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.
I agree and the rest of this thread is pretty much sidestepping the real issue. 12% of the US population is responsible for 40% of the Violent Crime in this country.
You need to reword what you wrote. 12% of the U.S. population is Black. 40% (where you got this stat from I don't know, the table you posted says 32%, but let's go with it) of violent crime is committed by blacks. However, let's take a closer look. The table says that about 2.7 million blacks (assuming none were arrested more than once) were arrested for these crimes. The black population of the U.S. is almost 39 million. So that means that only 7% of the black population in the U.S. was arrested for violent crimes. So instead of saying that 12% of the U.S. population is responsible for 40% of the violent crime, you need to dig deeper and determine the truth of this issue. 93% of blacks either aren't doing wrong or just aren't getting caught. I'd assume that an extremely huge majority are part of the former.
Of the top 25 most dangerous, 8 are located on the East Coast (10 if you count homestead, fl and myrtle beach, sc) and 2 on the West Coast.
#17 is a better way to look at the issue. The trouble with looking at the stats as a city count is that it glosses over the high density of the east vs. the very sparse density of the west, both in terms of number of people and number of cities. The 'east coast' states alone hold 36% of the U.S. population.
The fact that 8-10 eastern cities make a list of 25 (32-40%) is actually about what one would expect as a function of randomness.
South - 416.6 violent crimes per 100,000 people
West - 386.5 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Midwest - 368.5 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Northeast - 307.4 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Murder:
South - 5.4 murders per 100,000 people
Midwest - 4.7 murders per 100,000 people
West - 3.9 murders per 100,000 people
Northeast - 3.8 murders per 100,000 people
I just realized that I made some errors. I entered the wrong numbers (I used crime rates for the regional divisions instead of the actual region). Let me change this:
South - 423.7 violent crimes per 100,000 people
West - 386.5 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Midwest - 354.6 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Northeast - 349.0 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Murder:
South - 5.5 murders per 100,000 people
Midwest - 4.7 murders per 100,000 people
West - 4.2 murders per 100,000 people
Northeast - 3.8 murders per 100,000 people
Either way, the conclusion is still the same and the OP is still wrong.
This thread has to be more specific. What do we want to compare? Do we define the East Coast from Maine to Florida? Does the West Coast include Alaska or Just Washington to California? You seem to have involved Canada to – at least in Western Canada. Why not take the whole North and South America? The statistics is easily available. You have to define and narrow your questions so we can answer it. The easiest way is to compare cities (proper) in USA on the East Coast (from Maine to Florida) and West Coast (Washington to California) with over 500,000 people – that would leave us 13 cities. Looking at Murder and Manslaughter rate set at 100,000 people (2012);
East Coast
Baltimore (34.9)
Philadelphia (21.5)
Washington DC (13.9)
Jacksonville (11.1)
Boston (9.0)
New York (5.1)
West Coast
Fresno (10.1)
San Francisco (8.4)
Los Angeles (7.8)
San Jose (4.6)
Seattle (3.7)
San Diego (3.5)
Portland (3.3)
If we would look deeper and there are a lot of research on this matter. I do not think is the location of the city that is one of the most important factors that drive murder-rates. What we do know is that unemployment drive crime and apparently the largest West Coast cities have a larger percentage of people whom are not poor. There is a reason why the Midwest and Southern United States has so high levels of crime.
The OP said EAST COAST...somebody else took it upon themselves to start talking about the Northeast and so on and so on...The EAST COAST includes Miami.
I just realized that I made some errors. I entered the wrong numbers (I used crime rates for the regional divisions instead of the actual region). Let me change this:
South - 423.7 violent crimes per 100,000 people
West - 386.5 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Midwest - 354.6 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Northeast - 349.0 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Murder:
South - 5.5 murders per 100,000 people
Midwest - 4.7 murders per 100,000 people
West - 4.2 murders per 100,000 people
Northeast - 3.8 murders per 100,000 people
Either way, the conclusion is still the same and the OP is still wrong.
The cities of the Midwest get the most press for being dangerous, not the east or west coast. It is Detroit, Chicago, Saint Louis, and various other small Midwestern towns that are always in the news for being dangerous. Cities like Boston, New York, or Seattle, San Fransisco, San Diego are places that attract thousand each year because of the lifestyle offered by those coastal towns. You never hear they are dangerous, just incredibly expensive to live in.
I am assuming you're referring to African Americans making up 12% of the population?? I had no idea that I [and all the other African Americans in the US] was responsible for 40% of crime, never commited one in my life. Funny how misleading statistics can be.
Good for you Nella! But you're saying statistics are wrong if you (one of millions) haven't witnessed or committed it? Have you driven drunk? If not, drunk driving must not exist. MADD would be relieved to hear that. Or perhaps never abused a child or animal? Good, it's nice to know child or animal abuse are figments of the imagination to many.
You need to reword what you wrote. 12% of the U.S. population is Black. 40% (where you got this stat from I don't know, the table you posted says 32%, but let's go with it) of violent crime is committed by blacks. However, let's take a closer look. The table says that about 2.7 million blacks (assuming none were arrested more than once) were arrested for these crimes. The black population of the U.S. is almost 39 million. So that means that only 7% of the black population in the U.S. was arrested for violent crimes. So instead of saying that 12% of the U.S. population is responsible for 40% of the violent crime, you need to dig deeper and determine the truth of this issue. 93% of blacks either aren't doing wrong or just aren't getting caught. I'd assume that an extremely huge majority are part of the former.
38.3% was rounded to 40% which falls under the "Violent Crime" section of the FBI Crime Stats report attached. Violent Crime arrests for Blacks under the age of 18 stands at 51% with a whopping 68% rate for Armed Robberies. Interestingly enough the "over 18" rate drops to 36% overall for Violent Crimes, no doubt due to the fact one in three Black males are incarcerated at least once in their lifetime. You can distort downward saying just 7% of Blacks (out of the overall 12% or by margin just over half) were arrested for violent crimes, but what was the percentage rate for Whites? Nobody wants to talk about the elephant in the room but it's pretty clear what the truth is.
38.3% was rounded to 40% which falls under the "Violent Crime" section of the FBI Crime Stats report attached. Violent Crime arrests for Blacks under the age of 18 stands at 51% with a whopping 68% rate for Armed Robberies. Interestingly enough the "over 18" rate drops to 36% overall for Violent Crimes, no doubt due to the fact one in three Black males are incarcerated at least once in their lifetime. You can distort downward saying just 7% of Blacks (out of the overall 12% or by margin just over half) were arrested for violent crimes, but what was the percentage rate for Whites? Nobody wants to talk about the elephant in the room but it's pretty clear what the truth is.
Keep in mind that the article is talking about a possibility, not a reality and many that are incarcerated are for non violent offenses like drug charges, which are skewed. I believe what that poster is saying is that a small percentage of Blacks commit violent crimes, which is true as a small amount of people commit crimes in the first place and like I mentioned before, this doesn't get into another crime like DUI, which historically has killed roughly as many people as homicides.
We also have to look at what leads to such crimes and other social factors as well not just simply race, because if it was that simple, why does the Northeast have a lower rate than the West, given that the Northeast has a higher Black percentage? So, it isn't as simple as just saying race is the reason alone.
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.
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.
