Factors involved in violent crime rates in Minneapolis (neighborhood, universities)

[Isabel_009]

Thanks for raising this point - I hadn't thought about it. However it raises the question, what defines a metro area versus a city? Is it really largely an arbitrary distinction, or are there agreed upon characteristics that are consistent across cities/metro areas that make them comparable? I am not very knowledgeable about this stuff, but I am a little hesitant to believe that Minneapolis's grim statistics (on some counts) are due to an unfortunate and arbitrary boundary. Perhaps that could explain some of it, but one would think that if such boundary setting is largely arbitrary, then those who compile stats would try to control for this fact, such as by including some other index, like crime rates for the larger metro area, and seeing whether that changes things. But perhaps you are right - I'm afraid that this (crime stats, city boundary definition, etc) is something I know next to nothing about so I'm really just grasping at straws! Thanks for your thoughts!

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

Regarding the original post: when comparing crime statistics between cities and making judgments based on them, it is extremely important to not just compare crime rates in relation to population sizes of the core cities, but take into account the metropolitan area sizes as well. As has been discussed at length on this forum, Minneapolis is somewhat unique in terms of large metropolitan cities in that it defined and stuck to its city boundaries in the early part of the 20th century- I don't know the exact history, but the Grand Rounds (straddling the city border w/surrounding suburbs) was largely constructed in the 1930s, before much of the city's massive population growth, and the border has not changed since that time to my knowledge (although I know Ryan Lake in my neighborhood was an exception). In many other cities across the nation, this was not the case and/or continues not to be the case- e.g. in the case of my hometown of Sioux Falls (one of the faster growing cities in the nation in recent years), there are frequent expansions of city boundaries to continuously envelope all of the new growth occurring on the outskirts. Why is it important to take Mpls' boundaries into consideration?

• Minneapolis' core city population is relatively small at ~400,000, and, as mentioned above, the land area of Mpls proper is similarly very small comparative to the metro area's size.
• Minneapolis and the metropolitan area at large are similar to most other large metro areas in the nation in that most of the "big city" crime is concentrated in very centrally located inner-city areas (e.g. downtown areas and those areas directly adjacent to them)- crime rates tend to be higher in urban cores.
• Because of all of the above-Mpls' crime rates, if solely looking at core city crimes per 100,000, are going to be skewed to look higher than many of its counterparts across the nation because of the low core city population. Imagine how different our crime stats would look if the city boundaries of Minneapolis were expanded to include just the first-ring suburbs surrounding the city (which in many other areas would be more likely to be w/in city boundaries)- the rates per 100,000 in all crime categories would be vastly different.
• When comparing metropolitan areas and their crime statistics as a whole (and at times even core city crime statistics), Mpls is often/generally viewed as one of the safer cities/metro areas in the nation.

[atowers]

I haven't read all of the replies on here but where I'm at, the least I can say is I want out. I'm in the midway of st paul and I don't even feel comfortable going outside to get something from the car. Then again, I went from living in a suburban area in upstate New York to a big city here in Minnesota. When I was 7 months pregnant with our now 8 month old son, a couple of guys were shooting at each other outside of our windows. It's sad that it comes down to guns and violence in general.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by Isabel_009

Thanks for raising this point - I hadn't thought about it. However it raises the question, what defines a metro area versus a city? Is it really largely an arbitrary distinction, or are there agreed upon characteristics that are consistent across cities/metro areas that make them comparable? I am not very knowledgeable about this stuff, but I am a little hesitant to believe that Minneapolis's grim statistics (on some counts) are due to an unfortunate and arbitrary boundary. Perhaps that could explain some of it, but one would think that if such boundary setting is largely arbitrary, then those who compile stats would try to control for this fact, such as by including some other index, like crime rates for the larger metro area, and seeing whether that changes things. But perhaps you are right - I'm afraid that this (crime stats, city boundary definition, etc) is something I know next to nothing about so I'm really just grasping at straws! Thanks for your thoughts!

I used the same data you posted to, connected it to metropolitan size, and posted some charts ranking the individual crimes of the largest 32 metro areas in the US here: http://www.city-data.com/forum/city-...2-msas-us.html. For being the 16th largest, Mpls seems to consistely rank in the 20s (on a scale of high to low of 32) or middle-of-the-road, but I was surprised to see us edging up above middle-of-the-road on a few as well. Who knew Riverside, CA was so low in crime?

[green_mariner]

I don't know how many murders Minneapolis had in 2010, but I notice when it comes to violent crime, murder isn't among the highest numbers in Minneapolis. What I do notice is while the murder rate dropped between 2007-2009, the rate of rape have swung back into the 100's per 100,000.
I haven't murder of Minneapolis getting any murders for the first 3 days of this year. Sadly, a quarterback at a community college in Brainerd,MN was killed in Indianapolis at the first of the year.

