[ehenningsen]

Originally Posted by AksarbeN

Sorry if you thought I was smug. Yes bad things can happen that you may have little or no control over what your doing. However my point was that if your aware of what you’re doing and where you’re at, you’d seldom have any trouble.

Smug no ~ logical yes. I’m not in poverty but I’m far from the other end of wealthy. I avoid what looks like something that could cause problems and over the years it has paid off. Yes I have had a couple of minor issues but nothing like some people. Not everyone has a choice of where they live and work, but if you can make the best of something then do so. Be logical don’t be a victim!

My point is:
Look at the crime stats at any police department of a city and you’ll find that the majority of the crime happens in areas of poverty. That’s not my fault or yours; these people are victims of their neighborhoods and life styles. Should it be cleaned up ~ yes. No one should have to live in crime ridden areas of poverty. I also point out in my other post that the crime occurs in some of the best areas of the city as well. Those are the crimes of tax fraud, corporate crimes, legal drug use etc. that never get reported or caught. So there is crime elsewhere it just doesn’t get reported or caught.

The stats reflect the crime in poverty areas of a city, the larger the poverty area the more people who are affected the higher the numbers in the stats. So when you’re looking at the numbers per 1,000 it doesn’t reflect the city accurately and that’s my point.

It would be interesting to see the population totals with relationship of “poverty” per 1,000 and the “crime” stats per 1,000.

I reread your post, and I am at a point where I just ask myself... Why do I even try, everyone uses these statistics and twist them around to make Omaha and Nebraska look bad and only a few ever say anything, and then I post official information with links in comparable markets and then everyone jumps on my case... If you don't want to believe these statistics... then dont believe them I really do not care the only thing I care about is when people twist the statistics around....

[ehenningsen]

***AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSAR BEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN***** *AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBE N******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******A KSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN* *****AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKS ARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN*** ***AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSAR BEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN***** *AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBE N******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******A KSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN* *****AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKS ARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN*** ***AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN******AKSARBEN*** Disregard my last post, I'm sorry I didn't realize that you were not responding to one of my posts :-)

[AksarbeN]

Ehenningsen I'm not smug, I just know that stats can reflect more then what they always show! However I do appreciate your stats and good comments. Not to worry, I'm agreeing with you.

[Katiana]

I am the one who talked about being smug. It was probably an overstatement, and I apologize. I like your stats, ehen, but AksarbeN has a point too (which I have made several times myself) that stats don't tell the whole story. This is one of the few forums that I visit that doesn't have people fighting on it right now. Let's keep it that way.

[AksarbeN]

I’m not fighting about anything, I’m only pointing out that crime and poverty are connected for the most part. I have a great deal of compassion for those who suffer from poverty and crime. I’m a native of Omaha and continue to enjoy visiting my family there. I know the city and love it; I don’t want people who read the topic that was stated by WARNYOU to get the wrong idea of Omaha being a high crime city because it’s not. It has like every city areas of crime, avoid the area and you most likely will not have any problems. The area of poverty and crime in Omaha is reality small, so people need to enjoy the city the crime is not a big problem.

My comments on the non-poverty areas continue to stand however; that being those who live there are not counted in the stats because they had not gotten caught at their crimes of; white collar crime, cheating on taxes, corporate fraud, stealing from the slush fund etc etc. This makes their area of the city just as bad as the poverty area. Crimes are crimes, and only the ones that are counted are in the stats. The point is that these people are really no better then any of the others.

[kosnebbear]

About crime rates stats, I would like to know what they consider violent crimes? How do they rate certain crimes? Do all the states report crimes in the same way? Just recently Lincoln reported 17 cases of vandalism to vehicles in the Lincoln area. Would this be considered a violent crime the destruction of property? If it is does everyone know that what was damaged was just the outside mirrors to these vehicles. Just would like to know how they rate crimes and then we need to take a look at what the crime was really and not take what someone in a different part of the USA who is in a room looking at numbers only thinks. For me I will always consider Omaha, Lincoln or any other part of Nebraska much more safer than say Detroit, Chicago, New York or LA. The reason that I ask is that I just don't see the murders happening in Omaha, Lincoln or the rest of Nebraska like you see else where in the country.

[ehenningsen]

I believe the stats are physical harm based

[kosnebbear]

Okay then at what level say does a city like New York consider it to be a violent crime compared to say in Nebraska wheer someone getting into a fight at a bar and gets a broken nose out of it which to me is physical harm, but might not be the same meaning elsewhere. So what is the difference in the meaning of physical harm based in regards to violent crime rates? I still fail to see where I am in more danger walking the streets of Omaha compared to like New York City, Chicago, Denver or Detroit. The statical data may say that I am, but in fact I am not. Guess this is why I don't always trust statical data.

[ehenningsen]

kosnebear, I do not know, but I'm posting these stats in contradiction to mattden's stats.. that is all, please don't make me have to dig deeper than I have too

[Katiana]

Guess this is why I don't always trust statical data.

Neither do I, for reasons I have already stated. You need to consider the source, etc. I think feeling "safe" has to do with familiarity as well. I felt "safe" walking at night in Pittsburgh, something the statistics probably told me was wrong. BTW, I do feel safe when in Omaha.