2008 Murders.....Atlanta vs other cities (Dallas, Washington: crime, neighborhood, closing)

[tonygeorgia]

Originally Posted by TVR1997

what a great example of why one must look at the story behind the numbers. someone would think NYC is the most unsafe city but while it has the most murders, it has the lowest murder rate, even lower than San Antonio, TX. Who woulda thunk it?

I know I would not walk around parts of Queens, Brooklyn, Bronx, etc. I would not even ride on the subway late at night. I still feel unsafe in PARTS of Nyc.

[TVR1997]

Originally Posted by joe2000

I know I would not walk around parts of Queens, Brooklyn, Bronx, etc. I would not even ride on the subway late at night. I still feel unsafe in PARTS of Nyc.

OK And?

I wouldn't walk around parts of Atlanta, Philly, Boston or any major city at night. There are unsafe/unsavory parts of all cities. The point is that based on murder rates alone (I'd have to look at crime stats for rape, robbery, burglary, etc.), NYC is by far the safest city. Of course NYC is somewhat of an anomaly because a large portion of its wealthy live within its city limits (maybe only Boston and San Francisco are comprable here) but remember that NYC had close to, if not more than 2000 murders annually in the late 80s/early 90s. Someone has done something right there.

[RoslynHolcomb]

Per capita is the only way to do it accurately. I think we can all agree that a city with 50 people and 2 murders is more dangerous than a city with 100 people and the same number of murders. Of course, if you really want to evaluate how dangerous a city is, murder isn't a good variable to measure. Face it, most murders fall into two categories: criminals or domestic. I'm sure if you looked at raw data for the 105 murders in this town, overwhelmingly the victims were criminals of some sort. Usually in the drug trade. So, for the most part, if you aren't a criminal of some sort or involved in a domestic violence situation, you're unlikely to become a murder victim.

Yes, I know there are exceptions, but that's a general breakdown. The crime that would be a better indicator of crimes that actually impact citizens (besides white collar, of course) would be armed robbery. Armed robbery is a crime of desperados, most criminals don't want to interact with their victim if they can help it. They want to get your stuff and get away clean so they can fence it and get their fix ASAP. People who resort to armed robbery are incredibly dangerous and this is the crime most likely to catch a regular citizen.

I haven't studied crime in Atlanta, but if there's been a sudden sharp increase in the murder rate, it would be interesting to find out why. I'm sure the beat cops already know this already. All manner of issues factor into it, but usually there's some type of turf war amongst drug dealers, or other issues. Take NOLA for instance. The problem there, post-Katrina isn't too many criminals, it's too few. Yeah, I know that sounds counter-intuitive, but bear with me. As everyone knows, criminals police their own. They try to keep violent crimes down because they bring too much heat and impact profit. Well, in NOLA the criminals were evacuated as well, and many didn't come back. So you have a power vacuum and a subsequent power struggle. So, what, if anything is going on in Atlanta? Has a major drug dealer recently died, or been locked up? Those are the kinds of questions I would hope law enforcement is asking right now.

[tonygeorgia]

Originally Posted by TVR1997

OK And?

I wouldn't walk around parts of Atlanta, Philly, Boston or any major city at night. There are unsafe/unsavory parts of all cities. The point is that based on murder rates alone (I'd have to look at crime stats for rape, robbery, burglary, etc.), NYC is by far the safest city. Of course NYC is somewhat of an anomaly because a large portion of its wealthy live within its city limits (maybe only Boston and San Francisco are comprable here) but remember that NYC had close to, if not more than 2000 murders annually in the late 80s/early 90s. Someone has done something right there.

Nyc still have over 550 murders last year. Even though the city has over 8 million people those numbers are still dangerous IMO. I know about the per capita, blah blah blah but it is still bad in Nyc

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

Per capita is the only way to do it accurately. I think we can all agree that a city with 50 people and 2 murders is more dangerous than a city with 100 people and the same number of murders.

Per capita is the right measure, but it can be misleading as was stated. If you compare only within the city limits, a city like NYC has a much larger absolute population and many more high income and middle class residents who live within the city limits. That tends to show a lower overall crime figure compared to a city like Atlanta with a smaller population within the city limits and a higher percentage of that population being low income residents living in higher crime areas. If the entire Atlanta MSA (or at least the core metro counties) was compared, then I bet the numbers would come out a bit differently.

[nature's message]

According to the FBI files, Atlanta has a population of 533,014.

[TVR1997]

Originally Posted by neil0311

Per capita is the right measure, but it can be misleading as was stated. If you compare only within the city limits, a city like NYC has a much larger absolute population and many more high income and middle class residents who live within the city limits. That tends to show a lower overall crime figure compared to a city like Atlanta with a smaller population within the city limits and a higher percentage of that population being low income residents living in higher crime areas. If the entire Atlanta MSA (or at least the core metro counties) was compared, then I bet the numbers would come out a bit differently.

I am not so sure.The suburbs of NYC (Nassau, Fairfield, Westchester, Bergen County, etc.) are some of the wealthiest and safest in the nation as well as largest in terms of population. While Newark, NJ will defintely hurt the New York metro safety numbers, I doubt it would bring it in line with cities such as Atlanta or St. Louis. New York suburbs, by virtue of cost tend to have more high income earners populating them which is reflective in their lower crime rates. It is not as if the *criminal element* in the NYC metro area resides and commits much of its crime outside of NYC which would then skew the numbers for the entire Tri-State area. Its the exact opposite. And remember while NYC would have more high income earners, etc., it also has more criminals (and murders, rapes, robberies) which is why we have to look at per capita numbers.

I do agree though that its important to look at the totality of the Atlanta experience. The city of Atlanta makes up only about 10% of the metro Atlanta population whereas the city of NY makes up about 40% of the metro NYC (tri-state area) population. This is where you and others would have a valid point about crime stats in Atlanta proper distorting the reality for Atlanta metro.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by TVR1997

I do agree though that its important to look at the totality of the Atlanta experience. The city of Atlanta makes up only about 10% of the metro Atlanta population whereas the city of NY makes up about 40% of the metro NYC (tri-state area) population. This is where you and others would have a valid point about crime stats in Atlanta proper distorting the reality for Atlanta metro.

That was my point. If you look at the tri-state area in NY, there are something like 15 million people within a 50 mile radius, and the 5 boroughs have almost 9 million all by themselves.

I was thinking along the lines of what you mentioned that the actual City of Atlanta is only around 10% of the metro area but it probably accounts for a higher percentage of the serious crime. Maybe not, but that's my perception.

[tonygeorgia]

When i'm talking around NYC i'm thinking that over 550 were murdered there last year. Im not thinking that 550 were murdered but I should feel safer because of the per capita

[YBF]

Originally Posted by joe2000

When i'm talking around NYC i'm thinking that over 550 were murdered there last year. Im not thinking that 550 were murdered but I should feel safer because of the per capita

Whats your point of all of this? I feel alot safer in NYC than I do in the city of Atlanta and most of its suburbs...but at the end of the day who cares?