in 2010, St. Louis crime is down 7 percent.
Erica Van Ross, spokeswoman for the St. Louis Police Department, called the rankings irresponsible.
"Crime is based on a variety of factors. It's based on geography, it's based on poverty, it's based on the economy," Van Ross said.
"That is not to say that urban cities don't have challenges, because we do," Van Ross said. "But it's that it's irresponsible to use the data in this way."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 06:25 AM
 
Location: Clayton, MO
1,517 posts, read 1,928,067 times
Reputation: 409
2009 Most Dangerous Metro's

#103 - St. Louis

That's all you need to know.
http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/2009...9_Rank_Rev.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 09:15 AM
 
1 posts, read 2,624 times
Reputation: 12
I have had people murdered in Richmond that were not ghetto gang members or drug dealers. I have lived in Richmond mt whole life born and raised, and I work over in the iron triangle, I also live over in North Richmond. I would have to agree with this study sorry to say but it's true. When young men go into a church, and shoot two people, people are outside working on a car and 4 people are murdered, your at the donut shot and watch someone get stabbed in front of you, same place 2 mos later someone blast someone, and runs into grocery store and tosses gun in freezer? There is so much more I could go into, and do you not realize how small Richmond is??? In retro spect really?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 09:38 AM
 
9,664 posts, read 7,580,263 times
Reputation: 5823
Well, it's good to see that DC has improved significantly. Hopefully, it won't be in the top 25 any longer by this time next year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Florida
4,184 posts, read 6,491,562 times
Reputation: 1437
Good job Orlando. It went from number 17 in 2009 to not in the top 25 at all in 2010. In 2008 I believe it was in the top 10. Crime has dropped significantly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 10:06 AM
 
Location: ITP - City of Atlanta Proper
6,456 posts, read 6,430,306 times
Reputation: 3621
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorlander View Post
What a joke. St. Louis is not the most dangerous city. Not even close.


Quote:
Greg Scarbro, unit chief of the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program, said the FBI also discourages using the data for these types of rankings.
Kara Bowlin, spokeswoman for St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, said the city actually has been getting safer over the last few years. She said crime in St. Louis has gone down each year since 2007, and so far in 2010, St. Louis crime is down 7 percent.
Erica Van Ross, spokeswoman for the St. Louis Police Department, called the rankings irresponsible.
"Crime is based on a variety of factors. It's based on geography, it's based on poverty, it's based on the economy," Van Ross said.
"That is not to say that urban cities don't have challenges, because we do," Van Ross said. "But it's that it's irresponsible to use the data in this way."
With this I agree. Saying which city is most dangerous based on simply dividing the number of residents by the number of crimes occurred does not tell you how "unsafe" a city is. Has it gone without notice that none of the cities in the first post are larger than 200 square miles, with most in the 100 square mile range or lower? This measurement will always lean against cities with smaller square mileage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2010, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
24,787 posts, read 30,939,012 times
Reputation: 10444
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
With this I agree. Saying which city is most dangerous based on simply dividing the number of residents by the number of crimes occurred does not tell you how "unsafe" a city is. Has it gone without notice that none of the cities in the first post are larger than 200 square miles, with most in the 100 square mile range or lower? This measurement will always lean against cities with smaller square mileage.
+1

What an excellent observation. I never thought about it that way.

I've always been very critical of this ranking and never could quite point my finger on why I thought it was so unfair, but I think you may have hit the nail on the head!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top