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.
National average crime statistics, small towns versus heavily populated cities, murder rates, domestic violence incidents, random acts of violence, drug dealings, and criminal mischief
I've gone over the crime stats provided by this site and would like to know whether you all put much stock in them. I looked at the last two cities I live in and their cumulative score was 450 and 700 respectiviely. National average is around 350. Yet I rarely felt unsafe in either place and there were very few areas in either town I would not go at night. During the day I'd pretty much go anywhere. My current town clocks in at about 325, just under the average. I can hardly bring myself to lock doors around here. Threre's not a single street I wouldn't walk down alone at night. What are your thoughts on these stats?
I guess it depends. If it's a big city with a high crime rating, the crime is spread out, thus the personal risk is low. That's why I don't think I'd be scared of, let's say, Chicago. The crime rating is about 600 if I remember right, but it's a huge population. Thus, if you're in a good area, you should be fine.
Now if a small place has a 600 rating, stay away.
Just be sure to interpret the ratings in line with the population. Don't flip out everytime the rating is above the natl' avg without considering the population and also factoring that most crime is location-specific. In a gated community which many people think are safer for some reason, you're attracting criminals. Ditto for a ghetto. It's best to be in a normal looking area, not gated nor ghetto.
If the pop is 100,000 I would aim for a crime under 300, maybe 250. Seems like over that would be unreasonable.
To use Chicago again, in 2005 there were 446 murders. That seems high until you look at the "per 100,000" murders. Only 15. Your chances were 15/100,000.
However, one murder in a small 100,000 pop. city isn't horrible. Over 10 would start to get sketchy. There's not as many people to "absorb" the crime.
One of the things I've noticed about crime in smaller towns and cities: it seems to be criminal-on-criminal, e.g. a drug deal gone bad.
I find that a good way to stay "safe", in a small town, is to avoid hanging out with criminals.
There were two murders in my small town last year. Both were incidents of domestic violence. Not that domestic violence is "ok". I feel that I greatly decrease my odds of being murdered by not dating violent, abusive men.
Please note that I speak only of smaller towns and cities. Obviously in larger metropolitan areas there are acts of random crime and violence and I certainly don't blame the victims.
Crime stats are WAY overused and over-trusted by people in this forum. Lots of 'looking for a safe area' posts, and residents can't really assure a newcomer of having a safe, crime free experience. Each person will have his/her own individual experience in whatever area they choose. Obviously avoid run down delapidated abandoned areas or housing projects, but I've seen lots of statements about places that cover a huge area and a variety of neighborhoods...yet the entire city or county is labeled "dangerous".
sprtsluvr8 - quite true. I have a friend who has spent her whole time in Chicago living in much better areas than I and has had much more problems with crime than I have (she's been mugged, I have not), and we've both lived in the city proper for over 10 years (she's from a small town, I'm from a few miles south of the city in the southern burbs). If you looked at our history, she's only lived in the best, safest, and most expensive neighborhoods and I have not. It just isn't always an accurate predictor.
sprtsluvr8 - quite true. I have a friend who has spent her whole time in Chicago living in much better areas than I and has had much more problems with crime than I have (she's been mugged, I have not), and we've both lived in the city proper for over 10 years (she's from a small town, I'm from a few miles south of the city in the southern burbs). If you looked at our history, she's only lived in the best, safest, and most expensive neighborhoods and I have not. It just isn't always an accurate predictor.
Hurray! Some common sense and logic has surfaced. I have read other posts that echo yours, but you really hit the bullseye with your explanation.
I have found that the stats for the area I live in are right on. Of course it's no guarantee of safety, but overall they make sense in my experience. I am curious in regard to the original post - I would wonder if either 1. the crime was restricted to one or two bad areas, or 2. there was one or two categories that made the overall crime average go way up. Either scenario might make the stat seem artificially high. Also, how crime is reported can make a stat artificially high or low. Sometimes the crimes in area 'burbs get added into the stats of major cities. Sometimes cities categorize things in an odd way to over- or underinflate the numbers. Trenton, NJ's crime was down 26% in 2006 and some people are accusing the police and the politicians of underreporting things, to make the city seem safer. Who knows? I think it's important to consider the numbers, but it's just one factor. Finally, I don't think having a crime index rating around average is bad. It's just average. A rating of 700, however, is serious.
Being in law enforcement for 30 years I can say stats can be misleading. I'll give you a small example. Back in the 1980s' when Newark was the the stolen car capital in the state (and I think perhaps the country), many reports were not being entered properly. In NJ when a person enters a vehicle and steals items from the vehicle or attempts to steal the vehicle itself (as in punched out ignition) the report should reflect a number of charges. #1 If a window was broken to get in thats Criminal Mischief. #2 Once the person is in the vehicle thats Burglary. #3 If the person steals the radio out of the dashboard thats Theft (auto accessory). If the person also steals something else from the vehicle (as in a camera, money, your umbrella etc.) thats Theft (auto contents). Obviously if they take the car than its Theft (auto). Now the city of Newark didn't like the fact that everytime a car got broken into and a radio and some money or other item was taken, there would be 4 charges on the incident report. That's a bad thing for a city so enter creative criminal code reporting. Often times the Burglary charge would be left out or only one theft charge would be entered or they would forget about criminal mischief. So that's only 1 example on how not properly reporting could be misleading. Also often times like another poster said many crimes are not reported. Crime on crime (i.e. bad drug deals almost never get reported). Domestic violence is probably the biggest that never gets reported (many people don't report that they are a victim) and so on. In short I think most people know what areas have high crime rates but the numbers don't tell all!
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.
