Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
While this is true, the overall crime rate has dropped under De Blasio.
I don't like the mayor, but have to give credit where due. It's the safest big city in the country, and getting safer by the year.
If you think about it NYC just has a diluted murder rate, 43% of the MSA 35% of the NYC CSA live in NYC, if you took the inner 35% of most metro areas the murder rate would be really low.
For example if Providence (170,000 out of 1.6 mil) annexed the rest of Providence County (so total of 640,000) and only add a few murders, so the murder rate would plummet.
Ditto with Hartford being 10% of its MSA.
NYC is pretty close to its metro average because it makes up so much of its average. As opposed to Hartford which is a tiny portion of its metro so one bad neighborhood has a huge effect.
If you think about it NYC just has a diluted murder rate, 43% of the MSA 35% of the NYC CSA live in NYC, if you took the inner 35% of most metro areas the murder rate would be really low.
But that isn't the murder rate for NYC. Why would I calculate the murder rate that way, by randomly including suburbs, to meet some predetermined proportion of metro-area population?
The murder rate of NYC is extremely low, and lower than that of basically any major U.S. city. That has nothing to do with the city being "too big", in fact if NYC were smaller, it would have an even lower murder rate, since Manhattan and environs have a lower murder rate than the outer portions of the city (Manhattan didn't have it's first murder in 2016 until a few weeks ago).
But that isn't the murder rate for NYC. Why would I calculate the murder rate that way, by randomly including suburbs, to meet some predetermined proportion of metro-area population?
the suburbs aren't random; they're part of the metro. City limits very greatly by region.
Take a look at the link I posted. Some metros have violent crime concentrated in the city proper, others don't. Boston MSA had a murder rate of 2.1 in 2012; while the Seattle MSA had 2.9 per 100k. But by city, Boston is much higher.
In comparison, the New York City MSA had a murder rate of 3.8 per 100k, Chicago 7.1 per 100k
the suburbs aren't random; they're part of the metro. City limits very greatly by region.
Take a look at the link I posted. Some metros have violent crime concentrated in the city proper, others don't. Boston MSA had a murder rate of 2.1 in 2012; while the Seattle MSA had 2.9 per 100k. But by city, Boston is much higher.
In comparison, the New York City MSA had a murder rate of 3.8 per 100k, Chicago 7.1 per 100k
I think the rate of Atlanta's MSA is low too, but slightly higher than the national average. What puts Atlanta proper at a disadvantage is the low city population, about 420,000 and less than 10% of the MSA, but most of the murders in the metro occur within the Atlanta proper, and mostly concentrated is certain neighborhoods (mainly SW Atlanta).
the suburbs aren't random; they're part of the metro. City limits very greatly by region.
We aren't talking about metro area populations. The previous poster wanted to calculate the crime rate for NYC by including suburbs, up to some predetermined % of overall metro area. That makes no sense.
Calculate city-to-city or metro-to-metro but not using some random determination of what "should" constitute the regional share of city limits population.
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.