[Squeamish]

Originally Posted by atowers

I haven't read all of the replies on here but where I'm at, the least I can say is I want out. I'm in the midway of st paul and I don't even feel comfortable going outside to get something from the car. Then again, I went from living in a suburban area in upstate New York to a big city here in Minnesota. When I was 7 months pregnant with our now 8 month old son, a couple of guys were shooting at each other outside of our windows. It's sad that it comes down to guns and violence in general.

St. Paul is largely a safe city, but crime varies drastically as one moves a few blocks away in any given direction. Moreso than most major cities. For example, St. Louis has the very unsafe North City and the relatively safe South City. St. Paul's crime map cannot be described that simply.

Here's my favorite St. Paul crime map. I know this is just residential burglary, but the benefit is the little dots give you a more detailed breakdown than just the grid colors.

http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DID=13302

As you can see, burglary is generally concentrated in two areas, but there are other relatively high crime areas throughout the city. And these areas have very safe areas right next door. The "West Side" (south central) has a bad reputation, but grid 211, where I lived for 2 years, is exceptionally safe. I have friends who live in grid 84, a block away from where most of the dots are concentrated, but their street is quiet and full of responsible people. I live in grid 82. My door is so thin that it could easily be kicked through, but I'm really not that concerned. It's statistically very unlikely to happen here. Half a mile to the east and it'd be a totally different story.

If crime on your street is above your threshold of comfort, you don't have to move far to get away from it. Just move away from the dots!

Has anyone seen a similarly detailed crime mapping site for Minneapolis? I'm familiar with that popular spot crime site, but due to the short reporting period and the nature of the site, it doesn't clearly indicate good vs. bad neighborhoods.

I've traveled extensively to almost all major US cities, and spent a lot of time driving around them getting to know the neighborhoods. One thing that strikes me as unusual about the Twin Cities is that almost all neighborhoods "look" fairly clean and well-kept-up, at least compared to most other Midwestern and Eastern cities. Even the worst neighborhoods in the TC have mostly houses that are decently well taken care of. It's a lot harder to tell visually between a good and bad neighborhood in the TC than in other Midwestern and Eastern cities. Some friends of mine just moved into the un-numbered grid just north of 96. One of only five red grids on the map. You'd think they'd be scared, but they haven't said a word about it. And their neighborhood LOOKS clean and respectable. That's the strange thing about the TC. Western cities are more like this tho - harder to tell bad from good because it all looks good.

[audadvnc]

I was at a public safety meeting a couple weeks back with the Mpls Police Dept in attendance. We discussed a recent rash of burglaries in the Camden neighborhood; the police know who's doing it, but haven't caught them red handed yet. The same burglary gang was arrested, convicted and jailed last summer, but their 6 month sentence ended in the beginning of December - and immediately, the burglaries started right back up in the gang's old turf.

Why the short sentence for professional criminals? Prison overcrowding. We have to make room for all those 1st time pot offenders after all...

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by audadvnc

I was at a public safety meeting a couple weeks back with the Mpls Police Dept in attendance. We discussed a recent rash of burglaries in the Camden neighborhood; the police know who's doing it, but haven't caught them red handed yet. The same burglary gang was arrested, convicted and jailed last summer, but their 6 month sentence ended in the beginning of December - and immediately, the burglaries started right back up in the gang's old turf.

Why the short sentence for professional criminals? Prison overcrowding. We have to make room for all those 1st time pot offenders after all...

You raise a good point. I don't believe in jailing drug users. My view:If you're chemically dependent, you need to get treated, not jailed. Real criminals, such as the burglars, need to be in jail. We spend so much time trying to fight this "drug war" and we need to concentrate more on violent crime, rather than drugs.

[Bennie Flowers]

Isabel, what did the person who was robbed look like? Was he male or female? Young or old? Did they give their possessions over immediately or did they put up a fight. How many people were there to rob them?

[Mason3000]

Originally Posted by Ben Around

Some variation in crime rates, (especially rape) are explained by variations in reporting. In other words, what one city PD might report as a rape, another might report as an assault, or not report at all.

I suspect Ben Around's on the right track. Take a look at the Mpls crime maps published by the police. I doubt you'll find more transparency from any major Police Dept in the country. Also, having a major university campus (i.e. binge drinking & massive amounts of 18 year olds living in dorms together) in our city probably jacks the number up a bit as well.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Mason3000

I suspect Ben Around's on the right track. Take a look at the Mpls crime maps published by the police. I doubt you'll find more transparency from any major Police Dept in the country. Also, having a major university campus (i.e. binge drinking & massive amounts of 18 year olds living in dorms together) in our city probably jacks the number up a bit as well.

Other major cities also have universities in them.